Police v Faalogo [2015] WSSC 141 (2 March 2015)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Faalogo [2015] WSSC 141

Case name:	Police v Faalogo
Citation:	[2015] WSSC 141
Decision date:	02 March 2015
Parties:	The Police (Prosecution) So’olefai Faalogo, male of Falefa. (Defendant)
Hearing date(s):	-
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Courthouse, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Nelson
On appeal from:
Order:	No further deductions can be made in respect of your sentence Soolefai for this charge convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison, remand in custody time to be deducted.
Representation:	L Su’a-Mailo 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:

THE POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

SO’OLEFAI FAALOGO, male of Falefa.
Defendant

Counsel: L Su’a-Mailo for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 02 March 2015

SENTENCE

1. The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge that at Toomatagi on 19 December last year with intent to cause actual bodily harm, he did cause actual bodily harm to Ierome Seuvave a male of Falefa. The police summary of facts which he has admitted states that he is a 48 year old male also of the village of Falefa and at the time of the offending was employed as a carpenter by one Lafaele Folesi. The victim is a 26 year old married male of Falefa and father of two employed as a carpenter for the same gentleman Lafaele Folesi. So the defendant and the victim are workmates.
2. On the day in question 19 December last year they were both working on a project at Toomatagi. The defendant had borrowed a shovel from a neighbour to use. During the lunch break the defendant went to retrieve the shovel to return to the neighbour and discovered that it had been damaged. He investigated as to who had used the shovel. No one owned up to using the shovel and he walked over to where the victim and some co-workers were having lunch. He also asked them as to who had been using the shovel the victim denied that it was him. But the defendant had reason to believe it was the victim and the two men got into an altercation. Causing the defendant to lose his temper hold the shovel in both hands and hit the victim on the left hand side of his head.
3. The victim became instantly unconscious and fell down. The summary says witnesses said his head was bleeding profusely and his body was shaking. Co-workers ran to his aid and tried to stop the bleeding and stop his shaking. Police were called for assistance and the victim was taken to the hospital. He was admitted to the main hospital at Motootua for head injury and an open skull fracture.
4. His medical report notes that he required a five (5) day hospital stay and was discharged just before Christmas but he is currently on follow-up surgical treatment. I am not clear as to what that actually means but the victim impact report filed by the prosecution says the victim continues to suffer a disability. He has slower speech and reactions and the report notes that this was evident throughout his interview. The victim says he gets easily confused when he tries to think about things and it has affected his ability to earn a livelihood for himself and his family.
5. This was an extremely serious assault involving the use of a weapon to deliver a forceful blow to the head of an unsuspecting victim causing a skull fracture. An injury which commonly leads to death in this country. Cases where weapons are used to inflict such serious head injuries usually result in a term of imprisonment as a penalty. It is important that people in our community realize that if you do this sort of thing you will likely end up at Tafaigata. The purpose of such penalty is to send out a clear message to the defendant himself and to the general public at large.
6. Considering all the circumstances of your offending So’olefai I accept the prosecution submission that a 4 year term of imprisonment is an appropriate start point. But from that start point you are entitled to certain deductions which I now will make on your behalf. Firstly for your guilty plea which has saved the necessity of a trial and the necessity to call the complainant and other witnesses a deduction of one-quarter of the penalty, leaves a balance of 3 years in prison.
7. You have a good background as outlined in the pre-sentence report filed by the probation office and you have a clean criminal record. For those matters I deduct 6 months from the balance of sentence, leaves 2½ years in prison. The pre-sentence report confirms that the necessary apologies and reconciliation has been effected I make a further deduction in recognition of that fact of 6 months leaves a balance of 2 years in prison.
8. No further deductions can be made in respect of your sentence So’olefai for this charge convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison, remand in custody time to be deducted.
   

JUSTICE NELSON