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

Police v Lafaele [2015] WSSC 249 (8 May 2015)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Lafaele [2015] WSSC 249

THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Prosecution

AND:

Manuia Tanuvasa Lafaele, male of Salelavalu and Gataivai

Defendant

Counsel: F Laga’aia for prosecution

Defendant in person

Sentence: 8 May 2015

Oral Sentence of Justice E M Aitken

1. Mr Tanuvasa, you appear for sentence today having pleaded guilty to five charges; four of them on 18 March this year, namely that you threw stones to the danger of persons; that you were armed with a dangerous weapon, being the stones; that you intentionally damaged a police vehicle; and there is a charge of aggravated assaulted. The aggravated assault was the throwing of the stone that hit the wrist of one of the Police Officers who was fleeing from the scene at the time. You have also pleaded guilty to one charge of escaping custody on 20 November last year.
2. Now the facts of this matter are that on 18 March, the Police carried out a raid of one of the houses in your village where they found narcotics and where they arrested certain people. By the time the Police got back to their office they received a call from the Mayor of your village saying that you and one other person were making trouble in the village and two police vehicles turned around and came back to deal with it.
3. You saw them arrive and you immediately armed yourself with rocks which you then began throwing at the police vehicle. They had tried to step out of the vehicle to arrest you and that was your response to them. You continued to throw rocks at the Police Officers and the police vehicles, and one of those rocks smashed the front windshield of threw vehicles, which is an indication to me of the force with which you threw it.
4. One of the Police Officers was sufficiently concerned about what was happening to run away and as he was fleeing from the scene to get the support of another police vehicle, you threw a rock at him and that injured his right hand. The wound was about 2cm long by half a centimeter deep and he had to go see a doctor about it. You continued to throw rocks at the police vehicles and their response in the end was to drive away, and they in fact only arrested you about a month later.
5. You were granted bail by this Court but you failed to appear on 11 September last year and a warrant was issued for your arrest. You were located in November and remanded in custody but not long after that when your cell door was opened to give you food, you pushed the Officer away and fled, and you were not arrested again until, I think, sometime late in March and you have been in custody since that time.
6. When I look at your behaviour on 18 March, I would describe this as prolonged – in other words, offending that went on for a long time; a deliberate assault on the Police, both in terms of their vehicles and the Officers individually. You claimed that you were provoked and you thought the Police were coming to arrest you. The reality was that they probably were coming to arrest you but your behaviour in response to that was completely unacceptable, and you had obviously caused the Mayor of your village to be so concerned about your behaviour in the first place that it was he who in fact called the Police.
7. In determining the starting point in sentencing you, I am going to look at all of your behaviours on 18 March. As I said, you injured one of the Officers and he was initially very upset and angry with you personally although he tells the Court he has now forgiven you and moved on. The damage to the police vehicle cost over $9,000 to repair, so that is a significant amount of damage.
8. The Attorney General urges me to start with a sentence of 2 years imprisonment and has helpfully referred me to a number of similar cases in the past. Most similar just for the Prosecution’s benefit is Police v Visesio Aso and that is helpful to me but looking, Mr Tanuvasa, at your behaviour on this occasion, I fix the starting point at 2 years. This was an unprovoked attack on Police who had been called to the village by your Mayor and the purpose in sentencing you today must be to deter you and other people from behaving like this in the future. To that I add another 4 months to reflect the conviction for escaping from custody – again, that was a deliberate and serious offence and it increases the starting point to one of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment but there are a number of matters that require me then to reduce the sentence and I identify those now.
9. Firstly, I take into account the section 8 of the Village Fono Act and have regard to the fact that your family has been fined and already paid $500, and even though you caused all this trouble for your village, your village has in fact undertaken the ifoga process with the Police and made a gift of four fine mats and $600, and the Police have accepted the apology from your village. I am satisfied that there has been a very significant consequence already for your family and your village, and together, appropriately, your sentence is reduced by 25%, that is equivalent to 7 months, and reduces it down to 21 months.
10. You ask for leniency because of your family. I acknowledge that your sentence of imprisonment will have a very serious impact on your wife, on your young son and in particular, your elderly parents. They depend on you and you have grossly or significantly let them down with this behaviour. I will permit a small reduction of 3 months to reflect the fact that your family are really bearing the brunt of your behaviours.
11. Finally, you have entered pleas of guilty to these charges. They were entered prior to trial but as an unrepresented defendant and accordance with the practice in this Court, you are still entitled to the maximum credit and that is one-third, that equates to 6 months and it reduces the final sentence to one of 12 months imprisonment.
12. The sentence of 12 months imprisonment is imposed therefore. In respect of each of the charges, convictions are also entered and time in custody is to be deducted from the final sentence.
13. Mr Tanuvasa, this was very immature, irresponsible and criminal behaviour and your family will pay a significant price for it. I would encourage you whilst in custody to reflect on your behaviours and make a promise to yourself and your family never to put yourself or them in this position again.

_____________________
JUSTICE E M AITKEN