Appellant in Alleged Forgery Case says Chief Justice Erred in Decision

By Lagi Keresoma

APIA, SAMOA – 11 JULY 2023: Iliganoa Daphne Sapolu, the Appellant in the first case heard by the Court of Appeal Monday 10 July, claims that Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese erred in his decision of 14 December 2022 hence the appeal.

The decision dismissed Iliganoa’s claim that her late husband, former Chief Justice Patu Tiavaasue Falefatu Sapolu did not leave a Will, and that the Will presented by his sister Luamanuavao Katalaina Sapolu was a forgery.

Through her lawyer Su’a Leone Mailo claimed in court yesterday that His Honour Satiu erred in his findings that the Will was genuine.

“The Will was not complete nor executed or attested to by the two witnesses,” said Su’a.

Iliganoa filed a motion in the Supreme Court regarding her late husband’s alleged Will and the matter was heard in October and November 2022.

After a weeklong trial, Chief Justice Satiu Simativa Perese dismissed the motion and ordered the removal of the caveat against grant of administration of Patu’s estate.

In his ruling he said “I am of the clear view that Patu had his last Will and testament prepared by his sister as described by Luamanuvao.”

He also pointed out that “Mrs Sapolu claimed that the Will was the product of Luamanuvao and Maka’s dishonesty. Mrs Sapolu has not proven her claim.”

The Appeal
The Court of Appeal presiding Judges did not want to go through the whole case but asked Su’a to pinpoint exactly where the appeal lies.

Su’a highlighted evidence presented by their witness at the trial as the focal point of their appeal argument such as:

• Patu was asleep on the day Luamanuvao claimed that the Will was signed,
• The two witnesses who also verified the Will by signing their names on the document claimed that Patu was asleep at the time they signed the Will,
• That Patu never signed the Will,
• The New Zealand based forensic handwriting expert Linda Morell said the signature on the Will was forged.

There were several comments made by Su’a which the Court asked her to point-out from the transcript and one such comment was Morell’s actual comment that the signature was “forged”.

According to Justice Rhys Harrison who leads the Court of Appeal panel of Judges, it is a serious allegation and he wanted to know whereabouts in the transcript does Morell say the signature was a “forgery”.

The only words he could find in the transcript with regards to Morell’s response was the word “indication.”

Parties to the appeal
The Respondents to the appeal are the Public Trust who was the administrator of Patu’s Will represented by Shane Wulf and  Patu’s nephew Maka Sapolu represented by Unasa Iuni Sapolu and Josephine Sapolu.

Presiding Justice
The Court of Appeal started Monday with five cases on the list.

The presiding judges are Justice Rhys Harrison, Justice Raynor Ashner and Justice Sir William Young.