http://my.opera.com/Brunei_Darussalam/blog/show.dml/1111369




-->

Two Years For Killing Wife
By Yulz. Tuesday, 26. June 2007, 03:17:42
General, Wife, Kill, Brunei, news, Bad, Murder
These can't be right !! another murder case ? hope he's over it and stop doing such a terrifying thing Brunei is a peaceful country so be it !!!! Come on Bruneian .. lets fight together to stop all those bad thingsBandar Seri Begawan - Wife killer Liew Say Koo will be out of jail by November. Liew killed his wife in June last year, the court heard. Liew's early release is a result of a two-year sentence Brunei High Court Judge Dato Steven Chong passed on Liew yesterday. Liew, 44, a prominent contractor in Brunei, gave himself up to the police when his 26-year-old wife Wong Ai Na was found dead in a hotel room in the Brunei capital on June 12 last year and had been held in prison ever since. His sentence will be backdated to his initial remand in custody, the court ruled. He pleaded guilty to committing a rash act not amounting to culpable homicide by punching and kicking her. For good conduct in prison he could be given the customary one-third remission and therefore earning possible freedom in November. In passing the sentence, the judge remarked that on the facts before the court, even though Liew has a violent streak which he cannot control that is not sufficient enough to call him a dangerous man. The court also commended defence lawyer Mr Daljit Singh Sandhu, who with Mr Vincent Joseph appeared for Liew. Judge Dato Chong thanked Mr Sandhu for his "helpful" submissions. Appearing for the prosecution were Deputy Public Prosecutor Suriana Radin and DPP Farhanah binte Pehin Dato Haji Suhaili Soon after sentencing, friends and relatives rushed towards a much-relieved Liew outside the dock hugging and congratulating him. Liew who had been wearing a "lucky" brick red shirt with designs throughout the three-day trial also embraced his lawyers, thanking them. The court was packed during the trial and Liew flashed a victory sign from the dock briefly glancing at his supporters when the sentence was passed. The judge, reading out the five-page verdict, recalled that Liew, the defendant, was charged in the Magistrate's Court on June 13, 2006 with the murder of his wife, Wong Ai Na, contrary to Section 302of the Penal Code. The penalty for murder is death. On June 18, 2007, the Public Prosecutor preferred an alternative charge against the defendant of causing the death of Ai Na by doing a rash act not amounting to culpable homicide, by punching and kicking her, an offence punishable with a term of up to five years' imprisonment or a fine under Section 304A(2) of the Penal Code. The defendant pleaded guilty to the alternative charge whereupon the Public Prosecutor withdrew the murder charge. The statement of facts, admitted unreservedly by the defendant, is this: Ai Na, aged 26, the defendant's third wife lived in Limbang. She arrived in Brunei on July 9, 2006 and stayed at a hotel with the defendant. They moved to a different hotel two days later, the judgment continued. On July 12, 2006 at about 10pm, the defendant telephoned his friend Chung Yung Woei telling him that he had a fight with Ai Na and to call for an ambulance. Not long after that, the defendant called Chung again to ask why the ambulance was taking such a long time to arrive. Eventually, responding to Chung's call, paramedics went to a hotel which was the wrong place. But they met the defendant there and he directed them to the hotel where he was staying. He led them to his room where they found Ai Na, who appeared to be dead, lying on the bed. The police were alerted and several officers arrived at the scene. In his police statements the defendant said that he had an argument with his wife over a report she made at the Kuching Police Station. He said he had punched and kicked her "all over the body". He "used his hands to slap and punch the head and face region and that he used his legs to kick the deceased's legs and body". The defendant "admits that although he did not intend to cause the death of his wife, his rash act in punching and kicking the deceased all over had caused the death". He surrendered himself to the police that night and cooperated with the investigations. A post mortem carried out by Dr P U Telisinghe, a specialist pathologist in RIPAS Hospital, revealed 163 external injuries on Ai Na's body. Five injuries listed in the report which Dr Telisinghe opined were fatal - (i) oblique contusion with abrasion on the middle of the forehead at the hairline extending to the left 2.5 x 1.5 cm; (ii) 2.5 x 2.0 cm contusion on the left side of the middle of the forehead; (iii) 4 x 3.0 cm contusion on the right side of the forehead just below the hairline; (iv) 2.15 x 1.5 cm contusion on the right upper eyelid at the lateral margin; and (v) I x 0.5 cm contusion on the right side of the face lateral to the right eye. Ai Na died of subdural haemorrhage as a result of the injuries she suffered, the medical report said. The defendant is 44 years old and was born in Sarawak. He said in evidence that he started manual work at the age of 13 or 14 because his parents could not afford to pay for his education, the judge said. He came to Brunei at the age of 19 to work as a building construction worker. From that humble background he subsequently became a major shareholder of a leading building construction company bearing his name with more than 500 employees. Describing Ai Na as his "common law wife", the defendant said he loved her despite her problems with illicit substances such as drugs, violent temper and inability to conceive until she underwent in-vitro fertilisation. About the events leading to the death of Ai Na on the night of July 12, 2006 in the hotel, in essence, it was the defendant's story that in the morning he had "sexual intercourse" with his wife but she was unhappy with him when he became too