Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Solomon Islands

R v Fenly [2023] SBHC 172; HCSI-CRC 133 of 2019 (11 December 2023)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

Criminal Case No. 133 of 2019

REX

V

MATHEW FENLY

Date of Sentence: 11 December 2023

Kelesi A E for the Crown
Holara M R for the Defence

SENTENCE

Maina PJ:
Introduction

1. The Accused Matthew Fenly was charged with one count of manslaughter under section 199(1) of the Penal Code. He pleaded guilty upon own plea was convicted for the death of John Foster.

Summary of Facts

2. The Defendant Mathew Fenly is from Loina village, North Malaita, Malaita Province. The deceased was the late John Foster Bobo of Suafa Bay, North Malaita, Malaita Province.
3. On Friday, 30 September 2017, at or about midnight (0000hrs) and 1 am (0100hrs), the deceased, John Foster, was at Christian Waroa’s Betel Nut Stall. He had a few beers at that time.
4. At that night too, Ivan Tilo was also drunk and shouted and challenged the people along the road as he came toward the stall. When he reached the stall, turned to the deceased, and talked to him. He said some words to the deceased, but they later settled down and made jokes again. Ivan then thereafter left.
5. A few minutes later, the Defendant (Mathew Fenly) came to the market same market stall and stood there. Cristian Waroa, who was with the deceased at her market stall, thought he wanted to buy something. Suddenly he saw the Defendant walk straight to the deceased and talk to him.
6. Accused had or armed with a small kitchen knife and he then moved towards the deceased, and found him. Before the fight or scuffle with the deceased, the deceased asked the accused a match to light his cigarette two times but the accused indicated to the deceased that he had no match.
7. On the third time when the deceased asked for a match he uttered these words to the accused “if you no garem match, fuckem mum and dad blo you”. At that moment, they fought and fell to the ground, and not long after, they separated. The defendant stabbed the deceased with the kitchen knife because of the insulting words, which is against Malaita Custom.
8. Not long after, the deceased stood up and walked towards the opposite side of the road heading towards the clinic area.
9. Down from his house (close to where the incident happened), Ivan Tilo saw the deceased along the road. He also saw the Defendant wanted to pursue and deceased. At that time, the Defendant talked to Ivan and told him to go to him. He ignored him and went to the deceased. By then the Defendant then escaped from the scene.
10. Ivan Tilo then led the Deceased away towards the clinic area. When the deceased held onto his shoulder for support, he smelled blood on his body.
11. He then told the deceased to go and sat down on the road. He panicked, worried, and went to nurse Mary and told her to go and help the deceased. Nurse Mary took a torch, shone at the deceased and saw a deep cut in front of his chest.
12. The Deceased was later transported to NRH and was pronounced dead.
13. The post-mortem report stated that there were five external wounds. A chest wound below 2^nd rib to the right of the sternum. This wound did not enter the chest wall as it hit the sternum at the level of 3^rd rib. The stomach would measures 30mm x 10mm. Right lateral chest wound at the level of 5^th rib.
14. A deep laceration on the left palm at the base of the thumb, along the tenor muscles and a stab wound to the lower back about 4 cm to the central line. The accused died of pneumothorax of the left chest as a direct result of a stab wound to the chest and abdomen.

Maximum Penalty

15. The Maximum Penalty for the offence of manslaughter under section 199 (1) of the Penal Code is liable to life imprisonment.

Defence Submission

16. Defence counsel submits that the accused has no previous conviction, remorse and sorry for what he done. He fully accept his culpability and their submission is that his conduct since the offence has shown that demonstrably.
17. Accused had surrendered himself to the Police during the investigation and when the charge of murder was nollied and substituted to manslaughter, he immediately pleaded guilty to the charge.

Comparative sentences

18. Both counsels have cited a number of case authorities and indicating the range of sentences previously imposed in relation to manslaughter cases in this jurisdiction.
19. As the courts always says the best that a judge can do is to consider the mitigating and aggravating features of each case and have regard to sentences imposed in previous cases. Importantly to note that each case must depend on its particular circumstances thus the sentences imposed in each of those cases have reflected the particular circumstances of each case.

The Court

20. When I consider the facts and the circumstances of this case I think the starting in the sentence is 6 years.
21. The used of the knife is an aggravating feature in this case and I would say the fact the accused was also drunk.
22. Credit for no previous conviction and guilty plea and I take into account in this sentence. However, for guilty plea, it is an acceptance of the person who committed the offence or his action and any consequences to be imposed on him.
23. I noted the prospects for rehabilitation submitted by the defence counsel after release from prison I would encourage that should be the best option and no other for him. You are oblige and responsible for your wife and family for necessary needs, than drunk and cause troubles or commit the offences.
24. Taking into account the mitigation presented in the sentence for the accused a year is reduced from the 6 years.
25. For aggravating features, the accused used of the knife and he was drunk when he committed the offence. For these factors, a further sentence of 3 years imprisonment is imposed for the accused.
26. The accused Matthew Fenly is therefore sentence to 8 years imprisonment for the manslaughter of John Foster Bobo.

Orders of the Court

1. Accused Matthew Fenly is therefore sentence to 8 years imprisonment.
2. The period spent in custody for this case to be deducted from the sentence.
3. No further order.

THE COURT
Hon. Justice Leonard R Maina
Puisne Judge