THE CONTINUING SAD DEMISE OF ONCE RESPECTED PEOPLE

On December 29, 2015, Director of Land Management, Michael Borja, wrote Attorney General, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, asking her to file a petition in the Superior Court of Guam to correct four certificates of title issued in error. 

He noted “..the process to correct these certificates of title requires a judicial proceeding which is why we seek your service."

Read that again: “..the process to correct these certificates of title requires a judicial proceeding which is why we seek your service."  

See full document here

The next day, Borja wrote Sandra Miller, Governor Calvo's legal counsel, advising her of the errors and reaffirming that the "Errors can only be corrected by a judicial petition."

BORJA DIGS DEEPER INTO THE PIUS PUSS

Go here for PDF copy

On March 28, 2016, Director of Land Management, Michael Borja, sent a letter to Attorney General Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson saying:

On December 29, 2015, I sought legal assistance on a matter concerning the correction of Department of Land Management issued certificates of title for four properties in Yona where an instrument was missing after the titles were recorded. In response, on March 15, 2016, I received instructions from your Solicitor Division on a remedy for the situation and immediately executed the prescribed action.."

Seriously, Mr. Borja, what are you trying to do? Are you trying to fool us like the fools on the hill? Have you become a BIG LIAR just like them?

This letter to the Attorney General is designed to make us think that the AG did not answer you until March 15 and that the only advice you got in response to your Dec. 29 letter was from the "Solicitor Division." 

Bull___!

PANTS ON FIRE

If I may have KUAM's leave, I would like to copy in full Ken Quintanilla's excellent news report before sharing my comments.

Posted: Mar 21, 2016 3:17 PMUpdated: Mar 21, 2016 5:03 PM

By Ken Quintanilla

While thousands of the island's faithful observe Holy Week, controversy has risen over efforts to address a certificate of title for the multimillion dollar property in Yona under the Archbishop of Agana.

"I want to see the right thing done," stated Bob Klitzkie. But apparently that's not the case as the former senator continues to raise concern over issues with the Redemptoris Mater Seminary in Yona. Klitzkie claims there's a "bogus" certificate of title that needs to be addressed for the multimillion dollar property. Klitzkie has sent several letters and even issued a Freedom of Information Act request related to the matter, saying, "After the inspection that had been scheduled for Thursday (March 17) didn't happen because I was stiffed. I got a letter the next day from the director of Land Management telling me the documents he had said he had done in his letter of January 20 did not exist," he added.

According to a January 20 letter from DLM director Michael Borja, in consultation with their legal counsel and the Attorney General of Guam, a person of interest or the registrar is required to petition the court to correct the certificate of title and in this case the memorial which had been entered in error. He says in that same letter that the petition had been prepared and forwarded to the AG with instructions for the petition. Klitzkie requested for the petition however the DLM director responded to the FOIA, saying that there was none.

"Given the director's lack of candor throughout this whole matter after January 20 strains my credulity, I'll say this: the certificate of title finally has the memorial on it that should have been on it on the 30th of October when it was released by Michael Borja's deputy, but the certificate of title was not promulgated in accordance in direction with the attorney general of Guam Elizabeth Barrett Anderson who said you correct errors by petitioning the superior court. She didn't say you correct errors by sitting down with Attorney Jackie Terlaje and figure out some other way to come up with something that has the right stuff in the paper but the paper itself is not properly promulgated," he explained.

In response, Borja tells KUAM News that this is a civil issue between the two parties of interest, which are DLM and the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole. With the petition, he says one was prepared in draft but it was never submitted, executed or filed in the court because the two parties were able to meet and correct the error together. Borja says this is actually based on guidance from counsel and advice from the AG's Office as well.

Klitzkie in the meantime says while the DLM director has been playing "hide the ball" in terms of transparency, he wants to see an end to this situation.

KUAM News sent an email to the Attorney General's Office on the matter but we have yet to get a response.

*****

Now, let's compare what Michael Borja, Director of Land Management, told KUAM on March 21 vs. what he told Bob Klitzkie on January 20:

MARCH 21 TO KUAM

In response, Borja tells KUAM News that this is a civil issue between the two parties of interest, which are DLM and the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole. With the petition, he says one was prepared in draft but it was never submitted, executed or filed in the court because the two parties were able to meet and correct the error together. Borja says this is actually based on guidance from counsel and advice from the AG's Office as well.

