Police v Manu [2012] WSSC 87 (21 September 2012)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

Police v Manu [2012] WSSC 87

Case name: Police v Manu

Citation: [2012] WSSC 87

Decision date: 21 September 2012

Parties:
POLICE v FALA MANU, male of Matautu-uta

Hearing date(s):

File number(s):

Jurisdiction: Criminal

Place of delivery: Mulinuu

Judge(s): Nelson J

On appeal from:

Order:

Representation:
Ms F E Niumata for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Catchwords:

Words and phrases:

Legislation cited:

Community Justice Act 2008

Cases cited:

Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

THE POLICE

Prosecution

AND:

FALA MANU, male of Matautu-uta.

Defendant

Counsel: Ms F E Niumata for prosecution

Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 21 September 2012

SENTENCE

The defendant in this case has pleaded guilty to charge that on 05 August 2012 at Vaisigano he did rob the complainant of a T-shirt. At sentencing the defendant disputed that part of the police summary which stated that at the time he was in possession of a knife. Accordingly on police application the complainant and his companion were called. Their evidence satisfies me that the defendant at the time he committed these offence was indeed in possession of a knife. As described by the witnesses it was a small knife.

The facts show that at approximately 1:00am on the morning in question the complainant and his friend were hanging out at the Vaisigano Bridge having just finished work as security guards for KL Security at Matautu. The defendant approached the complainants friend first, began hassling him and eventually challenged him to a fight. The friend refused so the defendant turned his attention to the complainant. He also threatened him and demanded he take off and handover his T-shirt. The T-shirt is unique because it was of a special kind used to fundraise for KL Securitys Kaino Thomsen Fuataga a competitor at the 2012 London Olympics. The complainant refused so the defendant put the knife to his throat. Not surprisingly that secured the complainants compliance. He took off the T-shirt and gave it to the defendant. The defendant left.

The complainant and his friend reported the matter to the police. The defendant was apprehended later that night by the police. T-shirt was returned to the complainant and the defendant also apologized to the complainant and his friend at the police station.

The offending is serious and aggravated by the defendants use of a knife. The defendant said he was drunk. But that is no excuse for anything. This is also not the defendants first offence. Records show that he received leniency on charges of burglary and theft in 2010 when the District Court gave him a suspended sentence and community service. He subsequently reoffended in 2011 as part of a group from Matautu involved in the riotous stoning of buildings and vehicles. The court on that occasion sentenced him to 6 months in prison for armed with a dangerous weapon and stone throwing. He is now charged with another theft. This time a theft accompanied by a dangerous weapon namely a knife. Clearly the defendant has not learned his lesson and a stronger deterrence is required.

The maximum penalty for robbery is 10 years in prison. Considering all the factors of your matter an appropriate start point is 2 years in prison. For your guilty plea I deduct one-third of your sentence a period of 8 months leaving a balance of 16 months. For the apology and reconciliation made at the police station I will deduct 3 months leaving a balance of 13 months. A sentence of 13 months in prison is appropriate for what you did. However Fala I am also of the view having read the documents of your matter that you have a drinking problem and that you would benefit from a term of probation. I also note that you have been in custody awaiting sentence.

I am therefore going to reduce your sentence in order to comply with section 12 of the Community Justice Act 2008 as follows; firstly prison sentence is reduced to 10 months in prison. But after that you will serve a term of 12 months supervision on the normal terms and conditions plus the following special conditions. During the term of your supervision you will refrain from all forms of alcohol that includes home brew; you are not to be found on any premises licensed to sell alcohol or within 50 meters of any such premises; you will be subject to an 8:00 pm to 6:00 am curfew in your home for every night including Sundays.

O tulaga faapitoa ia o lau faanofo vaavaaia Fala e faaauau lava mo le taimi lea e te i lalo ai i le vaavaaiga a le ofisa faanofo vaavaaia pe a maea ona tuli lau faasalaga faafalepuipui. Ua e malamalama? (defendant indicated he understood).

E te iloa la’u faamatalaga ia oe Fala, e sili na sui le sikaili o lou olaga. Aua o le mea lea e te agai iai e te le iu lelei. Oute leiloa poo le a le mea o le a oo i lau fanau ma lou toalua a’o tuli uma nei faasalaga. Ae tatau ona e mafaufau lelei o lou lumanai e pule lava oe. Ae a tumau pea ou auala ia o le solitulafono ia e le alofia e le faamasinoga, na ona aumai lava o oe ave i gautā. Afai o le lumanai lena e te manao iai ia tatou alu ai faapena, ae pule a oe. Ua e malamalama? (defendant indicated he understood.)

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