SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Muatagata [2021] WSSC 42

Case name: 	Police v  Muatagata	
		
Citation: 	[2021] WSSC 41	
		
Decision date: 	30 August 2021	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (Prosecution) AND PILI MUATAGATA a.k.a PILI MAFUATU TAULELEI male of Faleatiu and Vaipu’a Savaii. (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:	On the charge of attempted murder of the first victim you will be convicted and sentenced to 11 years in prison. 

Considering all factors in respect of actual bodily harm on the second victim convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison, for the third victim 3 years in prison.  But because this is all part of the same incident these terms will be served concurrent to your 11 years. 

There will also be a concurrent sentence of 6 months in prison for the remaining charge of armed with a dangerous weapon namely a knife. 

That means Pili your total sentence according to what I have told you of 11 years in prison. Ae peita’i e le tu’ulafoaina e le Fa'amasinoga le tula’i mai o e sa aafia i le mataupu lenei i le asō, le la omai ma fai le la talosaga mo lau susuga. E tatau ona ave iai se fa’amāmā avega fa’apitoa pei ona ou fa'amatala i taulele’a ia. O le a toese leisi tausaga e tasi mai le 11 tausaga ona totoe ai lea o le 10 tausaga. 

A faapea sa iai se taimi sa e nofo taofia ai e fa’atalitali ai le faaiuga o le mataupu lenei e tatau ona toese mai le 10 tausaga lea ua fai ai le faaiuga a le Fa'amasinoga e te nofo sala ai i le toese. 

Representation: 	I Atoa and A Vukalokalo for prosecution
M Lui for defendant	
		
Catchwords: 	-	Attempted murder – actual bodily harm – armed with a dangerous weapon - 	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:	 	
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:
		
POLICE
Prosecution

AND:

PILI MUATAGATA a.k.a PILI MAFUATU TAULELEI male of Faleatiu and Vaipu’a Savaii.
Defendant

