HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

Case name: 	Crown v Violole 	
		
Citation:		
		
Date of decision: 	28 October 2022	
		
Parties: 	Crown v Rove Violole 	
		
Date of hearing: 		
		
Court file number(s): 	359 of 2019	
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal 	
		
Place of delivery: 		
		
Judge(s): 	Maina; PJ	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	The accused is sentence as follows:
1. Counts
Ct 1 3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 2 3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 3 3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 4 3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 5 3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 6 3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 7 3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 8 3 years imprisonment and; 
Ct 9 3 years imprisonment 
2. The total of years of imprisonment for the 9 counts is 27 years and to be as follows:
(i) Count 7, 8 and 9 is to be served consecutively – 9 years,
(ii) Count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 to be served concurrent to count 7, 8 and 9,
The total term of imprisonment to be served by the Defendant is 9 years imprisonment,
3. The period spent in custody for the case to be deducted from the 9 years imprisonment; and 
4. No further orders.	
		
Representation: 	Dalcy B Oligari for the Crown 
Pulekera R d for the Defence 	
		
Catchwords: 		
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	Penal Code (Amendment) (Sexual Offences) Act 2016 S 140 (1) (a) and (b) [cap 26], S 140 (a) (8) 	
		
Cases cited:	Pana v Regina [2018] SBCA 19, Regina v Kaliuae [2020] SBHC 30, Mill v The Queen [1998] 166 CLR59	

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 359 of 2019

Crown 

V

Rove Violole 

Date of Ruling: 28 October 2022

Dalcy B Oligari for the Crown 
Pulekera R D for the Defence 
SENTENCE 
Maina, PJ:
The Defendant Rove Violole pleaded guilty on 9 counts of sexual offences – child under 18 years contrary to section 140 (1) (a) and (b) of the Penal Code Cap 26 as amended by the (Amendment) Sexual Offences) Act 2016. 
The child complainant (name withheld) was 15 years 7 months old at the time of offences.
Brief Agreed Facts
The Defendant had sexual intercourse with the complainant on 6 occasions when the Defendant took out the complainant in the car at various locations in Honiara as Bobolake beach, Lengakiki/Water pump area, Lungga powerhouse side on a small hill, Henderson and on other occasions at the house, Lengakiki Honiara
Penalty
The maximum penalty for the sexual intercourse of a child under 18 years contrary to section 140 (a) (8) of the Penal Code (Amendment) Sexual Offences Act 2016 is 15 years imprisonment.
Mitigation
The Defendant is 46 years old from Baraulu village, Roviana Western Province and committed the offences when he was 42 years old. 
For the mitigation the Defence submitted that the Defendant has low education, the mother is very old and she rely on him. He has pleaded guilty on all charges and that express remorse on his acts and behaviours toward the Complainant, co-operate with the Police investigation and no previous conviction.
I noted the submission by the Defence on the reconciliation or compensation (custom) with what has been described as red money by the taxi owner, which the Defendant drove, committed the offences. However that may be for Defendant and his boss to do as to create or continue the peace and harmony them and as in a small society as ours.
Aggravating features 
What appears to raise an eye on the act and behaviour of the Defendant to the Complainant or the aggravating features are that the Defendant is cousin of the Complainant’s uncle, thus entrust the care for the Complainant, pre-plan occurred at various location in the car and repeated offences by the Defendant.
The starting point in the sentence of the sexual offences or of this nature, the Court of Appeal in the case of Pana v Regina sets the starting point of eight years if the Victim is below of the consenting age. The case conventional or set the consideration in the starting point limit if the Victim of the consenting age. 
Noting that, the Defendant repeatedly or planned to do this acts or sex with the Complainant, it is serious and an abuse of trust.  As his a relative, he should have the responsibility to look after the Victim than abusing her on the numerous occasions.  
I take into account what should be considered on your side (mitigating factors) and what should be taken as against you (aggravating features) and notably the method or  the circumstances you applied to have the sex with the Complainant on the several occasions. What you had done to the Complainant may also have effects to her future life.
Totality Principle 
There are 9 counts in the offence of sexual intercourse and the totality principle of the sentence to be given to the Defendant. It is so as the given maximum sentence for each count is or should be 8 years.
As remarkably considered by the courts that such approach in the sentence for the offence would be to impose a head sentence to achieve the end of justice and it is stated by Naqiolevu, J in the Regina v Kaliuae when he applied the totality principles in the case Mill v The Queen 
Taking into account all the circumstances, mitigating factors and aggravating features submitted by the Counsels, the court consider that it is appropriate that the sentence would also make Defendant and others realize the serious of the offence.
The Defendant Rove Violole is sentence to 3 years imprisonment each on the count of nine counts of sexual offences – child under 18 years.
Orders of the Court
The accused is sentence as follows:
1.	Counts
Ct 1	3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 2	3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 3 	3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 4	3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 5	3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 6	3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 7	3 years imprisonment, 
Ct 8	3 years imprisonment and; 
Ct 9	3 years imprisonment 
2.	The total of years of imprisonment for the 9 counts is 27 years and to be as follows:
(i) 	Count 7, 8 and 9 is to be served consecutively – 9 years,
(ii) 	Count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 to be served concurrent to count 7, 8 and 9,
	The total term of imprisonment to be served by the Defendant is 9 years imprisonment,
3.	The period spent in custody for the case to be deducted from the 9 years imprisonment; and 
4.	No further orders.
THE COURT
Hon. Justice Leonard L Maina
Puisne Judge