A MAN who killed an elderly man during a late-night argument over money in 2023 at Tausoro, Central Guadalcanal Province has lost his bid to overturn his murder conviction.
The Court of Appeal found the killing was not an act of self-defence.
The alleged incident occurred on the night of 11 August 2023 at Tausoro, Turarana area.
Stanley Gegesi and another man went to the deceased’s house to ask for $50 for work Gegesi had done in carrying timbers. The deceased was asleep when Gegesi and the other man arrived.
A scuffle occurred earlier between 10pm and midnight, and later the deceased went back to his house.
During the confrontation, the deceased struck Gegesi twice with a piece of timber.
Gegesi then picked up a bush knife and stabbed the elderly man multiple times in his head, shoulder and back, causing his death.
Gegesi was arrested and charged with murder and grievous bodily harm.
He pleaded guilty to the second charge on the second day of his trial in July 2014, but the trial continued on the murder charge, and he was convicted.
In his appeal, Gegesi claimed there was a substantial miscarriage of justice, saying the trial judge failed to allow his lawyer to put the defence case to certain prosecution witnesses, wrongly rejected his claim of self-defence, failed to consider whether the force used was excessive, and failed to make a finding under section 201(1) of the Penal Code.
However, the Court of Appeal, comprising President Justice Sir John Baptist Muria, Chief Justice Sir Albert Palmer, and Justice Philip Hugh Morrison, dismissed all four grounds of appeal.
The judges found no error in the High Court’s conclusion that Gegesi did not act in self-defence when he stabbed the elderly man multiple times with a bush knife following the argument over $50.
The Court noted that the deceased, aged 86, was old and frail, while the appellant, aged 25, was strong and fit, having earlier carried 40 to 50 pieces of timber.
Evidence showed that the deceased struck Gegesi twice with a piece of timber — once on the face and once on the shoulder — but there was no indication the blows caused serious injury or continued after Gegesi fell to the floor.
“On no rational view could it be said that the appellant’s actions were justified by the scuffle earlier in the evening,” the Court said. “The force used was excessive in the circumstances.”
The Court further rejected Gegesi’s argument that the killing should be reduced to manslaughter under section 204(b) of the Penal Code, which applies where an offender acts in excess of self-defence out of terror or loss of control.
It ruled there was no evidence that Gegesi acted out of such terror or fear of immediate harm to justify reducing the offence.
The Court also dismissed the argument that section 201(1) of the Penal Code — which addresses killings committed in the course or furtherance of another offence — should apply, noting that the High Court had already found Gegesi had the required intention for murder.
Having found no errors in the trial judge’s reasoning, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal in its entirety.
By ASSUMPTA BUCHANAN
Solomon Star, Honiara
