K LEDUA
Appellant
p class=MsoNormal alal align=center style="text-align: center; margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> AND:
STATE
Respondent
Appellant in person.
Rachel Olutimayin for the Respondent.
Date of Hearing: 26th Augus6
Date of Judgment: 26th August 1996
JUDGMENT
<1"> The Appellant who is aged 45 pleaded guilty i Magistrate's Court at Suva on the 1st of February 1996 to 6 to two charges of committing
an act with intent to cause grievous harm to two Policemen on the 6th of January 1993.
After various adjournments extending over nearly three years the Appellant changed hia from not guilty to guiltyuilty and was sentenced
to three years imprisonment on each of the two counts, the sentences being concurrent. The facts which he admitted in the Court below
were that on the 6th of January 1993 at about 4 p.m. the Appellant was being questioned at the Raiwaqa Police Station for suspected
breaking and entering. A number of Police Officers took the Appellant to his house at Naboro. On arrival there the Appellant went
inside the house and pointed to the place where he had kept the stolen items inside a bedroom.
After showing the Police the bedroom the Appellant went to another bedroom and picked up a cane knife. While he was on his way out
of that bedroom Corporal Desmond Bower met him. The Appellant tried to run away and Corporal Bower tried to get hold of him. The
Appellant swung the cane knife at Corporal Bower but it missed.
p class=MsoNormal stal style="margin-top: 1; margin-bottom: 1"> Then the Appellant ran away into mangrove nearby. He was pursued by the Police and finally located bted by Corporal Luke Qionibaravi
who tried to arrest him whereupon the Appellant swung the cane knife at Corporal Qionibaravi. Later with the help of the other officers
he was arrested and brought to the Police Station. He was convicted of an offence under Section 224(b) of the Penal Code of unlawfully attempting to strike a person with an offensive weapon. The maximum penalty for any of the offences under Section 224
of the Penal Code is imprisonment for life.
The Appellant has a record of 52 prior offences dating from January 1969 until November 1992 ranging from larceny, house breaking
and entering, burglary, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, attempted unlawful use of motor-vehicle, robbery with violence, growing
Indian hemp, being in possession of Indian hemp, obstructing a Police Officer in the execution of his duty, damaging property, storeroom
breaking, entering and larceny, office breaking, entering and larceny and a few convictions for being drunk and disorderly.
When sentencing the Appellant the learned Magistrate remarked that he had had too many chances already and had clearly made no attempt
to reform. He also said that the Court had given the Appellant all possible concessions with a view to his reformation but the Appellant
had not taken advantage of these concessions. I agree.
His record of convictions is the longest I have seen for one person although there are probably some that that are longer. In his
plea for reduction in sentence the Appellant stated that he had a wife and two young children aged 7 and 5. So often Courts hear
such a plea, the obvious answer to which is that offenders should consider their families before committing criminal offences; unfortunately
they never do.