JANUARY 20 TO BOB KLITZKIE (copy of letter here)

In a follow-up to your referenced letter, I have consulted with the Department of Land Management’s legal counsel and with the Attorney General of Guam regarding a remedy to correct a certificate of title which a memorial had been entered in error. Based on their advice and in accordance with Title 29, Guam Code Annotated, §29195, a person of interest or the registrar is required to petition the court to correct a certificate of title. 

Accordingly, the department, specifically the Ex Officio Registrar of Titles, has prepared and forwarded a petition, and other associated documents, to the Office of the Attorney General of Guam with instructions for the petition to be filed in the Superior Court of Guam in an effort to correct the certificates of title mentioned in your letter.

Let's summarize it:

• On March 21 Michael Borja told KUAM that he prepared a petition "in draft" but never submitted it.

• Two months earlier, on January 20, he put in writing to Bob Klitzkie that he, Michael Borja, the Ex Officio Registrar of Titles, "has prepared and forwarded a petition and other associated documents, to the Office of the Attorney General of Guam with instructions for the petition to be filed in the Superior Court of Guam..."

Now, let's look at some other things Michael Borja said:

"In response, Borja tells KUAM News that this is a civil issue between the two parties of interest, which are DLM and the Archbishop of Agana corporation sole."

This is absolutely OPPOSITE to what Michael Borja told Bob Klitzkie on January 20. In his letter to Bob Klitzike, Michael Borja informed Mr. Klitzkie that the Attorney General herself, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson, NOT the "Office" of the Attorney General, had instructed him to "petition the court to correct (the) certificate of title" as per Title 21*, Guam Code Annotated §29195.

*Borja wrote "Title 29" in his letter to Klitzkie, but there is no Title 29. The section referred to is actually found in Title 21.

Obviously the Attorney General, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson did NOT permit for the matter to be resolved privately "between the two parties of interest" but that the matter be resolved as per Guam Law before the Superior Court. 

Then there is this:

"Borja says this is actually based on guidance from counsel and advice from the AG's Office as well."

The "AG's Office" is NOT the AG. The AG is Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson. The "AG's Office could be the receptionist for that matter. So why does Michael Borja now refer to the fictive entity "the AG's Office" and not the actual "Attorney General" as he told Mr. Klitzkie in his January 20 letter?

The short answer is that instead of taking the guidance given him by the actual AG, he took the guidance of one Kristan Finney, who is NOT the AG, but an Assistant AG, and of course is in "the AG's Office." But of course Mr. Borja does not want to say that he acted "based on guidance from the Assistant AG" when he already put in writing that he had acted on the guidance given him by the actual AG.

The real question though is WHOSE guidance did Kristan Finney act on? Obviously it was not the AG herself. We already know the answer, don't we. As memorialized in a letter from Mr. Klitzkie to Mr. Borja, Attorney Finney herself told Mr. Klitzkie that she had to "sit down with her and see what could be worked out." 

We know now that the "her" is Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje. And Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje had a VERY GOOD REASON for NOT wanting a judge to lay eyes on the contested document: the Declaration of Deed Restriction, recorded by Archbishop Apuron at Land Management on November 22, 2011, and very quietly so. In fact, so quiet, no one knew about it until it was uncovered THREE YEARS later.

Apparently Archbishop Apuron did not want anyone to lay eyes on it either. 

Why?

Well, in case you've been wondering like "what's the big deal," well you shall soon have the answer to your question. You shall soon know why Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje, who just so happens to be, along with her husband, a "co-responsible" for the Neocatechumenal community in which Archbishop Apuron is "one of the brothers," had to find a way to keep that document out of court.

Obviously, Ms. Finney and Atty. Jacqueline T. Terlaje "worked something out." 

ARCHDIOCESE FINALLY ADMITS THAT THE DECLARATION OF DEED RESTRICTION WAS "IN FAVOR OF" RMS!

I wonder how Mr. Michael Borja is feeling today? I wonder if he knows that he is the latest casualty in the ongoing circus to cover Brother Tony's ass.

