Rex v Kite [2012] TOSC 14; CR 12 of 2012 (9 March 2012)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TONGA
CRIMINIAL JURISDICTION
NUKU'ALOFA REGISTRY

CR 12 OF 2012

REX

-V-

TEVITA KITE

BEFORE THE HON. JUSTICE SHUSTER

HAVING HEARD - Crown Counsel, Mr Pouono and from the defendant in person. The defendant pleaded guilty on first arraignment to a five count indictment alleging five counts of Embezzlement of cash from the defendants employer - on 10th February 2012.

On entering his guilty pleas, on arraignment, the facts were opened and agreed, and the case was adjourned for the preparation of a Pre-Sentence Report and the defendant was released on bail to be sentenced on Friday 09th March 2012 @ 14.00.

BRIEF FACTS

The brief facts are, the prosecution allege that the defendant was employed as an accounts officer at the Post Office in Nuku'alofa for the past three years. According to the prosecution the defendant, on five different occasions, last year, stole cash which was to be deposited at the bank on behalf of the post office. The court was told the defendant altered accounting documents to conceal evidence of his theft. The court was told the offences occurred during June, July, August September and October 2011 at a time when the defendant was employed as the sole accounting officer for Tonga Post Ltd. Management became suspicious in October 2011the defendant was confronted and he admitted his part in the embezzlemen of cash over $22,000.00 TOP and interestingly none of the stolen cash has been recovered.

On his arrest the defendant fully admitted the offences to the CID officers who investigated the case, and also in his police record of interview charge and his confession statements. No money has been recovered and according to the probation service, in the defendants PSR the defendant admitted the stolen money was used by him to buy alcohol - not essentials.

Having considered all the facts of the case, considereing the helpful PSR and considering the fact that the defendant pleaded guilty. and having heard from defence counsel and from the defendant in person and, considereing the fact this crime was obviously planned and it was also a premeditated theft - by a person working in a position of trust in the Post Office - it is a very serious case.

The court is of the opinion that this is a clear breach of trust case, it is a case involving "corruption" at a high level, and even with a guilty plea the defendant must be dealt with severely, to try to deter other employees from committing like crimes.

I told the defendant [in open court] that my starting point for a postal official who steals a large amount of money entrusted to him from his employer where he was the accounting officer in charge, is a sentence of four years imprisonment - even on a timely guilty plea.

I told the defendant had the defendant pleaded Not Guilty and been found Guilty after a jury trial, then I would likely have imposed a sentence of between 5/6 years imprisonment - to deter other public servants from committing such crimes involving a large financial loss to his employer . So applying the facts and breach of trust sentencing guideline cases to this particular case.

The defendant is sentenced as follows:-

Count 1 - The defendant is sentenced to FOUR YEARS in prison
Count 2 - The defendant is sentenced to FOUR YEARS in prison
Count 3 - The defendant is sentenced to FOUR YEARS in prison
Count 4 - The defendant is sentenced to FOUR YEARS in prison
Count 5 - The defendant is sentenced to FOUR YEARS in prison

All sentences are – to be served concurrent.

As the defendant is a first time offender the court, has then gone on to consider if it can suspend any part of the sentence which has just been passed on the defendant. Because the defendant has lost his employment and his good name, and he is unlikely to be able to gain employment in a similar vocation.

The court has decided to suspended TWO YEARS of the sentence which it has just passed conditional on the defendant- keeping the peace and being of good behaviour and committing no further offending during the period of the suspension of the sentence of imprisonment which is to start from todays 9th March 2012.

The court warned the defendant about committing further offences during the period of his suspended sentence.

This is to be a deterrent sentence, applying the principles enunciated in the case of - Crown –v- Cunningham
A copy of this order is to be served on the defendant, the head of Tonga Post, and the Prison Service
TOTAL PERIOD OF IMPRISONMENT TWO YEARS STARTING FROM TODAY

DATE: 9 March 2012

JUDGE