KOSRAE STATE COURT
FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA
EASTERN CAROLINE ISLANDS 96944
Cite as Kosrae v. Talley, Kosrae St. (1987)
CRIMINAL CASE N0. 25-87
OPINION DISMISSING CRIMINAL ACTION
(1) Whether defendant did committed any act which violated KC 13.503, (Disturbing the Peace).
(2) Whether defendant did insult police officer by directing the expression "lifinkiom" in violation of KC 13.609, (Insulting a Police Officer).
At the conclusion of the hearing, I found that defendant did not violate any of the charges made against him in the above criminal matter. Based upon the findings, the matter is dismissed, and defendant was ordered acquitted from both charges.
Defendant was tried with two counts; (1) Disturbing the Peace and (2) Insulting the Police Officer, Samuel Talley.
Government calls one witness, officer Talley and defense call two witnesses, defendant himself and Mr. Likiak Ittu.
During the night of this incident both defendant and Mr. Ittu met at the bridge near the Malem Municipal Office. While on the bridge, defendant requested Mr. Ittu for cigarettes, but unfortunately, Mr. Ittu did not have and advised defendant that he was also after cigarettes. Defendant left Mr. Ittu and proceeded to further look for cigarettes.
Defendant Swimmer Talley as he was about to pass the municipal building, he did not notice anyone but someone kicked him by the chest and he fell. While on the ground, officer Talley start to put an hand-cuffed on his arms.
While struggling with the Officer, defendant demands to know the charges. Officer Talley advised defendant by using local terms "nimet fwul" which meant to shut up. While he was already under arrest, the Officer charged him with the offense of Disturbing the Peace.
Mr. Ittu did not see Officer Talley at the bridge during this particular night. However, after defendant was arrested, he saw officer Talley.
Facts in these case are disputed. Officer Talley stated that he first met defendant at the bridge and advised defendant to leave. Mr. Ittu testified that he did not see the Officer at the bridge, during the night.
Facts that are disputed in this matter relayed to number of occassions where Officer met defendant on this night. It was contradicted to testimonies of defendant and the witness.
During this particular night, officer Talley was accompanied by one, Officer Tilfas doing their normal duty as patrol officer in Malem.
Mr. Talley claims that he first met defendant at the bridge and warned him. First occasion he met defendant was at the bridge. On second occasion, he met defendant in between the municipal building and a public bell used by the office. Contrary to testimonies of Mr. Ittu and defendant.
Defendant testifies to the Court that they met only once and that was beside the municipal building. It was the only time defendant saw him after officer Talley kick him at his chest. Mr. Ittu never saw Officer Talley and Officer Tilfas at the bridge. Nothing in the testimonies reflects Officer Constantine Tilfas if he was at the bridge.
Officer Talley claimed that people lived near by the bridge were disturb. If people were disturb, there should be testimonies presented to the Court to support both charges. There is no facts presented in the testimonies to reveals the persons that were disturbed, and the language directed to insult the Police Officers was not even mentioned. There were some words used, but it was not clear whether the term "lifinkiom" used or directed to the officer.
The statutory provision specified the necessary elements to prove the charge of disturbing the peace and the elements necessary to support the charges which quote "wilfully committing any act which unreasonably annoy, or disturb another so that he is deprived of peace and quite; or which provokes a breach of the peace." KC 13.503.
We must now considered the acts of defendant whether there was in fact any wilfully act which annoys, disturb persons. The act of disturbing the peace covers large range of activities. It covers activities which annoys or disturb people effected to such an extend as to deprive them of rights to peace and quite and to provoke breach of the peace. 11 TTR 385 (1963).
Second issue that needs to be considered here relayed to charge, Insulting Police Officer by directing the expression "Lifinkiom" to Officer Talley.
Basically from the testimonies offered in Court, there was no supporting informations that reflects such words as instigated in the complaint. If there was in fact such expression uttered directing to Police officer, it could have support the charge.
"Insulting a Police Officer is maliciously, and with intent to ridicule or humiliate, directing to a Police officer, while on duty and in uniform the expression "lifunkiom." The offense includes using the expression or a substantial equivalent:
(a) in any language
(b) in an abbreviated form or altered from having substantially the same meaning as the expression.
The term itself as if it was directed to Police officer can be reflected in the testimonies of officer Talley. There was languages used but not specifically referred to the term "lufinkiom" as testified by the officer.
Defendant challenged the charge and testified that he did not insult the officer but only demanding to know the charge made against him.
Based upon these facts, informations and testimonies by the witnesses, I found defendant Swimmer Talley not guilty on both charges. Defendant is acquitted.
Dated: 6/11/87 /s/
Harry H. Skilling
Kosrae State Court