Police v Patiole [2025] WSSC 69 (5 August 2025)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Patiole [2025] WSSC 69 (5 August 2025)

Case name:	Police v Patiole
Citation:	[2025] WSSC 69
Decision date:	5 August 2025
Parties:	POLICE (Informant) v FINAUVALE SYONARA PATIOLE, female of Fagamalo & Saleaula (Accused)
Hearing date(s):	Sentencing Hearing: 22nd July 2025
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 any remand in custody: (a) charge 1 of theft as a servant in Amended Charging Document dated 13th January 2025, 1 year 2 months’ imprisonment; (b) charge 2, theft as a servant of $2,900.00, 9 months’ imprisonment, concurrent; and (c) charge 6, forgery, 4 months’ imprisonment concurrent.
Representation:	L Matauaina for Prosecution A. Su’a for the Accused
Catchwords:	theft as a servant – forgery – Bank teller – breach of trust – pre-meditation – multiple victims – restitution – prior good character.
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

Informant

AN D:

FINAUVALE SYONARA PATIOLE, female of Fagamalo & Saleaula.

Accused

Counsel: L Matauaina for Prosecution

A. Su’a for the Accused

Sentence Hearing: 22^nd July 2025
Decision: 5^th August 2025

SENTENCE REMARKS OF CLARKE J

The Charges:

1. After a defended hearing, I found the accused guilty of three charges for which she today appears for sentence: two charges of theft as a servant and one charge of forgery.

The Offending:

2. The background to the accused offending is set out in my judgment dated 6^th June 2025. In summary, the accused was employed at the Samoa Commercial Bank (SCB), Fagamalo Savaii as the branch supervisor. The SCB branch Fagamalo is a small branch with only one other employee, Sisipeni Tuilapea who was a teller.
3. On the 2^nd February 2023, the accused had gone to Vaiuli Falo, a customer of the SCB and asked her to sign a withdrawal slip for $5,000.00. Vaiuli refused but the accused then later went with a completed the withdrawal slip for $7,500.00 and presented it to Sispeni and withdrew $7,500.00 from Vaiuli’s account. I was satisfied that it was the accused that completed the withdrawal slip forging Vaiuli’s signature and she then stole $7,500.00 from Vaiuli’s account.
4. On the same date, the accused also stole $2,900.00 from Faamalo Paoa, another customer of the SCB. The accused presented a withdrawal slip for Faamalo’s account to Sispeni for $2,900.00 and she dishonestly withdrew that money.

The Accused:

5. The accused is a 29 year old woman from brought up in Saasaai Savaii and a former employee of the SCB. She completed school to year 13. Both her parents are deceased. She is married with a two year old son and now operates a small salon in Saleaula, Savaii. She is described by her husband as a reliable, trustworthy, helpful, respectful and loving person. She has positive character references from her Church Bishop and Pulenuu and no prior convictions.

The Victims:

6. There are no victim impact reports. However, Faamalo Paoa has provided a letter to the Probation Service confirming that they have reconciled with and forgiven the accused. He also confirmed the payment of the full amount stolen of $2,900.00. In terms of Vaiuli Falo, the accused counsel has provided confirmation of $2,100.00 paid on the 27^th June this year. This is in addition to the $2,000.00 paid immediately after her offending, which came out in the evidence leaving the balance left unpaid of $3,400.00.

Aggravating and mitigating features:

7. The aggravating features of your offending are:
   • (a) serious breach of trust. You were the branch supervisor for the SCB at Fagamalo, Savaii and you abused the trust invested in you;
   • (b) the amount stolen of $10,400.00 was substantial and there were really three victims, including the SCB;
   • (c) it was premeditated and calculated; and
   • (d) the number of victims, being the SCB and the two account holders.
8. I accept as mitigating to you personally:
   • (a) the restitution, money recovered and reconciliation;
   • (b) prior good character; and
   • (c) your personal circumstances, namely, your care of your two year old child.
9. I do not accept that you are genuinely remorseful for your offending. You pleaded not guilty and this matter proceeded to trial. In your PSR, you maintained your innocence despite the evidence and your finding of guilt. While you wrote a letter of remorse on the 22^nd July 2025, it was a late in the piece insincere attempt to improve the outcome of your sentencing and I extend no deduction for this insincere remorse.

Discussion:

10. Finauvale, you were the branch supervisor of the SCB branch at Fagamalo. You were entrusted with great responsibility to ensure that the affairs of the bank were handled honestly and correctly. Instead, you lied and you stole from two of the bank’s customers, stealing in total $10,400.00. You then came to court maintaining your innocence and continued with your lies in an attempt to evade responsibility for your stealing. You instead tried to paint prosecution witnesses as either liars or wrong and tried it seems to pin your stealing on Sisipeni, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary that it was you. While your husband describes you as trustworthy, you are far from it. You have persistently lied and you are a thief.
11. Prosecution seeks a two-year sentence start point. Your counsel concedes to this recommended start point. In my review of the sentencing authorities, the start points for this level of offending is usually between two to three years imprisonment. I have decided however to accept the recommended start point by prosecution, though it is at the lower end of start points available to me. From two years, I deduct 15% or 4 months for the money repaid and reconciliation; 10% or 3 months for prior good character and from the balance, 3 months for your personal circumstances leaving an end sentence of 1 year 2 months imprisonment on a totality basis.^[1]

Result:

12. You are accordingly convicted and sentenced as follows, less any remand in custody:
    • (a) charge 1 of theft as a servant in Amended Charging Document dated 13^th January 2025, 1 year 2 months’ imprisonment;
    • (b) charge 2, theft as a servant of $2,900.00, 9 months’ imprisonment, concurrent; and
    • (c) charge 6, forgery, 4 months’ imprisonment concurrent.
      

JUSTICE CLARKE

---

^[1] The deductions have been rounded upwards in all cases to the benefit of the accused.