Judgment

Supang Lian JCA:

Introduction

[1] This is the tale of a senseless killing of a brother in the setting of a village in the hinterland of Sarawak.

[2] The appellant, Ringgie anak Ampas, was the person charged in the High Court at Sibu for the murder of his own brother, an offence punishable under s 302 of the Penal Code. The charge reads as follows:

"That you, RINGGIE ANAK AMPAS (NRIC:780819-13-5895) on 21 May 2017, between 11.00am and 11.30am at Kampung Sebintek, Skim B, Batu 24, in the district of Sibu, in the State of Sarawak, did commit murder by causing the death of ENTILI ANAK AMPAS (NRIC:721213-13-5241) and you thereby committed an offence punishable under s 302 of the Penal Code".

[3] The High Court had found the appellant guilty and convicted him on the said charge. He was sentenced to death. This is the appeal by the appellant against the said order of the High Court . At the conclusion of the hearing of the appeal, we unanimously dismissed the same, for the reasons stated below.

Case for the Prosecution

[4] The prosecution's case is derived from the Appeal Record, the findings of fact in the Grounds of Judgment of the High Court ("GOJ"), the Statement of Agreed Facts (marked Exhibit "D") and the submissions of counsel.

[5] On the morning of 21 May 2017 at about 11.00am, a quarrel started between the deceased, Entili Anak Ampas, and his daughter, Sudau anak Entili (PW11) in their house situated at the address stated in the charge. The deceased was the husband of Layam anak Nabau (PW2). According to PW2, the quarrel arose after the deceased confronted PW11 and questioned her on why she went out of the house two days earlier without informing him or her step-mother, ie PW2. The deceased was dissatisfied with his daughter's response and slapped her on her right and left cheeks. PW11 then cried and told the deceased that he was a bad father and that she would report him to the police for his conduct. They continued arguing until both were crying. When they had calmed down but still arguing, PW2 went down from her house to the house of her in-law Stanley anak Augustine (PW3), which was about 36 ft away. PW2 denied that her step-daughter was screaming when she left the house. At PW3's house, she inquired from him and his sister whether they knew who had sent her step-daughter back home to the house. Both said that they did not know. While they were still talking, PW2 heard the click of a shotgun and saw the appellant at the veranda of his own house aiming the shotgun at the deceased and wanting to shoot him. The deceased at that time had come out of his house and was alone at the veranda. PW2 shouted out to the appellant and said, "Don't do it as he is your own brother". Nonetheless, the appellant discharged the shotgun and shot the deceased who fell face down. After that, PW2 ran back to the veranda of her house where the deceased was and found him slumped face-down on a table. She further testified that her view was not obstructed during the incident and she could see the appellant clearly. She had been married to the deceased only nine months before this incident and within that period, had never seen the deceased beat his daughter or quarrelling with her.

[6] PW3 confirmed that PW2 was with him at the time of the incident and he saw and heard the appellant calling out to the deceased to come out of his house. When the latter did, the appellant shot him with the shotgun. PW3's house was about 30 meters away from the deceased's house whereas the distance between the appellant's house and that of the deceased was about 20 meters. Under cross-examination PW3 said that his view was obstructed by trees and bushes and he could not witness the incident clearly. However, he was certain that he heard the sound of the shotgun.

[7] From our perusal of the Record of Appeal, in particular, the Court testimony of Sudau anak Entili (PW11), we took note that the latter had confirmed that she and her late father were quarreling tha