Police v Leatioo [2024] WSSC 76 (27 August 2024)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Leatioo [2024] WSSC 76 (27 August 2024)

Case name:	Police v Leatioo
Citation:	[2024] WSSC 76
Decision date:	27 August 2024
Parties:	POLICE (Informant) v MATAMUA IEREMIA a.k.a IEREMIA IOSEFA, male of Salelologa (Defendant).
Hearing date(s):	15 April 2024
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Supreme Court – CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Chief Justice Perese
On appeal from:
Order:	Matamua, you are sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment, less time served. I direct your name be entered on the Sexual Offenders Register.
Representation:	H. Apisaloma for Prosecution A. Lesa for the Defendant
Catchwords:	Attempted sexual violation – using threatening words – taxi driver and passenger – custodial sentence.
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:	Police v Leatioo [2024] WSSC 40; Police v Taulapapa [2015] WSSC 238; Police v Tofilau [2014] WSSC 24.
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

A N D:

MATAMUA IEREMIA LEATIOO a.k.a IEREMIA IOSEFA, male of Salelologa

Defendant

Counsel: H. Apisaloma for Prosecution
A. Lesa for the Defendant

Date: 27 August 2024

SENTENCE OF PERESE CJ

The charges

1. Matamua Ieremia Leatioo, also known as Ieremia Iosefa (“Matamua”), has been found guilty of attempted sexual violation, guilty of assault when he tied up the victim with rags; guilty of being armed with a small knife which he used to threaten the victim; and he is also guilty of using threatening words to try to compel victim to comply with his demands for sex.

