IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v TS [2025] WSSC 82 (25 September 2025)

Case name: 	Police v TS 	
		
Citation: 	[2025] WSSC 82	
		
Decision date: 	25 September 2025	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (Informant) v TS, male. (Accused)	
		
Hearing date(s): 		
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Supreme Court – CRIMINAL	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Leiataualesa Daryl Clarke 	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	-	Permanent suppression orders are hereby issued prohibiting the publication of the name and village details of the victim in these proceeding in any new media or publicly accessible database. As there is a family connection between the victim and the accused and in order to protect the victim from identification, permanent suppression orders are also issued prohibiting the publication of the name and village details of the accused in these proceeding in any new media or publicly accessible database.
-	Accordingly, on the charge of rape, you are convicted and sentenced to seventeen (17) years imprisonment less time remanded in custody. On the remaining representative charge of incest, 8 years imprisonment concurrent.	
		
Representation: 	F Ioane for Prosecution
FJ Sapolu for the Defendant	
		
Catchwords: 		
		
Words and phrases:	(1) representative charge of seven (7) incidences of sexual violation by way of rape; and one (1) representative charge of five (5) incidences of incest. The victim is the accused biological daughter; There is nothing in the accused letter to me showing any insight whatsoever to his offending and its impact on his daughter. The only remorse he feels is for himself and where he now finds himself; 	
		
Legislation cited:	Family Safety Act 2013;	
		
Cases cited:	Key v Police [2013] WSCA 3,
Police v TA [2024] WSSC 89	
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

A N D:

