By Tim Rohr
Troy Torres (Kandit News) gives his take on Apuron's "victory video." At the end of the video, Troy says he "can't imagine what caused Apuron to make that video." It's not hard when you ask "WHO caused Apuron to make that video?" Answering that question tells you everything you need to do who the real danger is.
By Tim Rohr
Buried in Apuron's scripted drivel of May 7, 2025, is a not so thinly veiled reference of WHO Apuron (or more precisely, his puppet masters) is aiming at...once again.
Hmmm. I wonder who he is talking about? It's not hard. There is only one priest who Apuron has always been green with envy of. Apuron did everything he could to destroy him 10 years ago, and his lawyer did too.
In 2017, Apuron's puppet masters went to the Neo-rag "La Stampa" and did a hit piece on me and the priest.
In 2012, a blog called “Jungle Watch” was created online, attacking Archbishop Apuron and the Neocatechumenal Way, accusing them of manipulating the prelate and “colonizing” the entire Agaña diocese. The site is managed by Tim Rohr, a real estate agent employed by Msgr. Benavente and involved in the projected sale of the seminary.
Really? We are supposed to believe that an Italian newspaper heard about our little ruckus in Guam and investigated? Nope. Somebody fed that story to them. And I think we all can guess who.
Note: The "trained lawyer" is quoted at length in the story, and the author of the story, Salvatore Cernuzio, is a Neocat:
https://www.instagram.com/cernusalvo/p/BIDz_zSD5AP/?hl=en
https://www.instagram.com/cernusalvo/p/BIkh_goDHC7/?hl=en
https://www.instagram.com/cernusalvo/p/BiYyIzpDwWv/?hl=en&img_index=1
And by the way, there were no posts about Apuron until the Fr. Paul Gofigan thing blew up in July 2013 (not 2012). And even then, there were no "attacks," there were posts about what was already in the news. The only "attacking" would come from Apuron and his in-house freaks: Adrian and Edivaldo.
While I might be a real estate agent, I was NOT employed by Msgr. Benavente as one. I was managing the gift shop. But you see, Apuron's little puppet masters needed something to explain why stories about Apuron in JW, by Sep. 21, 2017, the date the La Stampa story was published, were getting tens of thousands of views and comments.
Apuron's puppet masters needed a motive for Tim Rohr to be doing what he was doing. So they made up the story about my being "involved in the projected sale of the seminary"...for the purposes of selling to a Chinese gambling interest. Here's more from the La Stampa story:
Everything began in 2002, when a group of Chinese entrepreneurs first laid eyes on the Accion Hotel in Yona, built as a Japanese resort in 2000 but which soon ended up in bankruptcy and set among 20 hectares of seaside property. When it first opened, the property was valued at between $60-80 million. David Lujan, their local lawyer, was authorized to offer $5 million for the site. The idea was to transform the hotel into a grand casino; this was part of a larger strategical project aiming at turning the island of Guam into a “Las Vegas of the Pacific” which would attract gamblers from China, Russia, Japan and Korea.
In later news stories, Apuron (his attorney actually) kept up the "casino" story, and, as you can see, in his little "I am innocent" speech of May 7, 2025, Apuron returns to it.
Apuron knows he's guilty as hell. The Vatican said so. The pope said so. The new archbishop said so. So, as I have continued to infer, this is not about Apuron. This is about fixing the black eye the Neocats got here in Guam. No seminary in the Neocat world had ever been closed...until it was closed by Archbishop Byrnes (and you see what they did to him).
It's a long shot at this point for the Neocats to ever restore a seminary in Guam, however, to the rest of the world's bishops where they are and where they are trying to expand, they need a story to explain what happened in Guam.
So even though they'll never restore Apuron, they can keep going with the story about how he was railroaded by "Tim Rohr and his associates" who "orchestrated" a conspiracy against poor Apuron which led to the closing of their seminary and all the bad press.
Never mind that the Vatican sent a delegation to Guam to directly investigate Apuron. Never mind that the court of the First Instance, a Vatican tribunal, found Apuron guilty. Never mind that the court of the Second Instance, an appeal personally overseen by Pope Francis, upheld Apuron's guilty verdict. Never mind any of that. "Look over here. Look at us. Look at all the pretty things we are doing." That's what they are saying to the bishops. And you can bet they are playing up the voluntary dismissals as a verdict of "innocent."
We know that they are doing this because the La Stampa story was recently repeated in a story that was curiously aimed at preventing Cardinal Tagle from ascending to the papal throne: "Tagle, the cardinal who loves casinos." The date says everything: May 6, 2025. One day before Apuron took to the cameras to repeat his casino theme and one day before the conclave convened.
