Wednesday, October 22, 2014


What Archbishop Anthony Sablan Apuron, Ofm. Cap. DD, Metropolitan Archbishop of Agana, Guam said about Joseph B. Lastimoza:

Letter to Fr. Paul Gofigan. July 16, 2013. Prot. No. 013-047

  • a grave harm to the parish
  • a probable threat to children of a nearby school
  • a lasting and potential threat to the safety and well-being of parishioners and office staff
  • gravely detrimental to the parish
  • harmful
  • grave, lasting and proven harm to the parish

Archdiocese Statement to the Media. July 22, 2013.

  • a danger to “a school full of children…CCD students, Confirmation students, and other youth groups…”

Letter to Fr. Paul Gofigan. August 20, 2013. Prot. No. 013-057

  • “the matter at hand was and continues to be extremely serious for the Archdiocese as a whole.”
  • “a known felon…having contact with parishioners”
  • a danger to the “safety of parish staff and even adolescents."
  • a probable threat to children of a nearby school
  • the presence of an individual with a pubically known record of sexual assault - a threat to youth and source of grave harm to the parish
  • no guarantee that the registered sex offender will never commit sexual assault again.

What the Guam Parole Board said about Joseph B. Lastimoza:

IN THE MATTER OF PAROLE DESIRABILITY FOR: Joseph B. Lastimoza, A Corrections Inmate, March 20, 1999 (document)
  • Release is compatible with public safety and security
  • There is substantial likelihood that he will abide by law and conform to the conditions of parole
  • Release at this time would not depreciate the seriousness of his crime nor promote disrespect for law
  • Release would not have a substantially adverse effect on institutional discipline
  • Continued correctional treatment, medical care or vocational or other training in the institution will not substantially enhance his capacity to lead a law-abiding life when release at a later date
  • The prisoner’s personality, including his age and maturity, stability, sense of responsibility and any apparent development in his personality promotes his conformity to law
  • The prisoner’s parole plan is acceptable with his release
  • The prisoner is able to assume obligations and undertake responsibilities
  • The prisoner’s family status and relatives who display interest in him and other close and constructive associations in the community is compatible with his release
  • The prisoner’s employment history, his occupational skills and training and the stability of his past employment is acceptable with his release
  • The type of home environment in which prisoner plans to live is acceptable with his release
  • The prisoner’s past use of narcotics or other harmful drugs or past habitual and excessive use of alcohol is acceptable with his release
  • The prisoner’s mental and physical make-up, including any disability or handicap which may affect his conformity to law is compatible with his release
  • The prisoner’s prior criminal record, including the nature and circumstances, recentness and frequency of previous offense is compatible with his release
  • The prisoner’s attitude toward law and authority is compatible with his release
  • The prisoner’s conduct in the institution including whether he has taken advantage of the opportunities for self-improvement afford by the institutional program is compatible with his release
  • The prisoner’s conduct and attitude during any previous experience of probation or parole and the recentness of such experience is compatible with his release.
  • The above name inmate shall perform 8 hours Community Service per month at the Dededo Catholic Church for the duration of his parole tenure.
To compare what the Parole Board said of Mr. Lastimoza, a group tasked with closely observing and reviewing Mr. Lastimoza's behavior for the nearly two decades he spent in prison, with Archbishop Apuron's condemnations, Archbishop Apuron, the "father" of our local church, the shepherd of ALL souls including Mr. Lastimoza' compare the two...Wow! Only the word SICK comes to mind.

And some more.

Archbishop Apuron, on July 16, 2013, also told Fr. Paul Gofigan:
The good of the soul of Mr. Lastimoza needs to be addressed in a proper way. Allowing him to work for the parish is not the right method to address this need.
Really, Archbishop? And how is that? What have YOU done to see to the good of Mr. Lastimoza's soul? What is that "proper way", THE "right method"? Have YOU done anything yourself? Have you even instructed anybody to care for Mr. Lastimoza's soul? Oh, that's right, too busy with your RMS boys.

You got rid of Fr. Paul but what did you do for Mr. Lastimoza other than try him and retry him in the media, persecute his family, further the decline of his aging mother, cause his young daughters to be bullied in school, and horribly hurt his wife? Oh, and not to mention your filthy implication of late night, alcohol-laced sexual rendezvous with Fr. Paul you made at a clergy retreat OF ALL PLACES!

