SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Faifua [2015] WSSC 35

Case name: 	Police v Faifua	
		
Citation: 	[2015] WSSC 35	
		
Decision date: 	11 March 2015	
		
Parties: 	Police (prosecution)	
	Thomas Faifua (defendant)
	
Hearing date(s): 	-	
		
File number(s): 	S1781/14, S1782/14, S1783/14	
		
Jurisdiction: 	Criminal	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Vaai	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	-	Convicted and sentenced to 4 years imprisonment less any time the defendant has spent in custody.	
		
Representation: 	L Suá-Mailo for prosecution
A Suá for defendant	
		
Catchwords: 	Theft - 	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:		
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

POLICE
Prosecution

AND:
THOMAS FAIFUA male of Sataoa and Lalovaea
Defendant

Counsel:	
L Su’a-Mailo for prosecution
A Su’a for defendant

Sentence:	11 March 2015

S  E  N  T  E  N  C  E

1. 	The defendant originally pleaded not guilty in August 2013 to several charges of theft while he was employed by the Vailima Breweries at Vailima.  He was jointly charged with other employees.   In December 2014 after several adjournments and after the prosecution has withdrawn other informations, the defendant and his co-defendants vacated their not guilty pleas and pleaded guilty to 16 informations alleging theft as a servant.  Maximum penalty for each offence is seven years imprisonment.
2. 	At the time of the offending the defendant was employed by Vailima Breweries as an Engineer Driver which required him to check and verify the volume of fuel delivered by the trucks of the fuel supplier and offloaded into the fuel storage tanks of the Vailima Breweries.  The amount of fuel supplied is recorded by the defendant.
3. 	Fuel trucks which enter the compound of Vailima Breweries are checked at the gate using a dipping rod to confirm the volume of fuel being delivered.  As the fuel trucks have several compartments the checking at the entrance gate is confined to the compartment(s) which contain the fuel.

4. 	After the fuel is offloaded the truck is again checked at the gate before it leaves the compound.  Only the same compartment(s) are again checked to confirm that all the fuel has been offloaded.  Prosecution summary of facts is not disputed.
The offending
5. 	Instead of pumping all the fuel into the Vailima Breweries storage tank the defendant and his co-employees as well as the truck driver pumped some of the fuel into the empty compartment of the truck.  Check at the gate which was again confined to the same compartments of the trucks did not discover the stolen fuel.  The truck driver then sold the fuel to several fuel stations and monies received were distributed amongst those involved in the theft including the defendant.
6. 	To conceal the theft, the defendant and his other co-defendants recorded the false volume of fuel received.  They did this on 16 different occasions between January 2012 and May 2013.  Over 164,000 litres of fuel were stolen.  Estimated costs of stolen fuel exceeded $420,000.
The defendant
7. 	The defendant a 31 year old single man from the village of Sataoa has a clean record and is portrayed in the probation report and testimonials from his village pastor and mother to be a dedicated son and Christian.  His academic background is described as being at good level.  He left college at year 12 level.
8. 	Probation service has assessed the defendant suitable for a community based sentence.
Discussion
9. 	Defendant’s counsel has said everything which can be said and advanced for the defendant.  Undoubtedly he is remorseful and he obviously succumbed to the temptation when his senior co-worker and co-defendant suggested the conspiracy to steal the fuel.  As the probation report observed the defendant’s greed for money got the best of him.
10. 	 The offending by the defendant and his co-defendants was an organized systematic large scale theft over a lengthy period of time by trusted employees of the Vailima Breweries.  Substantial volumes of fuel were stolen and the conspiracy would have continued had it not been discovered.  Significant financial losses were caused to the employer which undoubtedly affected the running of the business operations as well as staff morale.   Neither the defendant nor his co-defendant can repay the losses to the Vailima Breweries.
11. 	The other co-defendants involved in the organized enterprised have been imposed the same sentences.  There is no reason not to impose the same custodial sentence on this defendant.

12. 	The same starting point of 6 years is adopted.  I deduct 18 months for his guilty plea and remorse and a further 6 months for his previous good character.  He will serve 4 years imprisonment less time spent in custody.  

JUSTICE VAAI