PacLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Supreme Court of Samoa
You are here:  PacLII >> Databases >> Supreme Court of Samoa >> 2016 >> [2016] WSSC 183

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Decisions | Noteup | LawCite | Download | Help

Police v Pio [2016] WSSC 183 (12 September 2016)

THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Pio [2016] WSSC 183


Case name:
Police v Pio


Citation:


Decision date:
12 September 2016


Parties:
POLICE (Prosecution) v ALAIMALO aka FILIPO PIO male of Savaia Lefaga (Accused)


Hearing date(s):



File number(s):



Jurisdiction:
CRIMINAL


Place of delivery:
The Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu


Judge(s):
JUSTICE TAFAOIMALO TUALA WARREN


On appeal from:


Order:
  • I convict the accused and sentence him to 6 months supervision with the special condition that he perform 20 hours of community service as directed by his Village Council, the Savaia Village Council.


Representation:
F. Masei for Prosecution
Accused Unrepresented


Catchwords:
causing serious bodily injury


Words and phrases:


Legislation cited:
Crimes Act 2013 section 118(1), Community Justice Act 2008 section 13


Cases cited:


Summary of decision:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU


BETWEEN


P O L I C E
Prosecution


A N D


ALAIMALO aka FILIPO PIO male of Savaia Lefaga
Accused


Counsel:
F. Masei for Prosecution
Accused Unrepresented


Sentence: 12 September 2016


S E N T E N C E

The charge

  1. The accused appears for sentence on one charge of causing serious bodily injury with intent pursuant to s 118(1) Crimes Act 2013. The maximum penalty for this offence is 10 years imprisonment.
  2. He pleaded guilty to the charge on 22 August 2016.

The offending

  1. The Prosecution summary of facts admitted by the accused says that on 16 July 2016, at around 2 am, the accused was at home when he heard noises coming from the road in front of his house. The accused and his wife then went outside and saw the victim and his friend on the road and told them off for making noises. The victim and his friend then threw stones towards the accused. The accused also threw stones at the victim. The victim and his friend then left while the accused woke up his two sons and they chased after the victim. When they caught up to the victim, the accused punched and slapped the victim on his face and only stopped assaulting the victim when he saw blood on the victim’s face.
  2. The victim sustained a cut wound on his right cheek approximately 2-6cm deep.

The accused

  1. The accused is 56 years old, married with six children. He is currently unemployed.
  2. The accused is a first offender.

The victim

  1. The victim impact report given to the Court says that the victim is 38 years old from Savaia Lefaga.
  2. On the day of the offending the victim was intoxicated.
  3. He sustained lacerations to his face and a wound below his right ear which required 4 stitches. He also felt pain on his back but is uncertain as to how it was caused.
  4. He says the next day he felt sorry for himself. His family wanted to take the matter to the village council but is awaiting a decision from the court.
  5. The mother of the victim says that all their expenses were paid by the family of the accused, although the victim says that the accused has not approached him and there has been no reconciliation.

Aggravating features of the offending

  1. It is aggravating that the victim suffered injuries as a result of the assault on him by the accused.
  2. The victim is also still distressed and disappointed as the accused has not apologised to him.
  3. The victim was also outnumbered because although it was just the accused who assaulted the victim, the accused had his two sons with him.

Mitigating Factors

  1. I find that there was a degree of provocation from the intoxicated victim. However, the victim had retreated and was walking away, and still the accused chased after him which means that the accused continued the matter. What took place on this night prior to the offending, is not an excuse for the accused to be violent.
  2. The family of the accused paid for all the victim’s expenses.
  3. His early guilty plea to the charge is a mitigating factor.

Discussion

  1. Prosecution has recommended a sentence of 6 months probation, with a fine of $150.00 and 20 hours of community work.
  2. Having considered the aggravating features of this offending and the circumstances of the accused, I find that a non-custodial sentence is appropriate in this case. Section 13 of the Community Justice Act 2008 states that a Court may impose a sentence of supervision only if the Court is satisfied that a sentence of supervision would reduce the likelihood of further offending by the offender through the rehabilitation and reintegration of the offender. Section 16 of the same Act states that the Court may impose such special condition or conditions related to the rehabilitation or reintegration of an offender as the Court thinks necessary.
  3. The accused has led a life free from any offending. He is now 56 years old. Much can be said for taking this matter to the village Council as they can then monitor the accused in the village, and ensure that he does not reoffend.

Sentence

  1. I convict the accused and sentence him to 6 months supervision with the special condition that he perform 20 hours of community service as directed by his Village Council, the Savaia Village Council.

JUSTICE TAFAOIMALO TUALA WARREN

PacLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.paclii.org/ws/cases/WSSC/2016/183.html