Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Supreme Court of Tonga

R v 'Alatini [2025] TOSC 51; CR 236 of 2024 (16 May 2025)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TONGA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
NUKU'ALOFA REGISTRY

CR 236 of 2024

REX
-v-
TONI ‘ALATINI

SENTENCING REMARKS

BEFORE: HON. JUSTICE TUPOU KC
Appearances: Mr G. Aleamotu’a for the Prosecution
Defendant in Person
Date: 16 May, 2025

The proceedings

1. On 06 February, 2025, the Defendant pleaded guilty to wilfully hitting Sosefo Taufa’s left arm with a machete without lawful justification, causing a wound contrary to section 107(1) and (2) (c) of the Criminal Offences Act.

The offending

2. On the evening of 3 August 2024 at around 8:15PM, the Complainant accompanied by two friends was at a Chinese store at Veitongo. The complainant went inside while his friends remained outside. The defendant suddenly attacked the complainant’s friends outside. By the time the complainant came out, the defendant had fled.
3. The friends went home and returned with the complainant to the same shop around 9pm. There, the defendant attacked them again. While his friends ran away, the complainant challenged the defendant asking why he was attacking them. The defendant stated that he had come to beat them up, moving towards the complainant. The complainant punched the defendant, causing him to fall to the ground.
4. The defendant picked up a machete that was beside his bicycle and struck the complainant’s left arm with it, got on his bicycle and fled.
5. The Complainant was rushed to Vaiola hospital where his wound was treated and bandaged.
6. On 05^th August 2024, Dr. Halafihi confirmed in a report that the complainant had sustained on his left arm and forearm, a 30 cm healing laceration, extending from the left and mid-upper arm to the left proximal forearm as a result of the machete strike by the defendant.
7. The defendant was arrested on 8 August 2024.

Crown’s submissions

8. The Crown submits the aggravating features of the offending were:
   1. the use of a machete;
   2. no apology to victim;
   100. previous convictions;
   4. serious injuries sustained; and
   5. unprovoked attack.
9. The Crown submits the following as mitigating features;
   1. the early guilty plea;
   2. cooperation with the Police;

Victim Impact Report

10. The complainant reported suffering from pain as a result of his injury and not being able to sleep that night. Despite the healing of the wound, he remains traumatised by the experience and is apprehensive on the sighting of a machete.
11. The complainant acknowledged that the defendant’s mother apologised to him. However, he underlined that although he sees the defendant around Veitongo every so often, there has been no personal apology from the defendant to him for what he did.
    

Crown’s submissions on sentencing

12. The Crown referred to 3 comparable sentences. Two of the said cases involve the use of a machete. They were:
    1. Rex v Helu TOSC 26 of 2024- the Accused pleaded guilty to one count of causing serious bodily harm where the victim was taken to hospital and treated for a 7cm laceration which required internal and external sutures. The starting point imposed was 3 years’ imprisonment, reduced by a year after considering the mitigation factors leaving a final sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment with final 12 months suspended on conditions.
    2. Rex v Tevita Mahelofa Finau CR 03 of 2020- the Accused pleaded guilty to one count of causing serious bodily harm where he struck the Victim with a machete severing two of his fingers. A starting point of 3 ½ years’ imprisonment was imposed, reduced by 18 months for mitigation where the remaining sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment was fully suspended on condition.
13. Here, the Crown proposed the following sentence formulation. A starting point of 3 ½ years’ imprisonment to be reduced by 12 months in mitigation resulting in a final sentence of 2 ½ years’ imprisonment with the final 6 months to be suspended on conditions.
    

Defendant’s submission

14. I asked the Defendant if he wished to say anything before I delivered his sentence today. He did not.
    

Pre-sentencing report

15. Mr Toni ‘Alatini is 23 years of age, he is single and resides in Veitongo. He is the 5^th child in a family with 12 siblings. His father’s younger brother, Heimoana and his wife, Sulia raised the defendant. When they separated the defendant remained with Sulia, who later remarried.
16. For the past 6 years he has been in the care of Mr and Mrs Kaumavae. Mrs Kaumavae is Sulia’s younger sister.
17. The defendant struggled with his adoptive parent’s separation and described his life at the time, unstable and falling apart. He acknowledged that Mr & Mrs Kaumavae are doing their best to love and support him to be a responsible and good citizen.
18. He quit school at 5^th form and is helping Mr Kaumavae with tasks at the plantation. He is generally of good health.
19. The defendant told the probation officer that the complainant and his friends often visit the Chinese shop because his girlfriend works there and for the purposes of asking her out. That is why he attacked them.
20. The report assessed the defendant at “low risk” for re-offending and recommended a fully suspended sentence despite noting the summary of facts recorded the defendant to be in possession of previous convictions.
21. Attached to the report were letters from the Pea Parish Priest, the Pea town officer, the Vaini District Officer, the Hon. Member of Parliament for Tongatapu 8 and Falevalu Kaumavae. All of the correspondences provide a positive report on the defendant’s character.
    

