TEN YEARS AGO THIS MONTH - THE AGAT BOYS CAME TO LIFE

By Tim Rohr

In Part 1 of the series, JACKIE! NO SURPRISE, I referred to the Neocat Yona Property land grab as an attempt to "steal" the property from the archdiocese.

That's not entirely correct.

The Neocats knew Apuron's past and that lawsuits would be coming for him one day. And with how things were already unfolding in the States in those days (around 2000), with dioceses having to file for bankruptcy, the Neocats knew that The Yona Property, their seminary, would only be a matter of time before RMS would wind up on the judicial chopping block.

The only way to prevent that from happening was for Apuron to convey title to the property to an owner not legally associated with the archdiocese. This is why Apuron created (incorporated) a completely separate legal entity (RMS) on November 27, 2002, only a few days after he closed on The Yona Property on November 15, 2002. 

The trouble was how to transfer title to the property without our knowledge. 

As the record shows, the first thing was not to do it right away. Apuron would wait nine years. 

The second thing was to draft a conveyance document that did not look like one. So Apuron (and when I say "Apuron," I am always referring to Apuron and the Neocat leadership) came up with a document with the strange title of Declaration of Deed of Restriction, which, on its face, appeared to just restrict the use of the property to a Neocat seminary (but in fact, transferred title to RMS). *

The third thing to do was to record the document with the Government of Guam Department of Land Management without anyone (except for Apuron and the Neocats) knowing. Apuron would do this on November 22, 2011.

I've always been curious about this timing. What was happening in 2011 that suddenly moved Apuron and the Neocats to make this move after nine years?

While there had always been a low-level buzz about Apuron's sordid past ("The Agat Boys"), open accusations about this past were still three years away (when John Toves first went public). 

However, something happened in 2008 that probably triggered it. For the first time in the history of this archdiocese, a group of laypeople organized and publicly protested against their bishop.

The protest took place on April 20, 2008, in front of the Cathedral, during a major celebration attended by visiting bishops and cardinals. The Pacific Daily News reported:

Armed with signs and placards, a band of Catholics yesterday protested across from the Dulce Nombre de Maria Cathedral Basilica for what they believe is a dividing of Catholicism.

Group members said the protest was not against the Catholic church, but rather the Neocatechumenal Way movement, which they said members of the clergy and Archbishop Anthony Apuron were promoting.

The Neocatechumenal Way "has the ultimate goal of bringing the faithful gradually to the intimacy with Jesus Christ and to make them active members of the Church and credible witnesses of the Good News of the Savior everywhere," according to its Web site.

But Toto resident Lou Bamba said that a person must be invited to attend a Neocatechumenate gathering, whereas the Catholic church freely welcomes anyone.

Bamba said her understanding of the Neocatechumenal convocation is that the group brings non-practicing Catholics back into the church, and converts non-Catholics into believers.

"It's creating a major division in the Catholic church," Bamba said. "The archbishop is personally involved in this Neocatechumenal movement, ... and we feel that it is dividing the three main family institutions that make up the Catholic faith the clergy, parish and biological families."

The protest was a big embarrassment for Apuron, and I remember the look on his face when he saw the protestors as he and the visiting prelates processed into the Cathedral. The protestors stood immediately across the street from the Cathedral, holding large, visible signs. The look on Apuron's face was not one of embarrassment, but anger and revenge. And he would get it.

Ordinations at RMS were immediately ramped up; three years later, in 2011, he would secretly deed The Yona Property to the Neocats; in 2013, he would begin the hostile, public destruction of local clergy who stood in his way, starting with Fr. Paul and Msgr. James, and who knows what else he might have done if laypeople hadn't started banding together in what became the CCOG.

The ironic thing is, if Apuron hadn't started these wars (at the order of his Neocat handlers), the Catholics of Guam might have been content to let those stories about The Agat Boys remain just stories. 

Instead, those "stories," ten years ago this month, came to life in the persons of the real Agat Boys.

