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.
No comments:
Post a Comment