Police v Talosaga [2025] WSSC 78 (12 September 2025)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Talosaga [2025] WSSC 78 (12 September 2025)

Case name:	Police v Talosaga
Citation:	[2025] WSSC 78
Decision date:	12 September 2025
Parties:	POLICE (Informant) and FAAFETAI TALOSAGA male of Faleula (Defendant)
Hearing date(s):
File number(s):
Jurisdiction:	Supreme Court, CRIMINAL
Place of delivery:	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu
Judge(s):	Justice Tuatagaloa
On appeal from:
Order:	The defendant is convicted and sentenced as follows: Grievous bodily harm: 2years’, 7 months’ imprisonment. Armed with dangerous weapon (machete): 6 months’ imprisonment. Sentences to be concurrent less any time in custody.
Representation:	E Keil for Prosecution V Faasii for the Defendant
Catchwords:	Grievous bodily harm, armed with a dangerous weapon, victim impact, aggravating features, pre-meditation, mitigating factors, early guilty plea, apology, village penalty, aggravating factors, provocation
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:	Crimes Act 2013 s118(1) Police Offences Ordinance 1961 s25
Cases cited:	1. R v Taueki [2005] NZCA 174; 3 NZLR 372 2. Telea v National Prosecution Office [2017] WSCA 4 (31 March 2017) at [33]
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

AND:

FAAFETAI TALOSAGA, male of Faleula

Defendant

Counsel: E Keil for Prosecution
V Faasii for the Defendant

Sentence: 12 September 2025

SENTENCING OF TUATAGALOA J

The charge

1. The defendant is being sentenced for:
   • Grievous bodily harm, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years’ imprisonment. ^[1]
   • Armed with a dangerous weapon (machete), which carries a maximum penalty of 12 months’ imprisonment. ^[2]

Summary of Offending[3]

2. In the evening of 21 May 2025, the defendant was waiting for his ride to work when the victim and six other village youths approached and they had a conversation which became heated and turned physical. The defendant was punched from behind which caused him to bend forward whereby the victim kicked him three times on the chest. A man ran over from a nearby taxi-stand and the victim and his friends ran off with his bag, phone and shoes. The next evening, seeing the victim laughing with friends, he became angry, retrieved a machete from a nearby house, and attacked the victim. He was intoxicated at the time. ^[4]The defendant fled, and the victim was taken to the hospital.
3. Through counsel the Amended Summary of Facts (SOF) is confirmed by the defendant.

Injuries

4. The victim sustained the following injuries:^[5]
   • A 40 cm laceration extending from the chest to the back;
   • An open wound on the left forearm exposing bone, muscle and tendon.

Victim Impact

5. The 19-year-old victim was hospitalized for a week and took three weeks to recover. He experienced severe pain and was unable to perform daily tasks. Three fingers remain numb, affecting his grip. He has forgiven the defendant and wishes they had talked instead. ^[6]

Defendant Background

6. The defendant is 26, unmarried, and employed as a waiter. He is the second eldest of nine children. ^[7] Testimonials from his priest and village mayor describe him as hardworking and well-behaved. His parents also seek leniency.
7. The village imposed a penalty of $10,000 and a fine mat, which the defendant’s family paid.

Aggravating factors

• Use of a dangerous weapon.
• Multiple strikes.
• Premeditation.
• Victim was unarmed and unsuspecting.
• Severe injuries.
• Long-term impact on victim’s hand function

8. The defendant has prior convictions (2017 and 2021), indicating escalating behaviour.

Mitigating factors

9. The mitigating factors personal to the defendant are: his family apology, his early guilty plea, and village penalty paid in full.
10. Under the Village Fono Act 1990, village-imposed penalties are considered in sentencing.^[8]

Sentencing Guideline

11. The prosecution referred to the R v Taueki tariff bands for machete-related grievous harm: ^[9]
    • Band one: 3-6 years – Less severe cases
    • Band two: 5-10 years – Moderate severity with two or three aggravating factors; and
    • Band three: 9-14 years – High Severity with three or more aggravating features.
12. In Telea v National Prosecutions Office^[10] where the Taueki tariffs were adopted the Court of Appeal noted machete attacks typically start at 4 – 6 years. The increased statutory maximum from 7 to 10 years reflects Parliament’s intent for tougher sentencing. ^[11]
13. Guidelines are flexible and must be tailored to each case.

Discussion

14. Counsel for the defendant referred to some authorities of same offences but are of completely different circumstances. Counsel submitted that a custodial sentence is neither necessary nor proportionate in the circumstances of the offending. I disagree. Counsel for the defendant recommends for a non-custodial sentence of two years’ supervision alternatively, a custodial sentence with a starting point of 12 months’ imprisonment.
15. The Prosecution submitted for a starting point of 4 to 5 years’ imprisonment. I agree to the starting point of 5 years. This was a deliberate use of a machete and was not only one strike but twice putting the life of the victim very much at risk.
16. The injuries show significant force. The attack was deliberate, with the victim in a vulnerable position. The defendant’s actions reflect anger and aggression. Alcohol played a role. A combination of alcohol and anger always leads to violence resulting in serious injury or injuries, increasing the risk to public safety. A custodial sentence is necessary to ensure accountability, deterrence, and community protection.
17. The starting point reflects the seriousness of the offending and the various aggravating features of the offending.

Discount

18. The most significant mitigating factor is the early guilty plea and make the following deductions - 6 months for the apology to the victim’s family, a further 6 months for the village penalty imposed and carried out by the defendant’s family and 3 months for remorse. I will also allow three (3) months for any provocation. These leaves 42 months whereby I give 25% discount of 11months for his early guilty plea. This reduces the sentence considerably to 31 months or 2 years and 7 months.

Final Sentence

19. The defendant is convicted and sentenced as follows:
    • Grievous bodily harm: 2years’, 7 months’ imprisonment.
    • Armed with dangerous weapon (machete): 6 months’ imprisonment.
20. Sentences to be concurrent less any time in custody.
    

JUSTICE TUATAGALOA

---

^[1] Crimes Act 2013, s118(1)
^[2] Police Offences Ordinance 1961, s25
^[3]Refer to Amended Summary of Facts , dated 10 September 2025 for full set of facts
^[4] See Pre-Sentence Report, dated 2 September 2025; Alcohol and Drug Assessment Report, dated 16 July 2025
^[5] Medical Report by Dr Fogalele Su’a, dated 30^th May 2022
^[6] Victim Impact Report, dated 5^th September 2024
^[7] Alcohol and Drug Assessment Report dated 16 July 2025 for purposes of Alcohol and Drugs Court which is relevant to sentencing where there is no pre-sentence report.
^[8] Section 8
^[9] R v Taueki [2005] NZCA 174; 3 NZLR 372
^[10] Telea v National Prosecution Office [2017] WSCA 4 (31 March 2017) at [33] - “Broadly speaking and with the odd outlier, grievous bodily harm attacks with a machete have tended to result in starting point of four to six years’ imprisonment.”
^[11] ibid.at [31].