Monday, February 28, 2022



by Tim Rohr

Like shooting ducks in a barrel. That’s what it looked like, at least from what I saw of the recent trial to determine whether churches and schools could be included in archdiocesan assets to satisfy its creditors.

It was as if the church attorneys painted a target on its own witnesses and then instructed the other side to “aim here.” In fact, the attorneys for the creditors didn’t even need to aim. Just shoot.



Saturday, February 26, 2022


 Posted by frenchie

The balances of Justice

Which way shall Judge Tydingco-Gatewood tilt the balance.

After six days of laborious testimonies, the lawyers for both parties were called to present their closing arguements

Mr Caldie for the plaintiffs did a very professional, detailed and logical presentation

It was punctuated with case law, clearly understood Civil law, and easy to follow argumentation.

After a quick recess, Mr Camacho did his closing statement, I wish I could tell you that he did a good job. Rather than addressing the technical legal issues, he gave an historical and cultural presentation, switching at times to Chamorro, and starting to rambled without aim.

The Judge tried desperately to throw him a lifeline on several occasions. Admonishing for example, to give her legal reasons to rule in his favor. Every time Mr Camacho said he understood but continued with his rambling, illogical and poorly prepared statement. It was very painful to watch.

After another recess, it was time for redirect.

Again Mr Caldie, handled himself very professionally with precise, concise arguments and clear explanations to the judge questions. He did not lay into Mr Camacho as he could have clearly done so.

This was then time then for the second redirect , this time for the defense.

Another lawyer, Mr Talbott, who obviously was much better prepared, did a more eloquent and appealing presentation, but admitted that he could not provide precise case law. He pleaded with the judge to take a leap of faith, arguing that this is an unprecedented case, which needed an unprecedented ruling. This was a legal Hail Mary

After a 15 minutes recess, the judge is coming back with her verdict, and in a short statement declared for the plaintiffs, explaining the defendants failed to demonstrate their case. The Judge mentioned that this was a Chapter 11 reorganization ruling, and that she Hope this will not eviscerate the  parishes and the school.

She encouraged people not to have apprehension, and for both parties to bring finality to all.

She also encouraged all parties to meet with judge Perez to settle.

Mr Elsasasser made a statement on behalf of the Archdiocese, and declared they shall  try their best to find a way to try to bring closure to this process.

Mr Tudela finished with new remarks by thanking the court, on behalf of the 285 survivors, and made another very emotional declaration, along the same line as his statement of yesterday, and prayed for healing and closure.

More to come.


 Posted by frenchie

After a whole week of testimonies and legal arguments, what is sticking out as a sore thumb is the highly emotional, genuine and embarrassing for both parties, testimony of Mr Tudela on Friday morning.

Yet both parties have avoided revisiting this testimony, for different reasons.

Despite the Judge stating, like the Archbishop, that both parties are trying to achieve the same goal, the reality is that this not true at all.

Let me explain.

As Mr Tudela testified, they so far have not seen a penny from the sale of assets by the Archdiocese.

Yet six (6) Millions dollar have been paid to lawyers. This is an average of one million dollars per year of wait for the survivors.

Judge Tydingco-Gatewood alluded indirectly to this situation by advising the lawyers on several occasions, and reminding Mr Tudela (who was too emotional to clearly understand) that their best option for quick relief was the auspices of the reconciliation under the supervision of Judge Robert Feris in the federal court of Hawaii, where settlement is still a real option.

Short of this, the survivors are most likely to become victims once more.By the time the biggest  Creditors get paid, there will not be much left for the survivors, after the lawyers are done.

The major obstacle to the settlement is not the survivors, nor is it the Archbishop, but rather it is the Bank of Guam. The largest creditor going in the process of Bankruptcy, with close to $ 20 million loans and debts. They have been the key to any settlement or not. They have been the main obstacle.

As usual it seems that Lou Leon Guerrero is as dangerous as Killary

Do not mess with the Red Queen.

It looks like the Neo backers of LLG might have the last laugh after all.

Mr Tudela was first helped by Tim Rohr, my dear departed friend John Toves of Agat convinced the former Agat 4 to come forward, I have personally met several of the survivors, many of them refusing to come forward. My only question now is going to be: Are you gonna let the lawyers and BOG manipulate your pain or suffering? Or are you going to instruct them on what to do. The ball is really in your court. It looks like the lawyers for the creditors have done an excellent job.

How do we proceed. Do we want reconciliation of punishment?


 Posted by frenchie.

After a morning of very emotional testimonies, and the extremely logical and embarrassing remarks made by Mr Tudela, the challenge for the attorneys of both side, who had gotten a pretty well deserved black eye, would be to make this riveting moment become irrelevant and forgotten. It was now the turn for the defense to bring their witnesses and documents to make their case.

The two witnesses called were Fr Ronald Richards from the Archdiocese of Detroit currently on loan to Guam and acting as special counsel to the Archbishop , Chancellor (keeper of records) and Episcopal Vicar, acting as General.

The "eminence grise" of the Archdiocese of Agana should be an interesting witness, since he coalesced almost all administrative powers over the last 5 years.

Indeed the testimony lasted close to four and half hours. Therefore instead of trying to give you a step by step account, I will try to give you the main action and the general course of the testimony.

Questioning Attorney was Mr Anderson.

It was established through the testimony that Fr Richards had the requisite experience, education and access to documents in his present positions to make most of his testimony acceptable. 

This did not go without a fight, since in the first 20 minutes of testimony, there was a strongly fought back and forth between the attorneys, with many objections being raised as to what was acceptable. Most objections having been overruled, the difficult task of going through all the documents presented as exhibits , one by one was started and took nearly four hours to be finished. 

Documents presented covered the following:

Loans between parishes, loans to banks, fundraising for schools, request for beginning of construction, records of filing for corporation sole, loan payments by schools and parishes. Letters between priests and chancery , bishops and banks, bishops and priests, as well as war claims docs.

(Interestingly enough a letter from LL Guerrero pledging $100k to Apuron for the construction of a gymnasium at our Lady of Guam Academy)

Documents for post war reconstruction. Lack of signatures for certain documents, because they were carbon copies and not the signed originals. 

All along, there were objections and ruling to overrule or not. Basically the defense team, brought in , in a period of about 4 hours all their documentation, just as the plaintiffs did over the last 6 days.

After this was wrapped up, and as the lawyers and the judge herself were starting to show sign of exhaustion, the last witness was called.

During most of the hearings the Zoom attendance fluctuated between 60 and 90 people. Survivors, clergy, religious, and laity.

