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

Police v Sinei [2017] WSSC 156 (20 October 2017)

SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA

Police v Sinei [2017] WSSC 156

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN

P O L I C E
Prosecution

A N D

IOANE SINEI a.k.a JOHN SINEI male of Saina Faleata
Accused

Counsel:
A. Matalasi for Prosecution
E Moala for the Accused

Decision: 20 October 2017

SENTENCE

1. The accused appears for sentencing on 1 charge of theft as a servant in breach of section 161 and 165(e) of the Crimes Act 2013. The maximum penalty for theft as a servant is 10 years imprisonment.
2. The accused entered an early guilty plea to the charge of theft of $540.00 from his employer, Sheraton Aggie Greys Hotel and Bungalows Apia (“Sheraton”) (S1177/17).

The Offending

3. According to the Summary of Facts accepted by the accused through his counsel, the accused was employed as a Duty Manager for Sheraton Aggie Greys Hotel and Bungalows and Sheraton Resort. It appears that he commenced employment with Sheraton in 2016.
4. On Tuesday 11^th July 2017, the accused upon receiving $540.00 cash being the Sheraton’s revenue from the Spa takings then stole that money.

The Accused

5. The Accused is a 27 years old male from Saina Faleata. He is single and is an only child. He was educated in Samoa, attended the NUS and subsequently completed it seems a course in Massuers in 2014. In 2015, he started his own mobile masseuse business where he would earn $200 per week. In May 2016, he commenced employment with the Sheraton starting at an hourly rate of $5.00 per hour as a supervisor but increased to $7.00 per hour as a Duty Manager.

The Victim

6. The victim is the Sheraton. In the VIR, Sheraton says that the accused was someone that was a trusted employee. As a result of the accused actions, the Sheraton reviewed their systems and procedures on the handling of money. The victim says that the accused is remorseful and that full restitution has been paid.

Aggravating Factors:

7. The aggravating factors of the Accused offending is the significant breach of his employers trust given his position as a Duty Manager.

The mitigating factors

8. The mitigating features of this matter are the accused early guilty plea, full restitution has been made, the accused remorse and apology and his prior good character.

Discussion

9. According to counsel for the accused, the accused mother is unwell and the accused apparently stole the money to pay for taxi fares to and from the hospital, medical checks, medication and groceries for their home to sustain them until the accused was paid his wages.
10. Based on the references before the Court, the accused is a talented masseur with one of his clients Tuiletufuga Leapai Siaosi Tuiletufuga going so far as to say that “John is currently one of the best masseurs in Samoa”. The Sheraton Hotel’s Front Office Manager adds further that:

“To attest to his achievement, the Manaia Spa, which was the spa John was managing won an award in the World Luxury Spa Awards this year. An achievement that was difficult, yet possible through his passion and love for his work.”

11. He has glowing references from various other clients attesting to his talents. Apparently, it would also seem from the references, the accused continued with his private masseur business whilst employed with the Sheraton.
12. I do not accept that the accused used the money to pay for taxi fares to and from the hospital, medical checks, medication and groceries for their home to sustain them until the accused was paid his wages by the Sheraton. There are no receipts for those alleged expenses incurred and even if he did incur those for the reasons stated, it is no excuse. Furthermore, he would seem to have been able to access income through his own private after hours masseur services.
13. It is difficult to understand why talented people such as the accused commit these offences. They are people with good futures and opportunity and hold high positions in the company’s in which they steal from. Yet, it continues to come before the Courts and as the Courts have said often, it is a highly prevalent offence in Samoa. As stated by His Honour Nelson J in Police v Vaifale [2010] WSSC 60 (15 March 2010) which also involved sentencing on a charge for theft as a nt:

“Like drug offending, theft as a nt is one of thef the most prevalent offences in our community and because of that and the seriousness of such offending an consces to a small coll community, the court has evolved a normal sentencing policy for such ofch offences of imprisonment unless there are strong reasons why a case should be treated differently. And for repeat offenders, come knowing that nothing will save you from prison.”

14. In the accused case, he committed his offending just one month after I sentenced another Sheraton Duty Manager for the same offence of theft as a servant. Her case however involved theft of $1,385.32 and a non-custodial sentence was imposed.
15. Prosecution seeks a conviction and for the accused to come up for sentence in 12 months if ordered by the Court. That is supported by counsel for the accused and is also the recommendation by the Probation Service.
16. I accept that a conviction will be a penalty on you and which you will carry. You also had a very bright future with the Sheraton which you have now lost through your actions. I accept in all the circumstances that a non-custodial sentence is appropriate.

The penalty

17. The accused is convicted of the charge of theft as a servant and is to come up for sentence within 12 months if ordered by the Court.
18. You are to pay Court costs of $150.00 within 7 days, in default 7 days imprisonment.

JUSTICE CLARKE