IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
Police v Tafilipepe [2025] WSSC 25 (25 April 2025)

Case name: 	Police v Tafilipepe	
		
Citation: 	[2025] WSSC 25	
		
Decision date: 	25 April 2025	
		
Parties: 	POLICE (Informant) v DOREEN FRIEDA TAFILIPEPE, female of Siumu and Vailoa Faleata (Defendant)	
		
Hearing date(s): 		
		
File number(s): 		
		
Jurisdiction: 	Supreme Court – CRIMINAL	
		
Place of delivery: 	Supreme Court of Samoa, Mulinuu	
		
Judge(s): 	Justice Fepulea'i Ameperosa Roma 	
		
On appeal from:		
		
Order:	You are convicted of all four charges and sentenced to 14 months supervision with the condition that you complete 60 hours of community work.	
		
Representation: 	J. Leung Wai for Prosecution
J. Fuimaono for the Defendant	
		
Catchwords: 	Forgery – theft – partial restitution – early guilty plea – dishonest offending – victim a family member – breach of trust – apology – remorse.	
		
Words and phrases:		
		
Legislation cited:		
		
Cases cited:		
		
Summary of decision:		

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF SAMOA
HELD AT MULINUU

BETWEEN:

P O L I C E

Informant

AND:

DOREEN FRIEDA TAFILIPEPE female of Siumu and Vailoa Faleata

Defendant

Counsel:	J. Leung Wai for Prosecution
J. Fuimaono for the Defendant

Sentence:	25 April 2025

S E N T E N C E
Charges
1. 	You appear for sentence on four charges - two counts of forgery, each with a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment; and two accompanying charges of theft, each with a maximum penalty of seven years imprisonment given the sums involved exceed $1,000.
2. 	The record shows that on the 3rd March through Ms Leavai, your counsel appointed under legal aid, you entered guilty pleas to all charges.  She has not appeared this afternoon.  Ms Fuimaono - Sapolu who was here for a matter of her own has accepted brief instructions to appear on her behalf.  The advice by Ms Fuimaono Sapolu is that your counsel is at a funeral and seeks that sentence be adjourned for another three weeks.
3. 	No proper reason is provided and I will not accept the request by counsel but proceed with your sentence this afternoon.  Firstly, this matter was also adjourned when last called on your counsel’s application; secondly an adjournment for three weeks is not convenient to the court; and thirdly, whether or not counsel appears, it will not have an impact on the sentence I have decided to pass.  
Offending
4. 	The police summary which you accept says that the victim is a 70 year old grandmother of Vaitele fou and Lepea.  She stays home and takes care of her family.  Your husband is her grandson.  Prior to your offending, you were entrusted with handling the victim’s visa application to Australia which involved you dealing with her banking documents.
5. 	On the 20th September 2023, you forged her signature on an SCB withdrawal slip and withdrew from her account at the Fugalei branch the sum of $2,000.00.  The withdrawal was without the victim’s knowledge or permission, and the money you stole was used by you personally.
6. 	Almost two weeks later, you repeated the offending by forging the victim’s signature and withdrawing from her account through the SCB Vaitele branch the sum of $2,500.00.  The withdrawal was also unauthorised and for your personal use.  A year later when the victim visited the Vaitele branch, she discovered the unauthorised withdrawals.
7. 	In the presentence report you say that someone else was involved, and that person contacted and gave you the withdrawal slips.  You admit however forging the victim’s signature and withdrawing the monies for your own use.  You have also told the court this afternoon that you were under financial pressure to support your family, and were beaten by your husband when you failed to provide money. 
Aggravating Factors
8. 	The aggravating features of your offending are: 
(i) 	the element of premeditation;
(ii) 	the level of dishonesty involved;
(iii) 	breach of the victim’s trust; and 
(iv) 	the amount of money stolen being $4,500.00 is not insignificant.  
Mitigating Factors
9. 	The mitigating factors are:
(i) 	your personal circumstances - you are a 28 year old mother of 6 children, you have had a reasonably good education having graduated from the NUS TVET program.  At the time of offending, you were employed by Corrections at the Tanumalala prison and terminated as a result of the charges.  You are a first offender;
(ii) 	your guilty pleas entered through counsel at the earliest opportunity;
(iii) 	you have made part restitution of $1,200 confirmed by the VIR;
(iv) 	your apology confirmed by the victim as well as her plea for leniency;
(v) 	your expression of remorse. 
 Discussion
10. 	Forgery carries a maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment. The fact that they were accompanied by thefts of significant sums of money on two occasions warrants a deterrent sentence.  But I have considered the mitigation factors in your favour, and placed much emphasis on the plea for leniency by your victim grandmother in law.
11. 	She confirms you have paid back a significant amount and agreed to settle the balance.  She makes it clear that she would rather maintain her relationship with you and especially your children than money.  I accept her plea.
12. 	But you must know that this is serious offending and you are very lucky you are not going to prison today.  Prosecution had also recommended a non custodial penalty, I consider the cases they refer to. 
Result
13. 	You are convicted of all four charges and sentenced to 14 months supervision with the condition that you complete 60 hours of community work. 
JUSTICE ROMA