Police v Palanapa [2012] WSSC 16 (18 January 2012)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

THE POLICE
Informant

AND:

TITI PALANAPA aka MATAIO PALANAPA
male of Samatau.
Defendant

Counsels: Ms L Taimalelagi for prosecution

Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 18 January 2012

SENTENCE

The defendant in this case appears for sentence on a charge that he did indecently assault a 7 year old girl, a distant relative of his. He is an 18 year old single male who last year completed his Form 6 studies and according to the probation office report has ambitions to undertake further studies at the National University. I have no information as to his grades or educational prospects and the probation office report does not include these which would have been helpful.

As the defendant disputed the police summary of facts that he indecently assaulted the complainant, she was forced to come to court to relive this incident. The girl was understandably given her age very reluctant to talk about what happened but eventually she told the court about the incident. Her story was supported by the testimony of her 8 year old school mate who saw what happened through a window. As outlined in the courts ruling dated 16 December 2011 I accepted that the defendant had committed an indecent assault on the complainant.

The indecent assault consisted of the young girl being lured to the room of a nearby house by the older defendant and performing on him at his instruction some form of oral sex. He in turn did likewise to her. The incident obviously traumatically affected the young girl who was subsequently absent from school one week post-incident causing suspicion to be aroused in the minds of her teachers. Which ultimately led to the matter being uncovered and referred to the police.

One of the complainants teachers in her evidence talked about the change in the complainants personality post-incident from a happy, diligent student to being quiet, unresponsive and frequently pensive. Again given her young age this is not surprising. The complainants mother in the Victim Impact Report also acknowledged the change in behaviour of the young girl as a result of this incident. One bright area in the Report is the confirmation that the complainant has now resumed school and has expressed being happy in school and once again enjoying her subjects especially reading and drawing. The ability of young children to bounce back from traumatic experiences is not to be under-estimated and hopefully this young girl will suffer no permanent consequences of your actions Titi.

Considering all the factors in the case there is no question a penalty of imprisonment is required for what you did young man, notwithstanding your age. Your behaviour towards this young vulnerable female was depraved and inexcuseable and it is disturbing that you manipulated the young girl to a place where she would be alone with you. On the pretext of her fetching some salt for your cooking.

For your information an imprisonment penalty Titi is also in line with the courts policy in cases like this which is to impose strong deterrent sentences to continue to send the message to our community of the consequences of sexual offending especially on young girls. Considering all factors, an appropriate start point for sentence is 4 years in prison. But you are entitled Titi by law to certain deductions from that start point in recognition of the mitigating factors in your favour. The primary one being the fact that you are a first offender for which I deduct a period of one year or twelve months from the start sentence leaving the balance of 3 years. Offenders are also normally entitled to deductions for guilty pleas and normally the deduction is one-third of sentence because a guilty plea saves the necessity of a complainant having to relive the ordeal by testifying in court. And in recognition of the fact that it also saves the courts valuable time and limited resources. However in this case the defendant disputed what had happened which necessitated the complainant and other witnesses being called by the prosecution to verify the facts of the matter. You are therefore Titi not entitled to full credit for your guilty plea and I will only allow a three month deduction for that leaving a balance of 2¾ years.

For the fact that you are a very young man I make a further deduction of 6 months leaving a balance of two years and 3 months. The probation report notes that your family was fined by the village council and that fine has been paid. For that penalty I deduct a further 3 months from your sentence leaving a balance of 2 years. Had there been a formal apology and reconciliation for this matter as required by our custom and tradition you would have received a further deduction from this 2 year sentence. But the probation office report states that no such apology was made by your family or your parents and more significantly by you as the offender to either the complainant or the complainants family. You are therefore entitled to no further deductions from sentence.

For this matter Titi you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison. I direct that this term be served at the Olomanu Juvenile Facility at Mulifanua.

............................
JUSTICE NELSON