Police v Suataai [2021] WSSC 64 (22 October 2021)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Suataai [2021] WSSC 64 (22 October 2021)

Case name:	Police v Suataai
Citation:	[2021] WSSC 64
Decision date:	22 October 2021
Parties:	POLICE v FALANIKA SUATAAI, female of Mulivai Safata & Fasitoo-uta
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Niavā Mata Keli Tuatagaloa
On appeal from:
Order:	The defendant Falanika Suataai is convicted and sentenced to 13 months’ imprisonment for each count of forgery and theft as a servant. All to be served concurrently.
Representation:	I. Atoa for Prosecution L. Sio-Ofoia for the Defendant
Catchwords:	Forgery – theft as a servant – bank worker – restitution – carried out multiple times – first offender – apology – custodial sentence.
Words and phrases:	“breach of trust”
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013, ss. 161; 165(e); 194.
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Prosecution

AND:

FALANIKA SUATAAI, female of Mulivai Safata & Fasitoo-uta

Defendant

Counsel: I. Atoa for Prosecution
L. Sio-Ofoia for the Defendant

Date: 22 October 2021

SENTENCE OF TUATAGALOA J

1. The defendant Falanika Suataai, a 28 year old mother of two from Mulivai Safata & Fasitoo-uta appears today for sentence on six counts of forgery and five counts of theft as a servant having carried out the offences numerous times over the span of four months while employed by the ANZ Bank working part time as a bank teller since 2017.

Dates of offending

24 January 2020

2. According to the summary of facts, the defendant forged the signature of the owner of the account (Lupe) and withdrew $600 which she then deposited into her aunty’s account. She then later forged the signature of her aunty and withdrew the said amount and used it for her own personal use.

11 February 2020

3. Forged the signature of the owner of the same account (Lupe) and withdrew $300 and stole it for her own personal.

17 February 2020, 24 February 2020 & 03 April 2020

4. The defendant carried out the same actions on these dates stealing funds from the same bank account: $300 on 17 February, $1000 on 24 February & $400 on 03 April.
5. On 03 April 2020, the matter came to light when the owner of the account lodged a complaint with the ANZ Bank for the unauthorised withdrawals. The defendant pleaded guilty on 21 June 2021.
6. The defendant on five different occasions on dates noted above forged the signature of the owner of an ANZ Bank account and stole the amounts withdrawn. The total amount stolen by the defendant is SAT$2,600.
7. The penalties for the offences of forgery^[1] and theft as a servant^[2] is maximum 10 years’ imprisonment.
8. These are very serious offences as reflected by the maximum penalty for each offence under the law and without any exceptional circumstances warranting a departure from the Courts usual approach of imposing custodial sentences.
9. The Prosecution identifies similar sentencings imposed by the Court with similar circumstances and recommended a custodial sentence with a 2 year starting point. The Prosecution identified a high culpability level as this was not done once but up to six times by the defendant to the same account. This could have continued on if the owner of the account did not find out about it and lodge a complaint. The total amount taken of SAT$2,600 is a huge amount to a personal account and money duly earned and intended to be used by the owner of the account. Offences of this nature goes to the moral character of a person – that of dishonesty and such person cannot be trusted. There is also the usual collateral aggravating factors of any theft as a servant offence of breach of trust of the employer (ANZ Bank) who offers employment and trust their employees to work with honesty and with diligence.
10. Another aggravating factor is that another employee lost his job for having endorsed the actions of the defendant without having it checking it out first. This is the ‘trust’ between co-workers that they are doing their jobs accordingly.
11. I find appropriate the starting point of 30 months (2 ½ years) and make the following deductions taking into account what the mitigating factors are personal to the defendant and to the particular circumstances of this offending.
12. The mitigating factors personal to the defendant is her first offending status and that she has managed to repay most of the money back (except $300) showing remorsefulness and acceptance of what she did is wrong and had taken responsibility for her wrong behaviour; she has also apologised to the bank supervisor. For this, I deduct 12 months; this leaves 18 months. I further deduct 25% for her early guilty plea which is 5 months; leaving 13 months.
13. The defendant Falanika Suataai is convicted and sentenced to 13 months’ imprisonment for each count of forgery and theft as a servant. All to be served concurrently.
    

JUSTICE TUATAGALOA

---

^[1] Crimes Act 2013 s. 194.
^[2] ibid., ss. 161 & 165 (e).