Police v Vaeono [2014] WSSC 157 (28 July 2014)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Vaeono [2014] WSSC 157

Case name:	Police v Vaeono
Citation:	[2014] WSSC 157
Decision date:	28 July 2014
Parties:	POLICE (Prosecution) TAGI VAEONO, male of Vaigaga and Afulilo (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:	No other deductions can be made from your sentence Tagi, for this matter you will be convicted and sentence to 2½ years in prison effective immediately
Representation:	O Tagaloa for prosecution F K Ainuu for defendant
Catchwords:	-
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

TAGI VAEONO, male of Vaigaga and Afulilo
Defendant

Counsel: O Tagaloa for prosecution
F K Ainuu for defendant

Sentence: 28 July 2014

SENTENCE

1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to a charge that at Afulilo on 30 January this year he did an indecent act namely rubbing the private part of the victim a child under 12 years of age. The girl involved is in fact 8 years old. The charge carries a maximum penalty at law of 14 years in prison.
2. The police summary of facts indicates the defendant is a 42 year old male of Vaigaga but was residing at Afulilo at the time. He was employed by the father of the victim at the property of the victims family at Afulilo. The young girl was enrolled at Year 4 in a local Primary School. As he was employed by the victims father the defendant lived with the family at Afulilo.
3. At around about 8:00 pm the night of the 30^th of January 2014 after evening prayers, the defendant grabbed the victim as she walked towards the kitchen of the family house. He pulled her into a dining room and pull down her skirt and panty to her ankles. He used his index finger to rub her private part. The victim at the time was standing next to the defendant. The summary says that the actions of the defendant caused discomfort and pain to the victim. The voice of the father looking for the young girl interrupted what the defendant was doing and allowed the victim to escape.
4. This however aroused the fathers suspicions and he asked the defendant what he was doing to the victim. The defendant denied he was doing anything. The father interviewed the victim and she told him about the defendant touching her vagina. The matter was reported to the police and the defendant was interviewed and admitted to what he had done.
5. Does not appear to be any question that the seriousness of the defendants actions on a girl so young requires a penalty of imprisonment. The defendant is 34 years older than the girl. The incident took place at the family home. As an employee of the victims father the defendant would have had some position of trust allowed to him to be around members of the family. The circumstances of the matter seem to indicate that the defendant waited until the victim was alone before carrying out his actions.
6. Imprisonment would also act as a personal deterrent to the defendant to deter him from any future repetition of such behaviour. And to continue to send the message from the court to all males that such predatory acts on young females are not acceptable. Imprisonment is also an expression of societys condemnation of such behaviour.
7. In considering all the factors of your case Tagi, in particular the circumstances I agree with the prosecution an appropriate start point for sentence is 4 years in prison. From that I will deduct one-quarter of the term to reflect the guilty plea. Because that has saved the courts time and because that has avoided the necessity of the young girl having to testify in a public trial. That is a deduction of one year leaves a balance of 3 years. The pre-sentence report indicates you have a good background. There are also good references attached to that report from your faifeau and your pulenuu. You are a good contributor to your family, you have a clean police record this is your first criminal offence. For those matters I will deduct 6 months from the balance of your sentences leaves 2½ years.
8. Had there been a reconciliation as is usual in these matters a further deduction could have been made. But there is no evidence that was done. It also appear this matter did not reach the village council of your afioaga. You have therefore not been subjected to any village penalty.
9. No other deductions can be made from your sentence Tagi, for this matter you will be convicted and sentence to 2½ years in prison effective immediately.
   

JUSTICE NELSON