By Linny Folau

A 19-year-old man who brutally assaulted a 72-year-old in Vava’u — punching him from behind, knocking him unconscious and leaving him with internal injuries — has been spared immediate jail, receiving a fully suspended prison sentence.

Lopeti Lyden Po’uli was sentenced to two and a half years’ imprisonment, fully suspended for three years, after being convicted of causing grievous bodily harm. Justice Tupou imposed the sentence on 10 February in the Supreme Court at Nuku’alofa, following a jury trial in Vava’u on 19 November 2025.

The court heard that on the evening of 14 December 2025, the 19-year-old from Talau, Vava’u was at the Mohetaha Kava Club, where 72-year-old Sione Havea Fanua was also present. The group had been drinking beer and engaging in banter that escalated into an altercation between the defendant and the complainant.

After the exchange, the complainant left the kava club. When he reached the area near the Water Board and Governor’s office, he felt a punch from behind and turned to see Po’uli. The defendant struck him again, causing him to fall to the ground. While the elderly man lay helpless, Po’uli kicked him in the abdomen until he lost consciousness.

A security guard from Halaevalu Wharf later found the complainant and alerted police. He was taken to hospital, where he was treated for internal bleeding to his liver and other organs caused by the attack.

The Crown submitted that the offending was aggravated by several factors: the attack was unprovoked and followed only a minor verbal disagreement; the defendant pursued the victim and punched him from behind while he was walking away; the violence continued after the complainant fell; and the victim was elderly and vulnerable. The defendant also fled the scene without offering assistance, and the injuries were serious.

In mitigation, the judge noted Po’uli’s early guilty plea, his status as a first-time offender and his cooperation with police.

“The complainant because of his injuries is said to have lost the capacity to undertake any work in his plantation. Although the abdominal pain has gone his physical energy has not returned. Bearing no disregard to what the complainant suffered from his injuries, I have taken into account his age and the consequent decline in physical strength that entails.”

The complainant told the court that an offer of monetary gifts and a request for forgiveness had been made to him and his family before trial, but he declined.

The Crown proposed a starting point of five years’ imprisonment, reduced by 12 months to four years, with the final six months suspended for one year on appropriate conditions. Defence counsel argued for a fully suspended sentence with conditions including community service, saying this would allow the Kava Club to assist in the defendant’s rehabilitation and enable him to pursue further studies at Fokololo ‘o e Hau vocational centre to secure a better future.

A pre-sentence report described the defendant as a farmer growing kava and other crops commercially, earning about $500 a week to support his family. He was said to be remorseful, to have apologised to the complainant, and to have sought the court’s mercy and leniency. The Probation Officer assessed him as being at low risk of re-offending and recommended a fully suspended sentence.

In sentencing, Justice Tupou said the aggravating factors included hostility and vengeful anger towards an elderly man.

“For a 19 year old to attack an unarmed, unaware 72-year-old man from behind and continue to attack him while on the ground helpless and to abandon him while visibly injured is culturally intolerable and inhumane. He is very fortunate that the defendant has survived with very little harm.”

Having regard to the maximum statutory penalty, the aggravating factors, submissions from counsel, comparable cases, and the principles of punishment and deterrence — as well as the public interest in denouncing vengeful, alcohol-fuelled violence — she set a starting point of four years’ imprisonment.

This was reduced in light of the defendant’s remorse, clean record and the complainant’s recovery, resulting in the final sentence of two and a half years.

On the issue of suspension, the judge referred to the guiding principles in Mo’unga v R, noting that suspension may be appropriate where an offender is young, has a good record, is likely to rehabilitate, where there is some diminution of culpability “(of which there is none here)” and where there has been cooperation with authorities.

She also noted that a suspended sentence is intended to have a strong deterrent effect and should not be imposed if the defendant is incapable of responding to that deterrence.

“I have considered the defendant’s youth, his expressed remorse although late, his cooperation with the police, the complainant’s full recovery and believe that he will utilise any suspended portion of his sentence to rehabilitate himself,” she said.

Balancing the seriousness of the offending against those factors — particularly the defendant’s age and the deterrent effect of suspension — she concluded that a fully suspended sentence on strict conditions was appropriate.

Po’uli was ordered to complete 180 hours of community service in Vava’u, not commit any offence punishable by imprisonment during the three-year suspension period, and complete alcohol and drug awareness and anger management courses if available. He must also attend the Magistrate's Court in Vava’u for directions regarding his community service.

“The court hopes that you, Mr Po’uli will use the opportunity and leniency you receive today to change the course of your life for the better. You must also understand that failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the suspension being rescinded in which case, you will be required to serve the full sentence imposed here today.”