Thursday, May 12, 2016


I added the following notes to the previous post.

One more thing. Cruz should be thanking me, the governor, the other senators, the archbishop, or whoever influenced the legislation to exclude institutions and saving his political back side.

In the states, dioceses have had to sell millions of dollars of church property to pay for suits and claims. But people aren't connected to church lands in the states like they are here. Here on Guam, it is the PEOPLE who gave those lands and built those churches, and it is the FAMILIES of those PEOPLE who still attend those same churches built on those same lands that belonged to their ancestors who gave it to the Church. Had the Church been forced to liquidate those properties, properties that many FAMILIES still look upon as ancestrally theirs, the backlash against Cruz would have been vicious and immediate.

Vice Speaker, you are welcome.

And one more thing. The more I think about it the more Cruz' story simply makes no sense. Given Apuron's amorality and willingness to give away archdiocesan property to protect his own back side, why would he "influence" legislation that left himself exposed but not archdiocesan assets? He would have been more than glad to sacrifice church lands to pay for law suits and legal fees than have it come out of his pocket. We have already seen that!


  1. Tim, the interview w/Patti steamed up my car windows. Your 'afterthought' here is crystal clear. More than glad to sacrifice church lands, indeed.

  2. I say, poll the senators to find out who was "supposedly influenced" by the archbishop. Lairs of a feather, flock together.

  3. Hypothetical situation for our legal experts:

    A teenage boy musters the courage to confront the man who sexually assaulted him years before. During the trial a video is discovered clearly showing the assault. Unfortunately it also shows the teen got the date wrong and he missed the deadline for filing the case by two weeks.

    Does the judge bang the gavel and say, "Case dismissed. The defendant is free to go."?

  4. How do you know the video date is correct? That is a factual question, for the jury.

  5. wasn't cruz a judge for childrens court for a while? did he preside over any cases of molestation/predation? did he do his duty/public service on the bench?is his record public?