IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
(BEFORE THE HON R LUSSICK C.J.)

HCCrC 8/96

THE REPUBLIC

vs

BOUNTARAWA AUKITINO

Ms P Atanraoi for the Republic
Mr T Teiwaki for the Accused

SENTENCE

The accused has pleaded guilty to one count of burglary contrary to section 292(a) of the Penal Code Cap. 67 and one count of indecent assault on a female contrary to section 133(1) of the Penal Code Cap. 67. Both of these offences are serious. In respect of the offence of burglary the law provides that the accused is liable to imprisonment for life. In respect of the offence of indecent assault the accused is facing a penalty of imprisonment for 5 years. The brief facts of the offences are as follows:

On the early morning of the 2nd of April 1996 the accused broke a hole in the wall of the house where the complainant was sleeping. The house was of local construction so I would imagine that this would not have taken any great effort. The accused then woke up the complainant by tapping her ankle twice. He covered her mouth with one hand and grabbed her with the other hand. A struggle took place and the complainant fell off the bed. All of this time the accused had one hand firmly across the mouth and nose of the complainant. He tried to kiss her and he fondled her breasts despite the complainant's protestations. He finally left after the complainant promised to talk with him the next morning about whether or not she loved him. This of course was a ploy used by the complainant to get the accused out of her house.

It is quite clear on those facts that the accused broke into the complainant's house for the express purpose of sexually assaulting her. The complainant was later medically examined and the report shows that she suffered the following injuries:

Abrasions on the nose and chin
A sore inner lip
3 abrasions on each of the left and right feet
A few abrasions on both knees
One abrasion on the right elbow
3 abrasions on the left elbow
2 abrasions on the left hand
Aching muscles in the region of the neck

I am told that the accused is a single man aged 24 and comes originally from Marakei. His education is limited. He went as far as fourth form but did not complete that year. After he left school he stayed on to work in the school canteen. He then changed jobs to work as a supercargo in the school boat and this was the position he held at the time of the offences. 

The Court must regard these offences as very serious. Although the physical injuries suffered by the complainant appear to have been superficial the incident itself must have been most distressing for her. 

In the accused's favour he is a first offender and he has pleaded guilty to both charges. I am also told that he fully cooperated with the police. I also have before me a letter that the accused wrote to the complainant in which he apologises for what he did. I must say, however, that my impression of this letter is that it was written more with the motive of escaping punishment rather than being a genuine apology. Nevertheless I do take the letter into account as being some evidence of the accused's remorse. 

There is nevertheless no question that offences of this nature, because of their seriousness, must attract a term of imprisonment. Taking into account all of those factors in the accused's favour which I have mentioned I think the appropriate penalty is a term of imprisonment for a period of 3 years. 

The accused therefore on the charge of burglary is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 3 years. On the charge of indecent assault the accused is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 3 years. I order that both sentences are to be served concurrently.

THE HON R B LUSSICK
Chief Justice
(14/08/96)