May 17, 2016    Man alleges archbishop molested him as a child

June 08, 2016    Former Agat altar boy accuses Guam's archbishop of rape

June 15, 2016  Another accuser comes forward with sexual abuse allegations against Guam's            archbishop

* “It is my opinion that, based on Guam statutes governing the interpretation of deeds and contracts, the property interest conveyed is an absolute conveyance of the entire fee simple title of the subject property to RMHF, subject to a restraint in use.” (Note: RMHF is Redemptoris Mater House of Formation, otherwise known as Redemptoris Mater Seminary.) - Jacques Bronze, Legal Opinion on Declaration of Deed of Restriction, May 13, 2015

TRICKY DICK AND HIS IRRESPONSIBLE RESPONSE - PART 4 - AND WHY IS HON RUNNING OUT THE CLOCK?

Posted by Tim
Continued from Part 3

In Part 3, we dealt with items 1, 2 and 3. In Part 4, we will address items 4 and 5.

4. Tricky Dicks says: "...the Articles of Incorporation, Art. XII(iii), (sic - no need for comma) state that the Archbishop is the sole administrator of all the temporalities of the RMS."

LOL. Tricky Dick is tricky. He doesn't expect you to actually read the Articles of Incorporation. Actually Article XII(iii) does NOT mention RMS at all:

Full document here

This kind of thing kind of makes you wonder if Tricky Dick is just plain Dirty Dick. He's either really stupid or an outright dirty liar (i.e. a "Kiko"). You decide.

By the way, the original articles (recorded in 2002 and amended in 2004) did not have a section enumerating the powers of the sole incorporator. The version of the articles Tricky Dick references here was frantically slapped together and recorded at Rev & Tax on January 29, 2015.

Why, after more than ten years of no amendments to the original articles, was it suddenly necessary to completely overhaul the articles in January of 2015? Answer: a frantic attempt to cover their asses.

Three weeks earlier, on January 6, 2015, we unearthed and published the deceptively titled and clandestinely recorded Declaration of Deed of Restriction (DDR), which in 2011 conveyed title to the Yona property to RMS, Inc.

There was no denying the truth about this document. The only possible defense was that "Apuron was still in control." But per the then-current RMS Articles of Incorporation (2004), HE WASN'T. Thus the Gennarini-Pius-Eusebio machine sprang into action, manufacturing a whole new set of Articles - not just amending - and recorded them at Rev & Tax on January 29, 2015.

The most notable section of this new set of Articles is the section Tricky Dick references here: Article XII, (Article XI in the 2004 version) wherein there is an overt attempt to prop up the idea that Apuron is still in control. Let's compare here the 2004 amended Articles and the 2015 version:

2004 Version

Full document here

2015 Version

Full document here

As you can see, the INCORPORATOR article is greatly expanded.

Let's review. While The Diana and the other idiots (like Tricky Dick) continued to argue that there was no alienation, Gennarini and his smart boys knew better. They knew exactly how a court would view the document. (This is why Jackie Terlaje "worked something out" behind the scenes with the AG to keep the certificate of title issue from going to court.)

The DDR was not supposed to have been discovered - at least until after the statute of limitation ran out (see counter in upper right). But once discovered, there was no defense other than to try to show that Apuron was still in control. Thus, the frantic slapping together of the new set of articles with the new and improved INCORPORATOR section in the 2015 version.

However, Gennarini and Tricky Dick's problem is Guam law. While the Incorporator has authority to appoint and replace board members or even dissolve the corporation, the Incorporator cannot directly govern the corporation. Only the board can. And while Apuron is chairman of the board, he is, as legal counsel Ed Terlaje advised the AFC in September 2011, only "one of six votes."

Full document here

Thus, once again, Tricky Dick is either stupid or a liar (i.e. a "kiko"). You decide.

5. Tricky Dick says: "...the opinion of the Lewis-Roca law firm, specialized (sic - should say "specializing") in corporation sole laws, stating (sic - should say "stated") that the ordinary (sic - "Ordinary" should be capitalized) has never lost control of the property or of the Corporation..."

It would have been so easy for Tricky Dick to attach this opinion. But he didn't. Why not? For the same reason Apuron did not publish the opinion when he supposedly received it. We were told that if we wanted to see it we would have to go to the chancery. 

The only person who got to see this opinion was Attorney Bronze, who when he paid the chancery a surprise visit, was only permitted to read the opinion, standing up, at a counter, supervised by someone at the chancery, and could take no pictures, make no copies, and take no notes. And after Bronze's surprise visit, it was withdrawn from public view altogether.

Now why would that be?

