IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Lemaota [2015] WSSC 157

Case name: 	Police v Lemaota	
		
Citation: 	[2015] WSSC 157	
		
Decision date: 	16 July 2015	
		
Parties: 	The Police (Prosecution)
Kovati Lemaota, male of Aleisa and Ululoloa. (Defendant)	
		
Hearing date(s): 	16 July 2015	
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal	
		
Place of delivery: 	Courthouse, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Nelson	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant was in possession of the narcotics on the night in question and that he threw them away in order to try and avoid being caught with the narcotics.  The defendant is found guilty as charged and will be remanded on bail to the 31st of July 2015 for probation office pre-sentence report and for sentence.	
		
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:
		
THE POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

	KOVATI LEMAOTA, male of Aleisa and Ululoloa.
Defendant

Counsel:	O Tagaloa for prosecution
Defendant unrepresented

Hearing:	16 July 2015

Decision:	16 July 2015

ORAL DECISION OF NELSON J

1.	The defendant is charged that at Aleisa on Christmas morning 2014 he was found in possession of two branches of cannabis leaves.  He does not dispute the nature of the materials and a drug analysis report has been submitted confirming that the two branches are indeed cannabis leaves a prohibited narcotic.  He does however maintain that the branches do not belong to him and he has been wrongly blamed for this matter.  
2.	The police evidence comprising of the testimony of two police officers is that they were part of a police patrol that Christmas morning.  They passed a bus stop at Aleisa where a group of people were drinking and making a lot of noise.  The two police officers were in the lead vehicle POL 03.  Their testimony was that when they approached the bus stop the defendant was not part of the group, he was standing some five (5) metres away.  Constable Filifili Potoae who was seated behind the driver shone a torch directly at the defendant as he was concerned the defendant may throw a rock or a bottle at the police vehicle.  His evidence was when the police patrol pulled up and the officers exited the vehicle, the defendant ran off.  As he ran he threw something away.  
3.	Constable Filifili together with Constable Maria Lino who was seated beside him went directly to the spot where the defendant threw the objects.  What they found there was a lighter and the two branches of marijuana.  They retrieved the branches while other officers in the second police vehicle behind them chased and apprehended the defendant.  Both police officers said only the defendant and no other person ran away from the police party.  
4.	The defendant elected to give evidence and he said he knows nothing about these drugs but he does admit running away from the police.  His explanation for running away was that he was aware there was a law against drinking in public places and he did not want to get into trouble.  As for the testimony of the police officers he said they are lying and making it up.  
5.	In weighing up the evidence I take into account that the testimony of the two officers is consistent with each other.  Both were clear in their testimony that they identified the defendant through the headlights of their vehicle and also via the torch that Constable Filifili was shining towards the defendant.  They also both said they saw the defendant throw the marijuana away.  And that the defendant was the only person who ran from the police.  
6.	I do not accept defendants explanation that he ran because he was afraid of getting into trouble.  Others of the group did not share this concern and the defendant had been drinking in this public place for a period of time.  I see no reason why the police officers would come before this court and give false testimony.  
7.	I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant was in possession of the narcotics on the night in question and that he threw them away in order to try and avoid being caught with the narcotics.   The defendant is found guilty as charged and will be remanded on bail to the 31st of July 2015 for probation office pre-sentence report and for sentence.  Le tamaitai o le ofisa faanofo vaavaaia lea e alala mai Kovati, fai se lua tala ae te lei alu ese e taua le latou lipoti mo lau susuga.  Aso 31 o Iulai lea ua tolopo iai lau mataupu mo se faaiuga.  Faaauau pea lau saini ma tuutuuga ia e tatala ai oe i tua.  Faafetai ua maea. 

JUSTICE NELSON