Police Sergeant fined $3000 for actual bodily harm

By Lagi Keresoma

APIA, SAMOA – 27 SEPTEMBER 2022: Police Sergeant Khamtahn Stanley has been fined $3000 tala after being convicted of causing actual bodily harm.

He has to pay the fine by 4.00pm Friday 30 September and in default 3 weeks imprisonment.

His co-defendant Ulugia Lomalasi Laufili was fined $500 tala also to be paid by 4.00pm Friday and in default, 2 weeks in prison.

The defendants were charged with manslaughter after assaulting a man of Vaiusu village around November 2019, who later died at the national hospital.

They both pleaded not guilty before the Supreme Court and the charge was later reduced to actual bodily harm and the matter was referred for hearing at the District Court.

Presiding Judge Loau Donald Kerslake acquitted both defendants of the charge.

The private prosecutor Leinafo Taimalelagi Strickland appealed the decision and the Court of Appeal, found them guilty and convicted both defendants on 25 August 2022.

Although the hearing was conducted at the District Court, both were sentenced before Supreme Court Justice Lesatele Rapi Vaai.

In passing judgement, Justice Lesatele Rapi Vaai noted the seriousness of the offence hence the Court of Appeal’s decision to convict them.

He also noted the mitigating factors on behalf of the defendants who were both matais and leaders of Vaiusu village and that they assisted with the funeral expenses of the victim.

Specifically on Stanley, the Court noted that he has a good character record and reputation with the police force and both pleaded guilty to the charge.

Resumption of police work
When the District Court acquitted them of the offence; Stanley was reinstated as a police officer after 2 years suspension.

However, when the Court of Appeal convicted him, Police Commissioner Auapaau Logoitino Filipo told Talamua that he is waiting for a copy of the Court’s written decision.

He pointed out that under Section 57(4) of the Police Service Act 2009, only when an imprisonment sentence is handed down that warranted a dismissal, otherwise the officer remains in the service even if convicted.

However, Section 51(5) of the Inquiries Into Breach of Duty pointed out that “a member who is convicted  by a Court of an offence punishable by imprisonment is, in addition to the conviction and imprisonment, liable to any punishable under section 51B, as if the  member had been charged under this section and the charged had been proved,”

The penalties noted in Section 51B relies on a tribunal recommendation to the Commissioner of the charged member to be,

• cautioned,

• be discharged without the charge been proved

• the rank, pay be reduced

• a fine not exceeding 20 penalty units be imposed or

• dismissed from the service.

The law also states that the Commissioner is not bound by any recommendation and a dismissal decision is not effective until the decision is confirmed after an appeal.