Tuesday, May 12, 2015

MY COMMENT ON THE TEACHER ARREST

A 27 year old teacher was arrested for having sex with a minor and distributing pictures of the two in the act. Read story here.

Here is the comment I left on the PDN:

I don't see why this is a problem. 

Recently a Fr. Luis Camacho was arrested after being caught with a minor girl at a remote beach in Agat. Camacho was eventually charged with "custodial interference", but there are numerous unofficial reports, including a letter from Deacon Steve Martines, the former Sex Abuse Response Coordinator for the Archdiocese of Agana, that the two were having sex. There is also the matter, though also unofficial, that the charge was downgraded because the girl said it was consensual, which obviously can only refer to one thing. 

From this news story in the PDN it sounds like the relationship in this case was also consensual otherwise the main charge would be rape or sexual molestation of a minor. However (though child abuse is mentioned), the primary charge is the distribution of child pornography. 

But if the sex was consensual, why can't the girl consent to the distribution of pictures of the two having sex? If it was consensual then the two were doing nothing illegal. 

Guam lawmakers need to address the double standard. They say it is okay for a 16 year old to consent to have sex with anyone of any age 16 years or older, but it is illegal for her to consent to the dissemination of pictures of her having sex in a perfectly legal sexual relationship.

What's funny is that if either this teacher or Camacho had bought their partners a beer they'd have had the book thrown at them for supplying alcohol to a minor. But sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, or felatio? As long as you're 16 and say it's okay...no problem.

32 comments:

  1. WHAT About THE TEACHER At STA?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ 1:53..that's ok too cause she's a neo. SMH

      Delete
  2. Consenting to sex ranks up there with other adult decisions such as the ability to sign a contract, marry, and join the military. A person is typically recognized as an adult at age 18. Guam must change the existing law!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Luis Camacho should come back to face his charges. Come clean once and for all. The Archbishop should stop hiding these types of behavior. Pot fabot, Obispo, na para i kochinadas.
    Peter Perez

    ReplyDelete
  4. There seems to be a real unbalance when the law is applied. Luis was "caught" red handed, arrested for Custodial Interference, taken off the island to a land far, far away and the government doesn't blink an eye. Now you get this teacher, who through electronic media, is witnessed to having sex with a minor.....17 years at that, is arrested and charged with all sorts of charges and is confined. The law applied so unevenly and no one it accountable, in the case of Camacho.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First of all, Camacho was caught red handed with the girl, not having sex with her. The teacher, on the other hand, provided evidence of a sexual relationship by video taping the event. Unfortunately for him, it's the recording that is in violation of the law. So no, the law is not being applied unevenly.

      Delete
    2. Well we don't know that he was not having sex with her - at least from anything official. However, because the Archbishop promised an investigation and proceeded with his usual silence then we are free to speculate. If all Camacho did was pick the girl up from school and took her to the beach for a friendly chat then there was no reason to present a resignation and go into hiding. So we will have to assume that there was something very wrong with what was going on and that the only reason there was not a more serious charge is that it was "consensual". In the other case, though distribution of pornography is the main charge, child abuse is still one of the charges, yet the "victim" was said to have been 17, just like Camacho's girl. But no child abuse charge for him.

      Delete
  5. Would it be possible to organize a protest when and where Archie and the neos meet? Before mass with the press. I have not seen anything in papers recently. I know mass should be peaceful but him presiding is a public mockery of our faith. He is laughing in our face. CU

    ReplyDelete
  6. The ongoing situation in the Agana Archdiocese, the loss of credibility on the part of its archbishop and lack of definitive resolution to really grave issues are so disturbing to say the least. Much as we would like, nay demand, an immediate resolution, we have to resist stooping to the level of shenaniganism that has characterized the ncw, the archbishop and his handlers have demonstrated. At all times, let us manifest respect lest we become the ones we detest.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The morbid realities about the Camacho affair are these: Camacho is the Catholic priest charged and arrested; regardless of the crime he was slapped with, Camacho’s actions are reprehensible and scandalous. As if Camacho’s abuse wasn’t scandalous enough, we have apuron, the leader of the Catholic Archdiocese on Guam who -- one would think -- would be up in arms about Camacho’s incident and would be in the forefront applying the Archdiocese’ “Zero Tolerance” policy and consequences of sexual abuse committed by clergy under him but, apuron isn’t doing that!