I'll tell you why. If in fact the property was legally alienated, Apuron would be guilty of an ecclesial crime since he did NOT get the canonically required approvals from the AFC and the Holy See. Being guilty of an ecclesial crime would be easy grounds for his official removal.

Now note! The Lewis-Roca opinion does NOT claim that title to the property was NOT transferred to RMS, Inc. (i.e. "alienated"). READ THAT AGAIN. Lewis-Roca does NOT claim that title to the property was NOT alienated. It does not claim this because title to the property WAS ALIENATED and conveyed to RMS, which is exactly the central claim of the Bronze Opinion. Instead, Lewis-Roca only claims that Apuron has "never lost control."

Lewis-Roca is a reputable firm, and not likely to throw that reputation away on some two-bit prelate from an obscure diocese. Thus it could NOT opine that the title to the property was not conveyed to RMS, Inc. because IT WAS. Thus, it opined on all that it could opine on: that Apuron "never lost control."

Now watch! This is very sly. Lewis-Roca found a hole. As the Incorporator, Apuron still maintained control of the property in that he could dissolve the corporation, upon which, the property would revert back to the Archdiocese of Agana. However, he certainly did LOSE control of the property insofar as its remaining part of the patrimony of the Archdiocese of Agana.

And this is of course why, little Preston could tell the LFM ladies to get the hell off his porch, that this was a "private residence."

Now one more thing. Look at Article XII(iv):

In their haste to appear to be legit, Gennarini et. al. has handed Hon all the authority he needs to get the property back WITHOUT litigation (which he says he doesn't want) and WITHOUT Gennarini or Eusebio's approval.

Per the Articles of Incorporation for the Archbishop of Agana, and now per the 2015 RMS version of its Articles, Hon is the "successor of the corporate sole" even if he is the temporary successor. He thus has, within his authority, ALL THE POWER (Hon's words) to immediately dissolve RMS, Inc, upon which the Yona property will automatically revert back to the Archdiocese of Agana.

Even if he doesn't want to immediately dissolve RMS (which he should), he can, as he recently did with the Cemetery board, simply fire the current RMS board and replace them with people who have pre-agreed to convey title to the property back to the Archdiocese.

Yet, Hon appears to want to run out the clock.

COUNTDOWNCountdown

To be continued

RMS. THE FINAL CHAPTER. THANKS FOR CRAPPING ON US.

Dear Apostolic Visitors, 

Please pay close attention to the following:

On December 6, 2011, the Archdiocesan Finance Council (AFC: Richard J. Untalan, Joseph E. Rivera, Msgr. James Benavente, Sister Stephen Torres, and Msgr. David C. Quitugua) was scheduled to have a meeting.

They never met. In fact, they were never to meet again. 

On the agenda for December 6 was Item #5. 

Item #5 was to be another discussion about Archbishop Apuron's wish to assign the title or control of the Yona Property (the old Accion Hotel) to the Redemptoris Mater Seminary (RMS).

An earlier request to transfer the title to RMS had already been denied by 4 of the 5 members of the AFC, with Msgr. Quitugua, the Vicar General and a member of the Neocatechumenal Way, being the only one in favor. 

The problem was that Articles IX & X of the RMS Articles of Incorporation placed 75% of the control of the seminary in the hands of people outside the Archdiocese of Agana and inside high levels of the Neocatechumenal Way.

And, as the archdiocesan legal counsel would later opine, assigning the title or giving control of the property to RMS in any way, could pave the way for these stateside-based members of the neocatechumenal hierarchy to eventually lay claim to an asset valued between 40 and 75 million dollars. *

Upon hearing of the agenda a few days before the meeting, Archbishop Apuron, who was off-island at the time, wrote to instruct Mr. Untalan to take Item #5 off the agenda. Mr. Untalan complied.

However, even though Mr. Untalan had complied and removed Item 5, the Vicar General, Msgr. David C. Quitugua, on the morning of December 6, 2011, the day the AFC was to meet, sent an email to Mr. Untalan accusing him and the other members of the AFC as follows:

To deny the Archbishop this right (being present for the scheduled discussion), on the one hand, breaks communion with him and, on the other hand, represents a "vulnus" towards the Archbishop insinuating a form of disrespect towards his person. 

Later that day, Archbishop Apuron sent a separate email to Mr. Untalan wherein he berated Mr. Untalan, saying he was "appalled" at Mr. Untalan's disobedience and demanding that the issue was not to"be discussed until I come home", and to "stop this nonsense."

