Police v Imoa [2014] WSSC 144 (23 June 2014)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Imoa [2014] WSSC

Case name:	Police v Imoa
Citation:	[2014] WSSC
Decision date:	23 June 2014
Parties:	Police (Prosecution) Maile Imoa, male of Fasito’o-tai. (Defendant)
Hearing date(s):	-
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Nelson
On appeal from:
Order:	You will be convicted and sentenced to 7 months in prison on each of these charges but terms to be concurrent.
Representation:	O Tagaloa for prosecution Defendant unrepresented
Catchwords:	-
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

MAILE IMOA, male of Fasito’o-tai.
Defendant

Counsel: O Tagaloa for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 23 June 2014

SENTENCE

1. The defendant appears for sentence on three counts of carnal knowledge. The police summary of facts which the defendant has admitted says he is 19 years of age of Fasito’o-tai and Patamea in Savaii, currently unemployed but stays at home “tausi aiga”. The victim is a 13 year old female and at the time of this offending in Year 8 at the local school. But now she no longer attends school. It seems that at the time of this offending the victim and the defendant were in a relationship. But had not been going for a long time.
2. The three charges arise from three instances of consensual sex between the defendant and the complainant. Once at an unoccupied house in the bush and the other two at the defendants house which is where the police found her after being alerted by the victims family. The victim was taken back to her family and a police complaint was laid by them. Each of these sexual connection charges carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
3. The courts attitude to this kind of offence is well established. The law is there to protect young girls from mature men taking advantage of them. It is also there to protect young girls from making rash decisions and from getting into trouble. And in appropriate cases prison penalties have been imposed and will continue to be imposed. So that the message that goes out to the defendant and all young men is leave girls under 16 alone.
4. In this case the age difference between the defendant and the complainant is 6 years. The complainant at the time of this offending was only 13 years of age. She was at school and the defendant knew that. I note what is in her victim impact report that the offending has not really had any effect on her. But the young age of the girl means an imprisonment penalty is required.
5. As I have stated the maximum penalty is 10 years in prison. However considering all the relevant factors a 2 years start point is appropriate for your case. From that you are entitled to a deduction firstly for your guilty plea. For that I will deduct a period of 8 months as that has avoided the complainant having to come to court and a trial. Leaves a balance of 16 months in prison. You have a clean record, you are a first offender you have a good background according to the probation office pre-sentence report. I will deduct 6 months for those matters. Leaves a balance of 10 months in prison.
6. Had there been a customary reconciliation I will have made a further deduction but the probation office report says there has been no reconciliation. There has also been no village council penalty in this matter according to the pre-sentence report. No deductions can therefore be made for those matters. However you were only 19 years of age when this offending occurred. You perhaps made a very unwise choice as a young person. For that I will make a further adjustment to your penalty and deduct a further 3 months from the balance of your sentence. Leaves a balance of 7 seven months.
7. You will be convicted and sentenced to 7 months in prison on each of these charges but terms to be concurrent.
   

JUSTICE NELSON