Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Supreme Court of Samoa

Police v Tiui [2013] WSSC 143 (11 November 2013)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

Police v Tiui [2013] WSSC 143

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE

Prosecution

AND:

TUAILEVAOOLA TIUI also known as TUA TIUI, male of Saipipi.
Defendant

Counsel: F Lagaaia for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented
Sentence: 11 November 2013

SENTENCE

1. The summary of facts from the police which the defendant admits says that he is 22 years old of the village of Saipipi. He is single and works his family plantation to tausi the aiga. The first complainant is a 58 year old widow of Saipipi, runs a retail shop and a bakery in the village. The second complainant is a 22 year old female who works for the first complainant and lives with her.
2. On Thursday 29 August this year at about midnight the first and second complainant were watching TV with the girls of the family. Second complainant put the young girl to bed turned off the light and continued watching TV. The defendant entered the house without either complainants knowledge. The second complainants phone rang and she stood up to answer the phone. The defendant ducked and hid underneath the kitchen table as the second complainant approached the kitchen. When the second complainant got close to the kitchen table she was shocked when the defendant jumped out and closed her mouth with his hand causing them both to fall down. The defendant grabbed the second complainants pants and tried to hold her down. However the second complainant grabbed a bucket and hit the defendant with it. Causing the defendant to take hold of a plastic chair nearby and hit the second complainant. And then to break five louvers of the house and run away.
3. The matter was reported to the police by the first complainant and the defendant was apprehended and taken to the Tuasivi Police Station. Where he was interviewed and charged with one count of intentional damage, one count of unlawful entry, one count of assault, one count of armed with a dangerous weapon namely a plastic chair. The defendant has pleaded guilty to these charges.
4. Looking at this factual situation it seems the defendants purpose in entering the house was the second complainant. He told the probation office that he was drunk and looking for food but I doubt that is true. Because if he had wanted food he would have acted quite differently. I think he was drunk but was in pursuit of the 22 year old second complainant. Entering peoples houses at midnight in such pursuits and then assaulting people inside the house is not acceptable behaviour. Especially when the person you assault is a young female. The law says that this sort of behaviour is punishable by up to 5 years in prison.
5. I am not going to send you to prison for 5 years but I am going to send you to prison. Because this is serious offending. And also because it involves an assault on a female. But I do not believe a long term is required because you are a first offender, you have a good background of service and tautua to your aiga and nuu, you have also pleaded guilty Tua and saved the courts time. And the probation office says that some kind of apology not a full customary apology but some kind of apology was made on your behalf by your mother. That is of some value to you. But you must never do this again Tua otherwise the penalty will much greater next time. Ua manino lea tulaga Tua? (Defendant indicated he understood).
6. In respect of the offence of unlawful entry which carries a 5 year maximum penalty, you will be convicted and sentenced to 6 months in prison. To be followed by 6 months supervisory probation on the usual conditions plus the following special conditions: firstly no alcohol of any kind during your probation period. Secondly you are not to go near the first complainants shop at Saipipi or go near the second complainant. And thirdly you are not to try and contact the second complainant in any way whatsoever including by text or cell phone. You are also to obey all other conditions impose on you by the probation office about reporting and such-like.
7. In respect of the offence of assault with a one year maximum penalty, you will be convicted and sentenced to 6 months in prison. Term to be served concurrent. On the charge of armed with a dangerous weapon namely a plastic chair with a one year maximum penalty, you will be convicted and sentence to 3 months term concurrent. On the final charge of intentional damage of five louvers 3 months in prison also concurrent. Remand in custody time awaiting sentence to be deducted.
   

JUSTICE NELSON