IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Eti [2024] WSSC 138 (19 December 2024)

Case name: 	Police v Eti	
		
Citation: 	[2024] WSSC 138	
		
Decision date: 	19 December 2024	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (Informant) and SEILALA JODY ETI female of Vailoa Faleata (Defendant)	
		
Hearing date(s): 		
		
File number(s): 	2024-05451SC/CR/UP	
		
Jurisdiction: 	CRIMINAL	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Tuatagaloa	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	Convicted and sentenced to 16 months’ supervision for each offence (416 counts) to be served concurrently	
		
Representation: 	Attorney General’s Office for Prosecution
Defendant in Person	
		
Catchwords: 	Theft as a servant – first offender – early guilty plea	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013, ss.1161(1)(a); 165(e)	
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

AND:

SEILALA JODY ETI, of Vailoa Faleata and Afega.

Defendant

Counsel:	Attorney General’s Office for Prosecution
		Defendant appears in Person

Date:		19 December 2024

SENTENCING OF TUATAGALOA J
The Charges:
1. 	The defendant appears for sentence having pleaded guilty to four hundred and sixteen (416) counts of theft as a servant contrary to sections 161(1)(a) and 165(e) Crimes Act 2013, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment.
The Offending:
2. 	The Summary of facts (SOF) by the Prosecution says the following: 
•	The defendant was employed by the Farmer Joe Supermarket Fugalei as a cashier. Between 02 June 2024 and 27 July 2024, the defendant exploited a bug in the Farmer Joe company sales system to steal from the Company. The defendant would enter the quantity of an item as .0001 or any lower figure in the sales system which would be registered on the system as having no value or selling price and the defendant would keep the money paid by the customer for the item, instead of putting the money in the till. The defendant during this period made 416 transactions where she stole cash sums ranging from $1 to $96.40. The total sum of cash the defendant stole was $4,595.21
•	A customer on or around 27 July 2024 noticed the $0.00 value or selling price on her receipt for an item she purchased reported the matter to the Manager of Farmer Joe. This led to an internal investigation resulting in the defendant being charged.
The Defendant:
3. 	The defendant is 27 years’ old, in de-facto relationship with three (3) young children ranging from 2 years’ old to 6 years’ old.
4. 	The defendant is a first offender. She with her mother had apologized to the Management of the Farmer Joe Supermarket. The management confirms the apology by letter dated 13 November 2024. They have not only accepted the apology but had also asked that the defendant made repayment of $1,000 as retribution for the defendant’s misdeed.
5. 	The defendant had paid $1,000 to the Management of Farmer Joe as evidenced by receipts #0090 & 0091 of $800 and $200.
The Aggravating Factors:
6. 	The Prosecution identified the following as aggravating factors of the offending:
•	Abuse of position of trust – usually attach to employee – employer relationship
•	The time frame of almost two (2) months that the defendant continues to offend
•	The total amount stolen of $4,565 would no doubt have an impact on the operations of the Supermarket.
•	The offending at first was opportunistic but became premeditated when the defendant continues to offend.
The Mitigating Factors:
7. 	The mitigating features personal to the defendant are:
(i) 	Her early guilty plea; 
(ii) 	Prior good character;
(iii) 	Apology and 
(iv) 	Payment of money asked for by the Company as retribution for her misdeed 
8. 	The defendant in the Pre-sentence report (PSR) expressed remorse and I accept.
Discussion:
9. 	The Courts approach to sentence for theft as a servant is custodial unless there are exceptional circumstances. However, in the circumstances of this offending the mitigating factors outweigh the aggravating factors. Most important is the apology accepted by the Management of Farmer Joe and the money they have asked to be paid as retribution has been fully paid by the defendant. The apology and full payment show genuine remorse by the defendant. I have no doubt that the defendant has learnt a lesson and will refrain from further offending in the future
The Sentence:
10. 	The defendant is convicted and sentenced to 16 months’ supervision for each offence (416 counts) to be served concurrently.

JUSTICE LEUTELE MATA TUATAGALOA