Mr Ismael Perez Principal of Father Duenas Memorial School.

Credentials and identity were established and accepted, back ground was reviewed, and going over the document presented by Mr Perez, as being from personal knowledge.

The judge again made the lawyers aware that she knew the witness, because of her children's history at father Duenas. No objections from both sides. 

Testimony covered day to day operation, and the building of the school following a gift of land.

It was established that the gift of land was subjected to restrictions tied to the construction of a school only. Objection on hearsay was overruled based on fact that the granter was a family member of Mr Perez who had direct knowledge of said gift.

There was a last cultural misunderstanding based on Family/Clan names, which was strangely enough settled by the judge, who gave the cultural background to the plaintiffs lawyers, who in turn  lifted their objection. No cross examination. 

Proceedings ended at 5.00pm 

Closing arguments to be presented on Saturday February 26 at 1.00pm

Friday, February 25, 2022


 Posted by frenchie.     

This is supposed to be the last day of testimonies. We are starting 20 minutes late, 

Judge Tydgingco  Gatewood  goes over some Schedule changes.

The original schedule was supposed to have the closing statements from both sides to take place on Monday. We are now going to have the closing statements  on Saturday instead starting at 13h00 

Both parties then went into the details on how the closing statements would proceed and how long they would take.

The Judge then called on both parties to let her know who the witnesses would be for today's hearing. 

We were advised that Archbishop Byrnes would testified, followed by Mr Tudela from the committee of creditors. Mr Tudela is one of the first victims to come forward early in the process, he now represent other survivors.

The Judge then advise the parties that Honorable Robert Perez from the federal court of Hawaii will continue pursuing settlement before the March 4th or the March 11th scheduled meeting.

The judge encouraged both parties to use this great opportunity to settle the case.

After these issues were settled  Mr Glasovich addressed the issue of stipulation for Fr Ron Richards testimony. Ensued a back and forth between Mr Glasovich and Mr Anderson as the stipulations foundations. Judge overruled the stipulation and allowed for testimony to take place in the afternoon.

All things having been handled Archbishop Byrnes was called to testify and reminded he was still under oath.

Mr Caldie did the questioning, starting with the examination of certain documents, as well as questions about the process used to establish the difference between essential and non essential properties.

Then we moved to more documents which the Archbishop declared not knowing anything about. 

"this was my predecessor"

The next set of questions were about the guidelines existing prior to the bankruptcy filing. 

By this time 62 people are watching on Zoom

Documents admitted as evidence # 335, # 353.

Archbishop was asked to look at several letters. Do you recall? 

"I do not recall" 

This was the answer to several documents presented. 

Can parishes sue you? Yes but unlikely.

Would you give back the title or the deed of property back to Santa Barbara?


The zoom viewers are now numbering 78

What do think you have achieved? 

"We have been through a lot, and when you are in doubt you go back to the basic"

What is that?

"In this case this is Jesus"

Do you have anything to say to the survivors?

" Yes! I am Sorry"

We are now going into recess.


As mentionned earlier Mr Tudela is one of the first survivors to go public more than 6 years ago.

Mr Tudela is in his late 70s, and was born in Saipan.

This looks like it could be a very traumatic testimony. 

Mr Caldie doing the questioning makes the decision to let Mr Tudela testify without being interrupted.

Mr Tudela looks frail and fragile, but he talks clearly and with authority.

By this time the Zoom attendance reaches 90 people.

Mr Tudela proceeded to explain where he came from, how poor his family was, and how he was encouraged by his aunt and his grandmother to become a priest.

This led to him moving to Guam from Saipan, and be housed at the Friary while here.

Then slowly, painfully and with vivid details Mr Tudela related how he was first molested by a Capuchin at 2.00am  He was 12 at the time. He stopped several times to wipe his tears during this part of his testimony. Both the attorney and the judge gave him words of encouragement and solicitude.

He reported the problem, but instead of being protected he was moved to a far away parish.

He recouped from this ordeal and concentrated on his studies and side works. this is when he came into contact with Fr Louis Brouillard. (the most prolific abuser of the Archdiocese)

He moved to the parish in Mangilao, where he was then molested repeatedly by Brouillard who used the kids in his charge as his personal harem.

At this time the testimony became very emotional and intense.

"Why are we here today? The Church is not the enemy, it is the devil!

"my grandma used to tell me that to delay is to deny" 

"Delay, delay ! its been six years and we continue to delay!  

" I am 78, some of the survivors have died already, some like me are getting close to the end. I was supposed to get a bypass surgery, but I said no, then I was diagnosed with stage IV cancer, I did 32 days of radiation. I want this to be finished."

"Millions have been spent already. We have not seen a penny yet . Why are we here?"

"I don't blame the Church, I am still Catholic, I blame the evil people that did all these evil things."

Attorneys from both parties looked very uncomfortable.

Lots of pauses, lots of silences, lots of forced smiles and understanding looks.

The judge appears to be very moved by the witness.

Mr Caldie declares the end of the questions, and the defense does not have any question for Mr Tudela.

Yet we are not finished, because the judge takes the time to give advise and encouragement to Mr Tudela, talking about her own experience of prosecuting sex crimes, the courage needed to testify publicly. Conversation is very personal and very genuine.

After this highly unusual moment we go into recess  


 Posted by frenchie.


The Cathedral Basilica of Agana, was rebuild after two destruction in a row, caused first by the Japanese invasion and subsequent fighting to regain control from them, the other from natural disaster which befall our beautiful island from time to time.

On both occasions the people of Guam, and the strong Catholic community which has been the backbone of its civil society, found the courage and determination to rebuild bigger and better.

The latest major catastrophic event to strike the Guam Catholic Community was the decades of corrupt and devious leadership of Anthony Apuron, which led waste to the moral fiber of our Church, and allowed for the development and expansion of weak and corrupt civil leaders, who unlike their forefathers have lost almost all moral bearings in how they handle themselves and the trust of people who put them in office. This is what  some have called, a perfect storm.

This is nothing new. World History is replete with examples of decadent moral teachers who have led their community down the path of personal weakness, questioning of their system of values, loss of self-respect, and contempt for the other....

The latest plandemic was the revelation of the many evils that have slowly percolated through our civil system of responsibility or lack thereof. It has revealed how a few manipulative actors, used fear and lies to advance their narrow agenda at the expense of the general good. This should not surprise us Catholics. We have been warned from times immemorial about the fractures that allow for the fumes of evil to envelop us. We are at this cross in the road, where inaction and personal timidity could lead us to very dire consequences. 

