IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Leiataua [2014] WSSC 210

Case name: 	Police v Leiataua	
		
Citation: 	[2014] WSSC 210	
		
Decision date: 	15 December 2014	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (Prosecution)
LIUAFI LEIATAUA male of Faleu Manono and Talimatau. (Defendant)	
		
Hearing date(s): 	-	
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Nelson	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:		
		
Representation: 	O Tagaloa 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:
		
POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

	LIUAFI LEIATAUA male of Faleu Manono and Talimatau.
Defendant

Counsel:	O Tagaloa for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Sentence:	15 December 2014

SENTENCE
1.	The defendant has pleaded guilty to two counts of causing serious bodily injury and one count of being armed with a dangerous weapon namely a knife.  The defendant challenged parts of the original summary of facts provided by the police leading to an amended summary of facts dated 10 December 2014.  Paragraph 8 of that summary will also be deleted as it is not compatible with the evidence the court has heard.  
2.	The summary shows that the defendant is a 57 year old male of Manono and Talimatau.  He has according to the pre-sentence report children and a family for whom he provides.  There are two victims in this matter, the first being a 22 year old single male also of Talimatau employed as a security guard.  The second victim is a 17 year old single male of Talimatau who is the first victims younger brother.  
3.	On Friday, 19 September this year the victim had been consuming alcohol at a cousins house.  On their way home they ran into the defendant and his son who had also been drinking alcohol.  As the parties are known to each other they had a conversation on the road.  There is some difference as to what was said during this conversation but the end result was the parties separated and continued on their respective ways.  But not before the defendant uttered threats against the victims.  Threats that were heard by the female siblings of the two victims who told the victims about it.  
4.	The defendant and his son continued to their house where the defendant sat at the front drinking his beer.  Sometime later the victims and members of their family came to the defendants house.  One of the group confronted the defendant and his son about the words the defendant uttered previously that evening.  This led to a fight between the defendant and his son and the victims group.  In the course of which the defendant pulled out his pocket knife and stabbed the two victims.  
5.	The summary says the first victim suffered a one inch stab wound to the right side of his back.  A wound which required three stitches.  The second victim also sustained a one inch stab wound to the left side of his stomach.  A wound which required surgery at the hospital as the internal organs of the stomach were affected.  The victim impact report filed in respect of this victim also indicates that the victim was affected not only personally but financially by the injury.  
6.	It appears from the material before the court that unfortunately even though these people are acquainted and are near neighbours there has been no reconciliation of their dispute.     The wounds inflicted on the victims were serious and life threatening.  And were the result of the use of a weapon.  It also appears the defendant has previous convictions for offences of violence including a recent one for actual bodily harm in 2009.  
7.	In respect of the two charges of causing serious injury namely stab wounds to the two victims each charge carries a 10 year maximum penalty.  Prosecution have asked that sentence start at 7 years.  I consider that is too high given the circumstances of your matter.  I note that it was the victim and their group that came to your property seeking a confrontation which is exactly what they got.  The appropriate penalty for what you did in using this weapon in the course of the misa would be 12 months in prison Liuafi.  But that must be upgraded to 18 months because of your bad previous history.  
8.	The penalties are therefore as follows: for the two counts of serious bodily injury convicted and sentenced to 18 months in prison each count.  On the charge of armed with a dangerous weapon namely a small knife convicted and sentenced to 6 months in prison.  All these terms are to be served concurrent so that you will serve a total of 18 months in prison.   E poloaiga foi e le Fa’amasinoga e toese mai le 18 masina na le taimi lea sa e nofo taofia ai e fa’atalitali le fa’aiuga o le mataupu lenei.  

JUSTICE NELSON