By the way, Archbishop, did you AGAIN use your weight as "the owner of probably the largest block of Gannet stock by any Guam-based shareholder" as you did in your scolding letter to Mr. Douglas McCorkindale, President & CEO, Gannett Co., Inc. (the owner of the PDN) of January of 2001.

Is that what you did after the PDN recently published some pretty truthful articles about you and your sycophant cult?  Is that how we just happened to get the letter from "Mr. Mills" and the headline article plastering Mr. Lastimoza's picture on the front page? Is that what you did? Yah, right. Mr. Mills. Right. Damn you think we're stupid, don't you. 

That letter to Mr. McCorkindale was pretty amazing, Archbishop, even for you. Wow! The way you throw your weight around as a stockholder and an archbishop and threaten the CEO of Gannett as follows:
As you may know, a significant element of the PDN’s advertising profits accrue from the Catholic religious-based practice of placing announcements of deaths and death anniversaries in the PDN.  This juxtaposition puts the Archdiocese in the position of significant responsibility with respect to the quality of the PDN’s product.
Wow! That's amazing, especially in hindsight with your Diana idiots alleging that it was I who had influence with the PDN because my daughter was a Vibe reporter. SICK AGAIN!

Oh, and there's one more thing, Archbishop. In your August 20, 2013 letter to Fr. Paul you said:
“Sexual assault, whether committed against a child or an adult is never to be tolerated.” 
JT, did you read that? 


  1. Two reflections on these new revelations:
    1) lets hope that the Cannon lawyer of F Paul as well as his civil suit lawyer have access to these evidences.
    2)unfortunately these revelations are just the confirmation of what we have witnessed over the last two years.
    The depth of depravity this Archbishop has reached is astounding.

    How can a modern Church leader in all conscience resort to such vile and disgusting procedures?
    This behavior is beyond any ethical guideline for the average lambda citizen or corporate leader.
    It is totally unacceptable for a leader of the Church. Any Church, but specially the Catholic Church led by Pope Francis.

    The plotting, the lying, the mud racking, the assassination of character this Bishop and his minions have done at the bequest of a Sect like organization, with mafia like tactics and behaviors is totally unchristian and sinful.
    Personally I believe many segments of these actions are also criminal, and I pray that the proper authorities are taking note, checking names and getting ready to investigate these misdeeds.

    1. Please think of the victims of sexual abuse and the suffering and torment.

  2. Is there any record how his community service was accepted by Santa Barbara. Is this something that the Chancery needs to be informed of before he was allowed in Santa Barbara even if is court-ordered just as a matter of procedure/protocol.

    1. Dear Anon @ 10.14: Are you for real?
      A parole board does not just assign a parolee out of the blue.
      They have agreements with the businesses, NGO or religious organizations that are willing to work with these parolees.
      They have parole officers who check with said location.
      This is a very well established procedure.
      Of course the State department of Corrections and the Court have vested interests in these, so there are documents.
      Are they a matter of public record? That is another question.
      Due to the privacy laws, there are most likely restrictions on who has access to what where and how.
      Otherwise the rest is public record.
      The point of these revelations is that the Chancery is involved, a pastor cannot sign on this within the previous green light from the Chancery.
      Back then Father Paul was still studying at Harvard.
      So the Chancery knew, from the beginning.
      This is why this is so evil and immoral on their part to use something against father Paul for which they had knowledge of for over 13 years.
      Is this so complicated?
      They knew, they lied, they covered up.
      It had nothing to do with danger to children, it had everything to do with inside politics, and the order by Gennarrini to the Archbishop to get rid of Fr Paul.
      Nothing less than that.
      This is why Tim got involved with this blog, and that so many of us have participated in this fight.
      Time to wake up

    2. Frenchie, I am on your side. I wanted someone to clarify it some more and you did thank you.

  3. Joseph Lastimoza should file a legal suit against the archbishop and the corporation of the archdiocese of agana.

  4. Tragic manifestation in this case is that Archbishop Apuron is unable to speak truth.

  5. The parole board says that about EVERY sex offender they released into the community. That doesn't mean that all of them rehabilitated.

    1. Thus it is called "parole" and thus there are conditions to "parole". If those conditions are violated the parole is revoked. Mr. Lastimoza's parole was never revoked. Nice try.