After almost a week of testimonies in the Federal Court in Agana, we would like to decrypt what has transpired from these hearings. We shall also pose several uncomfortable questions about the path chosen by the Chancery representatives.


Over the last week, which you can follow with our day to day reports, several major facts have been revealed.

First : the previous ruling that was taken in the summer of 2021, by Judge Tydingco-Gatewood, allowed the plaintiffs aka the Committee for the Creditors, to include parishes and school assets in their quest for a financial settlement.

The hearings are taking place to identify the validity of some of the statements that were brought forth by the defense team for the Archdiocese.

What we have observed is the slow, grinding painful teeth of questioning of the people who filed written declarations in favor of their parish and/or school.

Before the trial the main hammer for the creditors, lawyers from the large legal firm of Stinson LLP based in Minneapolis MN had successfully argued that elements of the Canon Law of the Catholic Church were not allowed to be presented.

The main strategy of these lawyers is to question each individual, in order to strike out  all or part of their declarations. In order to achieve said results they have a very boring, and crude, but highly efficient method.

Establish the credential of the interviewee, establish that they are the author of the statement, try to take out part of their testimony as hearsay, for not being first hand personal knowledge. Finally trying to impeach the whole statement based on the testimony given

The defense strategy is to apparently redirect the conversation to the original narrative, and try to weasel in some factors they were not able to include earlier .

The plaintiffs' attorneys have been very aggressive and contentious, as they should be. Objecting to many of the questions by the defense. The result being that even if they end up being overruled by the Judge, it gives an impression that the defendants are trying to hide facts.

Overall results so far:

We are coming into the last day of testimony, before both parties are allowed to present their closing arguments to the Judge, apparently on Monday morning at 9.00am.

The testimonies so far have been laborious. Some witnesses have been better at presenting their story than others. This is not surprising, if you consider the diversity of people called.

The attorneys for the "creditors" have been diligent, aggressive and for the most part successful in their endeavor. They have avoided some of the cultural mistakes from the first day of testimony, and have navigated around these obstacles quite well.

The attorneys for the defense, looked like deer in the headlights on the first day. They were fully unprepared for the first cross examination. This was addressed the following days. Mr Andersen doing a very effective cross examination with the Archdiocese CFO Josephine Villanueva (who had several flippant moment) Yet they were totally passive regarding the repeated infringements of the plaintiffs' attorney into the Canon law domain, never calling an objection to the scandalous use by both attorneys of liturgical approach into a civil matter. An issue that they had the judge ruled on their favor.

The attorneys for the creditors consistently using the phrase "one body" which is of the canonical domain, as a civil argument. This should have been raised as an issue from the get go, and it was not at any time in the process. How can we justify paying six lawyers to be so passive in court?

Today the last witnesses shall be called, to include Archbishop Byrnes, who still appear to be very tired  and distracted.


Overall things are not looking up for the defense, their lackluster performance, their choice of strategy have given the plaintiffs a strong opportunity to add properties that were in existence well before the Archdiocese incorporated itself in the mid 1970s. Yet they also never made that argument to the court.

It really does not look like the millions of dollars spent to defend the Archdiocese from excessive demands have not been money well spent.

Thursday, February 24, 2022


 Posted by frenchie    



All lawyers and witnesses appear to be present, several people in the public bench area.

Right now we are waiting for Judge Tydingco-Gatewood

If everything goes as planned we should continue with the witnessing by Mr Aguon from Mangilao's Santa Teresita parish, by attorney Glasovich representing the plaintiffs.

 Mr Glasovich is the co-counsel, and work for the Law firm of Stinson LLP, 

Stinson LLP is a very large Law firm with offices is several cities in the USA lower 48 States.

David Lujan is seating with the plaintiff's lawyers, as the local Bar Lawyer.

When the Judge arrived, and after the usual practices of making official who is here, the lawyers engaged the Judge about scheduling issues.

Housekeeping issues regarding properties, that need to be removed and others that needed to be added. 

There was a short give and take, between all parties before the examination resumed 


 Mr Aguon not being a yes or no type of person, his testimony has a tendency to flow like an endless river. Lots of details and introspective, which has a tendency to break the tempo of the questioning.

At times, Mr Glasovich appear to struggle keeping a poker face, and look at a loss on how to curtail the length of the answers.

While the situation was serious, it brought a certain sense of lightness to the proceeding.

Is it a blessing or a scourge? Time shall tell.

My take was that the deep humanity and concern shown by Mr Aguon, most likely gave a different depth to the cold, machine like, robotic quality of the questioning until now. The word coming to mind is genuineness . It was a welcome break from the deliberate, planned approach of the lawyers.

Cross examination by Mrs Diaz for the defense.

 She faces the same challenges that Mr Glasovich with this witness, due to the long, unsolicited, and at  times rambling answers. Yet she was able to slowly channel this, by asking pointed and simple questions. It was interesting that the plaintiffs did not object during this testimony, which was unusual, but probably wise, in view of the unconventional and unpredictable nature of the answers of Mr Aguon

Mr Aguon testified that the parish had a tough time keeping up with the assessment, (because of the Pandemic) but that they were trying their best to catch up. All the while he testified that they were able to be financially independent.

Zoom attendance started with a dozen of people at the beginning, quickly increasing to over 40 and reaching 55 at 9.00am

 Mrs Diaz reviewed several more documents with the witness.

When time came for recess, Mr Glasovich raised a few issues, that will be taken upon return. 

It seems that there was a short cross . Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with the details due to Docomo substandard services. 

Will head to the Court for later session 

Next witness is Mr Fernandez, questionning by Mr Caldie.

Parish of our Lady of Guadalupe.

Missed this deposition completely due to Docomo blackout in our whole neighborhood.

Arrived at the Federal Court on time for the afternoon session. Witnesses are here, but the lawyers for both sides are in and out, apparently negotiating some minute details. Some members of the Clergy are here as well.

Attendance on Zoom seems to be as heavy as the previous day and the morning.

On the plaintiffs side Mr  Leo Tudela is sitting behind the lawyers for the creditors.

The committee for the creditors are as follow.

1 Bank of Guam . Danilo Rapadas

2 Everett Torregrossa. Berman O'Connor & Mann

3 Norman Aguon . Lujan and Wolff

4 Felix Manglona Lujan and Wolff

5 William Payne Jr. Lujan and Wolff

6 Roland Sondia. Lujan and Wolff

7 Leo Tudela. Lujan and Wolff




It would seem that the Lujan office has been the one recruiting the Minnesota Big Guns.

