Police v Molia [2023] WSSC 21 (17 April 2023)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Molia [2023] WSSC 21 (17 April 2023)

Case name:	Police v Molia
Citation:	[2023] WSSC 21
Decision date:	17 April 2023
Parties:	POLICE (Prosecution) AND FARANISISI SAUTIAIMALAE MOLIA male of Tufuiopa and Lotopa. (Defendant)
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 the offence of manslaughter, you will be convicted and sentenced to 6 years in prison, any remand in custody time awaiting sentence to be deducted.
Representation:	T Sasagi for prosecution A Matalasi for defendant
Catchwords:	- Grievous bodily harm – unlawful act – stab wound – manslaughter – reckless disregard for safety
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E
Prosecution

AND:

FARANISISI SAUTIAIMALAE MOLIA male of Tufuiopa and Lotopa.
Defendant

Counsel:
T Sasagi for the prosecution
A Matalasi for the defendant
Sentence: 17 April 2023

S E N T E N C E

1. The defendant has pleaded guilty to two charges: the first is that at Mulivai, Apia, on 06 October 2018 with reckless disregard for the safety of the victim Jonathan Maiava he did cause grievous bodily harm by stabbing him with a small kitchen knife. The second is that same time same place by an unlawful act he did cause the death of Falefou Lemana, the cousin of Jonathan Maiava by stabbing him with the same knife thereby committing the crime of manslaughter.
2. This court acting in its capacity as a Coroners Court certifies that the said Falefou Lemana 19 years old male of Nuu and Togafuafua, died in the early morning hours of 06 October 2018 as a result of a fatal stab wound to the chest. The court also certifies that alcohol played a role in this offending and that the accused is today being dealt with according to law.
3. The agreed summary of facts says that on Saturday 06 October 2018 the two victims and some cousins left their house in Togafuafua after a long nights drinking. They went to buy food at Pinatis Restaurant behind the Catholic Cathedral at Mulivai, this was somewhere between 3:00 and 4:00 am in the morning. The victims encountered another group which included the defendant and his brother Daniel. An exchange of not too complementary words occurred and the inevitable fight broke out between these two groups of youths. In the course of the fight the defendant stabbed the first victim Jonathan in the back of the neck with a kitchen knife. The summary goes on to say that a security guard from the Mulivai Cathedral pulled Jonathan inside the Catholic Church gate while the deceased continued fighting with Daniel the defendants brother.
4. The defendant joined this fight and stabbed the deceased on the left side of his chest. The internal postmortem report found that this single stab wound to the chest penetrated the skin and underlying soft tissue, transected the bony portion of the left fifth rib and focally injured the lower lobe of the left lung, penetrating the sac surrounding the heart causing two full incisions of the left ventricle of the heart. This caused the left lung to collapse and excessive bleeding in the left chest cavity and within the sac surrounding the heart. This was undoubtedly an unsurvivable and fatal injury and after inflicting it the defendant ran away. The Police arrived and took the deceased to the hospital but he was declared dead on arrival.
5. This is another tragic case of a young life needlessly lost as a result of immature and violent behaviour by young men. The defendant at the time of this offending was only 20 years old and the deceased was even younger, he was 19. The deceased and his cousin are not the only victims in this matter, the defendant now is the victim of his own actions. He has also admitted to having previous convictions including for offences of violence. So there should be no question in his mind as to where he is going today.
6. The purposes of sentencing as outlined in the Sentencing Act 2016 includes holding every defendant accountable for his actions. As well as denouncing his conduct as unacceptable to Samoan society, in the hope that it will deter the defendant from any such reckless behaviour in the future. But that of course is up to the defendant himself. It must also send a clear message to all young people of the consequence of this kind of behaviour and how the court will treat such behaviour.
7. As noted in many previous decisions of the court, sentences are tailored to the particular facts and circumstances of each individual case. With manslaughter, because of the large variance of such, a wide variety of sentences have been imposed by the court.
8. I will deal firstly with the more serious of the two offences that of manslaughter which is punishable under law by life in prison.
9. Police have submitted that in this case considering all the relevant circumstances the appropriate start point for sentence should be 10 years in prison. They point to the aggravating features of the offending such as the fact that there are two victims involved which indicates a very high level of aggression on your part. In this case you used an easily concealed weapon a small kitchen knife on an unarmed person. There was a special vulnerability of the deceased at the time because he was fighting with your brother Daniel and his attention would not have been focused on anyone else. It was s cowardly attack Faranisisi. And the part of the body you attacked is the heart, your strike went straight to the heart of the deceased.
