(Bandar Seri Begawan, 19th) The Court of Appeal ruled that the trial judge made an error in determining the starting point for sentencing a Bangladeshi citizen convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl.
Shaari (39), a garbage collector, was sentenced by the High Court to 25 years' imprisonment and 20 strokes of the cane for raping the victim in December 2021. The victim was also diagnosed with mild intellectual disability and a mild learning disability.
However, presided over by Chief Justice Datuk Chong Hui Yan and another judge, the Court of Appeal on June 18 ruled that the trial judge erred by using a starting point of 30 years, reducing the sentence to 13 years and 4 months.
The Court of Appeal ruled that, taking into account the aggravating factors, including the victim's age, her vulnerability due to her mental condition, and the boldness of the attack, which was witnessed by her grandfather near her home in broad daylight, 20 years' imprisonment would have been an appropriate starting point for sentencing.
The Court of Appeal also found that the trial judge erred in reducing the sentence by only one-sixth for the guilty plea and stated that the defendant was entitled to a one-third reduction for pleading guilty at an early stage.
The court emphasized that the strength of the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimony and sperm found in the vaginal swab, was not a legitimate reason to deny the full sentencing reduction for the early guilty plea, citing the UK Court of Appeal's decision in R v Caley. In the judgment, the judge stated: "We reject the prosecution's argument that the overwhelmingly strong evidence against the appellant justified reducing the discount for the guilty plea."
Although the prosecution insisted that a 25-year sentence was appropriate, the sentence was ultimately reduced. The prosecution emphasized several aggravating factors, including the prior inappropriate contact between the offender and the victim and that the crime was committed openly at the victim's home.
The court noted that the statutory minimum sentence for such crimes in Brunei is 10 years' imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane.
The defendant represented himself in court, stating during the appeal that he was the sole breadwinner of his family, which included his elderly mother, a paralyzed wife, and three children.
He also argued that he cooperated with authorities during the investigation and pleaded guilty at an early stage.
The Court of Appeal permitted his application to extend the appeal period before ruling to set aside the original sentence, replacing it with the reduced imprisonment term, while the sentence of 20 strokes of the cane remained unchanged.
Shaari (39), a garbage collector, was sentenced by the High Court to 25 years' imprisonment and 20 strokes of the cane for raping the victim in December 2021. The victim was also diagnosed with mild intellectual disability and a mild learning disability.
However, presided over by Chief Justice Datuk Chong Hui Yan and another judge, the Court of Appeal on June 18 ruled that the trial judge erred by using a starting point of 30 years, reducing the sentence to 13 years and 4 months.
The Court of Appeal ruled that, taking into account the aggravating factors, including the victim's age, her vulnerability due to her mental condition, and the boldness of the attack, which was witnessed by her grandfather near her home in broad daylight, 20 years' imprisonment would have been an appropriate starting point for sentencing.
The Court of Appeal also found that the trial judge erred in reducing the sentence by only one-sixth for the guilty plea and stated that the defendant was entitled to a one-third reduction for pleading guilty at an early stage.
The court emphasized that the strength of the prosecution's evidence, including eyewitness testimony and sperm found in the vaginal swab, was not a legitimate reason to deny the full sentencing reduction for the early guilty plea, citing the UK Court of Appeal's decision in R v Caley. In the judgment, the judge stated: "We reject the prosecution's argument that the overwhelmingly strong evidence against the appellant justified reducing the discount for the guilty plea."
Although the prosecution insisted that a 25-year sentence was appropriate, the sentence was ultimately reduced. The prosecution emphasized several aggravating factors, including the prior inappropriate contact between the offender and the victim and that the crime was committed openly at the victim's home.
The court noted that the statutory minimum sentence for such crimes in Brunei is 10 years' imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane.
The defendant represented himself in court, stating during the appeal that he was the sole breadwinner of his family, which included his elderly mother, a paralyzed wife, and three children.
He also argued that he cooperated with authorities during the investigation and pleaded guilty at an early stage.
The Court of Appeal permitted his application to extend the appeal period before ruling to set aside the original sentence, replacing it with the reduced imprisonment term, while the sentence of 20 strokes of the cane remained unchanged.