Police v Pupumai [2013] WSSC 110 (26 September 2013)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

Police v Pupumai [2013] WSSC 110

Case name: Police v Pupumai

Citation: [2013] WSSC 110

Decision date: 26 September 2013
Parties:
POLICE v SAOLOTOGA PUPUMAI, male of Fogatuli and Alafua.

Hearing date(s):

File number(s):

Jurisdiction: Criminal

Place of delivery: Mulinuu

Judge(s): Justice Nelson

On appeal from:

Order:
Representation:
F Lagaaia and O Tagaloa for prosecution

Catchwords:

Words and phrases:

Legislation cited:

Cases cited:

Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

THE POLICE

Prosecution

AND:

SAOLOTOGA PUPUMAI, male of Fogatuli and Alafua.
Defendant

Counsel: F Lagaaia and O Tagaloa for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 26 September 2013

SENTENCE

Defendant appears for sentence on two charges. Firstly that at Tuanaimato on 11 July this year while he was a servant of Samoa Land Corporation he did steal $700 in money belonging to the corporation. Second charge is that at the same place on the same date he committed the offence of burglary by breaking and entering the bookshop of the Corporation. Both charges carry a maximum penalty under the new Crimes Act 2013 of 10 years imprisonment.

The police summary of facts which the defendant has admitted this morning states that he is 23 years of age from Fogatuli in Savaii and Alafua. At the time of the offending he was employed by Samoa Land Corporation. His official designation is maintenance officer and he told the probation office that he is in fact a security guard. The summary states that on the night of Wednesday, 10th of July he was drinking with some colleagues at the Samoa Land Corporation bar at Tuanaimato. The bar closed at mid-night but the defendant continued drinking his remaining bottles of beer. At about 2:00 am in the morning he left the bar and walked past the bookshop located next to the bar.

He told the probation office that he checked on the other security guards and they were asleep. He returned to the bookshop and used his keys to open the door. He broke into the machine in the bookshop which contained the money. He took $700 from the cash machine and then left the compound. The following day he did not go to work but went to Savaii. By this time the employer has discovered there had been a theft and the police were called in. Eventually he was investigated and charged with this matter.

These facts indicate that the defendants offending was quite deliberate and probably planned. In the cause of his duties he had key access to the bookshop and he knew at 2:00 o’clock in the morning there would be no one around the area. He entered the premises and broke into the cash machine and took his employers $700.

Burglary and theft are two of the most prevalent offences in the country. For that reason the court imposes deterrent sentences to send a message to the defendant that such conduct is not acceptable. And to send a message to other people that if you do this you will likely go to jail. Even though the amount is small relatively speaking the defendant was a trusted employee of the corporation. Trusted with the keys to the premises, he was trusted to protect the premises. The circumstances are such that the penalty that should be imposed is one of imprisonment.

I will deal firstly with the theft as a servant charge which is the more serious of the two charges. As stated that has a 10 year maximum penalty. But an appropriate start point for sentence would be 2 years or 24 months. From that you are entitled to certain deductions which I will now make. Firstly for your guilty plea I will deduct one-third of that term a period of 8 months. Leaves a balance of 16 months. Secondly it has been confirmed that your family has made restitution in full to the Corporation of the money, that is a significant fact in your favour and I will halve the remaining balance because of that and deduct a further 8 months. Leaves a balance of 8 months. You have a good background of service to your family and you are a first offender before the court. There is also evidence of your good character before the court. Because of those factors I will deduct a further 4 months. Leaves a balance of 4 months .

On the charge of theft as a servant you will be convicted Saolotoga and sentenced to 4 months in prison. But your time in custody awaiting sentence is to be deducted from that period.

In relation to the charge of burglary you will likewise be convicted and sentenced to 4 months in prison. That term is to be served concurrent to your other term.

.........................

JUSTICE NELSON