Harsh words you say? Good. I mean them to be. 

Let's review.

Today's Umatuna says: 

"...the Director of Land Management and Registrar of Titles, Michael Borja, determined that the proper way to proceed with the memorialization was to cancel the former Certificates of Title…which did not include the Declaration of Deed Restriction, and issue new Certificates of Title."

So, Mr. Borja, apparently DETERMINED that "the proper way to proceed" was to ignore the legal direction given him by the Attorney General of Guam, Elizabeth Barrett-Anderson? Here, let me quote Mr. Borja's own words in his January 20 letter to Bob Klitzkie:

"I have consulted with the Department of Land Management’s legal counsel and with the Attorney General of Guam regarding a remedy to correct a certificate of title which a memorial had been entered in error. Based on their advice and in accordance with Title 29, Guam Code Annotated, §29195, a person of interest or the registrar is required to petition the court to correct a certificate of title."

Let's review that last part: "the registrar IS REQUIRED TO PETITION THE COURT." Instead Mr. Borja apparently ignored the direction of the Attorney General of Guam, damned the petition to the court, and hauled off and CANCELED the previous certificates, and then made new ones. 

The question is: DID MR. BORJA HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CANCEL THOSE CERTIFICATES? In other words, did Mr. Borja act outside his authority? And if he did, then he has put his entire career and personal good name at risk. And more importantly, why did he ignore the advice of the Attorney General?

As already mentioned in QUESTIONS FOR KRISTAN, the subsection of the Guam Code used by Mr. Borja at the recommendation of the Assistant Attorney General, Kristan Finney, makes NO provision for the cancelation of certificates of title. 

This could be tragic for Mr. Borja. But it's nothing new. Mr. Borja will be just the latest piece of meat thrown into the people-grinder by the neo-machine that has trashed Fr. Paul's good name, Msgr. James' good name, Bertha Evangelista's good name, Aaron Quitugua's priestly future, and now possibly the good name and future of Mr. Borja. 

And those are just the names of the people we know. There are so many lives which have been trampled on in the name of the almighty Kiko Arguello, in the name of this money laundering, land grabbing, power usurping, grotesque syndicate masquerading as a religious movement. 

Oh, and then there's this:

"While dissenters and opposers of the Archbishop have claimed that the now cancelled certificates of title were 'bogus', the Department of Land Management diligently acted to address the concerns over the memorialization."

Hmmmm. "Diligently acted??? It's been FOUR AND A HALF MONTHS since the false certificate of title was issued by Deputy Registrar and THREE AND A HALF MONTHS since the false certificate was printed in the Umatuna. "Diligently acted"??? And then only action AFTER nearly three months of letters, phone calls, meetings, and document inspections by Bob Klitzkie, half of which were ignored. And then still, action only came after a couple weeks of a "shaming" by Klitzkie in the media.

I am really sorry to have to question Mr. Borja like this. I was told he was one of the good guys. In fact, while it may not seem like it, I still believe he is. You see, I know how evil the Neocatechumenal Way can be. I've seen how it has twisted and maimed poor Brother Tony and left him a laughing stock. I've seen how it has turned roman collars into dog collars attached to chains held and jerked by Pius the Putrid.

And speaking of Pius the Putrid, let us now turn our attention to the BIG LIE that is sadly named Umatuna.

Let's look again at this statement and pay attention to the highlighted words:

 "...the Director of Land Management and Registrar of Titles, Michael Borja, determined that the proper way to proceed with the memorialization was to cancel the former Certificates of Title…which did not include the Declaration of Deed Restriction, and issue new Certificates of Title."

And now let's look at the Certificate of Title which was CANCELED:

OOPS! Well, what do you know! There it is! The Declaration of Deed Restriction. What? Wait a minute. The fools on the hill just told us that Mr. Borja, CANCELED the "certificates of title...which did NOT include the Declaration of Deed Restriction."

But there it is! The Declaration of Deed Restriction with the big stamp "CANCELED" and Mr. Borja's signature underneath it.

Let's do this again, because these people on the hill do not even know how to LIE right, so here it is:

• They said that Mr. Borja canceled the certificates of title which did NOT include the Declaration of Deed Restriction. 