Mr. Untalan, who had served the archbishop faithfully for many years, did not understand the viciousness of Archbishop Apuron's email and responded: "I am deeply hurt that you would accuse me of disobeying you and that I was creating nonsense..." 

Remember, all this happened on December 6, 2011. 

And now we see the incredible LIE that all this was.

All this berating and threatening by the Archbishop and the Vicar General of Mr. Untalan. All this saying that the issue was not to be discussed "until I come home". All this bull-crap from the Vicar General about their meeting being a "vulnus" against the bishop.

It was all an incredible lie and pure evil that was dumped on Mr. Untalan, because on November 22, 2011, two weeks before their mutual berating and bullying of Mr. Untalan, and unbeknownst to Mr. Untalan...

Archbishop Apuron had already assigned the old Accion Hotel property to RMS. 

In a DECREE OF DESIGNATION, notarized on November 22, 2011 and recorded at Land Management the same day, Archbishop Apuron decreed the following:

I DECREE TO DESIGNATE, ASSIGN, EARMARK AND OTHERWISE SET ASIDE THE PROPERTY SITUATED AT 130 CHALAN SEMINARIU IN YLIG BAY, YONA, GUAM - its legal description, as set forth fully below and incorporated herewith by this reference - TO THE REDEMPTORIS MATER ARCHDIOCESAN MISSIONARY SEMINARY OF GUAM, A NON-PROFT CORPORATION WITH THE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER #66-0626432, IN PERPETUAL USE AS A SEE OF THE REDEMPTORIS MATER ARCHDIOCESAN MISSIONARY SEMINARY OF GUAM AND FOR THE BLESSED DIEGO LUIS DE SAN VITORES CATHOLIC THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF OCEANIA. 

See the RMS Deed Restriction and Decree of Designation here.

Note that Archbishop Apuron gives control of the 40 to 75 million dollar property to an entity controlled by the leadership of the Neocatechumenal Way for PERPETUAL USE. This means that the Archdiocese of Agana, that's us, has lost this valuable asset forever. 

Even though the title remains under the Archdiocese of Agana, it can never be used for anything other than a seminary for the Neocatechumenal Way. And not only can it never be used for anything else, but because control of the property is assigned "in perpetuity" to a corporate entity which is NOT the Archdiocese of Agana, it can never be used even as collateral or accounted among the archdiocese's assets. 

So while schools struggle to stay open and churches have to do bake sales to fix leaky roofs and Msgr. James gets dragged through the mud for owing a few bucks on a loan, Archbishop Apuron hands over a deca-million dollar portion of our patrimony to his neo-masters for-freaking-ever and for-freaking-NOTHING.

Thank you, Archbishop Apuron and Msgr. David C. Quitugua. 

Thank you for crapping on us. 

On January 11, 2012,  Mr. Untalan and the other three members of the AFC who opposed the transfer (or assignment) of the property (Msgr. James Benavente, Joseph E. Rivera, and Sr. Stephen Torres), received a letter from the Arch-Deceiver, terminating their positions on the AFC. 

Thank you Richard J. Untalan, Msgr. James Benavente, Joseph E. Rivera, and Sister Stephen. Thank you for standing up to this evil though it resulted in false accusations against you and dirty, ugly remarks from the Archbishop and his Vicar General. Thank you for doing what was right. 

For Joseph Rivera and Richard Untalan, it was simply back to their private sector lives and on with work and life. For Sister Stephen, it was simply a quiet return to her convent and life as a nun. But for Msgr. James Benavente, the HELL for his opposition to Apuron's evil betrayal was just beginning.

And on July 25, 2014, it would come. 

And so our dear Visitors, today's news story in the Pacific Daily News says: Vatican officials to hear concerns.

Will you? Will you hear our concerns? Will you take us seriously? Because if you will not hear them, if you will not HEAR US, then you will READ about them in the papers for a long time to come. 

* On November 27, 2011, the archdiocesan legal counsel, not knowing himself that control of the property had already been deeded away, opined to the AFC: "...'alienation' and 'assignment' are words of distinction without a difference. Any documents containing these words would place a huge cloud on title to real property which would result in a protracted litigation and prohibitive cost to remove such cloud. Do you really want to risk title to the property conservatively valued at 75 million dollars?"