After another 20 minutes the lawyers are back at their respective tables, and Judge Tydingco-Gatewood has arrived. Before we can proceed with the following set of questions, the plaintiffs  bring up several "housekeeping" issues to the Judge, and a conversation between all the parties starts.

After another 5 minutes delay, the next witness is called.

Mr Vicente Mesa from the Astumbo Chapel. Mr Mesa was also the finance committee chair at Santa Barbara Parish, until 2021

Mr Caldie is doing the questioning once more. Mr Mesa insisted on keeping his face mask (double face mask) for safety reason. We learned later that his spouse is recovering from a serious health challenge, therefore he did not wish to take any risk)

Mr Mesa is apparently one of the original members of the "Astumbo Catholic Family Mission"

He is also the person that gave the land for the construction of the Chapel, which makes him a unique  witness, as he recalls the different restrictions, intentions and details.

The name of the Chapel being the Divine Mercy Chapel.

Mr Caldie then engage in his now well drawn series of questions , to find out if Mr Mesa recognize certain documents......He does not and requires to see the hard copy in its entirety to " know what I am talking about before I answer".

The operation is repeated several times, with different documents put in as exhibits.

It is at times difficult to understand Mr Mesa because he is wearing double masks. Therefore the questions have to often be repeated, making the process fairly slow.

The documents examination having concluded, Mr Caldie continue the examination after the short recess, and went over his song and dance routine regarding. the work of the Church, is the Catholic Church on Guam one Body? How does the Church help people?

Mr Mesa testified that the Church helped him, his family and friends get closer to God. Many parishes might look different, or even speak another language, but we are all one body all over the world and here on Guam of course. Everyone is welcome in our parish, even non Catholics.

Asked if the Archbishop owed him money or land, he said no. Mr Caldie joked that in his case that might not be true since he gave the land to build the Chapel. Mr Mesa answered that the Archbishop would owe the land to the building contractor, who was given the land as a guarantee for the construction of the building. 

Would you remain a Catholic, if the Archbishop closed your parish? 

"I am a Catholic forever" 

was the answer of Mr Mesa to the next four similar questions.

"Helping people is the Christian thing to do" 


Mr Camacho did the cross examination for the defense.

they went over Mr Mesa's background, knowledge of the local culture, opposing lawyer Mr Glasovich objected to several lines of questions about Santa Barbara supervision of the Chapel, with a series of tasty exchange under the eye of a tempering Judge who overruled the objections. 

Mr Camacho went over the different phases of constructions, their cost, and timing.

There were five phases 

Questions and answers on how they reached their financial goals.

On redirect by the plaintiffs, they went over more donations and restrictions of said donations.

Mr Mesa was excused and left. While we waited for the next witness. The lawyers ironed out some issues regarding the following testimonies, their timing and when they expected to have their closing arguments.

Apparently everyone agreed that closing argument would most likely take place on Monday after the court restart at 9.00am

The following witness was Mrs Kasperbauer, who had to be helped walking to the witness stand, and who also was assisted by a Chamorro court official translator. 

The questions again would be done by Mr Caldie, the lead lawyer for the plaintiffs. Following the first question: Are you from Guam? Mrs Kasperbauer went into her whole life story, which Mr Caldie did not try to stop. Probably a wise move.

The following questions were about Mrs Kasperbauer  participation in the creation of Astumbo's Chapel, the length of time, when was she involved, did she give money, land, and so on.

Mrs Kasperbauer continued with her testimony with a strong voice and clear mind.

Then followed the questions about culture and traditions. In answer Mrs Kasperbauer gave us all a lesson on history and culture of Guam.

At one time Mr Caldie attempted to be cute by making a remark about Guam being a matriarcal society. Again we were given a masterly historical dissertation on the reasons while this happened and how.

A few more questions were fielded before a short cross and the end of the day , at least in the court. 


Wednesday, February 23, 2022


 Posted by frenchie

Sister Angela continues where we had left yesterday.

Stipulations were made by both side, as to some documents being accepted as evidence, or as being hearsay.

Mr Caldie asked a few questions, before asking part of the sentence being stricken down. 


Fast cross and redirect.

Lots of housekeeping, issues about some of the details, basically trying to understand the origin of the recollection of the witness.

Meanwhile on Zoom the crowd look like they are finishing their lunch and slowly joining in, attendance quickly climbing over 40pp.

Mr Coldie is trying to accelerate the stricking or not of some of the statement of Sister Angela.

On cross by Mrs Diaz, there was the continued ballet of objections followed by different ruling from the judge. 

One main bone of contention was the gift of land by sister Angela's parents to Our Lady of Lourdes in Yigo.

After a protracted back and forth the judge overruled the objection of Mr Glasovich.

Attendance on Zoom is now over 50 persons. Again with a mix of laity, priests, religious and some survivors.

Mr Caldie took over the redirect of questions, and started with support of HR from the Archdiocese., and check writing, which sister Angela said was her own responsibility.

There were several arguments about housekeeping issues to admit or strike some parts of the statement of Sr Angela, before moving back to more mundane issues, like how do you help people in your community. Answer: we help the homeless, Students in need, ministerial instruments.

Then Mr Caldie went back to his preferred subject, are you one body with the Archdiocese.

Answer we are One Mystical Body. The Mystical Body is the whole Church of God.

Question who is in that Church of God? Just Catholic? Answer All the Children of God

Then Mr Caldie decided he did not need any more questions.

The next witness is Sr Maria Rosario Gaite, principal of the Santa Barbara School.

Mr Caldie started with the review of Sr Maria Rosario written declaration.

Trying to establish first hand knowledge, vs History of the School 

Sr Maria testified that the historical knowledge was based on  documents from the 50s, handbook, website and accreditation

The defense through Mrs Diaz  was able to have several of the paragraphs stricken by the plaintiffs to be put back as evidence. There was then a long back and forth regarding some article of the declaration.

After his usual tactic of trying to remove as many of the evidence brought in declarations, as hearsay, he proceeded to more specifics about finances, gifts and independence vs dependence from the Chancery.

A particularly strong point of contention was the gift by the Israel family of a computer science class, which Mr Caldie was very aggressive about.

Fund raising and donations were then approached, which Sr Maria Rosario said were  mostly the fact of the parent/teacher association

It was then established that the Archbishop does not support the school financially. Rather the School support the Archdiocese through assessments.

We then went through the painful line of questioning about belonging to a parish, donations and remaining or not a Catholic should the Archbishop close your parish. All this to a religious sister who took a vow of poverty.  Classy!!!

A short cross after the recess was not followed by a redirect.