tired. She berated him and accused him of being unfaithful. He left her in the room in order to attend a meeting. During the day, the defendant said he learnt about a newspaper report that his wife might have been molested by six men in Kuching earlier in the week. He suspected that the bruises he had noticed on her body could be connected to that incident. Upon returning to the hotel that night the defendant said his wife was asleep. He looked into his wife's handbag and found a police report. After reading the report he woke his wife up and enquired about the Kuching incident. She became verbally abusive. She disparaged his sexual performance, accused him of infidelity and uttered vulgarities. This soon escalated into physical violence. After the fight the defendant said they had a shower and went to bed and watched television whilst he made a cup of tea and placed a number of business and personal telephone calls. Later, the defendant recounted that when he tried to wake his wife up for dinner there was no reaction. He tried in vain to resuscitate her and realised there was something terribly wrong. That was when he called his friend Chung for help. No complaint was made by the defendant about his wife's assault on his private parts either in his three police statements or to the two doctors who examined him. He said he was ashamed to tell anyone and did not appreciate the importance of this occurrence towards mitigating his action. "I am grateful to Mr Sandhu, counsel for the defendant, for his helpful submissions," the judge said. "I accept the following factors must be considered in the defendant's favour in sentencing: (i) guilty plea; (ii) clear record; (iii) good character; (iv) there was a degree of provocation; (v) offence was committed in the "heat of the moment"; (vi) no weapon was used (vii) remorse of the defendant; (viii) cooperation given to the police; and (ix) compensation offered to the family of the deceased. "Mr Sandhu submitted, and I accept, that the offence was completely out of character. Through the counsel the court has received 10 testimonials from the defendant's friends, employees and clients: these include a retired Commissioner of Police and a Judge of the Syariah Courts. They speak of the defendant's character in glowing terms: he is honest, reliable, generous and good-natured. "Counsel for the defendant has referred to a very useful schedule of comparable cases outlining the offences, facts, mitigating and aggravating features, and sentences. Of course each case must be decided on its own facts. But I think two of the cases are of some relevance. "First, in Public Prosecutor v Jawah Anak Kiroh [19651986] BLR 183, the defendant, aged 80, killed his son by slashing his neck with a parang during a fight. He pleaded guilty to the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder contrary to Section 304 of the Penal Code. We do not know whether he was convicted under the first limb of Section 304 (maximum punishment of 15 years' imprisonment) or the second limb of Section 304 (maximum punishment of 10 years' imprisonment). The court accepted that the defendant was under some degree of provocation as his son had "abused" him and kicked him on the face. Both men had been drinking before the incident. Jones, J C, imposed a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment. Next is the recent case of Public Prosecutor v Ong Sui Kong [Criminal Trial No 24 of 2005] in which the defendant, aged 29, stabbed his 56-year-old father with a kitchen knife in a fit of anger after he was "told off' for driving his car into a ditch. The father died from his wounds. Likewise, as in Jawah's case (supra), both father and son were under the influence of alcohol at the time. The defendant pleaded guilty to the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder contrary to Section 304(2) of the Penal Code (maximum punishment of 15 years' imprisonment) and was sentenced (by Datin Paduka Hayati, J and Hairol Arni, J C) to three years' imprisonment. In passing the sentence, the High Court said that the authorities cited demonstrate how widely the facts vary in different cases. This sort of case is difficult when it comes to deciding on an appropriate sentence. It is not a matter of exact science or mathematical formula. The facts vary infinitely and therefore the punishment for them. The extent of the punishment must reflect all the circumstances. "I think it is safe to say on the facts before the court that the defendant is not a dangerous man in the sense that he is likely to be a danger to the public because he has a violent streak which he cannot control. "The killing of his wife was the culmination of violent scenes between them. It appears there was considerable provocation. Also, there seems to be some suggestion in the defendant's evidence and mitigation that some of the injuries could have been sustained by his wife in the Kuching incident; and one or more of the injuries to her head which resulted in her death may have been caused when she accidentally fell and hit her head on the toilet bowl during the fight. "Nonetheless, the defendant's responsibility in causing his wife's death cannot be treated lightly. He went far beyond the bounds of what was reasonable in his actions which resulted in the death of his wife and this is evident in his own plea and admission to the statement of facts. "The paramount interest must be the public interest. The court must bear in mind in passing the sentence that it must be a sentence as will reflect society's concern for the sanctity of human life. "Having considered all the circumstances of this miserable affair, I think a starting point of three years' imprisonment is proper. "Giving credit to the defendant's guilty plea, I sentence him to two years' imprisonment backdated to the date when he was first remanded in custody," Mr Justice Steven Chong said. -- Courtesy of Borneo Bulletin