Monday, May 9, 2016


Last week on Patti Arroyo's show during which she hosted Giuseppe Gennarini, Patti took a call from Bob Klitzkie. Before Bob got more than a few words into his question, Gennarini pounced on him with "you don't have the right document, you don't have the right document, article 6, article 6...

I was not surprised by Gennarini's aggressive attack and his unwillingness to let Bob even finish with one question. This is the MO of the kiko's: deny, deflect, shut down, shout down, etc. And Mr. Gennarini - at least per his history on Guam - is well known for his ugly tirades. (We shall have an affidavit saying so soon.)

While not surprised at Gennarini's outburst, I was somewhat surprised that he seemed so sure that Bob "did not have the right document" since Bob was referencing the Articles of Incorporation as amended in 2004 - the most recent version of the articles (or so we thought). 

Gennarini's attack on Bob was so vehement, immediate, and sure, that I immediately smelled something. I looked at "Article 6" and it was not what Gennarini was saying it was. It didn't matter really because the article Gennarini was referring to simply identified the archbishop as the "sole member" of the corporation, an argument he was trying to use to make RMS appear to be a corporation sole.

I was used to this argument since the "sole member" argument is all The Diana has every proffered. Guam law permits any number of persons to form a non-profit corporation.* And a sole member does not a corporation sole make. In fact, a corporation sole is formed under a different section of the code.

* § 10101. Nonprofit Corporations. Any number of persons, associated together for any lawful purpose other than pecuniary profit, may incorporate their said association, as provided in this Chapter. 

However, the corporation sole argument* is the only argument the kikos have, so they have to keep the lie going and hope that nobody like Bob Klitzkie catches on - which is why Gennarini immediately shouted Bob down.

*The "corporation sole" would make RMS a subsidiary entity of the Archdiocese of Agana, but it isn't. 

To me, listening, it seemed that The Gennarini was just waiting for someone to "go there." Of course he had to know someone would, since the ownership of RMS has been a major piece of the argument that has ripped this place apart...and for good reason: the ownership of RMS, the real ownership, is the dirty little secret that is at the root of a much dirtier not so little secret. But we'll get there later.

It also sounded like Gennarini was reading directly from a document..."the right document." The question was "Which document did he have?"

When Attorney Bronze did his legal opinion in early 2015, he had relied on the most recent corporate data on file at Rev & Tax for RMS, and the 2004 amended articles was the most recent set of articles given to Attorney Bronze. But what Gennarini was reading was NOT the 2004 articles. What was it?

I soon found it. 

Follow me here:

On January 5, 2015, while the Visitors from Rome were still here, we uncovered the Declaration of Deed Restriction that had been buried quietly away at the Department of Land Management since November 22, 2011.

The discovery of this document was a turning point in our argument as we had long suspected Apuron of colluding with the Gennarini's to squirrel away the archdiocese's largest asset - a property valued between FORTY and SEVENTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS.

The language of the Declaration was unmistakeable. Despite it's clever title the instrument in no uncertain terms functions as an "absolute conveyance in fee simple":

NOW, THEREFORE, KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that Owner hereby covenants and declares that the Property is and shall be held, used, transferred, sold and conveyed subject to the covenants and restrictions set forth herein:


And, beyond the above underlined language of conveyance, Apuron identifies RMS as its own "SEE." A "SEE" is an ecclesiastical jurisdiction, a SEPARATE jurisdiction from the Archdiocese of Agana:
And the property is given to this SEE forever (perpetual use).

Upon our revelation of this document, the chancery and their google lawyer, Diana, initially went apoplectic trying to disprove the language of conveyance. However, Mr. Gennarini knew better than to try to disprove what the other idiots were trying to disprove and apparently ordered "something else," and we shall soon see what it is!


The Declaration of Deed Restriciton was not supposed to have been discovered. It was designed to lay in wait for an unsuspecting bishop who might not be friendly to the Gennarini's. And when finally told to get lost they would produce the deed (that is what it is) and laugh in the bishop's face, since the property would be theirs.

As we saw from the Diana, this tact - that RMS is a corporation sole - very quickly became the kikos' talking point, permitting the kikos to say that Apuron did not alienate the property but only "deeded it to himself." 

However, the problem with this argument was that the RMS ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION clearly identify RMS as a non-profit corporation and NOT a corporation sole.

As you can clearly see, the formator of RMS is Apuron in his capacity as "Archbishop of Agana, a Corporation Sole." And immediately thereafter in Article I, RMS is identified as a "nonprofit corporation," NOT a corporation sole. And as per the above referenced section of Title 18, Guam Code Annotated, a non-profit corporation and a corporation sole are two different things.

This posed a problem. The difference between a corporation sole and a non-profit corporation was glaringly obvious on the first page of the articles. This had to be dealt with immediately if the "RMS is a corporation sole" narrative was going to survive.


So on January 29, 2015, a mere 24 days after we published the clandestinely recorded instrument conveying title to the Yona property to RMS, the kikos filed an entirely new Articles of Incorporation. I will explain why they are "new" and not just "amended," but let's take a look at what they did with the formation paragraph:

Do you see that? They removed all reference in the formation paragraph to Apuron acting in his capacity as a Corporation Sole. Why? Because now the average reader cannot see the difference that I have been pointing out for two years: that a corporation sole must say "corporation sole" as it appeared in the original and 2004 version of the articles. By ridding the words "corporation sole" from the formation paragraph, it is not obvious that the Archdiocese of Agana is a corporation sole and RMS is not.

The removal of the full name of the original incorporator (Archbishop of Agana, a Corporation Sole) actually makes this a different corporation which is why I said these are "new" articles. They are NOT just amended. The articles of a corporation can be amended, but just the "articles," not the formation paragraph, ESPECIALLY when a different formator is named:

In the original articles, it is a legal person, a corporation, which is the formator (Archbishop of Agana, a Corporation Sole). In the 2015 version it is a natural person who is the formator, Apuron personally. Legally, these are two DIFFERENT "persons."

We will be challenging this with Rev & Tax.

There is much more to show, which I will get to in my upcoming posts on this. But for now, the real mystery is WHY was this document NOT in the corporate folder at RMS when ALL the RMS docs were requested by Attorney Bronze three months after the stamped date of January 29, 2015, when Bronze began researching his legal opinion?

Given the fiasco over the certificate of title, the questionable actions of the Director of Land Management, the Deputy Registrar, the Assistant Attorney General, the Attorney General, the Executive Vice President of a Title Company, the constant and clandestine presence of "the trained lawyer" we now have to wonder about a kiko agent inside Rev & Tax?

Remember, Gennarini was SO SURE Klitzkie did not have "the right document." Maybe he was SO SURE because he knew the answer to the question I just asked.

More soon.

Meanwhile, everybody show up tomorrow at 10:30am in front of the Tanaka Building in Hagatna (between Fast Copy and Mobil) to sign the SILENT NO MORE petition so we can get that statute of limitations lifted on past sex crimes...some of which date to 1977.

Links will be provided to the full articles of incorporation on the next post. 

Recommendations by JungleWatch