The next witness called was Mr Aguon. Celestino Flores Aguon.

from Santa Teresita Church in Mangilao

Most of the questioning was about establishing the ownership of the different lots that comprise the Parish property.

Mr Aguon asserted that the parish owned the land, based on a land management document.

As he was  present before and during the construction of the new building , Mr Aguon  continued to disagree with Mr Glasovich who was trying to establish that Mr Aguon was wrong. Mr Aguon gave context to the process and acquiring  the land before construction.

The land itself was acquired from a gift by the Pangelinan family. Yet Mr Aguon did not see the name Santa Teresita on the deed,

Moving on to the financial account of the parish.

The witness and the lawyer went over the different bank accounts.

Attendance on Zoom remained strong around 50 people. 

Recess until tomorrow morning.


 Posted by frenchie

Josephine Villanueva

CFO Agana Archdiocese

Was one of two witnesses to be heard that afternoon.

Following his now well oiled set of questionnaire, Mr Caldie the lead counsel for the "Creditors", helped by his eager , yet much less pleasant assistant Mr  Drew Glasovich, established the identity and responsibilities of Mrs Villanueva, by drumming in his boring but efficient sets of documents, which are then accepted as exhibits.

Mrs Villanueva was presented a series of documents, letters and memorandum, about Our Lady of the blessed Sacrament bank accounts and a couple of condos in Taigaitai (Phillipines) which were not in the original schedule of bankruptcy, or even in the first amended schedule, but were presented at a later date. 

It appear that Mr Glasovich was inferring a dishonest filing by the Chancery, asking on several occasion if there were other "hidden" asset. To which Mrs Villanueva  answered : "not to my knowledge"

This showed us that the lawyers for the creditors have a very superficial understanding of the damage the AAA administration (specially under Vicar General Adrian Cristobal) had actually done, and how they hid many things from the public at large, but also from the Clergy, religious, and councils supposed to oversee these matter.

Mr Glasovich continued by revisiting some testimonies already approached during the examination of Fr Gofigan. Then the conversation moved to overseeing parishes bank accounts and schools.

There were more identifications of documents to be filed as exhibits, followed by questions  regarding a uniform accounting system, human resources, Payroll, and financial reporting to the Nuncio.

Both the Judge and Mr Glasovich did not have a clue of who and what the office of Nuncio is, and when they questionned Mrs Villanueva she gave a very uneducated and innacurate answer. Mr Glasovich understanding rapidly that he might have opened a door on Canon Law, quickly brushed over the issue.

At this time there were over 50 people who had joined the hearing on Zoom, including many clergy, religious and survivors. 

Despite his monotone and at times soporiphic delivery Mr Glasovich   was able to hammer away at the notion that the system put in place by Mrs Villanueva and Archbishop Byrnes was in fact a detailed control of both the schools and the parishes. A very ironic situation brought on by the bankruptcy filing which is putting the Chancery in a situation of damm if you do, damm if you don't.

The relentless questions about collections, parish membership, visiting other parishes, attendance, demonstrated a deep lack of knowledge about Catholic faith and practices, yet they also establish their notion that the Archdiocese is one.

Of course this notion of one, which is a spiritual, even esoteric notion, is totally perverted by the plaintiffs representatives for civil  reasons.

Despite the plaintiffs lawyers being adamant about not dwelling in Canon Law, they continuously venture in that domain, without any challenge from the defense.

Cross examination was done by Mr Bruce Anderson, who deflected most of the objections from the plaintiffs. The exchanges were at time very tasty and you could really sense the irritation in the voice of Mr Caldie, when the judge overruled his objections repeatedly.  

Mr Anderson was very efficient in his cross, establishing that there was no take over of the Basilica administration by the Chancery, that the Archbishop does not manage the parishes and/or the Schools

Mr Anderson also covered very effectively the issues of Donations, pledges and 2nd collections.

The redirect by the plaintiffs was done after another recess.

We experienced more tech issues in the afternoon which led to delays and frustrations.

The last witness for the afternoon was Sister Angela Perez of Our Lady of Guam Academy

Again the same set of questions were asked to Sister Angela, regarding administration, documents, bank accounts and hierarchy.

The examination then moved on to the inane questions about parish she attend, if she gives to collections, until Sr Angela told Mr Caldie that as a religious who give their lives to God often with no compensation, they were not in the habit of giving to collection. At that time it seems to down on Mr Caldie that this line of robotic questions was not applicable, and after trying two more times to redirect these questions he stopped by saying " this is not applicable sorry".

A short cross by Mrs Diaz, followed by a very short redirect ended the day, with both parties being far apart as the acceptability of some of the written deposition of Sister Angela.

Judge ruled to clarify on Wednesday

Tuesday, February 22, 2022

Bankruptcy Hearing and Zoom audience.

 Posted by Frenchie.

Just as when the Archbishop makes a statement publicly, or celebrate the December 8th Mass, people are watching and taking note.

The Bankruptcy trial of the Archdiocese might not see too many people going to the court to follow the proceedings, but the internet audience has been growing steadily.

Starting with 15 to 18 people on Friday preliminary hearing the audience grew to 25 to 30 on Saturday

On Monday the audience has continued to grow at time reaching 55 people and averaging around 50.

This is why it is particularly important that the audio visual tech support for this trial remain in control of the challenges faced.

Unfortunately this morning and this afternoon, we had to suffer through some long hiatus because of technnical glitches which did not allow the public to hear anything.

A word of advice to the cheerful  and pleasant Judge Tydingco-Gatewood. Do not forget the large public following the trial on Zoom, on Kandit News, Junglewatch and the drive by Media.

To the plaintiffs attorneys: Guam is not populated by a bunch of backwater boobs. A little decorum and more respect for some of the elders you are interviewing, will go a long way. The opposite shall not help you.

I noticed a lot of priests and religious people watching from the beginning to the end. I also noted several of the survivors paying close attention. 

To the lawyers think a little less about the fees you are going to make, and more about the victims of Apuron and his hilks.

As Tim Rohr clearly reminded us in his letter to the editor in today's PDN, it was the Catholics in the pews, who brought down the perverted and devious previous administration. It was not lawyers, politicians or journalists.

Don't forget this in your approach of this trial.

The people will support justice, but they shall not support excesses of any kind.


Letter: Guam's Catholics will rebuild after abuse case

By Tim Rohr

As trial in the archdiocesan abuse case moves forward to determine whether assets of churches and schools should be included in the quest “to find an authentic and thorough resolution” for “real healing,” as one lawyer put it, all involved should be reminded why Guam’s case is different than any other.

