Police v Su'a [2016] WSSC 128 (25 July 2016)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Su’a [2016] WSSC 128

Case name:	Police v Su’a
Citation:	[2016] WSSC 128
Decision date:	25 July 2016
Parties:	POLICE and THERESA FAAOSO SESEGA SU’A female of Se’ese’e & Lepea (Defendant)
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Mata Keli Tuatagaloa
On appeal from:
Order:	The defendant is convicted and sentenced to seven (7) months’ supervision with the following conditions: To continue her counseling sessions with the social worker at National Health Services until she is certified to be psychologically and emotionally fit. ii. Any other as directed by Probation, but that such directions should not hinder her counseling sessions with the social worker at National Health Services.
Representation:	F Ioane for Prosecution Defendant in Person
Catchwords:	Forgery – theft as servant – pre-meditated – large amount stolen – of previous good character – non-custodial sentence – suicidal – currently undergoing counseling – reparation paid in full.
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Police v Fa’afaga [2014] WSSC 114 (24 Feb 2014)
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E
Prosecution

AND:

THERESA FAAOSO SESEGA SU’A, female of Seesee & Lepea
Defendant

Counsel:
F Ioane for Prosecution
Defendant in Person

Sentence: 25 July 2016

SENTENCING OF JUSTICE TUATAGALOA

1. The defendant is to be sentenced on one count of forgery, maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment; and one count of theft as a servant with a maximum penalty also of 10 years’ imprisonment.
2. The summary of facts by the prosecution is confirmed by the defendant which basically says that:
   • The defendant was employed as a cashier by the Ministry of Police.
   • On 07 April 2016 the defendant forged the signature of a bank teller on a bank deposit summary making it look like the amount of $4,700 was deposited. Instead, the defendant kept the money and used it.
3. The prosecution provided the Court as guideline sentencing decisions on the same offending with starting points ranging from 12 months – 3 years imprisonment.
4. These starting points depend on the amounts stolen, the frequency and period of the taking. The prosecution on the basis of the amount alone taken in Police v Ruby Fa’afaga^[1] and distinguishing the frequency the defendant in that case took the money seeks a custodial sentence with a starting point of 18 months’ imprisonment. However, each case must be judged accordingly to its facts and circumstances.
5. A breach of trust is inherent where an employee steals from his/her employer. The offending by the defendant was pre-meditated in that she forged the signature on the deposit summary to facilitate the taking of the money. The amount she took is not small.
6. The defendant pleaded guilty when the charges were finalized by the prosecution on 27 June 2016. The early guilty plea is a sign of remorse and of the defendant taking responsibility of her wrong actions.
7. From the pre-sentence report the defendant is from a good stable family. She also has a good educational background up to tertiary level even though she did not complete her university studies. There are good testimonies by her mother and her faifeau. The defendant is young at 24 years’ old. The pre-sentence report provides that the defendant’s husband left her when she was charged with the offences leaving her with two (2) young children to bring up. She is a first offender with no suggestion of a tainted character prior to the offending.
8. The defendant’s family has paid in full the money she took in this offending and this has been confirmed by her employer, Ministry of Police.
9. As a result of the offending and what had happened since, the defendant attempted to commit suicide. She is currently undergoing treatment and counseling sessions with a social worker at the National Health Services who said in her report that the defendant is suffering from depression after a failed suicide attempt and severe low mood. The social worker in her report recommends that the defendant needs to continue with the counseling and treatment interventions until she is psychologically and emotionally fit. It is obvious the feeling of shame and guilt this defendant is undergoing as a result of her offending.
10. It is without a doubt that the defendant will find it hard to secure a job in the future given that she will have a criminal record especially with offences of a dishonest nature. The defendant will live with a criminal record for the rest of her life.
11. In the interest of justice a custodial sentence would be inappropriate. A non-custodial sentence with an emphasis on rehabilitation is most appropriate for this defendant.
12. The defendant is convicted and sentenced to seven (7) months’ supervision with the following conditions:
    1. To continue her counseling sessions with the social worker at National Health Services until she is certified to be psychologically and emotionally fit.
    2. Any other as directed by Probation, but that such directions should not hinder her counseling sessions with the social worker at National Health Services.
       

JUSTICE TUATAGALOA

---

^[1] Police v Fa’afaga [2014] WSSC 114 (24 Feb 2014)