• But Mr. Borja canceled the certificates of title which DID include the Declaration of Deed Restriction. 

Now let me help everyone out here.

You see, the false certificate published in the Umatuna on 11/29/15 did NOT include the Declaration of Deed Restriction.

But the certificate stamped CANCELED did have it:

So where was this copy with Declaration memorialized on it?  Why lookee here. It was with Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje all along, ever since December 15, 2015 when it was sent to Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje by Teresita Toves, the assistant to Mr. Santos. See the evidence here.

So this means that Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje, P.C., since she had the "corrected" version as of 12/15/15,  KNEW that the copy of the certificate published in the Umatuna was false and apparently DID NOTHING about it since we saw no updated version published in the Umatuna.

But NOW, here's the big one. Let's look at the canceled certificate:

Note that the Declaration is "in favor of": Archbishop of Agana, A Corp. Sole, Anthony S. Apuron, Ofm Cap D.D., Incumbent.

Do you remember that fake press release that Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje, P.C. sent out last November 17? If not here it is. Go ahead and read it. 

Here's how Attorney Jacqueline T. Terlaje, P.C. describes the Declaration:

 "...the declaration declares that the Archbishop of Agana, A Corporate Sole, is the “Owner” of the property, imposing on itself a restriction."

Ah, you see, how nice. The Archbishop was only imposing a restriction on himself. 

Really? 

If the Archbishop was only imposing a restriction on himself (or itself since the Archbishop of Agana is an office), then there is NO NEED to record a document at Land Management, is there? He only needed to do a decree. 

But in fact, just as Apuron, David, Adrian, and Pius the Putrid have been lying to us, it appears Jacque Terlaje was doing the same, because now the truth comes out in the March 15 certificate:

Ah, you see. The Declaration is NOT "in favor of" the Archbishop of Agana, a Corporate Sole, Anthony S. Apuron etc. etc. etc. Incumbent. The Declaration -as we have been saying all along - is 

IN FAVOR OF RMS!

And now to the conclusion. 

The certificate of March 15, 2016, shows that the Declaration of Deed Restriction is "in favor of" RMS. What does this mean? 

First, it means that RMS is recognized as a legal entity apart from the Archbishop of Agana, a Corporate Sole - which is why The Diana could never produce the documents showing that RMS was a Corporate Sole as she claimed. There is only one Corporate Sole and that is the Archbishop of Agana. RMS, as the new certificate demonstrates, is a legal entity separate from the Archbishop of Agana. 

Second, the "in favor of" means just that. The Declaration acts "in favor of" RMS. But what is the "favor"? The favor is in the language of the Declaration:

As you can see, the Owner "covenants and declares that the Property is and shall be held, used, transferred, sold and conveyed.." Folks, you can't get much clearer than that. The title of the document is deceptive, pretending only to be a "restriction" and only a "declaration." But when you use the words "sold and conveyed," ummmmm, well, folks, this property is GONE. 

For those who want a detailed explanation of this, see the Legal Opinion by Attorney Jacques Bronze.

We'll get to the part about "subject to the covenants and restrictions" in a minute. Let's now look at the language following the word "Declaration." 

As you can see, RMS is identified as a Non-Profit Corporation (not a Corporate Sole) distinct from the Archdiocese of Agana and distinct from the Archbishop of Agana because the Declaration refers to RMS as its own "SEE" which is an ecclesiastical jurisdiction. So the property is forever ("perpetual use) given to a "SEE" separate from the Archdiocese of Agana.

Now to the "subject to the covenants and restrictions." 

As you can see the only "restriction" is that it remain in use by a corporation currently named Redemptoris Mater Seminary. It does not specify that it must be used as a seminary, only that it be used by RMS, Inc. 

And guess what? There is already talk about moving the seminarians out of there and turning it back into a hotel since Guam has a shortage of hotel rooms and RMS is broke anyway. 

And guess what else? 

All the revenues generated by Hotel RMS will go to the Neocatechumenal Way via the corporate person of RMS, Inc, a corporation completely controlled by Giuseppe and Claudia Gennarini, Angelo Poschetti, and one Anthony S. Apuron, himself, personally, bishop or no bishop. 

Hmmm. "Hotel RMS." Like the Neocatechumenal Way, "you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave!"