Sunday, March 19, 2017

SEX ABUSE VICTIM: APURON PAID HUSH MONEY

Victim: Apuron paid $30K ‘hush money’
A former altar boy, who alleges he was repeatedly sexually abused, told The Guam Daily Post recently that Archbishop Anthony Apuron paid "hush money" in 2002 when he confronted the Catholic Church leader about the years of abuse he and other altar boys endured. CONTINUED

16 comments:

  1. It's time the archdiocese gets sued for its arrogance in covering up so many pedophiles. It's time the victims come out and not be ashamed and begin the healing for each of them. Whatever it takes for each victim to begin their healing. I pray each and everyday for all the victims who were cheated of their youth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. While I agree, the problem is that, today, the "Archdiocese" is us, you and me: our collections, our donation, our properties. The bad guys did what they did years ago and got away with it. Most have died and may be paying the "real price."

      However, we still have Apuron. But even there we must be vigilant. All he that can be done to him legally is to find him "liable." "Guilt" does not play into a civil trial, only a criminal trial. And the criminal statute of limitations cannot be lifted, as can the civil statute. And even so, Apuron has probably already spread most of his assets around and he'll be taken care of long term by the NCW's black trash bags.

      However, there are still some other priests who are still alive who cannot be overlooked. They played a major role in facilitating Apuron's BIG COVER UP. Many have quietly come forward about what they know about these priests. However it won't do any good unless they are willing to come forward publicly. I doubt that will happen, so I recommend waiting until the Archdiocese gets its act together on the third party alternative its working on. I'll try to get more info soon.

      Delete
  2. Apuron's favorite source of "untraceable" money was "I love the archbishop."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mary Lou Garcia-PeredaMarch 19, 2017 at 10:21 AM

      And isn't it curious timing that "I love the archbishop" has recently decided to retire?
      But I'm sure our separated brethren in the NCW Cult will claim that the "untraceable" money was the result of Divine Providence for their Brother Tony.

      Delete
    2. I'm glad Junglewatch warned us several years ago that "I love the archbishop" was giving money meant for the hungry to the NCW seminary instead. I stopped donating money to this deacon. When I would cross paths with him he would give me a puzzled look wondering why I stopped donating.
      Agnes

      Delete
    3. Not the only "I love the Archbishop" character in this play.

      Delete
  3. This victim was represented by an attorney. He went after the Church. They demanded compensation and he received it. It was not hush money. He entered into a binding legal settlement negotiated by his attorney. I guess the lure of more money is why he is back. Money can do that to you. This mess is so tragic and the faithful will be ones paying for the sins of Apuron and a few. The Church in Guam will never recover from this catastrophe. It will become non Catholic in several generations. Sad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The story says that the victim approached Apuron in 2000, but Apuron appears to have brushed him off. He then went and got an attorney.

      Delete
    2. Binding legal settlement? I say, then produce the document. The victim already said that the chancery has no record.
      I think it would be great for Apuron to attempt to sue the victim for this supposed "breach." It would be most incriminating wouldn't it?

      Delete
    3. Btw, are you blaming the victims for this mess? How truly courageous.

      Delete
    4. Of course I'm not blaming the victims but anyone who has had any experience in the legal field know thst when money is involved, memories get sharper all of a sudden and money is the final end. Look at Apuron's victims. All they wanted was to confront Apuron and reconcile with the church. When they had the chance to do so when Cardinal Burke was here, they refused because tbey may compromise their civil suit of $5 MILLION each. Honestly I can't blame them. It's me first before they are concern about the Church. Let's get rich off the Church. Nothing wrong with that. Just saying that the disaster ev5rtyone is predicting will come and obliterate our Church in Guam. Perhaps this is what is needed. No compromise and no balance. Clean up at all costs. Let me say this. If anyone checks on similar settlements in the States, $5 million is an outragous figure even for what happened to Denton. There has to be some semblance of sanity and reasonableness in all of this. Right now there isn't and quite frankly there never would be.

      Delete
  4. Also, it's not uncommon for bishops with seminarian boy-toys to pay the punks serious hush money.

    Starting in the 1970's where I live, that's how we got stuck with so many active homosexual priests in high places. They don't care who knows about their lifestyle because they're protected big shots.

    All of them got plum jobs at the chancery or became Pastors of the wealthiest parishes. Some of them still have a way to go before retirement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I overheard one of those highly favored homosexual Pastors excitedly talking to another homo priest in detail about a handsome high school boy he was grooming. This, in the middle of a crowded public event at a local Catholic high school for boys! I'll spare you the obscene details.

      Suffice it to say it took everything in me to keep from beating the daylights out of that red-faced pervert and phoning the bishop. The filthy Pastor was in his 60's and the boy he was going after was only 16.

      Delete
    2. ANON 4:27......if what you are alleging is true, and happened at a local Catholic High school, why are you keeping silent about it? For goodness sake, say something to someone of authority. Don't let this go and think no one will get hurt.

      Delete
    3. I did. The priest was moved to a small, poor parish with no school and he retired shortly afterward. Unfortunately, our diocese has had four gay bishops in a row, so the level of episcopal tolerance for his type is high.

      That retired Pastor was considered an expert on Vatican II, so his celebrity status was maintained by lectures he gave at the diocesan seminary and at affluent local churches. His type is bulletproof around here. He's totally retired now, but still a social favorite of the liberal elites.

      Delete
    4. My apologies, ANON 4:27/10:16....When I read your post, I was thinking that you were here on Guam, most especially using the term "local." Thank you for addressing this potential problem with your respective diocese.

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch