PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Supreme Court of Samoa
You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Supreme Court of Samoa >> 2025 >> [2025] WSSC 16

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Police v Reopoamo [2025] WSSC 16 (27 March 2025)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Reopoamo & Ors [2025] WSSC 16 (27 March 2025)


Case name:
Police v Reopoamo & Ors


Citation:


Decision date:
27 March 2025


Parties:
POLICE (Informant) v VAELE IOSIA REOPOAMO, TAUTI TIAKA, TOEMAGO PA’U LASALO, LEMANA NOUATA, OFISA SETAFAO, VAA ALAI, AMIGA LAGAAIA, TOMASI SAMUELU, FAAVEVELA LALE, LEMANA PENE and SALAPO ETENE UINI, all males of Lefagaoalii (Accused)


Hearing date(s):



File number(s):



Jurisdiction:
Supreme Court – CRIMINAL


Place of delivery:
Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu


Judge(s):
Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke


On appeal from:


Order:
You are accordingly convicted and sentenced as follows, less remand in custody:
a) Lemana Nouata on charge of kidnapping, 2 years 8 months imprisonment;
b) Vaele Iosia Reopoamo and Tauti Tiaki on charge of kidnapping, 2 years and 5 months imprisonment;
c) Ofisa Setefao, on charge of kidnapping 2 years and 3 months imprisonment and common assault, 2 months imprisonment concurrent;
d) Vaa Alai, on the charge of kidnapping, 2 years 1 month imprisonment and common assault, 2 months concurrent;
e) Lemana Pene and Faavevela Lale aka Tuua Lale, charge of kidnapping 1 year and 9 months imprisonment and common assault, 2 months concurrent;
f) Amiga, charge of kidnapping, 1 year 9 months imprisonment;
g) Tomasi Samuelu, charge of kidnapping, 16 months imprisonment; and
h) Salapo Uini and Toemago Lasalo, charge of kidnapping, 7 months imprisonment.


Representation:
L Su’a-Mailo for Prosecution
A Su’a for all Accused


Catchwords:
Assaulted – hogtied victim – kidnapping.


Words and phrases:
“e tu le to’oto’o” – “mu le foaga” – “ignored police warning to keep the peace” – carried out by 11 defendants – “abuse of position of authority” -


Legislation cited:
Constitution, Village Fono Act 1990,


Cases cited:
Police v Sefa [2024] WSSC 58;
Police v Luamanu [2018] WSSC 120;
Police v Sape [2015] WSSC 160.


Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU


BETWEEN:


P O L I C E


Informant


A N D:


VAELE IOSIA REOPOAMO, TAUTI TIAKA, TOEMAGO PA’U LASALO, LEMANA NOUATA, OFISA SETAFAO, VAA ALAI, AMIGA LAGAAIA, TOMASI SAMUELU, FAAVEVELA LALE, LEMANA PENE and SALAPO ETENE UINI, all male of Lefagaoalii.


Accused


Representation: L Su’a-Mailo for Prosecution

A Su’a for all Accused


Sentencing Hearing: 10th March 2025
Sentence Decision: 27th March 2025


RESERVED SENTENCE

Introduction

  1. On Thursday 14th September 2023, you brought shame on yourselves and tainted the good reputation of Lefagaoali’i. Your actions reverberated across Samoa and made headlines around our region.[1] As part of the Alii and Faipule, you took the law into your hands assaulting, hogtying and kidnapping your 73 year old victim. Today, you are being sentenced for those crimes.
  2. The charges are in charging document of 18th November 2024. All 11 of you have pleaded guilty to kidnapping which carries a maximum penalty of up to 10 years imprisonment. Lemana Pene, Vaa Alai, Ofisa Setafao and Faavevela Lale a.k.a Tuua Lale (“Tuua”) have also pleaded guilty of common assault carrying a maximum penalty of up to 1 year imprisonment.

The Offending

  1. The facts are in the Disputed Summary of Facts Ruling dated 3rd March 2025 and the Amended Summary of Facts dated 29 January 2025 (as amended). In early September 2023, the Catholic Church deacon at Lefagaoali’i complained to the village that the victim had entered his property drunk. The victim made insulting remarks about the deacon and the matai of Lefagaoli’i. The remarks were to the effect that: “Ou te tafagaina uma ulu o matai o le nuu lenei o Lefagaoalii.”[2] The complaint was conveyed to the village by Tauti Tiaka and another villager.
  2. A village meeting was held on Thursday 14th September 2023 at 8.00am at Aitauia’s home to discuss the complaint. The sub-villages of Siufaga and Lolua gathered but the sub-village of Asu did not. All 11 of you were at the village meeting. A resolution that “e tu le to’oto’o” (to banish the victim) was proposed by Aitauia, seconded by Vaele and agreed to by the rest of you. People present were deeply unhappy with the victim, as it was suggested that failure to comply with the decision would result in the threat of burning the victim’s property (the practice of “mu le foaga”). Aitauia and Vaele instructed the village to reconvene at 3.00pm to determine the victim’s compliance with the decision.
  3. At about 10.00am, Toemago led villagers to the victim’s home where Toemago communicated the village decision, “e tu le to’oto’o”. He told the victim he must vacate the property by 4.00pm or the village would take further action and they would return to check on compliance.
  4. At around 11.00am, Tauti and Lemana Nouata with other matai went to police for assistance to enforce the village decision. Police said they could not intervene. The response displeased Aituaia who remarked that “e le toe foi le nuu, ma o lea foi loa le mea e tatau ona fai ia So’oalo, o lea fa’aefuefu mea uma.” This sentiment was supported by Tauti and Lemana Nouata. In Lemana Nouata’s statement to police, he said: “Ia ga faamalie foi gai leoleo o le faaiuga sa iai i ka gei le fa ua leai a leai ua liu efuefu loa loga fale.” You were told by police to maintain the peace and adhere to the law.
  5. You all re-gathered at Aitauia’s home at 3.00pm with other villagers. The meeting was led by Aitauia, Vaele and Lemana Nouata. Police came and again reminded you all of the need to maintain peace and not act outside the law. Police were re-assured by Aitauia that nothing would occur so they left.
  6. With you all present, Aitauia then instructed the taulealea to bring rope and an amo. Aitauia, Vaele, Lemana Nouata and Tauti instructed the taulealea to check the victim’s compliance and if he had not complied, to tie him up and carry him away on the amo. All of you agreed to this.
  7. Aitauia then gave a speech to the taulealea that included Ofisa and Vaa that you are “the foundation and strength of the village” and to not be afraid of carrying out your duties. At 5.00pm, you then all marched to the victim’s home. Vaele with Aitauia directed the taulealea to surround the victim’s home to stop his escape. When you and the other villagers were seen approaching, a relative of the victim warned his niece and her children who lived with the victim to leave the house.
  8. Seeing villagers approaching, the victim came out of his home and raised his hands to surrender. Vaele, Tauti and Aitauia gave instructions to the taulealea to catch the victim and tie him to the amo. Vaa, Ofisa, Amiga and Lemana Pene then ran and captured the victim causing him to fall to the ground. Lemana Pene then kicked the victim, striking his shoulder and grazing his head. Vaa struck the victim’s back with a piece of timber and Ofisa and Tuua punched the victim, however, these were not powerful blows. As he was assaulted, Vaele, Tauti, Lemana Nouata, Amiga, Tomasi, Tuua and Salapo stood nearby encouraging the assault.
  9. Aitauia again instructed that the victim be tied and Tuua, Tomasi, Vaa and Amiga then hogtied him to the amo. He was then stabbed in the neck with a small knife by Aitauia and carried to the village aai 1.3 kilometres away, taking between 45 minutes to an hour. Ofisa, Vaa, Tuua, Amiga and Tomasi took turns carrying the victim while tied to the amo. When leaving the victim’s property, Lemana Pene questioned the victim’s defiance of the village and whether the victim should be taken to the umu, inferring it seems that he should be cooked as punishment. The victim was dropped a number of times. Tied to the amo by his hands and feet, he suffered severe pain from the rope. On reaching the aai, the victim was dehydrated and bleeding profusely from the stab wound to his neck. At the aai, he was placed on concrete and detained by you all.
  10. The victim was only released when the Methodist Church faifeau and the Catholic deacon knelt before Vaele, Tauti, Lemana Nouata, Toemago Pa’u and others of you and begged for mercy and for the victim’s release. Only then was he released and taken to the police station. He received medical attention and was hospitalised for 3 days. The victim was noted to have:

The Accused

  1. Vaele, you are a 75 year old matai of Lefagaoali’i, married with 12 children. You completed school to year 4. You have very positive character references and are a deacon in the EFKS Church and in the Church Choir. You suffer gastritis and take medication for your condition.
  2. Tauti Tiaki, you are a 68 year old matai of Lefagaoali’i married with 4 children. You completed school to year 2 and worked briefly for WSTEC. You otherwise have been rendering service as a matai, working your plantation and fishing. You have positive character references. You suffer from type 2 diabetes and hypertension and also take medication for your condition.
  3. Toemago Lasalo, you are a 60 year old matai from Lefagaoali’i and Lepea, married with 10 children. You completed school to year 10. You worked at WSTEC until it was closed. You have since worked your plantation. You have positive character refences. You suffer from diabetes and take some medication.
  4. Lemana Nouata, you are 55 years old matai and widower from Lefagaoali’i with 1 daughter. You completed school to year 12. While you worked briefly in Apia, you have spent the past many years back in Lefagaoali’i on the family plantation and caring for your parents. You suffer type 2 diabetes and hyper-tension. You also have positive character references.
  5. Ofisa Setafao, you are 27 years old from Lefagaoalii, single and unemployed. You completed school to year 11. You suffer from epilepsy. You briefly worked in Apia but returned to Lefagaoalii to render your tautua. You also have positive character references.
  6. Vaa Alai, you are 41 years old from Lefagaoali’i, Luatuanuu and Tulaele. You are married with 3 children. You completed school to year 13. You worked a number of jobs in Apia but returned to your plantation at Lefagaoali’i. Presently, your wife and children care for your ailing father. You have positive character references but have prior convictions entered in 2010 for theft as a servant and possession of narcotics. You suffer from gout.
  7. Amiga Lagaaia, you are 31 years old from Lefagaoali’i, single and employed at an engineering workshop. You were brought up in American Samoa. You went to Don Bosco for a period. You also have positive character references.
  8. Tomasi Samuelu, according to the Summary of Facts, you are 20 years old, single and unemployed. You completed school to year 10 before you opted to stay home and serve your family. You are described as respectful and obedient and have positive character references.
  9. Tuua, you are 26 years old, single and unemployed. You completed school to year 12. You have worked as a cook and kitchen hand at Tanu Beach fales and in New Zealand on the RSE scheme. You have positive character references.
  10. Lemana Pene, you are a 57 year old matai from Lefagaoali’i and Falefa, married with 7 children. You completed school to year 7. You are described as hardworking and a dedicated father. You have positive character references noting your dedication to the village youth.
  11. Finally, Salapo, you are a 61 year old matai from Lefagaoalii and Levi Saleimoa. You are a widower with 2 children. You completed school to form 5. You are described as a leader within your family and active within the church and village affairs. You also have positive character references in.

The Victim

  1. The victim is 73 year old Sooalo Asiata Lepa Tuuu. He is from Samauga, Lefagaoali’i and Australia. During his Disputed Summary of Facts evidence, Sooalo spoke of his treatment by you all and by the village. He remains very emotional to this day. An ifoga was however presented to him at both his Tulaele home and at Samauga. The Reconciliation Report says that on performing the ifoga and seeing all of your wives, children, mothers and fathers kneeling and asking for forgiveness, he felt overwhelmed and has forgiven all of you.

Aggravating factors

  1. There are a number of aggravating features to your offending:
  2. There are no aggravating factors personal to many of you. You are all first offenders except for Ofisa, Vaa and Lemana Pene. For Ofisa, you have a prior conviction for assault entered in 2016 and an uplift for sentence will be applied. For Vaa and Lemana Pene, your prior convictions are different in nature so I will not uplift sentence for those.

Mitigating factors

  1. Early in the sentencing proceedings, I raised with counsel whether acts and statements attributed to the victim in your Pre-Sentence Reports (PSR) mitigate the offending. Mr Su’a in his written submissions seems to refer to different remarks. Those that I rely on are in the PSRs. I have referred to the first statement at the deacon’s home where the victim said words to the effect of “Ou te tafagaina uma ulu o matai o le nuu lenei o Lefagaoali’i.”. The second involved a church service requested by the victim to make amends with the village. However, instead of making amends, he stated words to the effect of:
  2. Mr Su’a also submits in mitigation the victim’s performance of a saofa’i without following the cultural protocols of Lefagaoali’i. Prior to the Disputed Summary of Facts hearing, Mr Su’a confirmed he would be relying on those facts in mitigation. Time was provided for Ms Su’a-Mailo to consider Mr Su’a’s position and if at issue, it would be a matter to be heard in the disputed summary of facts hearing. It was agreed that this would not be a matter for hearing and the Court can refer to those facts in the PSRs. I proceed accordingly.
  3. While Ms Sua-Mailo seeks to distinguish the victim’s acts from ordinary acts of provocation,[4] this is no ordinary case and these were no ordinary acts or insults. The victim had conducted a bestowal of matai titles which he was not, it is said, connected to. He was banished but failed to comply with his banishment. The victim then followed with insults. These insults were deliberately and culturally provocative and levelled in a most offensive manner not against an individual but against all the village matai. This was carried out in a place of worship holding central significance in any village calculated to demean the village matai as well as in the deacon’s home. When he was again banished on the 14th September 2023, the victim again failed to comply.
  4. Although not raised by counsel, article 71 of the Constitution provides that “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, customs may be taken into account in all courts under this Part.” Article 1(3) of the Constitution also provides that “Samoa is a Christian nation founded on God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” In Samoan custom, the victim’s actions were culturally provocative in extremis and a direct affront to the standing and dignity of the Alii and Faipule and to Lefagaoali’i itself. He had ignored the village banishment. The insults were made in a place of worship before the gathered village and at the home of the deacon. For his actions, the village made the decision on the on the 14th September 2023 that “e tu le to’oto’o”. Given time to leave, he again defied the village. While the victim’s actions in isolation might not warrant reduction of the start point, I am satisfied that taken in totality, the victim’s acts were so culturally provocative as to warrant a reduction in the start point.
  5. The mitigating factors personal to the defendants I take into account are:

Discussion

  1. The Alii and Faipule is at the centre of village governance and decision-making in Samoa. The Alii and Faipule play an important role in securing peace and harmony in villages across Samoa, a role today enshrined in the Village Fono Act 1990. However, like every institution in a democratic society, the Alii and Faipule and everyone acting under the authority of the Alii and Faipule must act in accordance with the law. There should be no misunderstanding - the law applies to everyone. No institution or person is above the law, including an Alii and Faipule. If you break the law as you all have, the law will hold you to account.
  2. By kidnapping the victim, you deprived him of his personal liberty guaranteed by article 6 of the Constitution. By tying him to the amo, assaulting him and carrying him away to the aai in the way that you did, you also exposed him to inhumane and degrading punishment contrary to his Constitutional rights protected by article 7. You did so with the specific purpose of humiliating him before all the village see. In today’s internet age and social media, your actions were then beamed out for the rest of the world to see.
  3. What is particularly disturbing about your actions was that the institution of the Alii and Faipule responsible for maintaining peace and order in your village was used as an instrument to orchestrate the victim’s kidnapping and in doing so, breach his Constitutional rights. That none of you spoke up, particularly the matai amongst you, is difficult to understand. Not one of you spoke up to say that tying the victim up and carry him away on an amo was wrong. Not one of you spoke up to say it would be a crime for which you all may have to answer. Instead, you all agreed.
  4. I am in no doubt that you were all aware that the decision to tie the victim to the amo and carry him away would be a crime. You had been advised by police at 11.00am and again at the 3.00pm village meeting to maintain the peace and to act within the law. Having been warned by police on two separate occasions, you all chose to ignore those warnings. You all knew that what you were doing was wrong, but went ahead anyway. You felt for some reason that the law did not apply to you. The consequences of your actions however are now clear to you all. Having been remanded in custody for some months now, you are all now deeply remorseful. It is deeply regrettable that you did not listen to the police warnings or stop to consider the serious consequences for each of you by taking part in the victim’s kidnapping. The days of public humiliation, shaming and punishment in this way by hogtying a person is a relic long left in Samoa’s past with no place in modern Samoa. It is also a serious crime.
  5. Although the victim’s actions were culturally provocative and deeply offensive, it cannot justify his treatment at your hands. Your sentence has the purpose of denouncing your conduct and deterring you and others from committing this same or similar offence. An Alii and Faipule cannot take the law into its own hands and become an instrument to perpetrate crime. Where it does so, it becomes the solemn duty of the Courts to apply the law and hold those involved to account. As leaders of the kidnapping Vaele, Lemana Nouata and Tauti, you regrettably failed to show wise leadership (tofa ma le fa’autautaga) and the restraint the situation called for. Had you shown that leadership and restraint, we would not be here today.
  6. On your behalf, Mr Su’a seeks the imposition of a non-custodial sentence after deductions. Given the very serious nature of your offending, that is out of the question. Vaele Iosia, Lemana Nouata and Tauti Tiaki, prosecution seeks an 8 years sentence start point. Mr Su’a seeks 4 years sentence start point. In sentencing the three of you, I accept that it is appropriate to sentence you together and treat you alike because the differences in your culpability are minor.
  7. There is no guideline authority for kidnap sentencing. There can however be no doubt that kidnapping is a very serious offence reflected in the maximum statutory imprisonment term of 10 years set by Parliament and in the sentencing approach taken by the courts. This case however is quite different to many of the kidnapping cases that come before the courts which often involve kidnapping for sexual purposes and the kidnapping of taxi drivers, so are not particularly comparable. However, they remain helpful as general guidance on some of the factors relevant to kidnap sentencing and the start points adopted.
  8. I have had regard to the cases referred to me by counsel. In Police v Sefa [2024] WSSC 58, a 15 year old male victim was bundled from a public road into a car and kidnapped for a sexual purpose. The victim was blind folded and held down with an arm and driven off from Magiagi up the Cross Island Road. The victim managed to escape and was not sexually assaulted. The court adopted a 7 year start point.
  9. In Police v Luamanu [2018] WSSC 120, a 64 year old taxi driver was kidnapped. He was bundled into the boot for 8 hours. A 3 year start point was adopted for the ring leader of that kidnapping. That kidnapping however did not have the many serious aggravating features present in this case. In Police v Sape [2015] WSSC 160, a 5 year start point was adopted for the kidnapping charge involving the tying up and kidnapping of the victim to take him to his ATM to withdraw money of very short duration.
