Sunday, February 28, 2016


Continued from Part 8

As much as I would like not to suggest that the Department of Land Management has been compromised by the kikos, I'm afraid the evidence is certainly pointing in that direction. 

The bogus certificate of title did not appear out of thin air. It was put together by someone who was instructed to leave off the memorial showing the November 22, 2011 Declaration of Deed Restriction. 

The dungbats (the kikos on Diana's blog) have argued that the reason it was not recorded on the certificate was because the Declaration did not impact the title. Of course the dungbats can be forgiven for their ignorance because...well, they're ignorant. 

The Declaration restricts use of the subject property forever ("for perpetual use") for use by a Guam corporation that exists separate from the Archdiocese of Agana: the Redemptoris Mater Seminary. Let's examine the key language of the Declaration once again:

This means that even if the property was sold, it still could not be used by any other entity or party other than RMS. Obviously there is no question that the Declaration impacts the title, and Guam law requires that it be recorded on the Certificate of Title as a memorial. And it WAS NOT!

From what I understand, officials at Land Management are chalking up the bogus certificate (as published in the U Matuna on November 29, 2015) as a "mistake." Okay. But given that the property is conservatively valued at FORTY MILLION DOLLARS, this is a FORTY MILLION DOLLAR mistake! 

And what's more, such a mistake calls into question how many other mistakes the Department of Land Management (DLM), and specifically the Registrar of Titles, has made, potentially compromising title to your own property! The accurate recordation of documents affecting title to real property is the very foundation of our economy and society, and we are being asked to shrug our shoulders and write this off as a mistake? I hope you see how serious this is. 

Having done battle with the ugliest, dirtiest, most dishonest, group of people I have ever engaged in my life (the Gennarini-Pius-kikos in consort with Apuron, David, Adrian, et al) for over two years, and having cataloged volumes of LIES, I have to believe that they have got their dirty little hands on someone or "someones" at DLM. 

And here's my next piece of evidence:

This is a CERTIFICATE OF TITLE REQUEST FORM. It was used to request the certificates of title for the four lots which constitute "the seminary property." According to what is recorded on this form, the request was made by Bertha Evangelista of Title Guaranty of Guam

Notice that Ms. Evangelista did NOT sign the form, meaning that the request was probably called in. 


As you can see, the form has to be signed. The form was NOT signed. And as you can also see, the words "non-refundable" and "processing fee" indicate that the signed form must be submitted with the fee in order to begin the process of producing the certificates. Yet, the form was not signed, nor was it submitted, and neither was the fee of $32.50 paid up front. 

How do I know the fee was not paid up front - as would be required of anyone else?

Look at the date at the top of the form. It says 11/3/2015. There is the date of 10/27/15 in parentheses next to it and I'm going to come back to that. 

So according to the CERTIFICATE OF TITLE REQUEST FORM, the request was made on 11/3/2015. Yet the abstract of title was processed by Andrew Santos, the Deputy Registrar of Title on 10/28/15 (I will be including a link to the abstract of title tomorrow). And the requested certificates were issued on 10/30/15, four days BEFORE the request form was filled out!

Now, who among us can order a certificate of title and have it issued without following DLM protocol and paying the fee required by Public Law 29-02?

For now, I am not saying that Ms. Evangelista is personally involved in this subterfuge. She manages the affairs of a title company and DLM could certainly do "favors" for title companies. But it does not appear that Ms. Evangelista is acting in behalf of her company. 

The following record of payment appears to show that both she and Jackie Terlaje paid for the certificates personally:

Ms. Evangelista paid with Check #4786 and Ms. Terlaje paid with Check #1404. Here's another receipt showing the two check numbers:

Now let's go back to the second date written in parentheses. It says: 10/27/2015. Who gets to put two different dates 7 days apart on an official request form? 

Also, look at the very top showing the date 11/19/15, the amount paid, and the signature of the person who picked up the certificates - probably Lovelynn Maidesil who signed the Certificate of Title logbook with Archbishop Apuron on the same day (which you can see here.)