10. I agree with prosecution the start point should be 10 years in prison uplifted to 11 years because of your history of offending. But from that start point as your lawyer has pointed out you are entitled to certain deductions for mitigating factors. The first deduction is for your young age at the time of offending. The offending itself reflects your immaturity and reckless disregard for life. For that I will deduct 2 years from the start point, leaves 9 years in prison.
11. The court is also satisfied from the pre-sentence report that an apology and ifoga as required by our tu and aganuu fa’asamoa has been carried out by your family. Even though this process does not necessarily involve a defendant it is very much part of our custom and tradition which lies at the core of our way of life and social system. It is a part of our social governance structure and should be rightly factored into the courts decisions in relation to those who have offended against the rules of that structure. In any event the law mandates we take this into account and until Parliament changes that law we must obey it like everyone else. To reflect the ifoga and apology I will deduct one (1) further year, that will leave a balance of 8 years in prison.
12. The final deduction you are entitled to Faranisisi is for your guilty plea which has saved the courts precious time and limited resources. I note your plea was entered once the charges were eventually finalised by the prosecution. For that I will give you the full one-quarter deduction a period of 2 years, leaves a balance of 6 years in prison.
13. On the offence of manslaughter, you will be convicted and sentenced to 6 years in prison, any remand in custody time awaiting sentence to be deducted.
14. I move now to the second charge against you of causing grievous bodily harm under section 118(2) of the Crimes Act 2013 maximum penalty under law 7 years in prison.
15. It is clear from the agreed summary of facts and the witness statements on file which would have been fully disclosed pre-trial to defence counsel that there were two stabbings in this confrontation. There was the initial fight where Jonathan was stabbed, that fight involved you and Daniel and the deceased and his three cousins as per paragraphs 3 and 4 of the agreed summary. The second stabbing occurred after the Mulivai security guard had pulled Jonathan into the safety of the Church compound as per agreed summary of facts paragraph 7. That was when Daniel and the deceased were fighting and you went over and stabbed the deceased to death.
16. It is possible on these facts to take a view that there were in fact therefore two separate attacks. And that therefore the penalties for each attack should be treated differently, and you should receive cumulative sentences. This issue was not really addressed by either counsel in their submissions to the court but should have been. The prosecution have submitted a 2 year start point and a sentence to be served concurrently is what is required.
17. I cannot agree with that start point. This is offending involving the use of a concealed weapon and the stab wounds indicates that it was delivered to the back of the victims neck. Again a stab wound to a vulnerable area of an unarmed person. A stab wound that could have been delivered from behind or possibly while the victim was face down in the course of this fight. This makes this particular offending a serious one of its kind. As to the appropriate start point considering all the aggravating features of the offending a start point appropriate to the circumstance would be somewhere around 4 to 5 years in prison. And from that should be made deductions for the mitigating factors some of which I have already referred to.
18. If I start sentence at 5 years it would end up on that basis with an end sentence of about 3 years in prison. That end result would be commensurate with the aggravating factors of this matter. The question then becomes whether the 3 years should be added to your 6 years already imposed or whether it should be served concurrently. But as I have stated these issues were not adequately addressed by counsels in their submissions.
19. I have noticed in the many callings of this matter before me that you are indeed truly remorseful for what you have done. There is no evidence before me to suggest that you had consumed alcohol on the night in question. But clearly alcohol is identified in the Probation pre-sentence report as one of your problems. That would certainly explain why you would be on the road between 3:00 and 4:00 in the morning instead of being in Church with your other siblings and your mother. And I suspect alcohol is not your only issue your previous conviction for narcotics also suggests you have that problem as well. My strong advice to you Falanisisi is when you have served your prison term for this matter, you turn your life around and stay away from alcohol and drugs there is no future in that, especially for you.
20. In relation to whether the 3 years should be added to your sentence or not and bearing in mind what I have already referred to. O le fa’amāmā avega lea o le a tu’u atu e le Fa’amasinoga mo le vaega lea o lau solitulafono Faranisisi o le a fai le fa’aiuga o le 3 tausaga lea e tuli fa’atasi ma leisi fa’asalaga. O lona uiga o le aofa’i o le taimi e te nofo sala ai mo solitulafono nei e lua e 6 tausaga, toese ai se taimi sa e nofo taofia ai e fa’atalitali le fa’aiuga o le mataupu lenei. O le fa’amāmā avega lena e tu’u atu mo lau susuga ona o le mataupu lea.
21. Ae ou te le toe tau fai atu seisi fa’amatalaga lea ua mae’a ona fai atu. O la’u fautuaga ia oe tuli lou fa’asalaga, o lena e te laititi e lei taitai lou olaga. Ae a e te’a mai tua e sili ona e aloalo mamao mai ituaiga soligatulafono fa’apea. Aua a toe aumai oe Faranisisi e leai seisi fa’aiuga o totoe mo lau susuga. Ua e malamalama? (Defendant: O lea lava).
    

JUSTICE NELSON