In every other U.S. diocese which was similarly sued, the impetus for justice originated with lawyers, legislators or journalists. In Guam, lawyers, legislators and journalists had nothing to do with it.


Bankruptcy of Archdiocese of Agana day 3

 Posted by Frenchie

Proceedings were scheduled to start at 8.00am on Tuesday 22nd of February, while apparently all parties were present, the trial started after 9.00am with what appear to be the interrogation of Deacon Kim, the former financial head of the Archdiocese under AA, and a CPA here on Guam.

While the lead attorney for the plaintiff Edwin Caldie partner for the firm Stinson LLP in Minneapolis MN first came forward. It was his associate Andrew Glasnovitch a recent graduate of the University of Minnesota Law School (2016) who started questioning Mr Kim. It was hard to figure out what was going on, since the sound was off on the zoom court transmission.

After about 20 minutes of actual proceeding, a recess was called by the Judge while the technical snafus were worked on. 

Hopefully we can proceed at 9.45am as planned.

On a side note, the choice of Mr Glasnovitch as a lawyer against the Archdiocese is interesting in view of his personal activist background and his openly gay lifestyle. Stinson LLP  made him their outreach and recruit searcher for the LGBTQ community.

Think about where your money is going to go after all this is over.

Edwin Caldie restarted the questioning

Establishing who Mr Kim is, what his responsibilities were in the AA administration, before and after his hiatus in Sacramento CA.


Mr Kim was also asked if he knew of a policy to safeguard documents, he said he did not recalled.

Next set of question was about the Thomas Aquinas school process for closure, and what happened to the debt. Answer I do not remember . The plaintiffs added more documents as exhibits that showed a memorandum of actions to be taken after the closing, what to do with Rick Cruz.  Answer I do not remember but it is written in the memo.

The plaintiffs moved on to questions on being a Catholic, again with the same focus, on belonging to the same Church, being one with the Archdiocese. What do you expect the Archdiocese will do with the moneys collected.

We learned that Deacon Kim was Baptized in Korea while he was a senior in High School. That he became a CPA after studying at UOG, That he arrived on Guam in the 1970s and has lived here over 43 years. 

Mr Caldie went on with leading questions about donations, land, other investments, Would the parishioners defy the Archbishop if he attempted to close his parish? Answer yes. Mr Kim testified that donation were for GOD's work in his church (meaning the universal and apostolic church) Then Mr Caldie continued about giving money to the Archbishop. ...answer we don't give money to the archbishop, but assessment are governed by Church law. Of course Mr Caldie refused to hear this argument. 

On cross examination Mrs Diaz was a lot better prepared that the 2 previous days. She actually was able to establish the amount of money raised by the parishioners of St Andrew Kim, How and by whom the land property was aquired and who donated. She also was able to establish that other parishes in Korea participated in the fundraising of the construction of the Church. 

Mrs Diaz seemed to be even more combative in regards to the multiple objections from the plaintiffs who were for the most part overruled. The Judge also appeared to be slightly irritated at the condescending tone of some of Mr Caldies remarks. 

(was this an actual shift? Or just a temporary set- back for the plaintiffs? time will tell

Redirect was short and uneventful.

A recess was called for Lunch  

Return on Zoom at 12.15pm


 Posted by frenchie

Starting on Monday the 21st of February in the afternoon for a period close to one hour and thirty minutes  Archbishop Byrnes  appearing tired and somber, but trying to put on a happy face took the stand, after he was sworn in by the clerk.

The lead counsel for the creditors started in a polite way (as he seems to do on a regular basis), and immediately presented a series of documents, letters, memos and asking the Archbishop if he recalled reading and/or writing these documents.

The first documents were articles of incorporation going as far back as Archbishop Flores, and several other amended articles of incorporation done by AAA and himself.

Byrnes read every documents intently to see what was put in front of him .

On several occasions Archbishop Byrnes seem to have difficulties reading some of the documents. This was a slow and drown out process.

On one occasion the Archbishop noted that several of the properties listed had since changed ownership.

When asked if he was familiar with the submissions brought by the creditors, Byrnes answered I do not remember.

This was then followed by a flurry of submission of 6 new documents as exhibits with no objection from the defense. 

A letter to the faithful by the Archbishop about the bankruptcy also came into questioning .

While Archbishop Byrnes was confused and lost at times, he also mentioned :"I am not sure what that means" .  

Later Mr Caldie decided to ask about the Vicar General, his role, the Curia... a very strange line of questions since the had been so adamant about not bringing Canon Law in the process, yet he was the one asking for clarification about Canon Law.

This morning Archbishop Byrnes is schedule to continue testifying after Mr Kim the former financial officer of the Archdiocese and a CPA himself.

So far the trial started one hour late, and the sound on Zoom is not working. Perhaps something the Judge can pay attention to since yesterday afternoon the audience reached 50 people on the zoom feed, and that this morning there was already 32 people waiting patiently.


 Posted by frenchie     

During her opening statement yesterday Judge Gatewood told us that there was two sides but one goal.

This was reported by Haidee Eugenio in the Post

Read Here


This leads us to ask: is the Judge plain naive? (that would be hard to believe) or is she very sly?

  Why are we asking this question?



Simply because since the start of these official proceedings, it is very apparent that the counsel for the creditors has no interest in finding a middle of the road solution, which would provide the survivors "just compensation", while not destroying the Archdiocese as we know it" with all its imperfections and all its needs for improvement.

It is becoming painfully obvious that the goal of the Hit Team from Minnesota, is to squeeze the lemon as dry as it can. 

Making sure that Canon Law cannot be used as an argument to explain the way an Archdiocese works, while at the same time using questions about canon law (without appearing to) to advance a narrow and deceptive argument . The Church is one..... which is meant in a spiritual way, not in a civil law sense.

Here lies the problem. 

It appears the Judge was sending a warning shots across the bow of both legal team, to let them know this might not fly, while keeping a strong image of neutrality.

Like Sherlock Holmes told Dr Watson: "it is not what the dog did, it is what he did not do"

Monday, February 21, 2022



After the Lunch recess, judge Tydingco-Gatewood restarted the hearing for the bankruptcy of the Archdiocese of Agana.

Mr Cruz from San Bernadita parish in Yigo took back where he had left prior to the recess, in what had been a tense redirect regarding Mr Cruz not agreeing with Mr Caldie's assertion.

Indeed Mr Caldie in his brand new Torri Richards Hawaiian shirt, (these shirts sell for around $100.00 a piece) kept on harping on what looks like his main argument: the archdiocese is whole and one, as the Archbishop declared, while talking in a methaphore about the survivors, on several occasion.

