Thursday, May 26, 2016


If you're planning to visit the Children's Art Exhibit today, don't bother going to where the FestPac schedule in today's PDN says it is. 

From a report I recently received, the Children were turned away from exhibiting their art at the Basilica Museum by David the Villain who after agreeing to host the FestPac event decided at the last minute to charge the FestPac organizers an exorbitant fee, causing the organizers to scramble to find another venue. 

Apparently, this schedule has appeared in the paper over the last several days with many people showing up at the Basilica "Museum" only to find the place empty and the doors locked. (Of course there is no such thing anymore as the Basilica Museum. It was dismantled after David the Villain got rid of Msgr. James. See related stories here.)

I was told the Children's exhibit and the other exhibits listed were moved to Agana Shopping Center. And while there's been a whole lot of hollering going on about the alleged lack of organization, how about a shoutout for Apuron, David the Villain. Adrian the Drain, OJ the primatologist, and the other jokers who are making an international ass out of our local church. 

Wednesday, May 25, 2016


My brother is dead. This is a death threat:

  1. Maybe it's time for Tim to go see his brother....
It's the same person I've been tracking for awhile.

Hey, coward. See if you can identify yourself on this. I can.

Expect a call.


One would think that David the VG and Adrian the Chancellor, both of whom have been so in our face over the last three years with their false certificates of title and insulting attempts to shut us down at every turn, would be on the front lines with their own video messages declaring Apuron's innocence. 

After all, they have known him as long as the lapdog deacon they drug out to bark on cue (thanks to OJ's Oscar-winning direction - even getting Chamorro-speaking Tenorio to pronounce Quintanilla "kin-tah-knee-lee-ah" like it would be pronounced in OJ's mother tongue. LOL!)

But no David. No Adrian. Not a peep. Maybe they are pre-practicing their Miranda Rights:

“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?”

Well after three years of doing and saying really stupid stuff, we might surmise that keeping their mouths shut about the accusations of sexual molestation against Apuron is the their first smart move in a long while. Good luck, guys. 


LOL. Looks like we are not alone. However, even this article does not expose the real problem. The policy is written by bishops for bishops to protect bishops.

If the perp is the bishop - like ours is - then there is no policy. This is why the laity have had to step in  (just as we are) in the recent cases where bishops have ultimately been asked to resign. Also, this so called "charter" is non-binding because a bishops' conference cannot bind individual bishops to comply. It's all a ruse.

So the real message? The laity must be ever vigilant. Wherever possible, take back your children. Do as the bible says "train them up in the way they should go." Do not depend on the "church" to do it for you. Do as the Church itself says: be the "first educators" of your children.

And another message. Since the Mass is the "source and summit" of our faith, we can be sure - as we have seen with the neocat liturgy - that wherever the Mass is "abused," every other sort of abuse will follow.

And now, just for fun, let us once again watch the Archdiocese of Agana's most embarrassing moment - a real example of why you do not want to trust the current local church hierarchy (Apuron and his goons) with your children.

The Puppeteers with their puppet! from Undercover Neo on Vimeo.

Tuesday, May 24, 2016


Now that Diana has been exposed and the whole secret cult is unraveling as Apuron descends into a rabid fit of self-defense, it is good to revisit some of the posts of the past where we tried to raise the red flag. 

I came across this one from July 12, 2014 as we received the Apostolic Nuncio for a visit during which his message was to "build bridges." Exactly 12 days later, Apuron (the Molester) would haul Msgr. James into his office and blow up a very important bridge. The public bashing of Msgr. James would prove to be too much for the patient and tolerant Catholics of Guam. Looking back, it was a turning point. 

But back to July 12, 2014 and the "concerns" I posted about the Neocatechumenal Way. The original post is found here.


...Senator Blas just called BJ's bluff on the smoking thing. LOL. Two back to back scores for Blas this week so far. Is he running for governor? Peace.


12:40pm Updated - see ****** below

  1. Vincent P. Pereda - RESIGNED May 18, 2016
  2. Deacon Larry Claros
  3. Trinie Pangelinan
  4. Juan Rapadas - RESIGNED May 18, 2016
  5. Mariles Benavente - RECUSED self May 20, 2016*
  6. George Kallingal


Monday, May 23, 2016


Posted by Chuck White

Are you tired of reading stories about the sexual affairs of Neocatechumenal presbyters?  Sorry, but I've got another one...Read more.


As if it wasn't enough that Apuron used Roy for his own seflish gratification, now Jeff Marchesseault uses Roy for his own selfish ends as well.

Roy had just finished an interview with the PDN and had already gotten into a car with his friend who was transporting him to different meetings, when Mr. Marchesseault ran up to the car Roy was in and began knocking feverishly on the car window.

Roy, being the gentleman that he is, rolled down the window to see what the frantic man pounding on the glass wanted. He wanted a picture with Roy, and specifically a picture with Roy with the Cathedral in the background.

He wanted the picture so he could post it on his Facebook with the following message:


Guam senator introduces bill that would allow molested kids to sue perpetrators any time


Alexander Chen, a protector of pedophiles, decides to bring up the John Wadeson affair in the PDN. LOL. We're going to have some fun revisiting this. Thank you, Mr. Chen, for the opportunity. An opportunity made new again now that Roy Quintanilla has made known what Apuron did to him.

Alexander Chen ·
Did you know that Fr. Wadeson was exonerated of all the 'false' accusations that he was a victim of and that Tim Rohr never asked him for forgiveness for having publicly humiliated him and exiled him from the state of California and Guam?
Did you know that Tim Rohr was joyful with hatred as he associated Fr. Wadeson with the Archbishop in his campaign to smear the Archbishop, accusing him of harboring pedophiles?
Do you think Tim Rohr who did it once, won't do it again? and again? if it helps his agenda?
Did you know that there are people who would sell the truth, their dignity, the Church, smear anyone, lie, insult, degrade, deceive, etc. all for money?
Wake up and smell the coffee, scumbags like Tim Rohr abound in this World.

Dear Mr. Chen. Did you know that Fr. Wadeson was NOT "exonerated" as you say. Here is the finding of the Los Angeles Archdiocese as stated in its newspaper on April 15, 2015:
In relation to accusation first made in 1992 concerning alleged sexual misconduct in the 1970’s against Father Wadeson, then a member of the Society of the Divine Word, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles is aware that the allegation was investigated by the Society at the time and was not verified. 
No settlement was offered or paid by the archdiocese or, as far as it knows, by the society. Having reviewed the documentation presented by Father Wadeson, and following the 2014 reexamination, the archdiocese has concluded that there is no reason to preclude Father Wadeson from serving in priestly ministry. 
Let us look at a couple of things. First there is this: "the accusation was investigated by the Society at the time and was not verified." This is the equivalent of having Apuron investigate himself. There was no independent investigation. The Society (Society of Divine Word) to which Wadeson at the time belonged, and which would have been financially liable if it did find something, supposedly investigated one of its own with the verdict being that the accusation was "not verified." 

The investigation performed by the Society did not exonerate Wadeson, nor did it proclaim his innocence, which should have been simple to do if the accusations were false. Instead, the Society (which would have had to probably pay out big money) just said "not verified." 

In fact, we can be sure that the Society never did an investigation because if it had, Wadeson would not have had to appeal to the Los Angeles Archdiocese in 2014 when we "outed" him here in Guam. Had the Society actually investigated the accusations in 1992 and had a report saying that the accusation could not be verified, Wadeson would have had the results of that investigation and immediately produced them when we "outed" him. In fact, Wadeson would have produced them upon being placed on the 2004 Los Angeles Archdiocese list of priests "credibly accused" of sexually molesting minors. 

Wadeson was on that Los Angeles list for TEN YEARS before I said anything about it. What person in their right mind, having evidence that he has been falsely accused would not have produced evidence to have himself removed from that list. Wadeson did not produce it because he did not have it. And Wadeson did not have it because his Society NEVER did the investigation in 1992 they told the Archdiocese of Los Angeles they did when it inquired in 2015. 

Next, let's look at what the LA diocese actually said:
No settlement was offered or paid by the archdiocese or, as far as it knows, by the society. Having reviewed the documentation presented by Father Wadeson, and following the 2014 reexamination, the archdiocese has concluded that there is no reason to preclude Father Wadeson from serving in priestly ministry. 
What they're saying is that 40 years later, they didn't find anything. And why didn't they find anything? Because, and they say it themselves, they ONLY  "reviewed the documentation presented by Father Wadeson. " At most, the LA diocese may have also checked with Wadeson's former Society for the results of the non-existent investigation. 

