Police v Latu [2008] WSSC 59 (4 August 2008)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

TUPU OFISA LATU
male of Vailoa Faleata and Satoalepai Savaii.
Accused in person

Counsel: Ms Faumuina- Tuuga for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentencing Date: 04 August 2008

SENTENCE BY JUSTICE VAAI

Defendant is 28 years of age, married man with two children. He was formerly employed by GSI Company under the management of the victim.

The defendant’s employment was terminated on the 21st May this year for dishonesty and his final pay was withheld by the victim to recover losses incurred by the defendant’s dishonesty. On the following day the 22nd May 2008 the defendant again saw the victim about his final pay but was unsuccessful.

The next day the 23rd May 2008 the defendant after watching a rugby match took a taxi with his friends. His friends were dropped off at a nightclub and the defendant continued on to the GSI premises by the Fugalei market. The victim’s car was seen by the accused at the company’s premises. The defendant opened the window of the GSI building by force and entered the building. It was dark and the only light turned on was at the office of the victim; the rest of the building was in darkness. The defendant covered his face with a t-shirt and waited for the victim to come out of his office. As the victim left the office with the day’s takings in a bag he was punched by the defendant on the side of the face. He was again punched causing the victim to fall down. The defendant then grabbed the bag of money, struck the victim with a crow bar and ran away with the money. He caught a taxi and went to a friend’s place but no one was at the friend’s place. There was $25,763 cash and there were also cheques. The defendant took $200 cash, hid the back of money at the friend’s place, went to the nightclub where he dropped off his friends and shouted drinks. The next day the police recovered the bag of money from the friend’s place.

The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge of robbery for which he is liable to 10 years imprisonment and a charge of breaking and entering for which he is liable to 5 years imprisonment. The Court should note that there has been an increase in robbery cases involving violence. Premeditated offences of robbery involving violence and dangerous weapon should be dealt with severely to protect society and to deter the defendant and others who may have an inclination towards the same kind of conduct. Consideration of retribution and deterrence must accordingly take priority over rehabilitation and other considerations.

The offending by the victim calls for a sentence towards the top range of the scale. To effect the robbery the defendant broke into the building disguised himself and waited for the victim. The victim was alone and helpless. According to the victim’s impact report, the victim said that he was struck several times with the crow bar. After the incident the victim’s face was swelling, he suffered pain and discomfort. I have read and took into account what is said in the probation report. It does not alter what the Court has decided to do in this case and that is to impose a lengthy custodial sentence.

For this offence a starting point of 4 years and 6 months imprisonment is the appropriate one. For your early guilty plea I deduct six months imprisonment. For your previous good record I deduct another six months. For the charge of robbery you are sentenced to prison for three years and six months. For breaking and entering you are sentenced to twelve months imprisonment. Both terms to be served concurrently.

JUSTICE VAAI