Police v Leota [2008] WSSC 92 (28 October 2008)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

TAUTALAASO TUETUE LEOTA
male of Vailoa Palauli and Toamua
Defendant

Counsels: Mr Patu for prosecution
Mr Roma for defendant

Sentencing Date: 28 October 2008

SENTENCE BY JUSTICE VAAI

The summary of facts say that on the evening you stole the items valued in excess of NZ$3,000; you entered your employer’s compound at night you removed the items and took them to your home. When the unauthorised removal of the items was discovered by your employer, a public notice was issued, you responded to the public notice by returning the missing items and your seven years service was immediately terminated. The summary of facts suggested that you deliberately entered the premises of your employer at night to remove the items. But from reading the probation report and hearing your counsel’s submissions that does not appear to be the case.

There was a party at the premises of your employer that evening and the roll of copper wire was lying close to the company vehicle which took you home that evening. You put the copper wire onto the vehicle and you were driven home. That copper wire as I have earlier said has since been returned.

It has been said time and time again that abuse by employees of the trust of their employers is a serious issue and should be discouraged. Your counsel conceded that theft by an employee is a serious breach of trust and any accused convicted of theft as a servant generally expects a term of imprisonment as a sentence.

The prosecution in its very helpful sentencing memorandum has referred the court to sentences imposed by this court for similar offending, as well as a number of other relevant factors which support its contention that the court should impose a custodial sentence of not less than 12 months imprisonment.

However the level of criminality here is almost insignificant in my view, despite the value of the stolen item, your position in the company, the term of your service and the obvious trust placed in you by your employer. According to the probation service you have a drinking problem which has been a cause of concern for your wife and family. This offence as the probation service in my view correctly suggested has been fuelled by your degree of intoxication on the night in question.

You have lost your steady employment of seven years as a result of your inability to control alcohol. That is a punishment you have imposed upon yourself and your family. It has obviously taken a social and financial toll upon you and your family. I have read the probation report and the attached testimonials from your senior pastor and from Ale Vena, a very respected high ranking chief of your village and a former and very respected public servant. I am satisfied that you are very remorseful. This offence, I am satisfied, came about as a result of sheer stupidity, incited by alcohol.

I am satisfied a custodial sentence is not warranted. You are convicted and placed on probation for 18 months. You will also attend Toe Tomanatu Rehabilitation Center during the term of probation and you will also attend to any other programme as directed by the Probation Service to address your alcohol problem. You will also pay cost of prosecution of $500.

JUSTICE VAAI