|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Supreme Court of Vanuatu |
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF
THE REPUBLIC OF VANUATU
Criminal Jurisdiction
CRIMINAL CASE No. 08 OF 2001
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
-v-
HELLENAR LAWRENCE
/span>
Coram: Chief Justice Lunabek
>Counsels: Mrs Heather L. Leo, the Public Prosecutor
Mr. Kiel Loughman for the DefendantSENTENCE
This is the sentence of Ms Hellenar Lawrence. She was charged and pleaded guilty to the offence of Intentional Assault, Causing Death, contrary to Section 107(d) of the Penal Code Act [CAP 135].
Section 107(d) provides:
“No person shall commit intentional assault on the body of another person.
Penalty: (a)…
(b)…
(c)…
if the damage caused results in death, although the offender did not intend to cause such death, imprisonment for 10 years.”
The maximum penalty provided by law is imprisonment for 10 years.
The events leading to the death of the victim Celina Pakoa are as follows:
The defendant, Hellenar Lawrence had a boyfriend by the name of Richard Simbolo. On 13 February 2001, the defendant received a letter from Richard’s mother informing her that her relationship with Richard was to be ceased. The reason being that the Simbolo family heard lots of rumours surrounding the defendant’s sex life.
The defendant, on the next day, that is on 14 February 2001, decided to find out about the reasons of the letter and the source of the defamatory information. She went to see Celina Pakoa, the deceased, in her house and asked her about the rumours. Celina told her that she did not tell any stories/lies about the defendant. The defendant and the victim/deceased are and/or live in Pango village, Efate.
On the same day, the defendant went a second time to see the victim in her house. At that time, the defendant was accompanied by Mary and two (2) other girls. When the defendant and other ladies arrived at the victim’s house, Celina was not there. So they waited.
On her way to Celina Pakoa’s house, the defendant took a kitchen knife and put it inside the thights she was wearing.
Few minutes after, the victim arrived by bus driven by Vira.
Mary and the defendant asked the victim if she told lies about the defendant. Celina replied angrily that it was not true. The defendant got very crossed. Heated argument took place at Vira’s place between the defendant and the deceased. So Vira looked for a stick to chase them from his yard.
It was at that time that the defendant stabbed Celina Pakoa on her left lower chest. The defendant stabbed the victim only one time.
The victim, then, got a bush knife and tried to cut the defendant and her friends.
Vira stopped her and saw she was bleeding. He immediately took her to the Port-Vila Central Hospital.
On same date, 14 February, the victim got admitted to the hospital. The wound is 5 cm in length at the level of the 11th rib, and centred on a line half way between the spine and the posterior axillary line. The wound has reached at least the underlying rib.
The conditions of the defendant progressively got worsened. Despite intensive resuscitation with fluids and inotropic support, the patient suffered a cardiac arrest at 02.50am on the morning of 15 February 2001 from which she could not be resuscitated. The cause of the victim’s death was considered to be multi-organ failure following blood loss from a stab wound to the left lower chest. The death certificate issued on 15 February 2001 confirmed Celina Pakoa’s death.
The victim’s family made a compensation claim of Vatu 10,000,000 against the accused.
The defendant, Hellenar Lawrence, is from Pango Village, Efate. She is 23 and single. Before the incident, she worked at Le Lagon Hotel. She now lost her job as a result of the commission of the offence.
The defence counsel mitigated on behalf of the defendant as follows:
On 13 February 2001, when the defendant received and read the letter from her boyfriend’s mother, she was very crossed – she cried. The defendant was informed by some members of the Simbolo family that Celina Pakoa, the victim, was the person who said things about the life of the defendant drawing a negative picture of her as a prostitute.
Before the stabbing occurred, there was a heated argument between the Defendant and the deceased in Vira’s yard. Vira tried to get something, a stick, to chase them. It was at that time that the defendant stabbed the deceased on her left lower chest. This took place few seconds and the defendant gave the knife to her auntie after she stabbed the deceased.
On the same day, the defendant surrendered herself and cooperates fully with the police. She was kept in custody from 14 February 2001 until today, which is a total of 2 months. The defendant is a first time offender. She has no previous convictions.
In this case, the defendant was very angry. There is no doubt about this. Her personal integrity has been exposed to the public. She tried to find out. There is no problem of doing so.
The situation started to go wrong when on her way to the deceased’s house on 14 February 2001, she took a kitchen knife and put it into the tights she wore at that time.
Although the defendant’s sister Mary advised her not to take the knife with her and give it to others who were not involved, the defendant went ahead and took the knife with her. The defendant and Mary were prepared and decided to ask the deceased about whether she was the maker of the stories about the defendant. The defendant has opportunity to realise that she is going to commit/do something wrong. Nothing detracted her. She decided to do justice for herself by taking the laws in her own hands.
This is quite clearly wrong. This resulted in the death of the victim Celina Pakoa.
This is a very serious offence. The duty of the Court is to punish individual offenders, such as the defendant and also to protect the community/society at large from violent attack/assault on the body of the person(s) living in the society.
The serious nature of the offence warrants an immediate imprisonment sentence. I am surprise to see that the defendant is not charged under Section 106 of the Penal Code Act for homicide which represents heavier penalty and warranted under the circumstances of this particular case.
In any event, in cases such as this, where an offender deliberately went out with a knife which was carried as a weapon, and used it to cause grievous bodily harm resulting in death, even if there are good defence, the defendant could expect a sentence in a contested case between 8 to 10 years.
In this case, the defendant had carried a knife – had failed to retreat or put it away when she had opportunity to do so, and injured Celina Pakoa as a result of which she died.
I note she feels remorseful and says sorry to what she did. She told the Court she would not re-offend. The appropriate sentence I am intended to impose is 9 years imprisonment. The defendant is a young woman and had previous good character. This is her first offence. She pleaded guilty to the offence as charged and cooperates with the police. I take account of this in my sentencing which leads to the reduction of the total sentence by 1/3. The total sentence to be imposed is 6 years. The defendant has spent 2 months in custody. This will be deducted also. The defendant will serve a prison sentence of 5 years and 10 months.
If the defendant behaves well in prison then, she will have a remission of 10 months and will be called upon to serve only 5 years imprisonment.
When I sentence the defendant, I bear in mind of the security in prison and the conditions of the prison centres especially for the women. I am informed by the Public Prosecutor that even though there is no fencing security, there are iron bars on the doors and windows of the female room in the prison.
Security fencing and conditions of the prisons become an issue of grave concern in this country. It is difficult for a Judge to do anything about apart from contributing in ideas for change in comments, observations made in sentencing the accused person or in legal/judicial conferences/seminars held to this effect. Police and Government authorities need to do something about the conditions of prisoners in this country.
In this case, I decide not to deal with the issue of civil compensation claim of Vatu 10,000,000. The deceased family are advised to get the Public Solicitor or a private lawyer to assist them in lodging a separate civil claim.
14 days to appeal.
DATED at PORT-VILA, this 11th DAY of APRIL, 2001
BY THE COURT
Lunabek Vincent
Chief Justice
PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/vu/cases/VUSC/2001/35.html