Rodney Tomasi was acquitted of possessing the illicit drug cannabis because evidence of a search was inadmissible, and a further charge offering a bribe to Police Officers was unproven, ruled the Supreme Court on July 17.

On May 14, 2018 at Ha'ateiho, the accused was charged for possessing 0.83 grams of cannabis and had offered a bribe to police officers at Lapaha, when he asked for their price so they might refrain from arresting him.

Lord Chief Justice O.G. Paulsen in his ruling said due to the lack of evidence from the Crown, he accquitted the accused on the counts 

The Court heard on May 14 the Crown's principal witness, a police officer said he got information from a Police Sergeant that the accused was parked at Ha'ateiho and in his vehicle were arms, ammunition and drugs. 

The police witness and another police officer went to Ha'ateiho and found the accused sitting in his car (which had a flat tyre) near the Silapeluua fields. Another man was also there.

They carried out a search on the accused and the other man as well as the car, where a rolled “joint” was found and which the accused denied was his. The accused was arrested and cautioned. 

Meanwhile, the police search continued around the driver's area and cash was found hidden in the seat and what appeared to be methamphetamine in a compartment of the door. The accused again denied that this belonged to him.

The search of the accused and his vehicle was undertaken without a search warrant and the accused challenged the police's right to carry out the search.

Not proven

The police witness said they did not have a search warrant but the Tonga Police Act allows searches without warrant. 

“He and the other officer received instructions to undertake the search from the Police Sergeant, but this sergeant gave no evidence from which it can be inferred that reasonable grounds existed to suspect the presence of illicit drugs,” said the Chief Justice.

“The lack of relevant evidence means also that I cannot be satisfied that the further requirements in S. 24(1)(a) and (b) were satisfied to justify a warrantless search. In addition, I note that there was no evidence of compliance with S. 24(3).”

The Chief Justice did not accept the Crown’s submission, principally for the same reason that he found the search to have been illegal: the lack of evidence. 

“In the absence of evidence from the sergeant, I do not know if the search was conducted in good faith or deliberate breach of the law, or whether the evidence could not have easily been lawfully obtained,” he said.

“Whilst I accept that the evidence is important (and the prosecution will fail without it), this case involved a modest amount of cannabis and the offence is at the lower end of the scale of drug offending. For those reasons, I consider the evidence of the search should be excluded. As a result, the charge is not proven."

Bribery charge

This was in relation to what the accused said in the car on the way to the police station.

The Chief Justice was satisfied that the accused words formed a clear invitation to accept a payment to release him.

“There is no doubt in my mind that is what the accused intended by his words. But that is not an end of the matter for two reasons,” he said.

“First, the particulars in the indictment alleged that the accused offered a bribe to the officers so they refrain from arresting him.

“That is plainly not what occurred, as he had been arrested some time earlier. The accused offered a payment for his release from custody, which is a different matter. Had this been the only difficulty I would have been minded to remedy it by amendment of the indictment; but it was not.

“In the present case, the accused was arrested without warrant. The powers of the police to make an arrest without warrant are contained in S.115 of the Tonga Police Act, requiring that a police officer believes on reasonable grounds that the person is about to or had committed an offence,” he said.

A person so arrested must be brought before a Magistrate or, if there is no Magistrate, the officer in charge at the police station, to be charged as soon as practical after being arrested.

“The only basis for the police to believe that the accused had or was about to commit an offence was what was believed to be illicit drugs were found on this person and in his vehicle during the search,” he said.

"I am not satisfied that the search was lawful and the evidence of the search is inadmissible in evidence against Tomasi. There being no other basis for Tomasi's arrest, the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the officers were acting in the execution of their duty when Tomasi offered them an inducement to release him."

The Chief Justice then dismissed the bribery charge.

The accused was previously acquitted of charges in relation to possession of methamphetamine, arms and ammunition without a licence, which was also due to lack of evidence.