    2. Parole means to be released. There were some criminals released on parole and re-arrested. So, comparing the parole board's "desirability" is not 100% guarantee that the person will not be arrested in the future. Nice try.

    3. Parole does not mean to be released. It means to be released conditionally. Mr. Lastimoza fulfilled those conditions and was not re-arrested. 33 years later, Archbishop Apuron is saying he is a "danger to children". There's a "danger to children" alright. But it isn't Joseph Lastimoza.

    4. And of course in our knee jerk delirium to defend Apuron you miss the point. Apuron had no problem permitting Mr. Lastimoza to work at Santa Barbara in 1999 when the probability of trouble would have been higher. Apuron didn't need a reason to get rid of a pastor back then though.

    5. Dear Diana, I mean anonymous @ 11:30 and 3:45pm. Even if mental gymnastics was an event in the olympics, you still would not get the gold. You always fail to land on your feet.

    6. It is clearer than clear. Time to force him to respond to all our questions. Unless we make noise outside of Junglewatch, he doesn't care. He always has his group to assure him this is just persecution. He doesn't care. He used the same tactic to move Msgr James. Charged him with financial mismgt without an iota of proof. With Fr. Paul, he had to get rid of the guy. He used Lastimoza as scapegoat (conveniently forgot that some years back he didn't lift a finger to prevent him from volunteering at Santa Barbara). The Archbishop had to get rid of Fr. Paul for having the nerve to prevent his chosen people (the Neo) from entering the promised land of Santa Barbara. Truth does have a way of coming out. And in a very strange way. They thought with the lead from David Mills to expose Lastimoza some more, it will be in their favor. It just revealed the double face of the Archbishop.

  6. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, isn't it Tony?
    In 1999 you welcomed Mr Lastimoza back into the Church by allowing him to work for Santa Barbara Parish. You could have said no at that time and the court would have found other community service avenues for Mr Lastimoza. Where was your concern for the parishioners and children across the street in 1999?
    The answer is that there was no valid cause for concern because the probation office and court had done a thorough job in assessing Mr Lastimoza and determined the Church was a good path for him. So, in 1999, you did the right thing and welcomed him back into the sheepfold.
    So what happened in 2013 that caused your concern to suddenly skyrocket? Is there something that Mr Lastimoza did that caused you to reconsider the safety of the flock?
    Again, the answer is that there was no valid cause for concern in 2013. The reality is that you were looking for any excuse to sack Fr Paul and Mr Lastimoza seemed like an easy target.
    OH TONY. Your lies are really bringing shame upon our good Church. You completely forgot that you were the one who welcomed back Mr Lastimoza 14 years earlier, and the fools who advise you never thought to take the high road and advise against destroying this man to get to Fr Paul. Shame on David the JCD, and Adrian (the odd one) and even Ed Terlaje your legal counsel.
    But most especially shame on you, but also thank you.
    Because of your reckless ways, more and more people on Guam and even around the world, are starting to see what a monster you really are. Let us hope they do not lose faith in our beloved Church because of one very rotten apple at the top of our barrel.
    Soon, the Vatican will also realize the cost of keeping you in place is far greater than the benefit, and they will have to do something. For now, more people are becoming totally disgusted with your behavior, and I encourage them to speak out, directly to you. The more you know how even your loyal people are losing faith in your leadership, the sooner you will do the honorable thing and step down.
    We do not want to hear that you will change. We have heard it so many times before, but things only get worse. Your actions become more desperate, and the results are even more heinous.
    To conclude, you are everything a Church leader is NOT supposed to be. You are unholy, you are self-absorbed, your spirit is weak and needs the kiko way to prop it up, you are a liar, and you are a terrible example of what Christ taught about compassion.
    Please resign now! Let this nightmare stop and allow us to start the healing process.

  7. Apuron is a reckless evil callous monster and soon the world will know more about this man.

  8. “Sexual assault, whether committed against a child or an adult is never to be tolerated.” --- interesting. then this would be the case especially for a perpetrator who later becomes archbishop, no?