    Instead, apuron participates in the cover-up of the civil arrest of Camacho; he becomes involved in and cooperates with the spiriting-away of Camacho to a distant off-island place, thus protecting and shielding Camacho from civil and archdiocesan repercussions and consequences of his sin of sexual abuse of a minor.

    Luis Camacho was given the responsibility of overseeing the spiritual well-being of the families and members of not one, but two Catholic parishes on Guam; and apuron? Well, he is given an even higher responsibility and charge of over-seeing the spiritual well-being of all the Catholics and clergy of the Archdiocese of Guam! Isn’t that just dandy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems Rome not concerned. But we still are. For sure, for sure. Many people will be off island in summer months. Let's see what crap he tries. Be vigilant. Pray.

      Delete
    2. Do the brothers in Galilee know the filthy story? Or is he in the Holy Land. Question mark.

      Delete
    3. Adding fuel to the fire.....NEO Presbyter Luis continues to be on the Archdioceses payroll while serving the NEO/NCW Cult Agenda in another country. Compare this incident to the unjust and cowardly abuse Archbishop Anthony did to two outstanding Non-NEO Priests in a public forum..... Their appeals are still sitting in NEO Presbyter David, the Vicar General's desk..... Had they drank the KIKO cool aid, their case would have been dropped and a public apology would have been given by AAA. O' what a web this NEO/NCW Cult Chancery Leadership weaves when the continually practice to deceive..... Prayers from a distance.

      Delete
    4. Lots of people praying from a distance. Couldn't stand the stench one more minute. You know how sulfur gets to you.

      Delete
  8. If this is the type of actions the Archbishop is condoning. My entire family and my friends and neighbors will not ever donate to any type of appeal.
    Peter Perez

    ReplyDelete
  9. Also didn't the teacher from sta send student nude photos ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary Lou Garcia-PeredaMay 14, 2015 at 1:44 PM

      Anonymous (May 13, 2015 at 6:47 AM), as far as I can remember, the actual term used to describe what the teacher from STAHS sent was "inappropriate images" which could include nude — or partially nude — photos. Of course, in that case police indicated that "the investigation was ongoing" when the story broke in March … and we still have not learned anything in follow-up reports.

      In each case, the images — photos in the STAHS teacher's case and a video in the current case — were electronically transmitted in January 2015. With the STAHS case, the 20-something year old FEMALE teacher sent the images of herself to a 14-year old MALE student. Since "the investigation is ongoing," no arrest has been made. And, considering the amount of time that has passed, one can assume that no arrest will be made. In the current case involving a 20-something year old MALE teacher sending the video of himself and a 17-year old FEMALE student engaged in sexual activity to an ex-girlfriend, the consequences were swift: He was immediately arrested, charged with multiple felonies related to child pornography and confined.

      Clearly the MALE teacher's actions were more serious since they involved child pornography. In the meantime, no mention has been made of why it took the video so long to surface, considering that the ex-girlfriend claims to have received it since January. Are there any consequences for her having withheld the evidence for so long?

      While the actions of the FEMALE teacher did not involve child pornography, the victim in that case was younger — 14, as opposed to 17. The reports did not give any indication that there was any "consensual activity" going on between the two — nor could there have been because Guam's "age of consent" is 16. What the STAHS teacher did was still wrong but it looks like she is going to get away with it, in pretty much the same way presbyter Luis Camacho was able to escape any meaningful consequences for his actions. Is it because of their NCW-connection?

      Whatever the reason, there is definitely a difference in how males and females are treated in terms of sexual misconduct: Males have to deal with immediate consequences, including immediate arrest and confinement, while Females — for the most part — get a "Pass, DO NOT GO TO JAIL" card.

      Delete
  10. MESSAGE TO THE ARCHBISHOP - The day of the Fr Luis incident, you assured us all with "Don't worry; I'm on top of this! I'm so fast - I've already launched a "canonical investigation"! OK! So we are assured you're on top of it! So, what was the result of the "canonical investigation"? Any word of its results? We haven't heard or read about it in the Umatuna. I'm pretty sure, if the investigation was favorable, it would be headlined in the Umatuna, right? So what happened - it wasn't favorable?? Maybe you might want to keep your flock informed (as is your custom,right?). Another possibility - there never was a "canonical investigation". Or maybe we misread that for "comical investigation"????
    Regardless, don't we have a right to know what happened to one of Guam's pastors - and a Chamorro, at that? Is he OK? Is he in a monastery somewhere doing penance? Oh, no! You wouldn't do that to a Neo, right? Let's take a guess - perhaps in some plush place like Domus Galileae? Not a bad place to do penance, eh?