Counsel:	
I Atoa and A Vukalokalo for prosecution
M Lui for defendant

Sentence:	30 August 2021

SENTENCE
1.	The summary of facts from the Police admitted by the defendant says he is a 45-year-old male of Faleatiu and Vaipu’a Savaii, has a defacto relationship with five (5) children. 
2.	There are three (3) victims in this case. The first victim is a 55-year-old male of Faleatiu and the defendant is married to the first victims tausoga. 
3.	The Court has heard from the first victim personally this morning when he appeared and advised a confirmation of settlement and a petition for leniency for the defendant which I will take into account. The summary says the defendant and the first victim live on the same land but in different houses.
4.	The second victim according to the summary is a 51-year-old male of Faleatiu employed as a security guard. He also appeared before the Court this morning and petitioned on behalf of the defendant and again the Court has listened and again will give it due consideration.  
5.	The third victim in this matter has not appeared but the summary says he is a 52-year-old male of Faleatiu. According to the Victim Impact Report filed by him however it seems there has been no apology and reconciliation with that particular gentleman. 
6.	Circumstances of this matter is at around 4:00 pm on 19 May 2020 the first victim and the defendant became involved in a dispute over a “saogamea” for a family faalavelave because they are part of the same extended family. The defendant was drinking alcohol at the time and became angry at the first victim for not putting in what he was supposed to put in for the family faalavelave.  Sometime in the evening around 7:30 p.m. the first victim went to the front house or “faletele” and according to the summary was hanging out with the second and the third victim. It seems they are friends. 
7.	As the intoxicated defendant walked past to empty some rubbish he saw the first victim sitting inside the “faletele”. He called out a number of insulting words to the victim and threatened the victim that he will kill him on that evening, calling him names such as “fiapoko lou mea aivalea”.  The first victim responded to the defendant to go to sleep he is drunk and this angered the defendant even more. 
8.	The defendant returned to his house and went to the back and armed himself with a small kitchen knife. The defendant approached the first victim from behind with the knife and punched the first victim with his right hand causing the tip of the knife to hit and injure the first victims left lower eye. The defendant struck at the first victim again with the knife and injured the left side of the first victims jaw. The second and third victims intervened and tried to stop the attack. The defendant however continued to strike the first victim and this caused injuries to all three victims. Other family members intervened and managed to break up the assault and took the defendant to the back of the house. 
9.	The summary of facts says the defendant then armed himself with a machete and returned to where the first victim was sitting. A family member saw this ran over to the defendant and punched him causing the machete to fall and the defendant to fall onto the ground. The police were called and the victims were taken to the hospital. 
10.	At the hospital the injuries noted to the first victim was a 5 to 6 cm laceration right lower jaw and laceration below the left eye 10 to 12 cm long. There was also a 4 to 5 cm puncture wound on the anterior left upper chest and an 8 to 10 cm vertical laceration on the back of the shoulder as well as a small puncture on the left upper back. 
11.	The second victim sustained a 5 to 6 cm laceration to the top of his skull and the third victim had a 1 to 2 cm puncture wound on the lower back. 
12.	The defendant was taken to the Police Station where he was cautioned and charged with one count of attempted murder, two counts of actual bodily harm and one count of armed with a dangerous weapon. 
13.	On the day of the hearing on 14 April 2021 the defendant through counsel vacated his not guilty pleas and substituted with guilty pleas to all charges. 
14.	Clearly this is a serious attack using a knife. It is also clear the defendant wanted to continue the attack using a machete but was thankfully restrained by bystanders. In the course of the attack Pili injured two other people as well as the primary victim. If these people had not intervened the defendants attack would have no doubt continued. The fact that the defendant was intoxicated is absolutely no excuse or justification. The rule about alcohol is simple enough - if you drink and cannot control yourself you should not drink. 
15.	There are too many cases coming before this Court of drunken people using weapons to inflict serious injuries to others. Sometimes a stone in this case a knife. It is a trend to be severely discouraged by the Court. 
16.	The Courts sentencing must reflect the use of weapons, the condition that the defendant was in and the gravity of what he did. It must also reflect the seriousness of the injuries caused to all the victims, in the case of all victims their Victim Impact and medical reports indicate they took at least three weeks to recover from their injuries. In the case of the third victim he is complaining of ongoing problems as a result of the stab to his back.  
17.	The defendant must be held to account for his actions and the court must denounce his behaviour. And the courts sentence must also serve to deter him from doing this sort of thing again and to deter others.  
18.	I will deal with the most serious charge facing you that of attempted murder which carries a maximum penalty of life in prison. In general the starting point for sentencing on attempted murder charges involving a weapon range from at least 10 years up to 15 years in prison. The circumstances here where there is a high degree of violence and level of aggression involving a weapon on an unarmed man means the upper limit should be used, I start sentencing on attempted murder at 14 years in prison. 
19.	But from that start point Pili there must be deductions made and your counsel has referred to all these on your behalf. Firstly it has been confirmed from the Probation Office that the traditional apologies have been done to the first victim and his family and have been accepted. That was confirmed by the first victim this morning personally. There will be a 6 months deduction for that. 
20.	Secondly it has also been confirmed you have been banished from your village, as well your family has been fined a substantial fine by the village council of Faleatiu. Those are all appropriate traditional penalties, a 1-year deduction will be applied for that. 
21.	Thirdly you have a good pre-sentence report Pili, you have a background of service to your aiga, nuu and ekalesia. You have good references attached to the pre-sentence report, 6 months deduction will be applied for that as per usual practice. That takes into account also the fact that you are a first offender. That leaves a balance of your sentence of 12 years after deductions. 
22.	Final deduction you are entitled to Pili is for your guilty plea because that has saved some of the courts time and resources. Even though your guilty plea was entered late, I will still deduct 1 year from the balance of your sentence, leaves 11 years of your sentence.
23.	On the charge of attempted murder of the first victim you will be convicted and sentenced to 11 years in prison. 
24.	In respect of the actual bodily harm charge on the second victim who also appeared this morning, I note the nature of the injuries suffered. I also note the Victim Impact Report in respect of him as well as the third victim, and injuries apart, the only difference between the two victims is no apology was made to the third victim. But both are still part of the initial offending. These were good Samaritans who were injured while trying to help the first victim.  And they were injured because they were trying to help someone else. Prison is also an appropriate penalty for what you did to them. 
25.	Considering all factors in respect of actual bodily harm on the second victim convicted and sentenced to 2 years in prison, for the third victim 3 years in prison.  But because this is all part of the same incident these terms will be served concurrent to your 11 years. 
26.	There will also be a concurrent sentence of 6 months in prison for the remaining charge of armed with a dangerous weapon namely a knife. 
27.	That means Pili your total sentence according to what I have told you of 11 years in prison. Ae peita’i e le tu’ulafoaina e le Fa'amasinoga le tula’i mai o e sa aafia i le mataupu lenei i le asō, le la omai ma fai le la talosaga mo lau susuga. E tatau ona ave iai se fa’amāmā avega fa’apitoa pei ona ou fa'amatala i taulele’a ia. O le a toese leisi tausaga e tasi mai le 11 tausaga ona totoe ai lea o le 10 tausaga. 
28.	A faapea sa iai se taimi sa e nofo taofia ai e fa’atalitali ai le faaiuga o le mataupu lenei e tatau ona toese mai le 10 tausaga lea ua fai ai le faaiuga a le Fa'amasinoga e te nofo sala ai i le toese. 

JUSTICE NELSON