When you read the Tagle story, you will see the coordination between whoever was behind that story and Apuron's references the very next day to a certain priest and this priest's alleged connections to "powerful people and corrupt regimes." Apuron had not said this before. But in his May 7 victory speech, it comes at the very end and most pointed part of his talk. He - or rather his handlers - is aiming at someone specific. And for a reason.
But why are the Neocats shooting at Tagle?
Two reasons. One, Tagle hugely embarrassed them back in 2014 when the Neocat puppet masters were shouting about how their "initiators" (Kiko and Carmen) had been invited to Manila by Tagle. It, like everything they do and say, turned out to be a lie. And a letter, personally written by Tagle saying so, showed up on JungleWatch in a story titled NOW CLICK HERE.
The attack on Tagle by the Neocats is easy to trace. I just did a stat search on JW for the most viewed posts in the last 90 days, and guess which one is Number 1?
Really? Over 1000 views of an 11 year old post? Oh, and then suddenly a hit piece on Tagle one day before the conclave...with a reference by Apuron the very next day?
It's well known (in some circles) that Apuron hated Tagle. Back in the day,Tagle was just a young priest leading retreats for the clergy of the Archdiocese of Agana in Tagaytay, Philippines, a place that became immortalized on JungleWatch after Apuron, at a retreat there in May 2014, talked filth about Fr. Paul. See TANGO IN TAGYTAY.
Tagle was a young priest when Apuron and the boys first started going to Tagaytay for their annual retreats. And of course Apuron was a high and mighty Archbishop, but also a red-hat (Cardinal) wannabe. And Tagle beat him to it.
Worse (for Apuron), Tagle and Msgr. Benavente became friends. That's because that's what Msgr. Benavente does: make friends. And he makes friends because he's friendly. Apuron didn't make friends because he wasn't friendly.
But on to the second reason. Had Tagle ascended to the Chair of Peter, there's a good chance Msgr. Benavente, might have gone along with him in some capacity. And that would make Benavente harder to shoot at. And they desperately want to shoot at him...and me.
More to come.
Here's Cardinal Tagle's letter:
Most of the views have been of old Apuron stories from several years ago.
LINK to online version
In this column, I have three topics: The Apuron Fiasco, The New Pope, and, on a happy note, Mother’s Day.
The Apuron Fiasco
After nearly ten years (and little to no action), Apuron’s accusers (the plaintiffs) voluntarily dismissed their complaints. From the news reports, it appeared they were convinced to do so by their attorney because - as their attorney was reported to have said - Apuron had “very little financial resources.”
As this was a civil liability case and not a criminal case, and Apuron had no money to sue for, there was no point in continuing the case. In fact, it’s safe to speculate that the plaintiffs agreed with the dismissal out of mercy towards Apuron since they were constantly told that he was too old and sickly to continue.
But being “old and sickly” didn’t keep Apuron from immediately running to a camera to slam his accusers and proclaim the dismissals as evidence of his innocence - even though the cases were never about his guilt or innocence, only his liability.
Archbishop Jimenez jumped on the matter right away. In a letter to clergy a couple days after Apuron’s video victory romp, Jimenez put the slap down on Apuron stating: “our counsel has confirmed that a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) does not operate as an adjudication about the merits of a particular case.” In other words, nothing was proved, either way.
More importantly, Jimenez reaffirmed the Vatican’s clear verdict on Apuron in a true innocent or guilty trial: “…it remains the fact that on 07 February 2019, he was found guilty of committing abuse against minors…Nothing about that determination has changed.”
Actually, Apuron was first found guilty on March 13, 2018, but the verdict only stated that he was found guilty of “certain accusations.” After Apuron lost his appeal, Pope Francis personally clarified the verdict: “guilty of delicts against the Sixth Commandment with minors.
I’d like to say “end of story,” but it’s not. The story is about far more than just Apuron who has always been nothing more than a puppet in this horror show. It remains to be seen what the new Archbishop will do about the puppet masters.
The New Pope
Everyone who bet on this election lost. No one expected this guy. And for sure no one expected an American. Given the surprise, some believe it was a posthumous Francis punch at Trump.
There could be some truth to that given that Francis had appointed nearly two-thirds of the cardinals who elected the American, a man Francis had personally and rapidly promoted to the top of the Vatican apparatus in a very few years.
I won’t speculate further. I’ll just copy here what I posted on Facebook when I learned of the election:
“It doesn’t matter who the pope is. His only job and the only authority he has is to protect the deposit of faith as handed down by Jesus through the apostles. He can’t change a thing in that regard. That’s what Jesus meant when he promised “the gates of hell will not prevail.” And we certainly have had some popes who were right out of hell. So go on with your life and be concerned for your salvation and the salvation of your family.”
Mother’s Day
My brother Albert, a year younger than me, died in 1989. He and my mom were very close. Since his death she has often shared how she gets little messages from him, little awareness-es, you might say. Many of you who have lost a loved one, especially a child, know what I'm talking about.
In 2009, I sent my mom (who lives in California) a dozen roses for Mother's Day. My mom received two packages of roses, both from the same company, both sent from me. However, I had only ordered one package. She called to let me know. I checked my billing. I had only been charged for one. Apparently the flower company, FTD, had made an error.
However, the second package had 13 roses, not 12. Even if FTD had made a mistake and sent an extra order of a "dozen" roses, it is quite unlikely that they would have made the additional error of adding an extra rose. But it was in fact 13 roses, and "no one" had ordered them.
Albert was born on the 13th of November and died at age 31. Another message from heaven? We'd like to think so.
Happy Mother's Day.
Tim Rohr has resided in Guam since 1987. He has raised a family of 11 children, owned several businesses, and is active in local issues via his blog, JungleWatch.info, letters to local publications, and occasional public appearances. He may be contacted at timrohr.guam@gmail.com
By Tim Rohr
If I were Apuron's attorney, I would not have let him make a public statement after his accusers dismissed their complaints and here's why.
Few people understand the whole picture, and even fewer would have understood the complexities of what a voluntary dismissal by a plaintiff means under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
On the surface, as the initial news reports demonstrated, and why the plaintiffs' attorney needed to make a clarification, it appeared that the accusations against Apuron had been proven false and the cases were dismissed.
Had Apuron not said anything, at least not right away, more and more people would have accepted the first impression that the cases were dropped because they were proven false. It's a long shot, but he might have gained some traction with public opinion and maybe made some headway in getting his Vatican sentence lightened up if not overturned.
But no, Jacque the trained lawyer, immediately trotted the "too old and sickly to testify" Apuron out in front of the cameras, looking all spry and chipper, and had him run off at the mouth about his innocence while taking shots at his accusers, the media, public opinion, and anything or anyone else he could shoot at.
Obviously this provoked an avalanche of counter-fire from JungleWatch, which averages approximately 8,000 views per day (there will be more this month), but more importantly it provoked a damning letter from the current Archbishop who functionally put Apuron back in the Vatican jailhouse and reminded everybody of why Apuron was kicked out of here in the first place:
A really dumb move.
By Tim Rohr
 |
| Apuron at the Vatican, after he ran away from Guam in 2016 |
In light of what Apuron is claiming (his innocence), let us review what he claimed on April 4, 2019, after Pope Francis personally upheld his guilty verdict by the Vatican court.
My comments in red, and all emphases added.
LINK to original copy.
+++++
April 4, 2019
PRESS RELEASE
Statement of Archbishop Anthony Sablan Apuron, OFM Cap. D.D.
I am deeply saddened by the decision of the Holy Father to confirm the decision of the court of first instance. I lodged an appeal against that decision last year because I am innocent and the sentence of the court of first instance had vindicated me declaring non credible the majority of the charges made against me: I believe that the facts and evidence presented demonstrated my total innocence.
Here is what the court of the first instance found on March 13, 2018:
The Apostolic Tribunal of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, composed of five judges, has issued its sentence of first instance, finding the accused guilty of certain of the accusations and imposing upon the accused the penalties of privation of office and prohibition of residence in the Archdiocese of Guam.Apuron and his supporters have consistently claimed that because the court did not specifically state "sex abuse of minors," that Apuron was not found guilty of that crime. However, whatever "certain of the accusations" means, it was serious enough to deprive him of his office and prohibit him from residing in Guam - forever. So whatever he did, it was obviously very serious.
Of course we know what he did, because upon Pope Francis upholding Apuron's guilty verdict, Francis clearly stated what Apuron was guilty of:
...the Tribunal of Second Instance upheld the sentence of First Instance finding the Archbishop guilty of delicts against the Sixth Commandment with minors.Moreover, in addition to privation of office and prohibition from residing in Guam, the Pope went on to add an additional penalty:
...the perpetual prohibition from using the insignia attached to the rank of Bishop.