    Neo priest does a crime - quick! Hide him! Non-neo priest FABRICATED to do something wrong, drag him through the mud! That's what you call "fair play", right? We wouldn't know the difference, because we're suppose to be dumb, right? Oh, I forgot - we are not the "elite Catholics"; we are the Judases, right? Man, Guam! Aren't we so lucky to have such a smart archbishop. Good luck in your journey to nowhere. Goodbye, Red Hat! Boo-hoo!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. to: Anonymous May 13, 2015 at 8:38 AM

      Please wait, tony is waiting on Denver for another 20 page opinion

      Delete
    2. 8:38AM...HEHEHE! A 20 PAGE OPINION ON WHy THE POPE SHOULD HAVE ELECTED HIM FOR THE RED HAT!

      Delete
  11. Trying to bring a person back to the Catholic Church on Guam is one tough job. In a conversation to a non practicing catholic especially to the ones I know is extremely difficult. Quarrel starts to form and gets bitter at the mention of it's leader-Archbishop Anthony Apuron' name, and the topic remains on his role model of disloyalty leading them nowhere near the church. AAA, the world is collapsing-won't you help save souls.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Janet B - MangilaoMay 14, 2015 at 7:20 AM

      Throw in an envelop stuffed with lots of green stuff and you are sure to find Tony pursuing the issue with impressive haste.
      No envelop, no Tony.
      Sad but true.

      Delete
    2. It really is sad reality when an Archbishop can be swayed by an envelope. This is exactly how Archbishop works. Present an envelope and you can get what you need.

      Delete
    3. So sad, but ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

      Delete
    4. And no one in the whole world to stop him!! Pretty powerful guy that Apuron. Very powerful. Hillary is playing the silence trick too. Guess they both have a lot to hide. Good luck to both. Hideous.

      Delete
  12. Mr. Rohr - What's the latest about the FOIA request you have written DPS director concerning the police report of the Agat incident re one Luis Camacho? I thought the Chief acknowledged your FOIA request, and said you should be hearing from a desk sargeant regarding the investigation. Any word from the sargeant guy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He said they don't have anything: http://www.junglewatch.info/2015/04/pending.html

      Delete
  13. Criminal AttorneyMay 13, 2015 at 3:42 PM

    “Guam lawmakers need to address the double standard. They say it is okay for a 16 year old to consent to have sex with anyone of any age 16 years or older, but it is illegal for her to consent to the dissemination of pictures of her having sex in a perfectly legal sexual relationship.”

    There are two simple answers to your question. Federal law makes “child pornography” (defined as under 18 years old) a serious federal felony. Under principles of the Supremacy Clause and comity, Guam cannot immunize nor endorse violations of federal law.

    In practical terms, the individual actions of the old-enough-to-marry student harm only herself and her partner, and perhaps others if the partner preys on other students. But the photographs can be spread far and wide, causing more widespread and longer-lasting damage, including to the consenting subject if the photos are disseminated more widely than anticipated.

    So there is indeed a logical basis for punishing the dissemination of the photos even when the underlying conduct is perfectly legal. Especially as the age of consent varies from state to state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep. So the point is to raise the age of consent to sex to 18. Federal law does not dictate age of consent. But interesting point about old enough to marry. On Guam, a girl can marry (with conditions) at the age of 14. Would if her 25 year old legal husband sent a naked picture of his wife to a friend?

      Delete
  14. There was a comment here in all caps that used a lot of profanity. I normally don't admit such comments and this one got published by mistake. I have deleted it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Scary what can happen when “the Catholic Church has too much input into the police department.” Disturbing, “but necessary reading for those trying to wrap their minds around the abuse situation in the Catholic church, to come to terms with the depths of corruption from which the abuse and its cover-up emanate, and to understand why it was that, for such a very long time, Catholic institutions implicated in abuse were able to evade the law and media coverage.”

    http://bilgrimage.blogspot.com/2015/05/recommending-laura-bassetts-haunting.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FOPqpQ+%28Bilgrimage%29

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/14/cesnik-nun-murder-maskell_n_7267532.html

    Buried In Baltimore: The Mysterious Murder Of A Nun Who Knew Too Much

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Satan has his minions imbedded throughout this planet to include the Catholic Church. Fighting evil is a never ending battle here on earth. St. Michael protect us and defend us in battle.

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch