Police v Sang [2009] WSSC 20 (20 February 2009)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

LYNN AH SANG female of Vailele-uta
Accused in person

Counsel: Ms Faumuina-Tuuga for the prosecution
Accused in person

Sentencing Date: 20 February 2009

SENTENCE OF VAAI J

The defendant is a 21 year old female from the village of Vailele-uta. She recently married in December 2008 and has an 8 week old baby.

Between April 2006 and January 2008 the defendant stole from her previous employer on 36 different occasions sums of money totalling $37,881.30. At the time she committed the offences she was employed as a travel consultant. She has been employed for about 12 months when she commenced to commit the offences.

The sums stolen ranged from $100 to $9,000. Theft was discovered in February 2008 and the defendant was immediately charged. She denied the charges and the hearing was scheduled for 9th December 2008. On that date she vacated the not guilty plea. So the guilty plea was quite delayed.

Aggravating Features

1. The total sum stolen was relatively large.
   
2. Offending extended over a period of 21 months before it was discovered.
   
3. The defendant was in breach of her position of trust.
   
4. Restitution by the defendant of the amount stolen cannot be achieved and her previous employer is now permanently deprived of $37,000.
   

Mitigating Factors

1. In your favour I take into account your previous good character and I will make deduction for that.
   
2. You are also entitled to reduction for your guilty plea but you will not be entitle to a discount normally granted to an early guilty plea.
   

The sentence to be passed depends primarily on the circumstances of each case. Sentences imposed in the past for comparable cases do provide a useful guidance. The court is indebted to the prosecution for its very helpful and well prepared sentencing memorandum which amongst other things provide sentences imposed in the past for comparable cases.

People who hold positions of trust must realise that large scale misappropriation of funds placed in their trust and care will be dealt with sternly to convey intolerance and denunciation of their conduct.

The normal sentence in this type of case where the amount stolen is substantial, and the theft was extended over a lengthy period of time has been of a custodial nature. Such a sentence is justified here.

I consider 3 years as a starting point for your previous good record I deduct 6 months; for your delayed guilty plea I deduct 3 months. You are sentenced to two years and 3 months imprisonment.

JUSTICE VAAI