reminded that the court should adopt a humane approach when considering an appropriate sentence. [14] The crime committed by the accused led to the death of her domestic partner. It is aggravating that the deceased who was a healthy 71 year old father, lost his life. Domestic violence has become common place and the courts have imposed stiffer sentences in an attempt to deter others from resolving domestic disputes using violence. It somehow seems senseless that the deceased lost his life over what started our to be a quarrel over money. In this jurisdiction fatal assault with sticks are prevalent. General deterrence for crimes involving domestic assault is called for. I however do not lose sight of the fact that the accused acted after the accused refused to leave and verbally abused her. She has also suffered abuse over a period at the hands of the deceased. This lessens the moral blameworthiness of her actions. [15] Although I am mindful of her limited eyesight at the time and the persistence of the deceased, I cannot ignore the fact that she struck several blows of such force that she fractured the skull and ribs of the deceased. This is an aggravating factor. [16] Counsel for the accused referred this court to other decisions. The essential difference between those referred to by counsel and this case is the fact that the accused previously negligently caused the death of a person by using the same weapon. This demonstrates that the accused easily resorts to violence. This offence was committed during the period of suspension and I must conclude that this did not deter the accused from resorting to violence. One would have thought that negligently causing the loss of life of one person would have been enough to deter the accused from negligently causing the death of another person. Having considered this fact and her lack of genuine remorse, I am not persuaded that the accused would be a good candidate for reform in the form of community service or that it would be appropriate to consider personal deterrence as a form of punishment. [17] The daughter of the deceased felt that a fine would be appropriate. From this I infer that the family has shown compassion given the advanced age of the accused
reminded that the court should adopt a humane approach when considering an appropriate sentence. [14] The crime committed by the accused led to the death of her domestic partner. It is aggravating that the deceased who was a healthy 71 year old father, lost his life. Domestic violence has become common place and the courts have imposed stiffer sentences in an attempt to deter others from resolving domestic disputes using violence. It somehow seems senseless that the deceased lost his life over what started our to be a quarrel over money. In this jurisdiction fatal assault with sticks are prevalent. General deterrence for crimes involving domestic assault is called for. I however do not lose sight of the fact that the accused acted after the accused refused to leave and verbally abused her. She has also suffered abuse over a period at the hands of the deceased. This lessens the moral blameworthiness of her actions. [15] Although I am mindful of her limited eyesight at the time and the persistence of the deceased, I cannot ignore the fact that she struck several blows of such force that she fractured the skull and ribs of the deceased. This is an aggravating factor. [16] Counsel for the accused referred this court to other decisions. The essential difference between those referred to by counsel and this case is the fact that the accused previously negligently caused the death of a person by using the same weapon. This demonstrates that the accused easily resorts to violence. This offence was committed during the period of suspension and I must conclude that this did not deter the accused from resorting to violence. One would have thought that negligently causing the loss of life of one person would have been enough to deter the accused from negligently causing the death of another person. Having considered this fact and her lack of genuine remorse, I am not persuaded that the accused would be a good candidate for reform in the form of community service or that it would be appropriate to consider personal deterrence as a form of punishment. [17] The daughter of the deceased felt that a fine would be appropriate. From this I infer that the family has shown compassion given the advanced age of the accused
S%20v%20Kapolo%20(CC%2005-2012)%20[2013]%20NAHCNLD%2052%20(14%20October%202013).docx