The facts

2. The facts of the offending are set out in my decision Police v Leatioo [2024] WSSC 40 (27 June 2024). Today the defendant is to be sentenced.
3. The Prosecution submits that there are six aggravating features of the offending. Respectfully, I accept only three of these are truly aggravating as I discuss below, the other three refer to elements of the offences with which the defendant has been found guilty.
   • (a) Breach of trust and risk to members of the public using taxi services. I agree with the Prosecution that this a grave and perhaps most serious issue in this case. Passengers, particularly women travelling on their own, are entitled to feel safe and secure using this form of public transport.
   • (b) Vulnerability of the victim, who was taken without her consent to an off-road area she was not familiar with and driven into a clearing hidden by bush.
   • (c) Premeditation and planning. It is submitted that the way in which the offending evolved or unfolded suggested that the defendant had planned this type of attack. He had a knife on him which he used to threaten the victim.
4. Mr. Lesa elected not to address any aggravating features, and instead focused on what mitigating factors personal to the accused. He submitted the defendant’s standing in the community should be taken into account and that this was his first appearance as a defendant.
5. Counsel for the prosecution and the defence are some distance apart in terms of a starting point. The Defence submit that if a custodial sentence is considered appropriate that a starting point of 3 ½ years’ imprisonment be adopted. Prosecution on the other hand submit that on a totality approach that a starting point of between 7 and 8 years be adopted.
6. The sentencing in this matter is heavily influenced by the fact that it involves offending by the defendant at a time he offered his car and services as a taxi operator to the public. The victim was picked up at the wharf bound for the maketi where she was going to catch a bus to her home at Fogatuli.
7. I considered the defendant’s evidence implausible, and unreliable. He preyed on the victim.
8. What marks this case as being different to the taxi related offending the Police rely on: Police v Tofilau [2014] WSSC 24 (with a starting point of 7 years) and Police v Taulapapa [2015] WSSC 238 (with a starting point of 9 ½ years) is that the victims in those cases were vulnerable teenagers, and the level of invasion relatively worse. In Tofilau the Defendant kissed the just turned 17 year old victim and sucked her breasts, grabbed her thighs and he tried to remove her clothes. In Taulapapa the 58-year-old Defendant approached from behind and then grabbed and pulled the 15 year old victim into his taxi. The Defendant then parked under a tree in a dark area and sexually assaulted the victim by squeezing her breasts, trying to touch her private parts and trying to kiss her. He also jumped on top of her and tried to remove her clothing.
9. In this case, as I found:
   • 10. Laalaai says that it was inside the clearing that Matamua tried to sexually assault her. She says he got out of the car while she remained seated at the rear passenger’s seat. When he got out of the car, he laid paper on the ground and he said to her to come out. She rejected his request. He then opened the rear passenger’s door and despite her resistance he pulled her out and tied her hands together with rags.
   • 11. Laalaai said Matamua stripped off his lavalava and he stood in front of her, naked. He tried to pull off her clothes, but again she resisted. She was wearing blue trousers and despite Matamua using both hands, he could not pull the trousers down past her knees because she was twisting and turning her body. Laalaai then says Matamua produced a small knife and threatened her with it if she did not do what he wanted.
10. In carrying out its sentencing function a court has no option but to compare offending in different cases to arrive at appropriate punishments. Respectfully, as traumatic as the incident was in this case for the victim, the circumstances in the Tofilau and Taulapapa strike me as more confronting. All females, most especially vulnerable teenage girls are entitled to be safe when they use a taxi as public transport. Taulapapa’s case involved attempted sexual violation following her abduction by the defendant. It is understandable why the starting points of 7 and 9 ½ years were appropriate in those cases.
11. In this case, I admire the victim’s tenacity and the way she stood up for herself. The defendant failed to do more than attempt to sexually violate the victim, because she repelled his attack. Had he succeeded, he would today have been facing a sentence of life imprisonment.
12. Mr Lesa’s primary submission is for the court to consider a non-custodial sentence, but, if prison is an appropriate sentence he invites the court to accept a starting point of 3 ½ years, not the 7 or 8 sought by the Prosecution.
13. The intrinsic seriousness of this offence calls for a sentence of imprisonment. It is significantly aggravating that the offending was carried out by the defendant whilst he was acting as a taxi driver. He drove the victim to a secluded area and he attempted to force himself on her. I am unclear about the extent of the additional violence involved. I accept that the defendant pulled the victim out of the vehicle and tied her hands with rags, and that he showed her a knife in a threatening manner. However, there is no evidence that he touched, massaged or sucked on the victim’s breasts or genitals. I have found that he exposed himself to the victim making clear to her by his words and actions what his intentions were, but that appears to be all. In some sexual violation cases the defendant carries out sexual acts in front of the victim.
14. I consider a starting point of 3 ½ years is appropriate. After setting the starting point of the sentence, the court adjusts the sentence up or down depending on the defendant’s personal circumstances.
15. In this regard, the defendant is a first offender; he is a high chief of his village and a church deacon. His wife says that he is a hard-working man who has driven taxis to support his family since 2006. The family depend on him. The defendant’s wife says the matter is out of character for him and she asks the court for leniency, as do the Salelologa village mayor, the defendant’s pastor, employer, and a village friend.
16. Although all the purposes of the Sentencing Act 2016 are important, there are two which I consider most relevant in this case. They are (1) to hold the defendant accountable and (2) to deter the defendant or other persons from committing the same or a similar offence. I understand the defendant continues to protest his innocence, but perhaps that might be expected given his status as a leader of his community. It is a significant loss of face and credibility for him to be found guilty of these serious charges. Had he acknowledged the error of his ways, and offered his unconditional apologies to the victim those actions would have gone a long way to satisfying the purposes of being held accountable. A person’s acknowledgement of wrongdoing is an important signal of remorse, and if you returned to your occupation of taxi driver that you would not offend again. The community needs to be protected from those who exhibit predatory behaviour as you did in this case.
17. I am prepared to give the defendant a generous discount of 18 months on account of his previous good record, which includes his leadership role as one of the leading matai in Salelologa. It is at times like this that a person’s good work speaks for him or her, and you are entitled to that credit. You are a valued member of and shown leadership at and service at your Church. The Pulenuu of Salelologa advises that you are relied on for your counsel by Village Council. Your employer regards you as an honest person and you have held leadership roles in the taxi industry.
18. You are a frail man, and I am prepared to give you a further discount of 6 months on account of your diabetes and how that condition may make worse the already harsh conditions of imprisonment.
19. Taking all the discounts into account, your end sentence is 18 month’s imprisonment.
20. One further matter requires comment from the Court. The Pulenuu’s advised in his letter to the court of the victim being asked to attend a Salelologa village council meeting where she was asked to explain what happened. The Pulenuu advised in his letter of support of the defendant, the victim told lies to council and they found the defendant to be innocent. I came to a different view after two days of hearing. I record my concern about a Village Council over reaching its authority into the criminal jurisdiction of our legal system and trying to question complainants of sexual offending. Many if not all the members of the council are men, and most, if not all, have no or little experience in conducting inquiries into sexual offending. These are matters for the Police who are skilled in conducting inquiries into serious offending such as this.
21. Matamua, you are sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment, less time served. I direct your name be entered on the Sexual Offenders Register.

CHIEF JUSTICE