Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Papua New Guinea Law Reports

Kave, The State v [1986] PNGLR 305 (19 June 1986)

Papua New Guinea Law Reports - 1986

[1986] PNGLR 305 - The State v Horou Posu Kave 

[1986] PNGLR 305

N550(S)

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

[NATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]

THE STATE

V

HOROU POSU KAVE

Waigani

Wilson J

19 June 1986

CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - Relevant considerations - Unlawful Killing - Assault on Wife - Death from ruptured spleen - No differentiation in sentencing because of matrimonial relationship - Sentence of four (4) years.

In circumstances where a husband violently assaulted his wife by hitting her about the head with a closed fist and kicking her in the side, as a result of which the wife died from a ruptured spleen,

Held

A sentence of four (4) years in hard labour should be imposed “to demonstrate society’s disdain and condemnation of such behaviour and its results” and to demonstrate “to others who may have a similar disposition towards women, that such behaviour is wrong and cannot be tolerated”.

(Per curiam) the fact that a victim of a violent assault is the spouse of the assailant is not a matter relevant to sentencing.

Reasons for sentence

On a plea of guilty to a charge of unlawful killing Wilson J delivered the following reasons on sentence.

Editor’s Note

An appeal to the Supreme Court has been lodged.

Counsel

P Boyce, for the State.

D Sode, for the defendant.

19 June 1986

WILSON J: You have pleaded guilty to unlawfully killing Mary Sarufa who was your wife at the time of her death.

You had been having some arguments with your wife principally over your desire to have your small brother come to live with you while he was recovering from an illness. Your wife was not in favour. You had two very young children at home already and it would seem that your wife did not want the extra burden of looking after your brother.

On 8 February this year this argument erupted again. After returning from your wife’s brother’s place you argued at Hohola. On this occasion you hit your wife several times with a closed fist around the face and head. You then left with your elder daughter. You returned to where you left your wife soon after and you began hitting her again and then you kicked her on her left side. She immediately started vomiting. You took her to hospital and she died very soon after. The cause of death was the rupture of her spleen. I think it is safe to draw the inference that she had an enlarged spleen, due to the instantaneous reaction and speed of death.

You have pleaded guilty and say you were shocked when she died. The fact of a plea of guilty while taken into account does not provide substantial mitigation in such offences of violence.

The crux of your culpability in this case is your resort to violence, your unlawful assault on your wife which led to her death. You abused your wife by beating her. Women are entitled to the same right to life as men and men must come to know that they cannot expect leniency for the cowardly use of force against women. You would not have dared to use the same actions against a man. Men are physically stronger than women and men who abuse that strength must come to learn that they will have to bear punishment.

It is an unfortunate fact that many men consider they have some right to violently abuse their women. This is not a view which society should condone nor is it a view that this Court will encourage.

The fact of marriage does not give a right to mis-treat and it should not be a matter for differentiation that the victim of an assault of any kind of violence was the wife of the assailant. The same punishment should be applicable. Any other view can only lead to the assumption that wives have less rights and that their lives are somehow to be devalued simply because of the fact of marriage.

The death of women who almost invariably have a history of domestic aggravation through assaults that lead to the rupture of enlarged spleens is becoming far too commonplace. Certainly there are some genuine cases of real accidental deaths but these must be distinguished from those where death occurs from a violent assault.

In your case you were not satisfied with venting your anger in the first beating of your wife when you hit her several times with your closed fist, you came back and assaulted her again, this time fatally.

This woman was your wife, the mother of your children, entitled to your respect and support and protection. You have through your violent assault robbed her of her life.

I consider that you should receive a sentence which demonstrates society’s distain and condemnation of such behaviour and its results and that also demonstrates to others who may have a similar disposition towards women, that such behaviour is wrong and cannot be tolerated.

You are sentenced to four (4) years in hard labour, you have served three (3) months, you have three (3) years, nine (9) months left to serve.

Sentence accordingly

Lawyer for State: Public Prosecutors Office.

Lawyer for defendant: Public Solicitors Officer.