  10. Vaele, Lemana Nouata and Tauti, the start point for sentence cannot be less than 6 years imprisonment. You planned and directed the kidnapping. Aitauia and the 3 of you told the taulealea to check on the victim and directed that if he did not comply with the village decision, to tie him up and carry him away on the amo. At the victim’s home, you Vaele directed that the house be surrounded to prevent the victim’s escape and both you Vaele and Tauti then directed the taulealea to capture and bind the victim to the amo. The 3 of you with others then urged on and encouraged the assault of the victim.
  11. Vaele and Tauti, from this 6 year start point, I reduce the start point by 12 months for the culturally provocative acts of the victim. From the 5 year adjusted start point, I deduct 9 months for the ifoga; 6 months for your prior good character and 6 months for your genuine remorse leaving 3 years 3 months. I deduct 4 months for your age and health and as a degree of mercy for these factors; and deduct 6 months for your guilty plea on the date of hearing leaving an end sentence of 2 years 5 months (29 months) imprisonment.
  12. Lemana Nouata, from this 6 year start point, I also reduce the start point by 12 months for the culturally provocative acts of the victim to 5 years. From this adjusted start point, I deduct 9 months for the ifoga; 6 months for your prior good character and 6 months for your genuine remorse leaving 3 years 3 months. I deduct 7 months for your guilty plea leaving an end sentence of 2 years 8 months (32 months) imprisonment.
  13. For those of you who followed instructions of the those who led this sorry affair by capturing assaulting, hog-tying and carrying the victim away – Vaa, Ofisa, Amiga, Lemana Pene, Tomasi and Tuua, your culpability is lower than Vaele, Lemana Nouata and Tauti. Prosecution seeks a 6 year sentence start point. Mr Su’a seeks a start point of 3 years imprisonment but says this should not include you Amiga and Tomasi. I disagree with Mr Su’a. Both Amiga and Tomasi actively encouraged the assault of the victim and participated in hog-tying and carrying him away. I sentence the 6 of you alike. The appropriate start point is 4 years imprisonment.
  14. I begin with Amiga, Lemana Pene and Tuua. From the 4 year imprisonment start point, I reduce the start point by 8 months for the culturally provocative acts of the victim. I then deduct 6 months for the ifoga; 4 months for your prior good character; 4 months for your remorse and 5 months for your guilty plea leaving an end sentence of 1 year 9 months (21 months) imprisonment.
  15. Ofisa, as I said, you have a prior conviction for causing injury entered in 2016. I uplift your sentence by 3 months to 4 years and 3 months. I then deduct 8 months for the culturally provocative acts of the victim reducing the start point to 3 years 7 months. I then deduct 6 months for the ifoga; 4 months for your remorse; and 6 months from the balance leaving an end sentence of 2 years 3 months (27 months) imprisonment.
  16. Va’a Alai, you are not entitled to a deduction for prior good character. From 4 year start point, I deduct 8 months for the culturally provocative acts of the victim. From the adjusted start point, I deduct 6 months for the ifoga; and 4 months for your genuine remorse. From the balance, I deduct 5 months for your guilty plea leaving an end sentence of 2 years 1 month (25 months) imprisonment.
  17. Tomasi Samuelu, Amended Summary of Facts says you are 20 years old. A deduction for youth will be made. From the 4 year start point, I reduce the start point by 8 months for the culturally provocative acts of the victim. I then deduct 6 months for your youth; 6 months for the ifoga; 4 months for your prior good character; 4 months for your genuine remorse and 4 months for your guilty plea leaving an end sentence of 1 year 4 months (16 months) imprisonment.
  18. That now leaves Salapo and Toemago. You were both present and agreed with the instruction by Aitauia, Lemana Nouata, Tauti and Vaele that if the victim does not comply with the decision to leave his property, the taulealea were to tie him up and carry him away. As matai, you were both part of that decision-making. At the victim’s home when Aitauia instructed that the victim be tied up and as he was being assaulted on the ground, you Salapo also stood nearby urging on and encouraging that assault. After he was hogtied to the amo, you then both walked with the other of the defendants in front of, alongside and behind Amiga and Tuua as the victim was being forcibly taken from his home to the aai. At the aai, you both together with the other defendants detained the victim against his will. The appropriate start point is 18 months imprisonment. From 18 months, I deduct 3 months for the culturally provocative acts of the victim; 3 months for the ifoga; 4 months for your prior good character and genuine remorse; and from the balance, 2 months for your guilty plea leaving an end sentence of 7 months imprisonment.

Result

  1. You are accordingly convicted and sentenced as follows, less remand in custody:

JUSTICE CLARKE


[1] ABC Australia Pacific Beat, Agnes Tupou, “Samoa’s customary law questioned after 72-year-old man is bashed and hogtied”, Tuesday 26 September 2023, https://www.abc.net.au/pacific/program/pacificbeat/Samoa-s-customary-law-questioned-after-72-year-old-is-hogtied/102900312:RNZ Pacific News in brief for Samoa 19 <http://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/498301/pacific-news-in-brief-for-september-19> [2] See PSR Toemago Pa’u Lasalo 06 December 2012 at p.3
[3] See PSR Vaele Iosia Reupoamo 02 December 2012 at p.2
[4] Sentencing Memorandum at pp10-12.

PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/ws/cases/WSSC/2025/16.html