Police v Tagi [2013] WSSC 87 (15 October 2013)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

Police v Tagi [2013] WSSC 87

Case name: Police v Tagi

Citation: [2013] WSSC 87

Decision date: 15 October 2013

Parties:
POLICE (prosecution) and PAULO TAGI (accused) male of Nofoalii and Luua Faga.

Hearing date(s):

File number(s):
S1755/13, S1756/13, S1758/13
S1759/13, S1760/13

Jurisdiction: CRIMINAL

Place of delivery: MULINUU

Judge(s): CHIEF JUSTICE PATU FALEFATU SAPOLU

On appeal from:

Order:

Representation:
F Lagaaia and O Tagaloa for prosecution
Accused in person

Catchwords:
Sentence, burglary, theft, simple burglary , entering a building without authority with intent to commit a crime, mitigating and aggravating features

Words and phrases:

Legislation cited:
Crimes Act 2013 s.174

Cases cited:

Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

FILE NOS:

S1755/13, S1756/13, S1758/13

S1759/13, S1760/13

BETWEEN

P O L I C E

Prosecution

A N D

PAULO TAGI male of Nofoalii and Luua Faga

Accused

Counsel: F Lagaaia and O Tagaloa for prosecution

Accused in person

Sentence: 15 October 2013

S E N T E N C E

The charges

1. The accused Paulo Tagi appears for sentence on 3 charges of simple burglary, that is, entering a building without authority with intent to commit a crime inside the building, pursuant to s.174 of the Crimes Act 2013, and three charges of theft pursuant to s.161 of the Act. The offence of burglary or simple burglary carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment and the offence of theft carries a maximum penalty of one year imprisonment. To all charges the accused pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.

The offending

2. The accused makes his living by selling fa’apāpā for his aunty at Faga, Savaii, to stores in the villages of his district. A fa’apāpā is made of flour with sugar and coconut cream added to it. Sometimes ripe bananas are add on to give the fa’apāpā more flavour. There ingredients are then wrapped in a piece of banana leaf and cooked in a umu (Samoan oven).
3. However, the accused was not satisfied with the money he was earning from selling fa’apāpā either because his aunty was not giving him enough from the sale of fa’apāpā or because he was simply being greedy. So in the early hours of Thursday morning 1 August 2013, he entered a store at Fusi, Safotulafai, and went to the cash drawer, pulled it out, and took $280. Then in the early hours of Thursday morning 6 August 2013, he entered into another store at the village of Fatausi and went to the cash drawer, pulled it out, and took $170. And in the early hours of Wednesday morning 14 August 2013, he entered another store which is at Fogapoa, went to the cash drawer, pulled it out, and took $40. On this occasion, the accused had pushed his luck too far. He was seen and recognised by a son of the store owner who was awake at the time. The store owner’s son gave chase to the accused but the accused was too fast for him. The accused was reported to the police and he was subsequently apprehended by the police who then cautioned and interviewed him. He must have admitted the burglary of the other two stores to the police for the police to be able to solve those two burglaries so promptly.
4. When the accused was interviewed by the probation service for the preparation of a pre-sentence report, he did not want to discuss his offending with the probation service. He said to the probation service, what is the point of talking about what I did when I have already pleaded guilty to it. Evidently, the accused does not understand the significance of a pre-sentence report.

The accused

5. The accused is 24 years of age. He is single and is now unemployed. He left school at year 11 because of his father’s medical problems. When his father passed away in 2009, he sought employment and found one in Apia as an assistant carpenter. In 2011, he visited his father’s family in Faga, Savaii, and did not return to Apia. He stayed in Faga and helped out with his aunty’s business selling fa’apāpā. He drinks and smoke but his mother told the probation service that her son is a good boy. The written testimonial from the pulenu’u of Faga, Savaii, also shows the accused to have been a very good person. The accused is also a first offender.
6. The accused and his family have apologised to one of the store owners whose store was burgled by the accused and the apology was accepted. That store owner has asked for leniency on the accused.

The aggravating and mitigating features

7. The aggravating feature of this offending is that it is not a one off case of burglary and theft but a case of three burglaries and theft committed on three different stores within a period of 14 days. There is no mitigating feature of this offending.
8. On the other hand, there is no aggravating feature personal to the accused. But there are mitigating features personal to the accused. He is a first offender and a first time burglar. He had been a person of good character prior to the commission of these offences. The accused and his family have also apologised to one of the victim’s and the apology was accepted. The accused has also pleaded guilty to all charges at the earliest opportunity.

Discussion

9. Having considered the aggravating and mitigating features of this offending, I have decided to give the accused the opportunity to redeem himself and mend his ways whilst he is still a relatively young man. But let this be a solemn warning to him. If he appears before the Court again for this type of offending, he is unlikely to receive any leniency from the Court. So it is in his best interests to turn a new leaf and not to re-offend.

The result

10. The accused is convicted on all charges against him and sentenced to 15 months probation. As a special condition of his term of probation, he is to perform 100 hours of community service as directed by the probation service.

CHIEF JUSTICE

Solicitor

Attorney General’s Office, Apia, for prosecution