This is obviously a dishonest use of the declaration, but Mr Caldie is dead set on using this statement as a hammer to drive his point forward.


Fr Paul on Saturday and General Santos both brushed this assertion off during their respective testimony, pointing that we are one with the whole Catholic church worldwide, not just on Guam. I personally do not believe will stop this perverted version of the Archbishop statement, because it is one of his most powerful weapon in arguing that parishes are not independent entities, despite their canon law status and their separate bank accounts and separate financial council.The fact that we are one with our whole Church world wide does not mean Pope Francis is in Charge of the Agana Archdiocese, just as it does not mean the Archdiocese is controlling the parishes...

But we are not dealing with an honest individual, or team of individuals. They are here to make sure the pie is as large as possible, in order to get a bigger piece. Not particularly trying to bring justice to the survivors.  This is why the committee for the Creditors which include the Bank of Guam, brought in the Big Guns from Minnesota.

We should remind everybody that the Archdiocese has so far sold several properties, and that so far the survivors have not seen a single penny from it. Instead the Lawyers have done quite well, despite some minor adjustments by the Judge to some of their fees.

The next witness was Mr Richard Untalan who is the head of the Episcopal Finance committee

Again same tactic and technic. Mr Caldie who looked very confident and rested tried to establish the process for the identification of essential properties, (something Mr Felix had already alluded to) . By now the game is to continue to establish a corrolation between the properties and the Archdiocese.

Don't forget the exercise is  to attempt to fatten the piece of the pie. The other goal here is to see if any of the witness would contradict the statement of other witnesses. Mr Untalan remained cool as a cucumber despite the repeated attempt to confuse and/or trip him. He underlined the process they had to take to identify which property belonged to the Archdiocese, the parishes and other entities. Particularly he noted some properties which were thought to belong the Chancery, but in fact belonged to the Catholic Social Services or the Sisters of Mercy, as well as the Capuchin and the Dominicans.

Basically Mr Untalan confirmed the statements of Mr Felix on Saturday.

The Attorney for the plaintiffs introduced more documents as exhibits. During the process, question were asked about line of commands , again trying to establish the Archbishop as the ultimate Hierarchy. Mr Untalan continued unpertubed to describe their vetting process to establish the difference between essential and non essential properties. He explained quite well that pastors would defend their respective parishes teeth and nails, and the fact that Bishops in general have to follow rules of law that were over 2000years old.

Again the lawyer for the plaintiffs declared he should not bring up Canon law, because the judge had already ruled on the issue. Yet he was the one who had initiated the conversation. Mr Untalan remained relaxed, but concise and direct in his answers. He insisted that the Bishop relies on the college of consultors and the Presbyteral council for decisions.

Under cross examination by Geri Diaz attorney for the Archdiocese Mr Untalan insisted that while we are one Church on the island, we also were one Church around the world. What was true here, was true in France, here, in Korea or anywhere else in the globe.

Later on cross examination, Mr Caldie was more aggressive and less pleasant, telling Mr Untalan not to use the word pastoral for instance. Before asking if he knew any of the survivors, and how many? Mr Untalan recalled that he personally knew a dozen of them, and that he was aware of several others. Mr Caldie then pushed his line of questioning by asking if Mr Untalan thought that the victims were part of the Church to which he answered that we are all members of the Church of God.

Mr Untalan witnessing ended up on that note. It would then be up to Archbishop Byrnes to testify. 

We shall do a whole analysis of Archbishop Byrnes testimony later, because it was not ended today, but shall continue tomorrow.


 posted by frenchie

Proceedings restarted this morning, with a comical twist, as the suits and ties of the opening day were dropped by the Minnesotan lawyers for the benefit of brand new Hawaiin shirts...

I guess this is an odd attempt to look more "local" albeit not the most efficient one.

Michael Bevacqua will probably accused them of cultural appropriation, no doubt.

The examination of Mr Francis Guerrero chairman of the financial committee of our Lady of Purification continued, following the original one which started at the end of Saturday.

As we know on Guam, our Lady of Purification is a very small parish with a small but dedicated number of families who compose the body of parishioners.

This seemed to be totally overlooked by Mr Caldie, who stuck to his line of questioning which totally occulted this fact for the benefit of his very narrow line of questioning,which has remained the same with every witness.

How do you know the property is yours? Isn't the property held in trust by the Archbishop a corporation sole? How do you know the intentions of the person who gave the property away? All intended to show that the Archdiocese, not the parishes control the parishes.

Mr Caldie did not seem to make Mr Guerrero deviate from his testimony, ergo he went back to his mantra: "Are you one with the Archdiocese?" a very spurious argument which deviates the religious understanding of Catholics for the purpose of common law. 

It was not surprising that they had tried and succeeded to nullify the impact of Canon law, into said relation between the faithful and their Church.

Under cross examination by Mrs Jerry Diaz, (who seemed better prepared today than on Saturday), Mr Guerrero gave a very compelling testimony about his personal relationship to his parish and to his Church.

This seemed to rattle the representative of the Creditors who did a much tougher cross examination. Often bordering on the condescending and the sacrilegious with insulting questions about the survivors, which were taken back after several objections by the defense.

The examination continued for what appeared to be a very long and painful moment. Yet Mr Guerrero did not give what Mr Caldie seemed to look for.

The next witness Mrs Taitano of the Immaculate Heart of Mary in Toto fell as an easy pray for the lawyer of the creditors. Mrs Taitano looked honest, but dismayed by the questions and not mentally ready for the barrage of questions that befelled her. Really the symbol of the clash of two very different worlds.

The last witness before the Lunch recess was Mr Taitano of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Parish in Yigo, the former Chapel of the Neo, turned parish by AAA under father Jeff...

As we know this is one of the stronghold of the Neos on the island.

Mr Cruz the representative for that parish, also did not appear to comprehend the avalanche of questions asked by Mr Caldie, but he basically stuck to his guns, and under cross examination did make a couple of strong points in the favor of his parish. 

This lead to a contentious redirect from Mr Caldie, who tried to introduce an article from 2018 from the Pacific Island Time, where Archbishop Byrnes apologized to the victims in the name of the whole Archdiocese.

Objection from the defense were overruled, and Mr Caldie tried to impeach the statement of Mr Cruz. 

The Judge called for lunch recess, with instruction to Mr Cruz to return.

Mr Cruz looked utterly confused by what had happened and what was transpiring.

Bankruptcy proceeding Day 1 Afternoon session

 After returning from the Lunch recess, the proceedings progressed with the continued deposition of Mr Benjamin Diaz.

