IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Informant

AND:

SAKAIO SAVEA,
also known as MICHAEL SAVEA, of Sapapalii
Defendant

Counsel: Mata Tuatagaloa for Informant
Gabriel Gilmour for Defendant

Sentencing Date: 15 February 1999

ORAL DECISION OF JUSTICE WILSON

Sakaio Savea, also known as Michael Savea, of Sapapalii, you are 23 years of age. You have changed your plea of not guilty to a plea of guilty. I have accepted your plea of guilty and so you now stand convicted of the crime known as rape.

On 19th September 1998 at Sapapalii you had sexual intercourse with Ana Paiva (aged 22 at the time). It was sexual intercourse with consent, but you extorted her consent by fear of bodily injury and by a threat.

Rape is a serious crime at any time. Your crime was the more serious because of these factors:

(1) You used violence towards her (you pulled her hair and you forcibly blocked her mouth, to stop her from screaming, and she sustained injuries to her body (swelling and bruising to her lip - with a cut inside -, an abrasion to her left leg, and soreness to her right knee).

(2) You threatened to kill her if she did not agree to you having sexual intercourse with her. (She, understandably enough, was very frightened).

There were, I find, few mitigating circumstances of the crime itself. There is nothing which makes your crime into a less serious crime of its type other than the fact (which I accept for sentencing purposes) that this was a spur of the moment crime when you were affected by liquor. In no way did your victim encourage you or lead you on.

I must impose a deterrent sentence here, to deter you from ever committing a serious crime like this again in the future and to deter other men who might be thinking of raping a woman.

I do not overlook the matter of rehabilitation, but, in this case, deterrence must come first (deterrence is the paramount consideration) and rehabilitation must come afterwards.

I have read the facts of this case as were handed up by the lawyer for the prosecution. I listened as they were read out to you this morning. I listened to your lawyer speak on your behalf.

I have read the probation report.

I note that you have never committed a serious crime like this before. In fact, you have never committed any crime before. You are entitled to some leniency (and mercy) because you await the sentence of this Court as a first offender and as a man of previous good character. I give you credit (in the order of 20% off - one year lesser sentence than I might have imposed) because you pleaded guilty and thereby saved the cost of a long trial and saved the victim of your crime from having to give evidence and because you are truly remorseful. You have made a traditional apology and gift of compensation.

I note that you have since this trouble, been banished from your village, and you have been living with your uncle at Salai. I take into account the punishment you have already received in terms of banishment.

You were apparently under the influence of alcohol at the time of this crime. That is an explanation but no excuse.

I take into account in your favour your youthfulness. I have read the references (3 in number). Those references re-affirm that you are a young man of previous good character and indicate that this criminal behaviour was out of character and that you have a good future notwithstanding this serious crime that you committed.

With all due respect to the writer of the probation report and your lawyer, I do not think that you can correctly be described as the victim of your parents' separation. Even if that is a correct description, I think that that played no part in your offending behaviour.

There are some crimes which are so serious and which are such a worry to the people (when the people hear about them) that an actual prison sentence must be imposed, even when the offender is young and a first offender and a person of otherwise good character. This is such a crime.

The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned for 4 years.

JUSTICE WILSON