And then there is this from Mr. Chen:
Tim Rohr never asked him for forgiveness for having publicly humiliated him and exiled him from the state of California and Guam?
Mr. Chen, let's review. I understand that given your kindergarten understanding of things this might be difficult for you to grasp, but I didn't exile anybody. LOL. It was Apuron who ran Wadeson out of town because Wadeson was an embarrassment to him. Take a look at what Apuron said on July 22, 2014:
In response to concerns in the community regarding Father John Wadeson serving in the Archdiocese of Agana, the Archbishop has decided to remove Father Wadeson from active and public ministry at this time. The Archdiocese of Agana has a policy regarding sexual misconduct and sexual harassment and takes these matters very seriously.
LOL, Mr. Chen. It was Apuron who "publicly humiliated him and exiled him," and you want ME ask "for forgiveness." You must be a neocat, Mr. Chen. Only neocats think like KAKA. LOL

Moving on, it was the LA Archdiocese who banned Wadeson from public ministry in 2003, ELEVEN YEARS before I brought up Wadeson's record in July of 2014. In fact, I published nothing new about Wadeson. The list with Wadeson name on it and the accusations was published by the LA Times in 2004. 

In 2011, Wadeson applied for permission to minister in the LA Archdiocese and was refused. And not only was he refused but the LA Archdiocese contacted Apuron and warned him about Wadeson:
In 2011, Wadeson asked the Los Angeles archdiocese for authorization to minister once more in Los Angeles because he was traveling in California. The archdiocese refused and contacted archdiocese officials in Guam after learning he was working there, said archdiocese attorney Michael Hennigan. He said he did not know what was done with the information.
Mr. Chen, that was in 2011. Apuron was told about Wadeson in 2011 and did nothing. The least Apuron could have done would have been to require Wadeson to get the results of the investigation that his former Society supposedly conducted "at the time" (1992). But Apuron did not. He did not because Wadeson did not have the report. And Wadeson did not have the report because there never was one. 

And by the way, Mr. Chen, WHY is Wadeson, a priest incardinated in this diocese, a priest who is on our payroll, a priest we must provide health insurance for, a priest who we must provide a retirement for, a priest who lives at our expense...WHY is he applying for ministry in the LA Archdiocese, and why, since he got on our payroll in 2004, has he been somewhere else 99% of the time? 

Hmmmmm, Mr. Chen, Hmmmmmm? Back to kindergarten, Mr. Chen. Your KAKA catechists have much to teach you. Courage. 


Note: See my 2011 note added to the bottom of this post.
Cruz has said he doesn’t plan to reintroduce the bill again because there could be a constitutional issue of constantly reopening statutes. 
“I don’t want to be embarrassed that it’s going to be challenged constitutionally,” Cruz said. “I can’t keep opening and closing and opening again the statute.”

Dear Mr. Joe Santos,

It sounds like this time around BJ is protecting Apuron. Never mind the coward, BJ, Mr. Santos. You are doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do! And when you do the right thing because it is the right thing to do, you don't worry that you might be "embarrassed." Press on, Mr. Santos. Your cause is just and your motive sincere. Plus, you are doing the hard work that The BJ never did, working to get public support. This is what TRULY helping the "little guy" looks like. Press on, Mr. Santos. Press on. 

Free counters!

Silent No More! petition drive

Campaign aims to lift statute of limitations on civil claims of child sexual abuse

Catholics urged to sign "Silent No More" petition

Silent No More: resident starts movement against child sexual abuse

Petition targets sex abuse

Joe Santos with Patti Arroyo

Petition Launched to Lift Statute of Limitation on Sex Abuse

Guam teacher campaigns against stature of limitations

New Guam campaign against child sex abuse

Teacher Starts Campaign to End 2-Year Statute of Limitations of Child Sex Abuse on Guam

The following was sent to an email list which included the then senators. A PDF copy of the original email can be found here

Tim Rohr
February 23, 2011


This is a personal message. No one has asked me to send this. No one has asked me to speak in defense of the Church. 

I am sending this message tonight because Bill 34 was debated today in the Legislature and was moved to the 3rd Reading File, which means it will be up for a vote in the next few days.

