IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT APIA

BETWEEN:

THE POLICE
Informant

AND:

SIO IOANE
male of Leusoalii and Salelologa Savaii.
Defendant

Counsel: Ms L Su'a-Mailo for prosecution
Mr S Wulf for defendant 

Sentence: 17 October 2011

SENTENCE

The defendant is this case appears for sentence on twenty charges of theft as a servant. Nineteen of those charges involve some $7,600 stolen by the defendant from his employer a local supermarket over the months of September and October 2010. The twentieth is a single charge involving $11,248.45 using the same methodology but involving only one customer and represents money stolen on 04th October 2010. The total amount involved in all thecharges is $18,915.85 and each count of theft as a servant carries a 7 year maximum penalty. 

The summary of facts which has been accepted by the defendant relates that he is a 34 year old male of Leusoalii and Salelologa in Savaii and was formerly employed by Chan Mow Wholesale as a delivery supervisor responsible for the companys truck deliveries in Savaii. The defendants job was to collect monies from customers for goods delivered or sold to them and to issue receipts for such monies. On nineteen occasions representing the nineteen smaller thefts the defendant received cash from customers for purchases and issued receipts from his receipt book. His system was to write the word "paid" on the original receipt given to the customer but write the word "unpaid" on the carbon copy kept and given to the company. The cash payment would then be retained by the defendant and applied for his own personal needs. The payments ranged from the lowest of $46.23 to the highest for the nineteen charges of $1,012.30. 

The twentieth charge relates to a payment on 04 October 2010 when a customer paid to the defendant $11,248.45 which the defendant kept. The defendant used the same methodology namely to write "paid" on the original and "unpaid" on the carbon copy and it was suspicions as to this particular transaction which prompted the company to launch an investigation into the defendants activities resulting in this matter coming to light. 

The courts policy in relation to theft as a servant offending has been well spelled out in many cases in the past. Cases such as Police v Valaauina [2009] WSSC 21 where it was stated that; 

"Because of the seriousness and prevalence of such offending usually a penalty of imprisonment is imposed. The only time that it is not imposed is if there are exceptional circumstances warranting some other treatment. The reason for such imprisonment penalty is to not only deter the offender himself or herself from such future behaviour but also others who may be tempted to emulate it."

As stated in the prosecution sentencing memorandum the sentence must reflect the abuse of financial trust. It must reflect that the offending was planned and premeditated and would have involved an element of concealment. This is also not a one off theft. There are twenty charges facing this defendant. The victim impact report from the defendants former employer indicates how the defendants offending has resulted in substantial financial loss to the company. Theft of an amount close to $20,000 would affect the financial operation of any company. As well it would also affect the reputation of the company. All these factors go to aggravate the criminal behaviour of the defendant in this matter. 

There is no doubt Sio that given the scale and criminality of the offending in this case an imprisonment penalty in accordance with the normal policy of the court must be imposed. There are no exceptional circumstances in your case. But in fixing an appropriate penalty I do take into account what your lawyer has submitted. The fact that you have pleaded guilty to the charges and saved the courts time and resources as well as the fact that you are a first offender. 

Considering all relevant factors you will be convicted and sentenced as a total sentence for all twenty charges to a period of 2 years in prison. 

.………………………
JUSTICE NELSON