IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Lalopapa [2014] WSSC 198

Case name: 	Police v Lalopapa	
		
Citation: 	[2014] WSSC 198	
		
Decision date: 	21 November 2014	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (Prosecution) v VA LALOPAPA male of Samalaeulu and Sasina. (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:	The defendant and his family have been able to meet a substantial monetary penalty; I will therefore deal with this by way of a monetary penalty.   In respect of the offence of sexual connection the defendant will be convicted and fined $1,000.  In addition to that he will make a payment to the probation office of $500 as a contribution to the victims ongoing educational expenses.  He will also pay police costs $100, probation costs $100, court costs $100; that is a total sum of $1,800.  In respect of the fine of $1,000 I will give the defendant 7 days or until 4:00 p.m. Friday next week 28 September in default he will serve 6 months in prison.  In respect of the other monies of $500 and $300, that $800, also payable by 4:00 p.m. next Friday; in default a further 6 months in prison.  	
		
Representation: 	O Tagaloa for prosecution
S Ponifasio 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:

	VA LALOPAPA male of Samalaeulu and Sasina.
Defendant

Counsel:	O Tagaloa for prosecution
S Ponifasio for defendant

Sentence:	21 November 2014

SENTENCE
1.	The defendant has pleaded guilty to charges of sexual connection and abduction.  The police summary of facts which he has accepted through his lawyer says he is a 55 year old male of Sasina, residing at his wifes village of Samalaeulu married with 4 children.  The victim is a 14 year old female attending college.  The usual prohibition order will issue in relation to the publication of the victims details.
2.	On 21 February this year during the Savaii Rugby Sevens competition for secondary schools the victim was standing in front of her house waiting for a bus to go to the rugby.  The defendant drove past with his daughter and offered the victim a lift.  The victim got into the vehicle and the defendant dropped his daughter off at the Red Cross office at Tuasivi and continued on towards Salelologa.  When the vehicle went past the turn off to the rugby park at Iva, the victim asked the defendant where they were going.  The defendant told her he would bring her back to the rugby after he put petrol in his vehicle.  
3.	The defendant continued to drive and at Salelologa they went to a deserted area near the road to the Don Bosco School.  The defendant parked his vehicle got out and walked around to the victims side.  Opened the door of the passengers side and started talking to her about some pasese.  The summary of facts says he reached over and took off the victims shorts and underwear and fondled her private parts.  When the defendant heard a truck approaching he stopped what he was doing and victim put on her clothes.  The defendant drove back to Salelologa and bought some food for the victim and then dropped her off at the rugby.  
4.	This matter would never have been discovered except that subsequently in July 2014 the defendant boasted to one of the victims teachers about what he had done.  That teacher told another teacher.  There was an investigation in the school and eventually the matter was referred to the police leading to the defendants guilty plea and appearance for sentence today.  
5.	Offending of this kind by a mature, married man on a young girl is always a serious matter.  The summary of facts shows that the defendant lured the girl to a deserted spot then removed her shorts and underwear and sexually assaulted her.  He was only stopped going further by a passing truck.  What puzzles me however is that the summary then says that the victim put on her own clothing.  The summary seems to indicate that the victim put up no resistance at the defendants action of taking her to a deserted spot.  It also appears in the documents before the court the victim is not a sexually inexperienced female and it is clear that she did not reveal this incident to anyone or make any complaint.  If not for the defendants own blabbing of the matter to someone else this incident would never have come to light.  All these seem to cast some doubt as to exactly what happened between the defendant and this young girl.  I have a feeling the whole truth has not come out but I can only proceed on what I have been given and what I have been given is a charge of indecent assault by the defendant on the young girl and the other circumstances of this matter as referred to.
6.	The prosecution have said in their submission that this is offending at the lower end of the scale of such offences.  It also appears from what I have read the defendant has been heavily penalised by the Alii and Faipule including a penalty of banishment.  A response which was entirely appropriate to the offending and for which the court congratulates the Alii and Faipule of Samalaeulu I give significant weight to their penalty as required by law.
7.	Ou te le o iloa Va po ole a tonu le sa’o o le mea lea na tupu i le va o oe ma le teinetiti lea.  E fai sina gegefu o le aumaiga o le mataupu lea i luma ole fa’amasinoga.  Ae pau le mea e mautinoa o le teinetiti e laititi ae o lau susuga ia e le o se tagata laititi.  Ua matua lou soifua, fai lou aiga, fai lou toalua, ou te talitonu foi e le’o oe o se tagata e tatau ona a’afia i nei ituaiga solitulafono.  
8.	I le sailiiliga la po’o fea le amiotonu ma o le a se fa’auuga e talafeagai, e fai a si faigata o lau mataupu.  E mafai foi ona fa’apea atu e tele tama o la e tuli latou fa’asalaga i le falepuipui i mea fa’apea i teineti laiti.  Aisea?  Ia e le tau fai atu se tala a le fa’amasinoga, na e manino, o lea e taumafai le tulafono e puipui fanau laiti a le tatou atunuu mai ituaiga amioga fa’apenei, mai ituaiga tagata ia e pei o oe.  Ia e tatau ona fa’aeteete le fa’amasinoga i le fa’atinoina o lana tuite ma le fa’agasologa o solitulafono fa’apenei . 
9.	Peita’i ua maea na ou faitau uma i ripoti ia ua tuu mai ma le fautuaga ua tuu mai e le gata o le ofisa o le loia sili ae fa’apena foi le tamaitai loia o lo’o tulai mo lau susuga.  Ua iai la sou manatu o le a le tuu atu se fa’asalaga fa’a-falepuipui i lau susuga.  Ae avea ia lenei mataupu ma se aoaiga i lau susuga po’o lou tofa foi mo le agai i luma.  Ia ae lelei a le tatou ta’ape ua manino le mata a le vai.  O le mea lena ma le fa’aiuga le na mo le asō.  A toe aumai lau tofa po’o lau susuga i luma o le fa’amasinoga i se mea fa’apea i se isi taimi mulimuli mai, ia e sili na e sau sauni o le a pau loa le mamafa o le samala a le tulafono i lou ao.  Ua manino ia tulaga Va? (Defendant indicated he understood).
10.	The defendant and his family have been able to meet a substantial monetary penalty; I will therefore deal with this by way of a monetary penalty.   In respect of the offence of sexual connection the defendant will be convicted and fined $1,000.  In addition to that he will make a payment to the probation office of $500 as a contribution to the victims ongoing educational expenses.  He will also pay police costs $100, probation costs $100, court costs $100; that is a total sum of $1,800.  In respect of the fine of $1,000 I will give the defendant 7 days or until 4:00 p.m. Friday next week 28 September in default he will serve 6 months in prison.  In respect of the other monies of $500 and $300, that $800, also payable by 4:00 p.m. next Friday; in default a further 6 months in prison.  
11.	In respect of the second charge of abduction I am not satisfied that the elements of this charge have been made out by the police summary of facts.  Accordingly, I am dismissing that charge for lack of evidence.

JUSTICE NELSON