Considerations

22. It has been widely held that offences involving the use of machete in assaults constitute a special category of aggravation^[1] that warrant imprisonment. In addition to the comparable sentences referred to by Crown, I have had the opportunity to also consider:
    1. Siokatame Tupou v R [2019] TOCA 8, where the defendant attacked two men with a machete causing grievous bodily harm to one and serious bodily harm to the other. After an argument and fight with one of his victims, the defendant went home and returned with a machete. He struck one of the victims with the machete 5 times and again after he fell. Then chased his second victim and repeatedly hit him around the head with the machete. He did not stop until his younger brother removed the machete from him.

The injuries sustained by the victim for the relevant charge of serious bodily harm charge, included multiple lacerations to his left arm, forearm and hand, which all healed with no long term complications.

The starting point for the serious bodily harm charge was 4 years imprisonment which was upheld by the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal opined that:

“... Offenders inflicting serious injury with a weapon must ordinarily expect to serve a term of imprisonment. That is particularly so given the prevalence and availability of machetes.”

2. Also, in Lopeti v R [2019] TOCA 5, the defendant was charged and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment for armed robbery and 2½ years concurrently for causing serious bodily harm where a machete was used to inflict serious injuries during the course of the robbery. The Court of Appeal considered the Judge was right to take into account that the offending was a deliberate and planned theft involving the use of a lethal weapon to inflict a serious wound on an innocent young man.

23. Here, the defendant by his own admission, went to the shop to beat up the complainant and his friends. He brought a machete with him, no doubt, for that purpose. To attack others with a lethal weapon such as a machete, on an assumption they are interested in one’s girlfriend is absurd, and I find the defendant’s act and excuse for it, deplorable.
24. The maximum statutory penalty for causing serious bodily harm is 5 years’ imprisonment.
25. Having regard to maximum statutory penalty, the planned and deliberate use of a machete, the serious injuries sustained by the complainant, the comparable sentences, the sentencing principles of punishment, personal and general deterrence, I set a starting point of 3 years’ imprisonment.

Mitigation

26. For his early guilty plea I reduce the starting point by 9 months leaving a final sentence of 27 months imprisonment.
    

Suspension

27. The principles for suspending a sentence as set out in Mounga v R^[2] favour the defendant in part. He is young and cooperated with the police.
28. However, the defendant is a recidivist that had not taken the opportunity offered by previous suspended sentences to rehabilitate himself. Further, he has not taken any steps to apologise to the complainant in person. That is most unfortunate as it plays a significant role in healing and restoring relations and often justice.
29. For the reasons discussed, the defendant is entitled to a partially suspended sentence. I am willing to offer him a final opportunity to use the suspension offered here to rehabilitate himself in the hope he will turn his life around with the help of those who had taken time to write in support of him today. I suspend the final 12 months of the sentence for a period of 2 years on conditions.
    

Result

30. Toni Alatini is convicted for causing serious bodily harm and is sentenced to 2 years and 3 months imprisonment.
31. The final 12 months of the sentence is suspended for a period of 2 years on the following conditions, namely, that during the said period of suspension, Mr Alatini is to:
    1. not commit any offence punishable by imprisonment;
    2. report to the probation office within 48 hours of his release from prison;
    100. be placed on probation; and
    4. complete an anger management/or such other course as his probation officer may direct.
32. Failure to comply with any of those conditions may result in the suspension

being rescinded, in which case, the Defendant will be required to serve the

balance of his sentence.

33. Subject to compliance with those conditions, and any remissions, the result is that the

defendant is required to serve 15 months’ imprisonment.

P. Tupou KC
Judge

Nuku’alofa: 16 May, 2025

[1] R v Fakaanga [2022] TOSC 33; CR 172 of 2021 (6 May 2022)

^[2] [1998] Tonga LR 154