Police v Oto [2014] WSSC 76 (28 November 2014)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

Police v Oto and Palatiso [2014] WSSC 76

Case name:	Police v Oto and Palatiso
Citation:	[2014] WSSC 76
Decision date:	28 November 2014
Parties:	Police and Lealaiauloto Oto male of Avao and Auala and Tauefu Palatiso male of Saleaula
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):	S1489/14
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Vaai
On appeal from:
Order:	(Sentence)
Representation:	F Lagaaia for prosecution T Leavai for defendants
Catchwords:
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Prosecution

A N D:

LEALAIAULOTO OTO male of Avao and Auala

First Defendant

TAUEFU PALATISO male of Saleaula

Second Defendant

Counsel: F Lagaaia for prosecution

T Leavai for defendants

Sentence: 28 November 2014

S E N T E N C E

Introduction

1. Defendants, you both appear for sentence on charges of forgery and theft for which you are liable to 10 years and 7 years imprisonment, respectively. You were both members of the Itu o Tane College school committee. The defendant Lealaiauloto was the secretary of the committee and Tauefu was one of the three signatories for the bank account. The monies collected from the students for their school fees were collected by the committee and banked with the National Bank.
2. On two occasions in September and November of 2013 the two defendants withdrew $600 and $500, respectively and used it for their own personal use. The withdrawal of the cash was facilitated by the defendant Lealaiauloto forging the signature of one of the signatories to the bank account. The monies were used by the two defendants for their personal needs, particularly alcohol and cigarettes. The offending was discovered after the change in the membership of the school committee.
3. The prosecution has filed submissions, asking the Court to impose a custodial sentence to begin at 2 ½ years imprisonment for forgery and 2 years for the offence of theft.
4. The aggravating factors of this offending are quite obvious. The offences were premeditated. You were selected by your respective village to be the representatives of your villages on the school committee. The monies were collected and banked for the needs of the students of the college and the theft was accompanied by the commission of the crime of forgery. Although the defendant, Lealaiauloto committed the forgery, the defendant, Tauefu was a party to the forgery and in fact encouraged the forgery. There is nothing in the probation report or any other documents before me to suggest that the monies have been repaid.
5. I note from the probation report and the summary of facts that both defendants are elderly men, aged 61 and 56, respectively. I am also told by the probation report that you are both church deacons and your respective ministers speak highly of both of you. I am also told by the probation report that Lealaiauloto was banished by his village but has been allowed back after he apologised to his village. The defendant Tauefu has apologised to the District as well and both defendants have been pardoned by the District as well as their villages. The Court has been advised through the probation service that the district has deliberated and both defendants have been forgiven and that the District has also requested that the charges be withdrawn. But this is a crime against the State and the matters cannot be withdrawn as these were offences against the laws of the State.
6. The attention of the Court has been drawn to the fact that the defendant Lealaiauloto seems to have a drinking problem and this was probably the motive for his offending. According to his church minister he has been relieved from his duties as a Sunday school teacher because of his alcohol addiction.
7. For the defendant, Tauefu the Court finds it difficult to find a reason why he should commit such an offence because he has 8 children, and 3 are in New Zealand who regularly remit monies to him for his needs, so there was no need for him to steal monies from the school committee’s account.
8. However, considering their age and their previous good record I have decided that a custodial sentence will not be warranted. I accept that they are remorseful and they have accepted their stupidity in the commission of the offences.
9. For both offences, they are both convicted and placed on probation for 12 months. They will perform 50 hours of community work.
10. Each defendant will pay restitution of $550 to the probation office by monthly installments of $100. If the Itu o Tane District College committee does not require the funds then the funds will be kept by the probation service for its needs.
11. Each defendant is also ordered to pay costs of prosecution of $2,000 to be paid by installments of $100 per month; first payment 30^th of this month; in default 4 months imprisonment.
    

JUSTICE VAAI