Bill 34 enacts "window legislation" which will lift the statute of limitations for alleged crimes against children, so that these alleged crimes - days or decades old - can be prosecuted.

On the surface, the bill is appealing. Who could be against justice for children? And in normal circumstances I wouldn't be opposing the bill or asking you to oppose it.

As a teen, I was a "victim" of unwanted sexual advances by a member of the Catholic clergy. I also had the "hierarchical door" slammed in my face when my father and I went to see the Archbishop (Los Angeles) about the matter.

I shed no tears for the LA Diocese when it had to cough up somewhere near half a billion dollars in law suits over child sexual abuse. 

However, there are a couple things that you should know about Bill 34. First, Bill 34 and its predecessor, Bill 334 in the last legislature, despite what Senator B.J. Cruz continues to publicly disclaim, IS AIMED at the Catholic Church in general and the Archbishop in particular.

Bill 34 is Senator Cruz's personal act of retaliation against the Archbishop for opposing Bill 185 which would have legalized same-sex unions. 

Senator Cruz made this threat after a meeting with the clergy and some members of the Legislature at the Hilton Hotel in 2009 when Bill 185 was being hotly debated. Senator Cruz knows he made this threat. And Senator Cruz knows that his primary purpose of introducing Bill 34 is his personal vindictiveness.

Senator Cruz is welcome to introduce whatever bill he wants regardless of his personal motivations. Its just too bad he doesn't have the courage to stand on his convictions and take on the Archbishop and the Catholic Church publicly. He has to hide behind his supposed concern for justice for children.

But the real reason to oppose Bill 34 is not because of Senator Cruz's childish tirade, but because the Church isn't the Archbishop and the priests. The Church is US. This is especially true on Guam where the assets of the Church are directly linked to the people who sit in the pews and their ancestors.

Window legislation such as Bill 34 has resulted in major financial damage to diocese across the U.S. To pay for this, the dioceses have had to sell its properties, which is the only wealth most dioceses actually have.

In the states, where most members of parishes are not intimately connected to the founding of parishes and where most of the properties sold were already abandoned or scheduled for downsizing anyway, the impact of the sold properties was not personal.

On Guam, it will be quite different. This afternoon I spoke with a person who is running a bake sale to help pay back the loan needed to repair their parish church after the last typhoon. I am sure you are quite familiar with the needs of parishes being met by "the little people", the many people who quietly give, work, and donate to keep their parishes and schools alive.

Churches, schools, chapels... on Guam, these were not built by wealthy bishops and priests, these were built by you, by your parents, your grandparents, your ancestors. The land upon which many church buildings stand was for the most part given to the Church from family lands.

In addition the Archdiocese of Agana educates about 5000 young people every year at a savings to the Government of Guam of about $6000 per child. Its charities feed, clothe, house, and care for more people every day than all the government agencies put together.

Yet, as one Catholic Senator (who supports Bill 34) said:

"The witness that stepped forward to provide testimony against Bill 34 (Deacon Jeff Barcinas) at one point articulated the fact that he was concerned about the financial impact this might have upon the institution that he represented and so in my mind he was saying it was all about money..." (KUAM)

Of course its all about the money Senator, but its not about Deacon Barcinas' money. It's not about the Archbishop's money. It's about the our money. It's about the money that is needed to feed those homeless every day at Kamalin Karidat. It's about the money that is needed to keep an extra 5000 students from knocking down the doors of the public school system for whom our government can't even provide working buses and functioning toilets let alone quality education.

Perhaps Deacon Barcinas could have and should have better made this point. But perhaps we are expecting too much of our elected leaders to understand the implications of financially destroying an institution that is holding up a huge corner of Guam's society and serving the needs of people GovGuam will otherwise be required to care for.

The sad part is that the "victims", if indeed there are any, will see a pittance in financial gain compared to the attorneys who will gorge themselves on the proceeds of the sale of ancestral properties that Bill 34 will force. And most of them won't even be from here as you probably can guess. 

It's quite easy to understand Senator Cruz's blindness or apathy to the damage that will follow Bill 34. It's not as easy to understand the blindness of other senators to the damage they are about to do, NOT to Archbishop Apuron, not to some abstraction called "the Church, but to their own people. I'm hoping that there will be enough who will not be so blind. We shall see.



