You are here:
PacLII >>
Databases >>
Supreme Court of Samoa >>
2019 >>
[2019] WSSC 95
Database Search
| Name Search
| Recent Decisions
| Noteup
| LawCite
| Download
| Help
Police v Faatafa [2019] WSSC 95 (7 June 2019)
SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Faatafa [2019] WSSC 95
Case name: | Police v Faatafa |
|
|
Citation: | |
|
|
Decision date: | 07 June 2019 |
|
|
Parties: | POLICE v IRENE RUTI SITITI FAATAFA female of Moamoa |
|
|
Hearing date(s): |
|
|
|
File number(s): |
|
|
|
Jurisdiction: | Criminal |
|
|
Place of delivery: | Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu |
|
|
Judge(s): | Justice Nelson |
|
|
On appeal from: |
|
|
|
Order: | On these charges Irene you will be convicted and sentenced in respect of all charges to 40 months or 3 years and 4 months in prison.
|
|
|
Representation: | L Faasii for prosecution M Soonalole 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:
IRENE RUTI SITITI FAATAFA female of Moamoa.
Defendant
Counsel:
L Faasii for prosecution
M Soonalole for defendant
Sentence: 07 June 2019
S E N T E N C E
- Irene appears for sentence on forty-five (45) charges of theft as a servant involving some $57,000 odd tala in total. The police
summary of facts which is not disputed says she is a 35-year-old female of Moamoa and the victim company is Central Corporate Company
Limited. At the time of the offending Irene was employed by the company as its Manager in Samoa. The documents before the court
indicate the company is based in Panama and the defendant was in charge of their local office and was responsible for handling all
monies and transaction involving the company.
- On forty-five separate occasions between 04 January 2017 and 21 January 2018 the defendant would write out cheques on the company
cheque account, cash them and use the money for her own purposes. Amounts of the cheques varied from the largest of $4,560.00 on
19 January 2017 to the lowest of $120.00 on 17 February 2017.
- It seems the defendant was engaged in the procedure of using the company cheque account as her own personal kitty bank. This matter
only came to light when a sudden audit was carried out revealing the missing monies and the false supporting documents that the defendant
created to hide her thefts. Resulting in the police charging the defendant with these forty-five counts of theft as a servant.
- This is another tragic case of a young woman embezzling money from her employer which has now closed its Samoa office for reasons
that are not quite clear but may be unrelated to the defendants offending. What is clear is the seniority of the defendants position.
She was the local Manager of an offshore company. And as such was in a position of great trust and responsibility. A trust which
she consistently abused over approximately a twelve-month period according to the charges. The amount she stole is significant.
And this is a case of not one-off offending but multiple offending on different dates.
- The offending was clearly planned; the summary of facts indicates she falsified documents to cover up what she was doing. There is
no question an imprisonment term is required to hold her accountable for what she did, to denounce her behaviour as unacceptable
and to continue to send a deterrent message to the community that you do this kind of thing you probably will end up in Tafaigata.
A message the court will continue to send to young women such as the defendant.
- In case your counsel has not told you Irene the maximum penalty by law for what you did is 10 years imprisonment for each charge.
The prosecution have suggested that the circumstances warrant a start point for sentence of 6 years in prison. I think that is
slightly high I will start at 5 years.
- From that is to be deducted matters in your favour or mitigating factors. The first is for your previous good record and background
as detailed in the pre-sentence report supported by various references which speak well of you. it is also not disputed that you
are a first offender. To reflect those personal circumstances I will deduct 6 months from the start point of sentence, leaves 4½
years in prison.
- The document shows there has been no restitution and neither has there been any apology to the complainant understandably though because
it is no longer in business in this country.
- The only other mitigating factor in your favour Irene is your guilty plea which has saved the courts valuable time and resources.
I will give you the usual twenty-five percent deduction from the balance of your sentence that is a period of 13½monhs, leaves
a balance of 40½ months. I will round that off to 40 months. There are no other factors that require to be taken in consideration
in your favour.
- On these charges Irene you will be convicted and sentenced in respect of all charges to 40 months or 3 years and 4 months in prison.
JUSTICE NELSON
PacLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/ws/cases/WSSC/2019/95.html