Police v Tautala [2000] WSSC 4 (17 February 2000)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Informant

AND:

AINEA LAPA TAUTALA
of Salailua.
Defendant

Counsel: R Schuster and T Potoi-Vaai for Informant
P Petaia for the Defendant

Hearing: 16 & 17 February 2000
Judgment: 17 February 2000

JUDGMENT OF SAPOLU CJ

I would come directly to the gist of the conclusion that I have reached as to what should be the outcome of this case.

Essentially the only evidence that was adduced by the prosecution to link the accused to the charge against him is an oral admission that he made to Constable Simi Ioelu. In that oral admission the accused told Constable Simi Ioelu that the marijuana plant which was shown to him belonged to him and that the accused did plant that marijuana plant at his plantation at Siutu, Salailua. However in his oral testimony before this Court the accused stated that the reason he made that oral admission to the police officer who interviewed him was because of his concern for his brother who was at Salailua at that time and he wanted to protect his brother. He denied in his oral testimony that the marijuana plant which forms the subject of the charge was planted by himself. He also denied that the marijuana plant in question belonged to him. There is no other evidence to connect the accused to the marijuana plant which forms the subject of the charge against him. But the court has before it only two conflicting statements from the accused himself.

In such a situation the Court is of the view that there is a reasonable doubt as to whether the accused did cultivate the plant with which he has been charged. It would also be unsafe to enter a conviction when the only evidence before the court to connect the accused to the marijuana plant is his oral admission which he has now denied.

In all the circumstances the charge is dismissed.

CHIEF JUSTICE

Solicitors:
Attorney General’s Office for Informant
P Petaia for the Defendant