Siaosi Helu (36) was sentenced to four-months imprisonment of possession of illicit drugs, namely of 0.47 grams of cannabis in Nuku’alofa in 2021. His co-accused Akuila 'Aho had his sentence fully suspended.

These allegations arose from a “stop and search” of the car that Helu was driving on 4 October 2021. 'Aho was his front seat passenger. The two faced a five count joint indictment alleging possession of drugs and utensils.

Hon. Mr Justice Cooper sentenced the two last month at the Supreme Court in Nuku’alofa.

A repeat offender, Helu had 11 convictions for nine offences, that included a term of imprisonment from the Supreme Court of one and a half-years for possession cannabis in 2018. He also has convictions for theft, four offences of assault, housebreaking, with the last recorded offence in 2019 for drunkenness. He was sentenced in the Fasi Magistrates' Court to $500 fine or 10-weeks imprisonment in default.

The judge said, in the light of those convictions and the instant offences, the conclusion was that only a prison sentence could follow.

He was then sentenced to four-months' imprisonment with the final month suspended for one-year, on conditions. His sentence was back-dated to 21 February 2023, when he was first detained in police custody.

“Because he pleaded guilty to possession cannabis, albeit right at the end of the trial, whilst I conclude he gets no discount for that plea I do hold it in his credit, when assessing suspension."

Meanwhile, his co-accused, Akuila ‘Aho (23) was sentenced to three-months imprisonment for possession of utensils.

The sentence was fully suspended for one year, on conditions. He only had one previous conviction for drunkenness in 2018.

Unadmissable evidence

On a charge of possession of 1.57 grams of methamphetamine, 'Aho was found not guilty. 

The judge said the critical point in considering this count is the evidence of the proof the substance was methamphetamine, and that only came from certificate of analysis from testing the items with the TruNarc device.

“A certificate is a document tended to prove, in this case, a procedure was carried out correctly and accurately and in turn those results are accurately stated therein, by way of a solemn declaration.

“The certificate in question sets out firstly the training that Officer Pale had undertaken. That means there was a level of expertise that must be acquired for the use of both the TruN arc device and the reading of the findings. The certificate notes both the training for operating and later the reading of the spectrum that the machine creates from the test.”

The judge said, in the final section there is this line: The results have been verified by another officer qualified to operate the TruN arc Analyser. That was then signed of by Officer Pale as the officer who conducted the test and then by Officer Kava as the witnessing officer who had verified the results.

“This information was untrue. There was no evidence that Officer Kava was trained to use the TruNarc device, and in any event, he had not witnessed the results.

"That means the declaration was both untrue and misleading. If the document contains a false declaration, as a matter of logic, it can no longer be a certificate, as it does not honestly record either the events or the results, or both, it is having become a false certificate."

He said the Crown was invited to make representations as to why the certificate should not be excluded. None were made.

“Therefore the document is not admissible,” he ruled.

"There being no evidence other than the purported certificate upon which the Crown can prove what the contents taken from the Pall Mall box, recovered from the front passenger footwell of Mr. Helu's car, they cannot prove the existence of illicit drugs as alleged."

Mrs S. 'Eliesa was counsel for the prosecution.

The defendants represented themselves.