Elijah Wood: 'Hollywood in the grip of child abuse scandal similar to Jimmy Savile'

Wood said the abuse was allowed to continue because victims “can’t speak as loudly as people in power.” 
“That’s the tragedy of attempting to reveal what is happening to innocent people,” he said. 
“They can be squashed but their lives have been irreparably damaged.”

Sunday, May 22, 2016


 - Louie Gombar

Notice the fascinating changing of the colors of the Redemptoris Mater Seminary.  When the morning sun makes its appearance beyond the horizon the seminary is set ablaze with the fiery-red hues of that magnificent disc of life.  As they day ages the RMS changes to a delicate pink much like the living coral that defines our Pacific waters.

Notice the changes of the NCW hierarchy as they evolve from displaying those insolent melanins of defiance to the depressive look of disorientation wondering how the real Catholics were able to dig up Roy Quintanilla.  The truth is Mr. Quintanilla never needed digging up.  He was always around building up his courage, confined by and suffering in his bubble of experience, always reminded, always prompted by the horrors of the molestation which he endured.

Notice the changing colors in  Eduvaldo’s appearance who always approaches everything with an affirmative stance.  Eduvaldo knows everything.  That’s why Eduvaldo was put in charge of whatever he is suppose to do.  Notice the change to the sometimes greenish, sometimes reddish bewilderment of the realization that the end is near.

Finally, notice and enjoy the colors of the shepherd, whose vestments appear to be taking on a change of its own.  It is ever so subtly moving from  the majestic and pious red and white to the infamous black and white - stripes.  Deliverance.


Pageview Update

Pageviews today (so far)
Pageviews yesterday
Pageviews last month
Pageviews all time history




I posted this 12 minutes before Roy's press conference last Tuesday. :)


On Tuesday, May 17, 2016, Roy Quintanilla, made known that he was sexually molested by Anthony S. Apuron, currently the Archbishop of Agana, approximately 40 years ago when he was a twelve year old altar boy in the parish of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel in Agat, Guam.

Within a few hours, the Archdiocese released a statement stating the following:

On the introductory page to the "policy," we read:

NO. 1. Despite the first principle of the policy being "the victim is not responsible for the abuse," within only a couple hours of the release of this statement, the Archbishop, the person ultimately responsible for seeing to it that "the victim is not responsible for the abuse," personally attacked the victim.

NO. 2. Despite the second principle of the policy being "the healing of the victim should be primary concern," within only a couple hours of the release of this statement, the Archbishop, the person ultimately responsible for seeing to "the healing of the victim as the primary concern," personally attacked the victim.

NO. 3. Despite the third principle of the policy being "all allegations of sexual misconduct are to be taken seriously," within only a couple hours of the release of this statement, the Archbishop, the person ultimately responsible for seeing to it that "all allegations of sexual misconduct are to be taken seriously," personally attacked the victim.

And within 24 hours of his own attack on the victim, Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron had both Deacon Frank Tenorio and his personal secretary, Fr. Edivaldo Da Silva Oliveira, personally attack the same victim in the same way.

Having immediately violated the first principles of his own policy, Archbishop Anthony S. Apuron proceeded to violate the policy itself:

Item 2c. requires the Archbishop to "direct an Investigator to do a complete investigation."

There will be no Investigator and there will be no investigation. Per the Pacific Daily News (May 20, 2016), Archbishop Apuron's personal secretary and Archdiocesan spokesman,  Fr. Edivaldo Da Silva Oliveira, declared: "it never happened."
Rev. Edivaldo da Silva Oliveira, who identified himself as a personal secretary for the archbishop, spoke on behalf of Apuron on Friday. 
When asked if Rev. Niland told Apuron what Quintanilla told Niland, Oliveira said, “(Niland) never reported because it never happened.” 

However, in doing all this, attacking the victim - first personally and then with Tenorio and Edivaldo, Apuron has completely admitted his guilt. If Apuron was innocent, it not only would have been easy for him to extend an invitation to Mr. Quintanilla to further discuss the matter, it would have been the right thing for a bishop to do. At the very least he could have done what Cardinal Pell had done when similarly accused. Pell stepped aside and permitted a third party investigation. When exonerated he returned to his job. 