TS

Accused

Representation:	F Ioane for Prosecution
FJ Sapolu for the Defendant

Sentence Decision:	25th September 2025

SENTENCE
1. 	As is usual in these types of matters, I issue prohibition orders prohibiting the publication of the names of the accused and victim together with their village details.
2. 	The accused appears for sentence on one (1) representative charge of seven (7) incidences of sexual violation by way of rape; and one (1) representative charge of five (5) incidences of incest. The victim is the accused biological daughter.
The Offending:
3. 	The accused through his counsel accepts the Amended Summary of Facts dated 21st August 2025. I will not repeat the Amended Summary of Facts in detail except to traverse the material facts in broad terms.
4. 	The accused sexual abuse of his daughter began sometime between the 1st April and 31st May 2021, following the general elections. When the accused’s sexual abuse began, his daughter was 12 years of age. On the first occasion, the victim had gone to sleep with her siblings in their fale faataalaelae. The victim felt someone pulling down her short and panty. The victim woke to then see the accused lying on top of her. The accused told his daughter “aua e ke pisa, I feala kamaiki.” She felt his naked body on her, he started kissing her mouth but she turned away. The accused grabbed her face, kissed her lips and caressed her breasts and body. He then penetrated her vagina with his penis, having forceful sexual intercourse with her without her consent. As he did so, the victim was crying and asked him to stop but he continued until he ejaculated. He then returned to his bed to sleep. The next day, the accused told the victim “aua e ke fai I kamaiki I le mea ga fai agapo.”
5. 	During that same period between April and May 2021, the accused raped his daughter at their home on a further six (6) occasions. The accused pattern of behaviour during this period was largely similar. Each incident took place at night while everyone was asleep, often around midnight. His daughter would be asleep. He would go to her, remove her shorts and panty waking her and then rape her. On the fifth occasion, his daughter had told the accused that what he was doing was wrong, she wasn’t happy with him but he proceeded to rape her.
6. 	After the rapes, the accused then began an incestuous relationship with his daughter beginning in October 2022 continuing until February 2023. Again, these acts of sexual intercourse would occur in the dark of night when everyone was asleep. The accused would go to his daughter, wake her and then engage in sexual intercourse. This occurred on five occasions.
7. 	The accused’s sexual abuse of his daughter came to light when an aunty of the victim went to the home to visit the victim and her siblings and found the accused sleeping with the victim “like a couple”. The victim became pregnant but miscarried after a few months.
The Accused:
8. 	According to the Amended Summary of Facts, the accused is a thirty-six (36) year old male. He seems to have given a number of different dates of birth in the material on the court file. His Samoan passport bio-data page shows he was born on 28th August 1987. I accept this is correct. He is now 38 years old. When the offending began in around April 2021, he was 33 years of age.
9. 	The accused grew up in Savaii completing school to year 12. He looked after his grand-parents for a while before finding work. He has worked at Starkist in American Samoa and on his return, worked as a bus driver. He is a father to three boys and three girls. He is no longer with the victim’s mother but in a new de-facto relationship. 
10. 	He has no prior convictions and positive character references.
The Victim:
11. 	The victim is the accused biological daughter. She was born on the 3 July 2008. At the time the accused began sexually abusing her in April 2021, she was 12 years 9 months old. In her VIR, it is obvious that the accused’s offending has had a significant impact on her. She speaks not only of the physical pain she endured during the acts of sexual intercourse, but in particular, her mental anguish. She speaks of her disbelief that her own father could commit these acts against her, of preferring death because of what was happening to her and that her life had been at a standstill because of this matter. She speaks of her desire to move on with her life and complains of not being able to move on because of the delays with this case.
Aggravating and Mitigating Factors:
12. 	There are a number of serious aggravating features to the accused’s offending. These are:
(a) 	the accused is the victim’s biological father. It is therefore offending within a domestic relationship as defined by the Family Safety Act 2013 and an aggravating feature of the offending (see sections 2 and 14);
(b) 	the multiplicity of the offending coupled with the duration of the offending over a two plus year period;
(c) 	the age difference between the accused and the victim of 20 years;
(d) 	the consequential vulnerability of the victim given her young age and relationship to the accused;
(e) 	the gross breach of trust in the offending as the victim’s biological father; 
(f) 	the victim became pregnant, though miscarried a few months later; and
(g) 	the clearly premeditated and calculated nature of the offending.
13. 	There are no mitigating features in respect of the offending.
14. 	There are no aggravating features personal to the accused. He is a first offender. In mitigation however personal to the offender, I take into account his prior good character and his guilty plea, late as it was. 
15. 	During sentencing, counsel for the accused submitted remorse and the accused medical conditions in mitigation. An undated letter from the accused was handed to me in support together with a letter from Dr Loana Tanielu dated 1st September 2025. I give no credit for remorse. There is nothing in the accused letter to me showing any insight whatsoever to his offending and its impact on his daughter. The only remorse he feels is for himself and where he now finds himself.
16. 	In relation to his medical condition, he suffers from gout and complains of the diet in the prison consisting of sausages and tinned fish. Gout is a manageable condition with medication. Prison Services can provide medication to manage the condition. There is no basis for this factor in mitigation.
Discussion:
17. 	TS, you have a positive reference speaking of your contributions to your church. In court, you have prominently worn a crucifix. In your letters to the court, you have continuously referred to a righteous God and indeed threatened God’s wrath on your former lawyer. 
18. 	Psalms 103:13 says that: “As a father has compassion on his children, so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him.” I struggle to reconcile the crucifix you adorn yourself with to the crimes you have perpetrated against your own daughter. You showed no compassion for your daughter. You raped her seven (7) times over a two-month period, often crying as you did so. On one occasion, she told you it was wrong, yet you raped her anyway. You did so in your family home as your other children slept nearby. You were well aware that it was wrong telling the victim not to tell her siblings. In your daughter Soaso’s statement to police, she said she saw what you did and heard the victim crying. You then engaged in an incestuous relationship with your daughter. Your offending only came to light when an aunty found you sleeping “like a couple” with your own daughter.
19. 	No words can ever sufficiently condemn what you did to your daughter. You were duty bound to protect her from harm, yet you were the perpetrator of the greatest betrayal any daughter could suffer: sexual abuse by her own father. As your daughter expressed in her VIR, the long delay in this case has taken a significant emotional toll on her. This delay has in large part been due to you. You entered not guilty pleas in June 2023. On the date of hearing in August 2024, you entered guilty pleas through your then counsel. After being remanded in custody pending sentence, you then applied to vacate your guilty plea strongly denying the allegations against you in your affidavit and saying of your then legal aid counsel that she had: “nail me alive inside the coffin & force me to bleed guilty…”
20. 	Your wish was granted. Your guilty pleas were vacated in December last year only for you to enter guilty pleas again in June this year. You have demonstrated and shown no insight to your offending and the harm and shame you have caused for your daughter. As I have said, you feel sorry only yourself. Perhaps as you serve your sentence, you might come to understand the harm you have caused to your daughter and show some genuine remorse for someone other than yourself.
21. 	Prosecution seeks a 20-year sentence start point. Your counsel agrees. This start-point places your offending in band 4 in Key v Police [2013] WSCA 3, 19 years to life imprisonment. Band 4 is reserved for the most serious of rape cases consisting of multiple offending over a considerable time including repeat offences within a family relationship. I agree that your offending falls within band 4, the question is whether I agree to 20 years. I have had regard to the authorities cited to me. I have also had regard to Police v TA [2024] WSSC 89 involving 13 charges of rape, 10 charges of incest and 1 of unlawful sexual connection where a 22 year start point was adopted.
22. 	Although Police v TA involved more charges, it was an older victim who also did not become pregnant. In my view with regard to the authorities, the appropriate start point on a totality basis on the representative charge of rape is 21 years imprisonment. From that start point, I deduct 1 year for prior good character and 3 years for your late guilty plea (after earlier vacating an earlier guilty plea) leaving an end sentence of 17 years imprisonment. 
The penalty:
23. 	Accordingly, on the charge of rape, you are convicted and sentenced to seventeen (17) years imprisonment less time remanded in custody. On the remaining representative charge of incest, 8 years imprisonment concurrent.
JUSTICE CLARKE