Police v Lapana [2007] WSSC 96 (19 December 2007)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD IN APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

TAFITO LAPANA
male of Tauese and Tapueleele Savaii.
Accused

Editor's note: Sentence by Sapolu CJ

Counsel: P Chang for prosecution
R T Faaiuaso for accused

Sentence: 19 December 2007

SENTENCE

The charges

The accused appears for sentence on three charges of theft as a servant and six charges of forgery. The maximum penalty for theft as a servant is seven years imprisonment and for forgery it is five years imprisonment. To all charges the accused pleaded guilty at the first opportunity.

The offending

At the material times the accused was a supervisor at the bulk store section of the Chan Mow Supermarket at Matafele. On six separate occasions from 6 December 2006 to 30 January 2007, the accused would pull out receipts from the supermarket bulk store receipt book and write out an order for goods from the Chan Mow Wholesale at Togafuafua forging the signature of the senior supervisor. The forged orders would be used to pick up goods from Chan Mow Wholesale. The accused and a friend would then take the goods and sell them for cheaper prices.

On three separate occasions, the accused used the orders he had forged to obtain goods from his employer. On 12 January 2007 he unlawfully obtained goods worth $856.05; on 22 January 2007 he unlawfully obtained goods worth $2,535.45; and on 30 January 2007 he unlawfully obtained goods worth $2,010.30. The total value of the goods unlawfully obtained by the accused was $5,401.80.

The accused

Given the accused’s date of birth shown in the pre-sentence report, he would now be 29 years old but 28 years at the times of the commission of the offences for which he is now appearing for sentence. He is married with two children. He has had an above average level of education having finished school at Year 12. In 2000 to 2002 he served as a Mormon missionary in Samoa and American Samoa. He then worked for more than four years in various companies. His latest employment was with Chan Mow Co Ltd where he committed the present offences. He is presently unemployed.

As it also appears from the pre-sentence report, the accused told the probation service that he had been taught by a fellow employee about how to steal from their employer by falsifying the receipt books and so forth. That is no excuse for the accused, himself, to steal from his employer. He should have known that it was wrong to steal, especially as he had been a missionary for his church for two years. The accused also told the probation service that he spent the money he obtained from the sale of the goods he took from his employer on buying food and daily outings with his friends.

The accused has apologised to his former employer and has been forgiven. He is a first offender. The testimonial from the bishop of his ward (uarota) shows that he has been an active member of his church and a person of good character.

The decision

Whilst sentences in other similar cases provide useful guidance, the sentence to be imposed depends primarily on the facts of each case. No two cases have identical circumstances. So variations in sentences passed is to be expected.

In this case, the aggravating features would be the degree of trust that was placed in the accused as a supervisor and breached by him as well as the degree of criminality involved. What the accused did was to forge purchase orders to deceive and obtain goods from his employer. It was a calculated act. What the accused told the probation service was that he learnt the "tricks" from a fellow employee. This suggests that the accused must have contemplated for some time to take goods from his employer before he actually forged the orders which he used to obtain goods from his employer. The total value of the goods taken by the accused is also a relevant feature.

The mitigating features would be the accused’s guilty plea and the fact that he is a first offender.

Having regard to all the circumstances, the accused is sentenced to 16 months imprisonment on each of the charges against him. On each of the charges of forgery he is sentenced to 10 months imprisonment. All sentences are to be concurrent.

CHIEF JUSTICE

Solicitors
Attorney-General’s Office, Apia for prosecution
RT Faaiuaso Law Firm