By Linny Folau

Christopher Taufa (38) was jailed for causing grievous bodily harm when he used a branch or a piece of timber to attack his neighbour during a drink-up in 2022. The attack was extreme.

Justice Cooper sentenced him to 30-months' imprisonment, with the last six months suspended on conditions on 26 March, at the Supreme Court in Nuku’alofa.

On 8 January 2024, the accused appeared for his trial and was unrepresented, facing two counts alleging attempted murder and, in the alternative, grievous bodily harm.

The judge stated that on his application, the case was adjourned overnight to allow him more time to study the committal papers. On 9 January, following discussions with Crown, he was re-arraigned on count 2 (grievous bodily harm) and pleaded guilty.

The victim was Mr. 'Afa Hingano 'Ahokava. On 23 December 2022, the accused and victim were neighbours and at around 5:00pm started drinking together at the victim’s fale (house).

The court heard that the accused became violent and struck the victim with a piece of wood to his head. The victim then tried to run away but he was struck again, that was all he knew of what happened to him. His sister Ofoi, who was nearby at her fale, came when she heard noise of the fracas. She found Mr. Talanoa with blood on his hands and face so she fled and got her father, Kepueli 'Ahokava.

When Kepueli arrived, the accused told him he had killed his son. This led to an altercation between Kepueli and the accused, it seems someone intervened to break that up, but in the meantime the police had been called.

Kepueli found his son lying on the ground, apparently unconscious, with a bloodied face. The bruises around his eyes had caused them to swell shut and blood was coming from his nose, his eye brows and lips were injured. The father noticed a piece of timber he described as a piece of 4x2, that had nails sticking out of it which was blood stained, found next to a siale mohe branch. His son was urgently taken to hospital and was not discharged until 27 December.

Injuries

The judge stated that the attending doctor provided a medical report dated 16 January 2023. Mr. 'Ahokava was found to have sustained: bruising to mouth and chin with swelling of left cheek; small wound at mid chest level; left eyebrow laceration, the length of his eyebrow, deep to the bone and intra-cerebral bleeding to the head.

On 14 January 2023, the accused was interviewed by the police and he admitted attacking the victim, hitting him with both the branch and the piece of timber, as well as striking him to his chest, foot and stomach.

“The accused's plea came on the first day of trial, as the Crown took some time on that day to consider his offer for a plea to count 2,” said the judge.

“From this it is clear to me that it was the first time this had been considered, as such it was the first time it was available to Mr. Taufa. I reiterate, that he was unrepresented. Given these circumstances I conclude that it is right to treat his plea as having been made at the first available occasion. The offer to drop count 1, in exchange for a plea to count 2, had never been available before to him up until then. He had no legal representative to advance his interests in any negotiations with the Crown's lawyers.”

“In regards to injuries, it is quite plain the Crown's case was that Mr. 'Ahokava had not only sustained serious injuries, but the attack has been extreme. They perhaps relied on that statement Mr. Taufa made to the victim's father, that he had killed him, as a reflection of his then state of mind,” he stated.

Gaps

The judge stated that the doctor provided a medical report for trial that the Crown relied on.

“The doctor had not been asked what was meant by a "significant" head injury, nor what an "intracerebral bleed" was, how severe a bleed it had been and whether it had been life threatening. The doctor also did not give any opinion as to the extent Mr. 'Ahokava's life had been put in jeopardy, if at all. The doctor also did not appear to have been asked, because he gave no opinion as to the degree of force that caused the injuries. These were all essential for the Crown to build their case in respect of the allegation of attempted murder, but were entirely absent,” he stated.

In addition, the photographs were not clear. The piece of timber with the nails, said to have been a weapon Mr. Taufa used was not photographed, nor the siale mohe branch. The medical report made no reference to puncture wounds consistent with nails or that any injury was or could have been so caused.

“There was no statement relating to a forensic examination of that piece of wood, or of the stick said to have been used as a weapon. For a case alleging offences of this gravity, a forensic examination of the weapons was essential,” said the judge.

“All of these basic questions are fundamental in building both a picture of the ferocity of an attack as well as building a case for trial. This material would also inform the Court when it comes to sentence,” he said.

Because there was no evidence of a forensic examination of the weapons there was a significant gap in the evidence.

The doctor, without being carefully and systematically required to provide an opinion covering the fundamental inquiries as to type of injury, nature of causation and opinions as to gravity, he would not know to respond in that detail, stated the judge.

Meanwhile, the accused told the Probation Officer of his great shame and regret in committing the offence. He was assessed as being at a high risk of re-offending and as a high risk to the community. He also apparently told probation that he blamed the victim for marijuana plants missing from his plantation and other missing property and this led to the dispute and attacking the victim.

“Whether Mr. 'Ahokava's head injuries were caused by the branch or the piece of timber has not been explained. There were no witnesses. Mr. 'Ahokava told police he was hit to the eyebrow with the piece of "4 x 2" timber. How reliable was his recollection when he was apparently knocked out shortly after? Mr. Taufa disputed that was the weapon.

“In interview, Mr. Taufa stated he hit the victim to the eye brow with the stick. He also admitted hitting Mr. Ahokava with the piece of wood that contained the nails. He accepted he had used it to strike him to the stomach, chest and foot. He accepted he punched his victim all over his face,” he stated.

“Admitting using a piece of wood with nails in it as a weapon, is in no way the same as admitting to using the nails in a piece of wood as part of the weapon a victim was struck with. There is a significant difference. He was not asked, nor did he admit to causing any particular injury with a weapon. Though it can be deduced the chest injury was caused by the piece of timber because he admitted using that to strike his victim to the chest.”

Sentence

The judge stated that any offence that involves using a weapon to attack another person to their head would almost certainly have to attract a prison sentence it being so serious.

A three-year starting point was appropriate in this case. “That must be increased by six-months to reflect the fact that two weapons were used, the branch and the stick and the repeated nature of the attack. For his guilty plea a 30% reduction is merited in this case, because that was the first time the Crown had considered his offer of a plea on the basis of accepting count 2 and not proceeding against him on count 1. Therefore, 42-months reduced by 12 left a sentence of 30-months' imprisonment.”

He then considered partial suspension and considered the principles in Mo'unga [1998] Tonga LR 154 aimed at promoting rehabilitation. The defendant here has only one previous conviction and pleaded guilty. A portion of his sentence ought to be suspended and concluded that the last six-months of his sentence should be suspended for 12-months, on conditions.

The accused was then sentenced and backdated to his first remand in custody on 8 August 2023. However, any breach of those conditions or by committing a criminal offence during the term of the suspended sentence will lead to being resentenced and sent to prison, ordered the judge.