Not much progress since the morning session, as the attorney for the plaintiffs continued to try to lead the witness to agree with his assessment, with a fairly heavy handed approach, partially hidden behind a simulated sense of conviviality.

On the cross examination for the defense by a different Attorney (Mrs Diaz)

The defense attorney seemed to be all over the board and without any real strategy and/or preparation.

The next witness after some confusion, was Mr Joaquin Santos Jr. Well dressed and dapper Mr Santos made the lawyers look like they were dressed in patatoe bags.

Mr Santos was well prepared, articulate, and did not get flustered by the leading questions of the plaintiff's lead attorney, whose main mission is to establish that the parishes' properties actually are controlled by the Archbishop, rather than being independent entities. Mr Santos who reside with his spouse in Merizo, is the head of the financial council of the Asan parish. Many of us here on junglewatch know him as the Neo leader of Asan, better known under his nickname Danny.


You can refer back to a very telling exchange following his defense of AAA.

Read Here

None the less Mr Santos gave a strong testimony which seemed to put off the plaintiff's side.

The next witness, Teresita Perez from our Lady of Piece Parish was obviously very nervous and easily flustered by the leading questions of Mr Caldie.

The Following witness was Fr Paul Gofigan the current pastor of our Lady of Lourdes in Yigo, and former Rector of the Cathedral Basilica.

The co-counsel of the plaintiffs Mr Lujan understanding this witness was going to be more compelling, used his legendary chuztpah to do little talk with the witness, prior to his deposition.

Mr Caldie continued the same line of questioning that he had asked the previous witnesses. The only problem for Mr Caldie being that Fr Paul was not easily manipulated as the previous ones. On several occasions Fr Paul asked for more clarification, which seem to keep the lawyer off balance.

Asked if he thought the Church was one (a back handed way to agree with his statement that all parishes are controlled by the Archdiocese) Fr Paul answered that yes the parish is one with the Archdiocese, just as it is one with the rest of the Catholic Church.


It seemed to have surprised Mr Caldie, who was off for a while. He tried then a different line of questions, which did not validate his point of contention. The examination continued for near 90 minutes. On several occasion Mr Caldie asked " would not you agree that...." to be answered with a strong NO, every time causing chuckles in the room.

On another occasion Fr Paul noted that the Pastor is in charge of the parish, and that while the Archbishop has temporal power over pastors, he is more of an overseer, rather than a micro manager, which is not his role

It was obvious to most local observers that there is a huge gap between the approach of the Minnesota Team, and the local lawyers. It is apparent that there is a huge cultural disconnect between these two approaches. This is not even including the complicating fact that some of these parishes are fully controlled by the Neos, who have their own agenda .

Cross examination was done by Mr Camacho who clarified several blurring issues raised by the plaintiffs.

The last witness for the day was Mr Francis Guerrero of our Lady of Purification.

Because the court ran out of time, the testimony of Mr Guerrero shall continue on Monday Morning

Saturday, February 19, 2022



Federal Judge Tydingco-Gatewood

This morning slightly after 8.00am, after the Jury was seated, and the Judge sat down, the official proceedings about the Bankruptcy of the Archdiocese of Agana started in a classic way, with the usual false conviviality showed by lawyers. 

Opening statement was done by the lead counsel for the creditors  Edwin H Caldie Partner of Stinson LLP Minneapolis' office. 

Mr Caldie is what is usually called a heavy weight in the field of bankruptcy representation for creditors's rights and Business litigation. 

BA in Psychology from the University of MN

JD (cum Laude) Boston University School of Law. 

Admitted to the Bar in Minnesota, Illinois and DC

In his statement Mr Caldie affirmed that he would show that the Church assets are one and whole. In his argument he used the Archbishop's own words in his remarks about the survivors back in 2017.

Not a very honest approach, but still efficient as far as creating confusion in the mind of the Jury

Following the  Creditor's lawyer's opening statement, it was  time for the defense of the Debtor to do the same. Archbishop Byrnes representing the Archdiocese was sitting quietly at the defense table  surrounded by his attorneys.

The defense held that contrary to the creditor's attorney claims, they would show that the legal situation of the properties at the center of the dispute, is far from being black and white, but rather had many different shades of Grey. They claimed that they would demonstrate their point

From the opening statements, it was very obvious to the spectators, that we are going to see a clash of culture, between Chamorro tradition and usual customs and the cold representatives of English common law, as brought forward by the lawyers hailing from the cold steppes of Minnesota. The style, approach, and logic could not have been more stark "from the get go".

Between a highly respectful culture of elders and wisdom holders versus the cold analysis of a Lutheran world, where these factors have little to do with facts.This is probably even more distorted by the experience the law firm of Stinson LLP has acquired litigating Catholic bankruptcy cases in Minnesota, (Crookston, Mpls/St Paul, Duluth) . The only cultural thing close to the Chamorro identity in Minnesota would be the Indian reservations which sprinkle the State of 10 thousand lakes. These two world do not mix well at all..

The proceedings are opened to the Public, and a few people were attending in person. It is also available on Zoom, where there were around a dozen people at the start of the proceeding. The zoom crowd grew to 33 at one time before settling around 28 persons until the Lunch recess.A few technnical glitches were experienced, but were resolved fairly quickly, with the judge apologizing to the viewers.

The first person called to the witness stand was Mr Christopher Felix a long time realtor on Guam.

Mr Felix was grilled politely, but relentlessly by Mr Caldie about how he was recruited to identify and evaluate properties for the Archdiocese, and by whom.

The intent here being that the Archbishop are controlling all the assets of the Church on the island, and that the hierarchy of responsibilities links everything and everyone to the Chancery.

What transpired from this examination, was that the Archbishop does sit on the Finance council, but is not the all powerful potentate described by Mr Caldie, the questions were mostly leading, but were not challenged often by the defense, who opted to do a sober but efficient cross examination under the hospices of Mr Talbot

What transpired was that the parishes had been standing on their own financially for decades, and that there had been very little reporting to the chancery of financial matter until it was initiated before the Bankruptcy filing, for reasons of findings and identifications.

The Creditor's attorney included several exhibits in evidence to his arguments.

Redirection of question of Mr Felix continued, and tried to establish the fact that the Archbishop was fully in charge of assets.

Mr Felix resisted well to all the pressures of the Attorney. 

It was established that the Schools in Agat, the dominicans  in Yigo and Catholic charities were completely independant properties from the Archdiocese, other properties remaining to be determined.

After Mr Felix finished his testimony, it was time for the next witness Mr Benjamin Diaz.

Mr Caldie continued the examination of the witness until lunch recess.