IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT MAGISTRATE’S COURT	)       
OF SOLOMON ISLANDS AT GIZO		  		)	
(Criminal Jurisdiction)					

Criminal Case No. 80 of 2019 

REGINA

-V-

JOHN MASURU

Date of hearing:		October, 8th, 2019
Date of sentence:		October 11th, 2019 

Ms. Trisha Korokini for the Prosecution 
Mr. Clifton Meleu Ruele for the Accused 

SENTENCE

1.	On 8th October, 2019, the accused person, Mr John Masuru entered guilty pleas to the following offences:
i.	Count 1 – Malicious Damage contrary to section 326 of the Penal Code (Cap. 26);
ii.	Count 2 – Simple Larceny contrary to section 261 of the Penal Code (Cap. 26);
iii.	Count 3 – Drunk and incapable contrary to section 179 of the Penal Code (Cap. 26);
iv.	Count 4 – Assault on Police Officer contrary to section 190 of Police Act;
v.	Count 5 – Escape from Lawful Custody contrary to section 199 of the Police Act;
vi.	Count 6 – Idle and Disorderly Person contrary to section 175 (d) of the Penal Code (Cap. 26).

2.	I accordingly entered conviction on his own guilty pleas and proceed to sentence him.

3.	At the outset, I must say that the accused person is not a first-offender, he was just released from custody late, 2018, and thereon committed these following scores of offences. Accordingly, I will consider him as a repeated offender.

4.	Most of these offences it happened over the span of 6 months in 2019, except for the Malicious Damage charge which happened in November, 2018. This is a case which demonstrate someone who has no respect for the law enforcement agency and the rule of law in this country. It appears that the initial sentence had not render him any message. For most of these offences it occurred whilst under the influence of liquor.

5.	For the assault on Police Officer charge, I could not ascertain from the agreed facts what really is the assault, it is silent, it is more like resisting arrest which I think the facts or the charge is defective. Hence, benefit of which must tilt to the accused person.

6.	The Malicious damage charge occurred at a banking institution (BSP) in Munda that normally used by people for their daily livelihood. Although the damage was done on the door, it is my view that such organisation should be highly respected for their service to our local communities. The ANZ bank had already left Munda and the public would not want the only remaining bank to leave anytime soon for such senseless attitude demonstrated by the accused person.

Maximum penalties for the offences

i.	Count 1 – Malicious Damage – 2 years’ imprisonment
ii.	Count 2 – Simple Larceny – 5 years’ imprisonment
i.	Count 3 – Drunk and incapable - $600 or 2 months’ imprisonment
ii.	Count 4 – Assault on Police Officer - $50,000 or 5 years’ imprisonment
iii.	Count 5 – Escape from Lawful Custody - $10,000 or 12 months’ imprisonment
iv.	Count 6 – Idle and Disorderly Person - $600 or 2 months’ imprisonment
7.	I acknowledge the case of Menime provided by counsel Ruele to assist the Court in arriving at a proper and fair sentence, however, I remind myself that this particular case involves a first-offender. The accused herein this case is a habitual offender and return to court with scores of offences.

Sentence remarks

8.	The accused person needs to understand that all human beings aged each day, that being said, he must now take his life serious and start to involve in things that will make him a productive person in the future so that he can assist himself in years to come when there is no support from parents or guardians. Our Parents, guardians’ and care-givers will soon have their turn to leave this earth, as such, we cannot exclusively rely on them for everything in life, at some point in life one needs to man up and do what is required of a man in the family, to be the head and strive to make ends meet.

9.	Learn to move away from bad-peers which will bring him no good but a ticket back to this Court and correction centre. There is no distinction award nor Dux or any First price for such attitude, it will only waste much of his precious time that if spend with his family, school, sports or other valuable things will benefit him and his family.

10.	Alcohol is not manageable with most people, and the accused is in this so-called group. He normally does crazy and foolish things when intoxicated. He needs to rule it out for his own good, otherwise, he might end up with a hard consequence in life ahead because such life is predictable, and that is going on an illusionary journey which will one day suffer a hard rock-bottom lesson.

Mitigating factors
11.	He has entered guilty pleas to all the offences charged which has protects most of courts time and resources from running a full-trial, accordingly, provide the 25% discount as available in the case of Qoloni. He is a relatively young person with more to learn and explore in life.

Sentencing consideration
12.	Having considered the circumstance of the offending, the accused level of culpability, apparent aggravating factors balancing with the mitigating factors, I impose the following final sentence:

i.	Count 1 – Malicious Damage – 10 month’ imprisonment
ii.	Count 2 – Simple Larceny – 12 months’ imprisonment
i.	Count 3 – Drunk and incapable – 1 month imprisonment
ii.	Count 4 – Assault on Police Officer – 1 month imprisonment
iii.	Count 5 – Escape from Lawful Custody – 4 months’ imprisonment
iv.	Count 6 – Idle and Disorderly Person – 1 month imprisonment

13.	For reason that he has already returned the mobile phone to the complainant or owner, I invoke section 44 of the Penal Code and partly suspend 9 months’ accordingly for 1 year. Hence, he shall serve the remainder of 3 months’ imprisonment.

14.	In relation to count 4, 5 and 6, since all 3 occurred on the same date I simply consider them as one transaction and accordingly order that they be served concurrently. Thereafter, it shall be served consecutively to count 1, 2 and 3 above. Therefore, the resulting sentence is 18 months’ imprisonment.

Sentence orders

1.	I hereby sentence the accused person – Mr John Masuru to 18 month’ imprisonment.
2.	Sentence shall commence from date of first remand.
3.	14 days right of appeal applies.
4.	Conviction entered.
5.	Order accordingly.

THE COURT

…………………………………………………………………
MR. LEONARD. B. CHITE 
 Principal Magistrate