State v Qasi [2013] FJMC 370; Criminal Case 158.2013 (7 October 2013)

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF FIJI
AT TAVUA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 158/13

BETWEEN:

THE STATE

AND:

VASEVA QASI

Prosecution: PC Dinesh
Accused: In Person

SENTENCE

1. Vaseva Qasi you pleaded guilty to theft contrary to section 291(1) of the Crimes Decree No. 44 of 2009.
   
2. You waived your right to counsel and opted to represent yourself. You pleaded guilty voluntarily to the charge when it was read and explained. You also accepted the facts tendered by prosecution.
   
3. The Court is satisfied of your guilty plea being unequivocal and you've convicted as charged.
   
4. The facts alluded by prosecution was that between 14th April 2010 and 22nd August 2011 you as exhibit writer stole cash amounting to $1435.25 from exhibit RCE no. 06/10 & 07/09 and used it for your personal use. Nonetheless you replaced all the money before the matter was discovered. What probed investigation into the matter was that on 5th August 2011 you handed over the duties of exhibit writer to one WPC 3874 Irinieta. It was noted that there were discrepancies of serial note numbers written and pasted in column 1,2, 3, 5 when contrasted with those in column 4 written by you.
   

Investigations revealed that you had used the money and when replacing the money you wrote new serial numbers of those notes on a piece of paper and pasted it over the old serial numbers of the money used.

After relevant enquiries you were than caution interviewed for the offence and admitted the allegation.

5. You have mitigated and I take the following in your favour:
   
   • Guilty plea.
   • First offender.
   • Remorseful and requested for forgiveness.
   • The money stolen has been fully replaced.
     
6. The following features I would regard as aggravating:
   
   • Breach of trust.
   • Benefit derived from committing the offence.
     
7. Theft under the Crimes Decree carries a maximum imprisonment term of 10 years.
   

The guideline in case authorities suggest that tariff for theft ranges from 2-9 months for 1st convictions and between 9 – 24 months for 2nd convictions depending on the value of the goods and circumstances of the stealing. (see: State v Saukilagi [2005] FJHC 13; Ronald Vikash Singh v State HAA 035 of 2002).

8. However the offending in this case is more fraud related and is not a simple theft case. The money stolen was lawfully in your custody and you converted it for your own use. In my opinion the proper tariff would be between 18 months - 3 years imprisonment.
   
9. In considering the circumstances of the offending in this case, I take a starting point of 18 months.
   
10. For the aggravating factors I increase your sentence by 2 months. Your sentence is now 20 months.
    
11. This being your first offence and other mitigating circumstances including the replaced money I reduce your sentence by 4 months. For your guilty plea, your sentence is further reduced by 6 months imprisonment. Your final sentence is now 10 months imprisonment.
    
12. I now consider whether to suspend your sentence. This is your first offence and you've remorseful for your action. It's undisputed that no loss has been caused as the money has been replaced. Having said that I bear in mind that you committed the offence whilst being a member of the Police Force. This type of offending within the Police Force is not the first of its kind and is something the Court is concerned about in the public interest.
    
13. Members of society place a high degree of trust in the Police Department however when a police man or woman breaks the law, it deteriorates the level of confidence people have for the Police Force and more so it tarnishes its good image and reputation as well.
    
14. Apparently this type of offending has occurred in the past and will likely occur in the future thus the Court has to impose a sentence that will send out a clear message that Police Officers who commit such offences will not be dealt with leniently by the Court.
    
15. In my view it would be appropriate in the circumstances to order that part of your sentence be served in prison and part be suspended. There are no exceptional or compelling circumstances to wholly suspend your sentence.
    
16. I therefore order that you serve an immediate prison term of 4 months. The remainder of 6 months will be suspended for 2 years.
    
17. If you commit any offence within the operational period of 2 years, you'll be charged for breaching this suspension order and if convicted you'll be made to serve the 6 months or part of it with any other penalty imposed in that other offence.
    
18. 28 days to appeal.
    

Samuela Qica
Resident Magistrate

7th October 2013