Police v Vaoiva [2009] WSSC 29 (8 April 2009)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

LAIFA VAOIVA male of Sapo’e & Vaiala.
Accused

Counsel: R Titi for prosecution
R Papali’i for accused

Sentence: 8 April 2009

SENTENCE BY SAPOLU CJ

The charges

1. The accused appears for sentence on three charges of theft as a servant relating to three separate incidents which occurred between 31 August 2007 and 1 October 2007. Initially, the accused had pleaded not guilty to the charges but on the date of hearing, the accused changed his plea to one of guilty.

The offending

2. As it appears from the summary of facts, the accused was at the material times employed as a cashier at the Samoa Life Assurance Corporation. His duties included receiving payments from contributors of the Corporation to pay for their life insurances. The accused would record those payments in the receipt book and issued the contributors with receipts. At the end of each day, the accused would prepare "balance sheets" for all payments received and receipts issued. He would also prepare a lodgement sheet for banking.

3. After all that is done, the accused would hand over the money, copies of the receipts issued, the balance sheets, and the lodgement sheet to the Corporation’s senior accountant to check and endorse for banking.

4. On 12 September 2007, the accused received total cash payments of $5,118.70 from contributors for their insurances. He then took that money for his personal use and did not refer the balance sheets to the senior accountant for endorsement.

5. On 19 September 2007, the accused received total cash payments of $5,702.50 from contributors for their insurances. Again he took that money for his personal use and did not refer the balance sheets to the senior accountant for endorsement.

6. Then on 28 September 2007, the accused received total cash payments of $5,195.70 from contributors for their insurances. Again he took that money for his personal use and did not refer the balance sheets to the senior accountant for endorsement.

7. The total sum of money taken by the accused from his employer was $16,013.90.

The accused

8. The accused is a single, 23 year old male. He told the probation service which prepared his pre-sentence report that his offending stemmed from his break-up with his ex girl friend. He was heartbroken and turned to drinking and clubbing with friends to ease the pain. As he had no money at the time, he turned to his employer’s money.

9. The testimonials from the pastor and pulenu’u of the accused’s village show that he is a trustworthy and co-operative member of his church and village aumaga.

10. The pre-sentence report also shows the accused to be a well-educated young man.

11. The accused is also a first offender.

Aggravating factors

12. The principal aggravating factor in crimes of theft as a servant is the breach by the accused of the trust vested by his employer in him. In this case, the accused was employed as a cashier which is a position that involves financial trust. The accused breached that trust.

13. This is also not a case which involved one isolated incident of theft. It involved three separate incidents of theft. The total amount of money taken by the accused is also not insignificant.

Mitigating factors

14. The only circumstances which I consider to be mitigating in this case are the fact that the accused is a first offender and that he was a person of good character prior to the commission of these offences as well as his plea of guilty even though it was a delayed one.

The decision

15. Having regard to the aggravating factors relating to the offending, there being no mitigating factors in that regard, I will take 2 years as starting point for sentence.

16. I will then deduct 4 months for the mitigating factors relating to the offender, namely, the fact that the accused is a first offender as well as his delayed plea of guilty. That leaves 1 year and 8 months.

17. The accused is sentenced to 1 year and 8 months on each of the three charges against him. All sentences to be concurrent.

18. Any time the accused has spent in custody is to be deducted.

CHIEF JUSTICE

Solicitor
Attorney General’s Office, Apia, for prosecution
Toa Law