  9. Sick men do sick things. Desperate men do desperate things.
    But our Archbishop has top honors in being desperately sick in his attempt to squash Fr Paul Gofigan by using a bystander as a pawn in his evil game.
    This is the final straw for me, and I am happy to say that my 84 year old mother and her three surviving brothers have now seen who this man actually is. They have never spoken badly about our Archbishop before, and they often chastised me, telling me to respect the office.
    Apparently, though, our conversations did not fall on deaf ears. My uncle was the one who pointed out to me what he had seen on Jungle Watch and asked me if it could be true. In a sarcastic way I asked if he was surprised, but realized that he was seriously shaken. We sat last night for nearly an hour discussing, and looking at the facts. Another uncle tried to defend the Archbishop, but ultimately even he finally conceded that what the Archbishop had done to Mr Lastimoza was not only wrong, but was a grave injustice, especially since the Archbishop himself allowed the man to volunteer at Santa Barbara when it was his decision to make.
    My mom is so cute, she now wants to go back to several key issues and look at them with freash eyes, without the cloud of the authority of the office.
    I am convinced she too will come to the same conclusion. My uncles are already talking among their circle of friends, and I know my mom will do the same once she sees the reality of the situation.
    Tim, my family has finally reached the tipping point, and I hope others will start to look at the realities, and not the title of the office. Once the people unify, there will be no choice but for the Archbishop to step down for the good of the Church, or for Rome to act because of these tragedies. Now is a time for prayer for the Holy Spirit.

    1. It is time to protest in front of the Cathedral. Who will lead us? This is the smoking gun/tipping point. It can't be clearer than this. This is it. Guys, wrap those white ribbons around the antenna of your cars so that we will know we are ready to take it to the next level. Actual protest. Intersection of ITC. We have to make noise outside of Junglewatch.

    2. Gus , not only Mr. Lastimoza but also the victims of sexual abuse. Young men, seminarians, students, abused .

  10. You guys had a meeting yesterday. What was it the second, third, fourth? Lots of people know about it and you guys continue to allow the Archbishop to save face and cover up for his brown-nosers. Come on! Put it out there already!
    All this back and forth about suspicion and waiting on Rome and will it break the Church? The church breaks a little more everyday because those of us who believe in Monsignor James, Father Paul and every parishioner disrespected by those neos have to bite their collective tongues and remain silent. ENOUGH!
    Most of us want to go back to our Cathedral and have our beloved priests put back in their respective parishes. I think the Archbishop should just retire be done, he's got no leadership anyway. Sanctimonious and unlikable guy from the start. Just go.

    Here, let's start with the Blue Boy magazine subscription being delivered to Chancery Office.
    You know how I know? Because it was accidentally delivered to my office at PDN with 'his' name on it.

    Glass houses!


    1. Blue Boy is nothing my friend much much worse . What about San Francisco bath houses.

    2. Dear Anonymous at 4.01pm.
      Beware of sensationalism, this could hurt our legitimate cause. It might be true that somebody receives "blue boy" at the Chancery, but this in itself is hardly a crime, even if it shows a great lack of judgement and a challenge to the vows of celibacy that all priests take.
      We know by now, that some priests, the career minded ones that Pope Francis has denounced on several occasions, do not take these vows very seriously. There has been enough scandals within our Church to prove this.
      But we must not loose sight that many other priests take this vow very seriously, and abide by it everyday of their lives.
      This would be an insult to all these good men to trivialize it.

      As for your San Francisco bath houses remark, unless you refer to old incidents that you are aware of (for which I encourage you to notify the Nuncio in person); the San Francisco bath houses were closed in 1983 by Mayoral decree in view of the Health emergency that represented the spread of Aids in that city. The name of that Mayor: Sen Dianne Fienstein.

    3. Thanks, Frenchie. I was about to take the comment down. I didn't know what it referred to at first and didn't have time to give it much thought. However, your response to it is a great service to all such comments. We don't need undocumented sensationalism, the documented variety is sensational enough. Thanks again.

    4. @1:38 who Is you guys had a meeting???

  11. As they say, the Truth will eventually prevail. The archbishop's shameful and brutal actions are all coming to light and seen for what they are: the act of a man, fallen from grace, and desperately trying to regain perceived grace through deceit, subterfuge, and abuse of authority. May God have mercy on his soul.

  12. As a staunch catholic, chances should be 'GIVEN" to people who are worthy of being forgiven. Fr.Paul is a good priest , i know all "PRIESTS" should be forgiving . I understand the law about " ZERO TOLERANCE POLICY" I mean if the person has changed let us not endanger the man to criticisms .