Also, looking at the color of the ink, the form appears to be filled in all at the same time. Obviously the person making the request would have had her own pen and filled in the request information, and the DLM employee who wrote the information at the top would have had a different pen. And even if they shared the same pen, the information would have been filled in on different days: 11/3/15 for the requester and 11/19/15 for the person recording the pickup and payment. Really? The same pen two weeks apart?

The 10/27/15 date was written in AFTER the date of 11/3/15 was entered, and 10/27/15 is the date that the request was called in. It would have to be because Andrew Santos' abstract of title was performed the next day on 10/28/15 and the titles issued on 10/30/15.

But what is really important here is that Bertha Evangelista, Lovelynn Maidesil Jackie Terlaje, Archbishop Apuron, and Msgr. David C. Quitugua ALL had access on 11/19/15 - ten days before the bogus certificate was published in the U Matuna - to the copy of the certificate of title MISSING the required memorial.

And we are to believe that NONE of them knew there was a problem - ESPECIALLY the people from Title Guaranty since they are in the Title business, and Jackie Terlaje since she is an attorney??

They KNEW the copy of the title was bogus. How do I know that? Because when I visited Andrew Santos on December 14, 2015, he confirmed that he had gotten a call from "law offices" to correct the certificates. And as demonstrated on the same post, it was the "law offices of Jackie Terlaje." 


  1. Given the recent bribery fiasco within the DMV, you might have possibly uncovered more corruption at the Department of Rev and Tax.
    Why can't KUAM or PNC do some investigative reporting such as this? Tim, have you ever thought about becoming a news reporter? It's about time GovGuam has some accountability with the public.

    1. LOL. I am a news reporter. This is news and this is where I report it. And from the looks of the traffic, far more people read it than if it was reported only by local media. The media will get involved. We are coming to that.

    2. Has the spanking brand new Presbyter Pedro served one day in Guam yet? Where is that guy? No word of assignment. Something is wierd. VERY. The published lists of priests was the key to exposing big problems of abuse. There will be no lists in the future. And no memory of where they are since we don't have a clue. Where is Luis Camacho? Doing penance? Doubt it. Let's come crystal clear about where these INCARDINATED priests are, ARCHBISHOP. Publish please. NOW

    3. I can tell you where Luis is. In fact, Diana can tell you. As per an email I just received, she posted about it on February 21 and in a way that severely endangers the Christians in that country. I am going to forward a copy of the post to the key office in Rome. They will NOT be happy to see what she said. And since Pius publicly promotes her blog, maybe Pius will be hearing from them. Better stay anonymous, Diana.

    4. Oops, must be Qatar! As for Pedro, probably he didn't qualify to be US citizen like the rest. Must be stuck somewhere in South America. Is Heraldo back? Did he forget about his mission at the prison.

  2. Thank you, Tim, for your diligent work uncovering this mess. If it is just an "honest" mistake then those involved can do what is necessary to correct it. If it a concerted effort to mislead the public then those involved must be brought to justice.

  3. Tim, All the Attorney General needs to do is review your findings and verify them. You have done all the heavy lifting for them, The ball is now in the AG's Court. Tick tock tick tock.

    1. Hopefully, those in the Attorney General's office don't believe high-status priests are above the law. Hopefully, there are no Neos among the AG and assistant AGs.

  4. We are seeing a frightening pattern!

    We see that the kiko-cult machine has its influence spread all over the place.
    a.) they are able to keep Rome at bay from liturgical abuses
    b.) they have bought and paid for a lackey bishop in Guam to do their dirty deeds
    c.) they have infiltrated the AGs office to suppress sexual crime investigations against a priest and minor girl
    d.) they have infiltrated land management to falsify public records
    e.) they have successfully suppressed sexting investigations by GPD against a St Thomas teacher

    What we see is a very powerful and corrupt organization that makes Dan Brown stories look like first grade attempts at fiction. We have an organization hell bent on glorifying Kiko Arguello. And little Guam is at the center of a fight to rid the Catholic Church of this heretical cult.

    These are indeed interesting days for our Church on Guam. Everyone who loves the Catholic Church should fight with every ounce of energy they have so our descendants will not question our apathy in the future.

    Let's go Guam. This is no longer just about a terrible bishop, this is about the welfare of our local Church and the universal Church as well. And we can have an impact on both!


Recommendations by JungleWatch