Chief Immigration Officer Tamasa Dennis Lutu is to be sentenced in May stemming from testimony that the court found less than honest.
Tamasa was testifying why he failed to appear for a hearing last July in the case of Pelenato Maiava, a sex offender who entered the territory on many occasions despite a ban that he stay away from the territory.
The ban was part of Maiava’s sentence for a sexual assaut conviction.
The immigration chief appeared before Chief Justice Michael Kruse on Wednesday and pled no contest to revocation of his probation.
The court had found he submitted a false affidavit when he testified as to why he had failed to appear at a July 2015 High Court hearing to explain how Maiava escaped the notice of Immigration even though he was on a list of people prohibited from entering American Samoa as part of their sentences for criminal convictions.
The court said Tamasa violated a condition of his probation for contempt of court…that is to remain a law abiding citizen,
The court has set sentencing for May 6.
Tamsasa and the Immigration Office IT Manager Lawrence Apo were found in contempt of court for not being present at the July 2015 hearing on sex convict Maiava’s case
The Immigration chief and IT Manager Apo, Tamasa’s step son were off island for a family reunion.
Apo paid his fine but Tamasa appealed the court’s decision claiming he was never served a subpoena and was told by a staffer of the AG’s Office that the hearing had been postponed but he was never given a new hearing date, ‘
He asked for a motion for reconsideration, which was duly turned down by the court.
The court said it grants a motion for reconsideration or new trial only if the motion is based upon manifest error of law or mistake of fact.
It said the chief immigration office did not meet this burden;” in his brief he does not deny or challenge the principal basis of the court’s order at all.”
According to the court, the immigration chief even voluntarily concedes that the court has inherent power to punish for contempt.
The ruling said his arguments without presenting any error of law or mistake of facts, :simply assert that the court’s decision was wrong.
“Instead his affidavit contradicts his own in-court testimony.
“On August 26, 2015 he testified under oath that he received a subpoena ordering him to attend court on July 9, 2015 from an assistant and he was in court on July 9, 2015.”
This testimony, according to the judges , directly contradict the statements in the immigration chief’s subpoena subsequent affidavit that he had never been served with a subpoena and he was unaware who served him the affidavit and he was not in High Court on July 9, 2015.
The order says that Peseta’s self-contradiction indicates he either did not testify truthfully in court or he submitted a false affidavit. And this is a violation of the condition of his probation that he remain law abiding.
