Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback High Court of Kiribati

Republic v Teitiaki [2010] KIHC 72; Criminal Case 13 of 2010 (16 June 2010)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KIRIBATI
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
HELD AT BETIO
REPUBLIC OF KIRIBATI

High Court Criminal Case 13 of 2010

THE REPUBLIC

V

ERIUTA TEITIAKI

For the Republic: Ms Pauline Beiatau
For the Accused: Mr Mantaia Kaongotao

Date of Hearing: 16 June 2010

DECISION ON SUBMISSION OF NO CASE TO ANSWER
(Ex Tempore)

At the close of the prosecution case I asked Mr Kaongotao whether he had any submission to make. He submitted that his client had no case to answer. I then put to Ms Beiatau that I must have a reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused. These two (or three – only two are alleged but the statement of the alleged victim, Miita Teitiaki, mentions two in 2008) incidents were vaguely set in 2008 and 2009. Yet it was not until March 2010 complaint was made to the police. In the meantime – until the last Christmas holidays – Miita continued to live in the house with the accused, his wife and family.

The prosecution called only two witnesses, Miita and her brother Roota. I believe they are twins. The girl who gave her age as twelve is physically mature: the boy who gave his age as thirteen is physically immature. I could not rely beyond reasonable doubt on the accuracy of the evidence of either of them.

Although Miita said in evidence she did tell the accused’s daughter – who was not called – nothing was done about anything. There was no reason why she could not have made a complaint to an adult, perhaps her aunt, the wife of the accused: if not to the aunt then to some other adult within or outside the family.

Yet nothing was done for up to two years.

Perhaps the story is true but I have the feeling that there may be bad blood in the family and the children have been encouraged by their mother – who it seems has mental problems – and others to go to the police with this story.

To sum it up: the allegations may be true but on the evidence presented by the prosecution I must have a doubt about them: a doubt which is reasonable.

There will be a verdict of not guilty. The accused is discharged.

THE HON ROBIN MILLHOUSE QC
Chief Justice