IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN

POLICE
Prosecution

AND

TAU IOSIA
male of Siumu.
Accused

Counsel: M Boone-Dumaran for prosecution
Accused in person

Sentence: 21 February 2006

SENTENCE

The charges

The accused is charged with two counts under s.52 (1) (a) of the Crimes Ordinance 1961 of having indecently assaulted a girl under the age of 12 years which carries a maximum penalty of seven years imprisonment. To the charges the accused pleaded guilty at the earliest available opportunity.

The offending

The accused is a 17 year old male from the village of Siumu. The victims are a 9 year old female and a 10 year old female both of whom are also from the village of Siumu. According to the summary of facts prepared by the prosecution, between the 01st and the 30th of December 2005 at the village of Siumu, the accused asked the two victims to come with him under a lemon tree on the opposite side of the road from the house of the 9 year old victim. He then whispered into the ear of the 9 year old victim to get a piece of stick with which to penetrate her private part and that of the 10 year old victim. After whispering this, the accused then pulled off the panty of the 9 year old victim and started sucking her vagina. The accused also pulled off the panty of the 10 year old victim and started sucking her vagina.

Later on the police came to Siumu, located the accused, and brought him to the Apia police station. When questioned by the police, the accused readily admitted to having indecently assaulted the victims.

The victims

Both victims attend primary school. They and the accused are cousins.

The accused

The accused had attended school but at the time of these offences he was staying home to look after his sick father who has become a cripple. His family is financially unstable as it depends solely on the meagre income of his mother who works as a housekeeper for one of the hotels at Siumu.

The accused and his family have apologised to the families of the victims but only one of the victim’s families has accepted the apology.

According to the pre-sentence report prepared by the probation service, the accused told the probation service that he had learnt about sexual activities from talks with some of the boys who are his friends.

The testimonials provided by the pastor and pulenu’u of the accused’s village show that the accused had been of good character prior to the commission of these offences.

The accused is also a first offender.

Aggravating circumstances

The fact that the victims are cousins of the accused is an aggravating circumstance.

Mitigating circumstances

The accused’s plea of guilty to the charges at the earliest opportunity, his young age, the fact he is a first offender and was of good character prior to the commission of these offences, and the apologies he and his family had made to the families of the victims may be taken into account as mitigating circumstances.

The decision

The number of sexual offences involving young offenders which are presently coming before the Court has become a matter of serious concern. Parents should be alert and keep a watchful eye on the proper upbringing of their children. This is an area where the parents, village schoolteachers, the village councils, and members of the village clergy can work together for the protection of our youths and communities. We often speak of our young generation being the future of our families, our villages, and our country. The future for us does not look bright if our youths do not receive the necessary moral upbringing and kept under proper parental supervision.

Having considered all the circumstances including the youth of the accused, I have decided to impose a term of probation to give this young accused a chance to redeem himself while he is still young with almost all his future still ahead of him. At the same time I must warn the accused not to commit this kind of serious offence again. If he does, imprisonment would be the most likely outcome. The Court is not likely to have any more mercy on him.

The accused is convicted and sentenced to 2 years probation. As a special condition of his term of probation, the accused is ordered to perform 300 hours of community service as directed by the probation service.

CHIEF JUSTICE