60-year-old jailed for raping neighbour
The High Court has jailed a 60-year-old man for 16 years for raping and sexually assaulting his teenage neighbour.
In October of 2023, the man lured the 14-year-old girl on the pretext of running to the shop when he pulled her into his house and threatened to kill her if she cried and performed the sexual act on her.
The matter only came to light when the girl was found to be in her third trimester.
The rapist has no previous conviction and earned a living by farming root crops.
Justice Lee James Burney, before sentencing the man at the High Court in Labasa, said the survivor had to endure an unwanted pregnancy during her schooling, with the experience bound to cause her continuing emotional stress.
“I would encourage you to reflect at length on the inevitable harm that your offending has caused to (the victim) and to engage with any intervention programs that may be available to you during your period of incarceration,” Justice Burney said while sentencing the man on June 13.
The man will be eligible for parole after serving 10 years of his sentence.
Court lenient on youth
The High Court in Labasa has imposed a community-based corrections order for one of the two men found guilty of assaulting and robbing a man last year.
The two, aged 18 and 22, committed the act in the early hours of January 22, 2024, while the victim was walking down the street near their home.
The victim was punched and robbed of his mobile phone.
Justice Lee James Burney’s pre-sentencing report stated the 18-year-old committed the offence when he was 16.
He had left school in Class 8 for work to support his family and is currently a casual labourer in a construction company in Labasa. He is also remorseful for his actions.
Justice Burney has decided not to record a conviction with a year imposed on him to comply with every reasonable direction of the supervising officer. If he does not comply with these conditions, he will be dealt with differently by the court.
“I want to know how you get on during the Order, and that is why I have ordered the community-based corrections officer to send me a progress report after six months,” stated the judge on June 13.
“I would be really pleased to hear that you are keeping out of trouble and showing that you can be a good citizen.”
The other accused was 21 at the time of the offence and maintained throughout his interview that he was innocent and was at the wrong place at the wrong time.
The court, however, found that his refusal to accept responsibility does not bode well for his rehabilitation.
Justice Burney could not go along with the recommendation to have a community-based order due to the accused having already served a suspended sentence for offences of dishonesty and having regard to all the circumstances of his offending.
For that, he was handed a two-year and nine-month jail term suspended for three years.
“By a very fine margin, I have decided that suspension is justified. You are not a hardened criminal, and I feel sure that you have no wish to repeat the experience of your period in custody on remand.
“You are now in a stable relationship and have the responsibilities of parenthood, which I believe will incentivise you to become a productive and law-abiding citizen.
“You should be in no doubt, however, that this is the last chance saloon for you.”
Judge rules forsacked policeman
The High Court in Suva has declared that the decision of the former police commissioner in dismissing an employee without hearing his mitigation was unreasonable, unjust, and irrational.
And as such, the court ruled that the sacked police officer be reinstated and all his lost earnings be paid in full.
This was the ruling delivered by Justice Senileba Levaci on a judicial review application filed by Shymal Shesh Kumar, who was represented by lawyer Jagath Karunaratne.
Mr Kumar, who was based at the Nasinu Police Department and later at the Criminal Investigation Department, was issued with two default notices in March 2021, alleging incidences that occurred in November 2020.
He had sought a judicial review against the decision of the police commissioner at that time, Sitiveni Qiliho, based on recommendations from the Police Disciplinary Tribunal to dismiss him from the force on May 6, 2021.
His lawyer submitted that there was a breach of natural justice because Mr Kumar was not allowed to mitigate or explain the reasons for the allegations against him during the tribunal hearing after pleading guilty.
So after making her analysis Justice Levaci, quashed Qiliho’s decision made on May 11, 2021.
“The applicant is to be reinstated and his salaries, which were suspended from indictment until his dismissal, be repaid to him,” stated Justice Levaci in her ruling delivered on June 13.
“Alternatively, that the Applicant be repaid his full salary and benefits from the date of indictment until judgment, and a compensation on a generous scale be awarded to him.
“The matter is remitted to the respondent under Order 53 rule 9 (4) of the High Court Rules 1988 to comply with the orders of the court within 60 days from today.”
The police force is also to pay cost of $2500 to Mr Kumar.
