IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

THE POLICE
Informant

AND:

IRWIN LEASI, male of Mulifanua.
Defendant

Counsels: Ms F. Vaai and Ms P. Valoia for prosecution
 Defendant unrepresented

Sentence: 20 September 2010

SENTENCE

 This defendant appears for sentence on 42 counts of theft as a servant and 149 counts of false accounting. What was said in the previous sentencing that has just been handed down in respect of Police v Matau Milosia also applies to this case. But this case is perhaps more severe in its criminality in that it involves a larger number of charges which is indicative of a larger scale of criminal offending. But the level of deception involved in this case is as much as was involved in the previous case in that here the defendant also used fictitious names of ex-employees to carry out his illegal activities. 

 The police summary of facts which the defendant accepts relates as follows: the defendant was employed by Yazaki EDS Samoa Limited as firstly a floor operator and then subsequently as a payroll officer from November 2008 until his termination in January 2010. At the time of the offending the defendant was one of two payroll officers for Yazaki and in that capacity was responsible for preparing and inputting salaries and wages for all employees of the company. On 149 different occasions the defendant in preparing the payrolls fraudulently made false entries into the Yazaki computer payroll system by reactivating the accounts of employees already terminated or who were no longer working for Yazaki. The defendant would then issue pay for these reactivated employees as if they were current employees on the company payroll and then he and a colleague on 42 separate occasions uplifted the pay packets of these people and used the monies for their own personal purposes. In this way they were able to steal $298,419.50 over the period March to August 2009. This means over a period of some five months they were able to steal almost $300,000 from this company. That is a staggering amount considering the time frame of the offending and is indicative of a planned and systematic theft. The courts penalty must reflect the degree of criminality involved in these thefts as well as the scale of the offending.

 Looking at comparable and similar cases there is Police v Nofoaiga [2007] WSSC 47 involving 95 counts of theft as a servant and 65 charges of false accounting and an amount in excess of $183,000. The sentence there was 4½ years. The case of Taylor Miti which was just referred to that occurred on 2 August 2010 involved 97 counts of theft and an amount of almost the same as your amount defendant of $298,052.13. The sentence there was also 4½ years in prison. There is no question that this theft has caused a very large loss to the company involved and there is also no doubting the usefulness of Yazaki to the economy of our country. There is probably justification therefore for imposing a heavier sentence on you than was imposed in these previous cases because your offending is on a much larger scale. However I have read through what is in your probation report and also considering the other circumstances of your case and have decided to impose a sentence in your case similar to the previous cases that I have just referred to.

 Accordingly in respect of the theft as a servant charges, for all those amounts above the amount of $5,000 you are convicted and sentenced to 4½ years in prison; in respect of all offences involving amounts between $4,000 and $5,000 you will be convicted and sentenced to 4 years in prison; in respect of the amounts between $3,000 and $4,000 you will be convicted and sentenced to 3½ years in prison; in respect of amounts less than $3,000 convicted and sentenced to 3 years in prison. In respect of the false accounting charges 149 in total you will be convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison. All these terms are to be served concurrently so the nett sentence is you will serve 4½ years in prison.

JUSTICE NELSON