SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Alofa’e [2012] WSSC 68

Case name: Police v Alofa’e
Citation:  [2012] WSSC 68
Decision date: 25 June 2012
Parties: 
POLICE v MATAFA ALOFA’E  male of Samatau and Luatuanuu
Hearing date(s): 
File number(s): 
Jurisdiction:  Criminal
Place of delivery: 
Judge(s): Nelson J
On appeal from:
Order:
Representation: 
Ms L Taimalelagi for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented
Catchwords: 
Words and phrases:
Legislation cited:
Cases cited:
Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

THE POLICE
Informant

AND:

MATAFA ALOFA’E  male of Samatau and Luatuanuu.
Defendant

Counsel:  Ms L Taimalelagi for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence:  25 June 2012

SENTENCE

This defendant appears for sentence on a charge that at Samatau on the 16th of April 2012 he did cause grievous bodily harm to his friend Faaaliga Pa’u Migao a male of that village.  The summary of facts which the defendant has admitted states that the two men have known each other for almost 20 years.  It seems like this offence was committed in a moment of temporary insanity of the part of the defendant towards his friend.  
The facts are that on Monday 16 April at about 8:00 am in the morning the defendant was at another friends home at Samatau.  They were sharpening their machetes no doubt preparing to go to the plantation for the usual chores of the day.  The victim arrived and they all proceeded to sharpen their knives and talk.  Not long after the victim arrived he and the defendant started quarrelling about a canoe that the two of them had gone fishing in.  A canoe that belonged to another matai of the village.  The quarrel escalated and the summary relates that the defendant directed his machete at the victim which I take to mean that he used it in a threatening gesture towards the victim.  
The victim reached for a rock and according to the defendants account to the probation office he threw a rock which hit him.  And that as the victim reached for a second rock the defendant began striking the victim with the machete.  More than one strike was delivered in particular one to the right elbow of the victim and another which the victim blocked causing the machete to almost cut off the victims fingers.  
The victim suffered a number of deep wounds with one to his left forearm measuring some 22 cm going down to the bone.  This blow fractured the bone and severed the surrounding nerves and arteries.  That is indicative of the sharpness of the instrument used as well as the force with which the blows were delivered.  Equally forceful must have been the blow which the victim blocked with his fingers which now have iron or steel pins in them inserted by the doctors at the hospital in order to facilitate re-growth and repair.   The victims injuries were serious and painful and it will take time for him to recover from his wounds.  
The defendant told the probation office that the reason why he assaulted the victim was the argument over the fishing boat.  Which the two of them had lost while out fishing and which no doubt they were trying to resolve as to who would pay for the fishing boat.   The defendants loss of composure was severe as were the consequences of his action.  Which is noted in the victim impact report as follows: the victim is currently facing difficulties when moving.  The right arm was injured severely with two deep slashes.  His left arm is totally dysfunctional from being slashed with the machete.  He feels as if he is a child again who needs to be fed by others.  He has trouble going to the bathroom.  The defendant is not able to work therefore he is not able to provide for his children.  That is his main concern.  The victim had to take needle injections in his arm to help with the pain and healing.  He also has to take medicine in tablet form.  The victim today is still in pain.  He wears an arm sling to comfort his left arm.  He moves slowly as a result of the incident.  
The maximum penalty for this offence is 7 years in prison.  Because of the seriousness of the offending and your use of a weapon there is no question imprisonment must be imposed for your case.  The real issue is how long is appropriate given the circumstances of the matter.  Considering all relevant circumstances a 5 year start point is appropriate.  But there are deductions which you are entitled to which I will now make.  Firstly for your guilty plea Matafa which has saved the necessity of a trial, I deduct one-third of the term that leaves a balance of 40 months.  For the fact that you are a first offender I deduct 6 months leaving a balance of 34 months.  The probation office have confirmed the village punishment of banishment from your village, because of that matter I will deduct a further 6 months from your sentence leaving a balance of 28 months. The probation office has further confirmed that an ifoga and reconciliation in the traditional fashion has been done by your family.  For that matter and because of your friends prayer for leniency from the court I will deduct a further period of 4 months from your sentence leaving a balance of 24 months.  
It would normally also be necessary to upgrade your sentence Matafa to reflect the violence of the attack and the use of a machete that had just been sharpened.  But I have concluded that upgrading the sentence to take account of that is offset by the fact that as per what you told the probation office your attack was a retaliation to the action of the complainant in assaulting you first.  I therefore do not propose to make any further adjustment upwards to your sentence.  For this matter you will accordingly be convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison.

JUSTICE NELSON