Obviously Apuron has done none of these things. Instead he has immediately and viciously attacked the victim. 

Now, this brings us to why Apuron and the Waldo (aka Fr. Edivaldo Da Silva Oliveira) suddenly up and departed to Manila yesterday morning. 

For now, it is Apuron's word against Mr. Quintanilla's. Apuron knows that so long as he can keep this one on one, he can continue to deny the charges. However, two on one, three on one, and more... will change the matter very quickly. He must keep other victims from coming forward. 

Fr. Matthew Blockley was invited to be incardinated in this diocese by Apuron in the early 90's. However, Blockley saw something that made him split to Saipan after only a couple of years in Agana and before he was ordained. 

Blockley was ordained in Saipan but ran afoul of Bishop Camacho when Apuron and Pius tried to insert the Neocatechumenal Way into Saipan in the late 90's. According to Blockley, he also stumbled across some grave financial improprieties. Blockley - per his account - was severely beaten one night by a group of thugs (who he believed to be Bishop Camacho's) and fled to the states where he hid for several years for fear of his life. 

Upon his retirement, Camacho released an all points bulletin to all the U.S. bishops to flush out Blockley and force him back to Saipan (though according to Blockley, Camacho knew where he was). The priest in the states who had given Blockley shelter for several years could no longer do so. Still fearing for his life, Blockley fled to Manila, where (again according to Blockley) he is living privately under the protection of Cardinal Tagle. 

What did Blockley see in the early 90's that made him flee Agana? Apuron knows. The only question is what will it take to buy Blockley's silence?

That's all I can say for now.

For all posts related to Fr. Blockley go here

Saturday, May 21, 2016


Hafa Adai All,

We will be having a prayer protest in the front of the Cathedral tomorrow, Sunday, May 22 ...park at 9:00 am at Agana Swimming Pool or Agana Shopping Center parking lot near Wendy's. Buses will be provided......please tell family and friends!




Tony running out the back door
in order to avoid the laity who
were praying the rosary at
the front. 
On February 12, 2013, the Vatican instructed Apuron to amend his 2002 sex abuse policy. The instruction pointed out six areas of the policy that needed amendment. Apuron did nothing. On Nov 5, 2015, I posted a copy of that letter and wrote in detail about it in this post: DEAR CDF, "SCREW YOU!" - LV TONY

I draw your attention to show that there was no consequence for The Tony NOT complying with the Vatican directive. This is important for us to understand. Outside of liturgical and doctrinal matters, the Vatican, even the Pope, has very little authority in a diocese. In administrative matters, such as the institution of a sex abuse policy, individual bishops can do what they want.

I state this because STILL so many are looking to Rome to solve our problem. 

Let's get this straight. In most matters, especially with what we are dealing with here, a bishop is not answerable to anybody but the faithful in his diocese. And in our diocese, there are very few people demanding accountability from this bishop or willing to pay the price to hold him accountable, which really boils down to constant public demands.

Some are under the impression that the pope has removed bishops. He has not. Almost always the most he can do is ask for their resignation. And even in these cases it was the laity who did the work to bring their case against a certain bishop to Rome. 

It is very possible that Apuron has already been asked to resign by one of the Vatican Congregations, but has refused - or should we say, Pius has refused to let him resign. They need to keep him going to do this upcoming ordination. 

Public protests, letters to the editor, radio show call-ins, signs, comments submitted with real names on this blog, etc. The din must become deafening. And stop asking him to "step down." That sounds too dignified for this pathetic monster. It's time to start saying "get the hell out. " 

However, there is one thing that can be done to legally remove him. Pass a bill lifting the statute of limitations on past sex crimes against minors. Then watch Tony run. But it will be too late. 


Google myspace diana111

Here's what you get:

Now click on May Llanes (diana 111) on Myspace.

Here's what you get:

Here's what you got on May 7:

May 7 is when I first hinted at her identity here and again here and posted a blurred picture of her here.


New news stories and postings of interviews updated on this post.


Rev. Edivaldo da Silva Oliveira, who identified himself as a personal secretary for the archbishop, spoke on behalf of Apuron on Friday.

When asked if Rev. Niland told Apuron what Quintanilla told Niland, Oliveira said, “(Niland) never reported because it never happened.”