Police v Leiataua [2015] WSSC 211 (17 December 2015)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Leiataua [2015] WSSC 211

Case name:	Police v Leiataua
Citation:	[2015] WSSC 211
Decision date:	17 December 2015
Parties:	Police (prosecution) and Kuss Aukuso Leiataua, male of Solosolo
Hearing date(s):	-
File number(s):	S1842/15, S1870/15 and S1869/15
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Vaai
On appeal from:	-
Order:	He is sentenced to 6 months imprisonment less any time spent in custody.
Representation:	F Lagaaia for prosecution C Vaai for defendant
Catchwords:	Sexual connection – victim impact report – culpability of the offending
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

KUSS AUKUSO LEIATAUA male of Solosolo
Defendant

Counsel: F Lagaaia for prosecution
C Vaai for defendant

Sentence: 17 December 2015

S E N T E N C E

1. The defendant, a 20 year old married man of Solosolo village pleaded guilty to one count of sexual connection with a young girl under 16 years of age, also of Solosolo, and a neighbour of the defendant. She was 14 years at the time of offending.
2. Three days before the incident, the young girl was alone at her home when she was approached by the defendant and he persuaded her to be his girlfriend. Because he was married, she declined.
3. On the night of the incident the defendant walked to the girls home, stood outside cooking house close to the window of the girls bedroom and called the girl to come over. She walked out of the house and joined the defendant at the outside kitchen where the defendant commenced to fondle her breasts and vagina. He then inserted his fingers inside her vagina. They both heard the girl’s parents who were then looking for the girl. He fled and the girl left the kitchen and hid somewhere else where the parents found her. She told her parents what happened and police were alerted.
4. He entered guilty plea at the first mention of the charge. He has apologised to the girl’s family.

Victim Impact Report

5. The Victim Impact Report prepared by the office of the Attorney General says that the girl was scared of the defendant at the time of the incident, she is angry and disgusted with what the defendant did to her; her relationship with her parents has been adversely affected and she does not wish to see the defendant again.
6. She also contended that the defendant did not apologise to her or her family.

Aggravating factors of the offending

7. The young age of the girl is in the court’s view the most significant aggravating factor of the defendant’s offending. She was 14 years; her immaturity and inexperienced was taken advantage of by the defendant; so that even though she was a willing partner that will not mitigate the culpability of the offending.
8. I reject the contention in the victim’s impact report that the girl was scared of the defendant. Obviously the meeting was pre-arranged. She was secured in her home when the defendant called her to come out. If she was scared she could have woken up her parents.
9. I also reject her contention that the defendant has not apologised. The Probation Service has talked with the girl’s mother who confirmed the apology by the defendant.

Discussion

10. The prevalence of sexual offending on young girls justifies stern measures to convey society’s denunciation to deter men, old and young, in the commission of similar offences, and to protect immature young girls.
11. I adopt 12 months as the appropriate starting point. For his previous good record, his apology to the girl’s family and early guilty plea, I deduct 6 months.

Sentence

12. He is sentenced to 6 months imprisonment less any time spent in custody.

JUSTICE VAAI