Yet, Apuron wants us to believe that the first Vatican tribunal and then the Pope are wrong. And he still wants us to believe given his little speech the other day after his accusers decided to dismiss their complaints after ten years of going nowhere.
In fact, it's quite a slap in the face to them. They were told for ten years how old and sickly Apuron was and how he couldn't even sit for a single deposition, so it's quite possible out of mercy that they dropped their cases. And then immediately Apuron runs to the cameras, not looking old or sickly at all, proclaims his innocence (again), and slams the very people who showed him mercy. But that's Apuron.
It's also quite possible that the court of the first instance, out of reserve and mercy for Apuron, did not detail the exact crimes Apuron had been found guilty of. And of course, Apuron right away ran to the cameras saying that this was evidence of his innocence. Apuron's complete disregard for the mercy the first court showed him is probably why Francis made the reason for the guilty verdict very clear upon the failure of Apuron's appeal.
In addition to the pattern of contradictions evident in the accusations laid against me, my hopes for a successful appeal were supported by what I considered to be definitive new evidence which illustrated what I have always asserted to be a coordinated campaign against me.
As the primary "coordinator" of the alleged "campaign," I can tell you yes, it became a "coordinated campaign." I detailed the whole thing in a series I titled "Orchestrated."
The short version is this. After Apuron kicked Fr. Paul Gofigan out of his parish, and then Msgr. James Benavente, a man living in San Francisco named John Toves publicly claimed that Apuron had sexually molested a relative. As that story gained traction, others who Apuron had sexually abused began to wake up.
After Roy Quintanilla came forward to accuse Apuron, the news got to a woman living in Arizona who used to live in Agat, Guam, and whose son, on his deathbed, told her that Apuron had raped him. The woman, Doris Concepcion, made the story known to the press whereupon Apuron, on May 31, 2016, threatened to sue me, Doris, and anyone else involved in exposing his crimes:
Therefore, the Archdiocese of Agana is in the process of taking canonical and legal measures against those perpetrating these malicious lies. (Archdiocese of Agana, Press Release, May 31, 2016)This is when things started to get coordinated. We had no legal protections against Apuron, and he had the money of the archdiocese to crush us. So we began working on legislation that would allow us to fight back. That legislation became the public law lifting the civil statute of limitations on the sex abuse of minors which was enacted in September 2016.
By then Apuron had already run away and been hiding for months. The problem escalated when the guy Rome sent to run things, Archbishop Savio Hon, who worked for Cardinal Fernando Filoni, a Neocat cardinal, mocked Apuron's accusers - in a clear attempt to save the Neocatechumenal Way in Guam. At that point, the late-Senator Bob Klitzkie got involved and developed the legislation to include institutional liability, which was critical to attracting lawyers to the case.
So yah, it was "coordinated," but not from the start. Every time Apuron made a move, beginning with his treatment of Gofigan, there was an "equal and opposite reaction." Apuron, per his recent video, is still making those moves and provoking ever more "equal and opposite reactions," if only, at this point, my reminding everyone of just how terrible this man was...and still is.
The pontifical secret prevents me from litigating my good name in public, but I wish to take this opportunity to offer my deepest thanks to the many individuals who have privately and publicly come forward in my defense, despite threats and the climate of fear on my beloved home of Guam. This climate, - shown by the local media, - which hampered the work of the court of first instance, testifies to the presence of a pressure group that plotted to destroy me, and which has made itself clearly known even to authorities in Rome. Several persons have told me - with great pain and fear and asking me not to reveal their names - they had been asked to make allegations against me, even offered money.
So pathetic. This man is either Evil Incarnate or he is sick, very mentally sick. Out of charity, I'll assume the latter. Apuron has had no problem over the years "litigating (his) good name in public." In fact, if there really was a "pontifical secret" in place, he could not have even written this very statement where he proclaims his innocence immediately after being found guilty for the second time by Pope Francis himself.
If there really were threats, a climate of fear, a pressure group that plotted to destroy him, and people who were offered money to make allegations against him, then now's your moment Mr. Apuron. Now's your moment. There is no more legal action in either the church or the civil courts, so you are free to name names. So why aren't you? Because you're a liar.
Child sexual abuse is an abhorrent crime that cries to heaven for vengeance. The desperate need for justice and compassion for the survivors is fundamental. So too is the urgent need to fight this evil always and everywhere through a transparent and courageous search for the truth.
LOL. I sure hope Apuron is truly mentally ill, because otherwise this statement is a sacrilege which itself "cries to heaven for vengeance."
The sentence of the Holy Father concludes my search for justice in the canonical forum: I owe His Holiness my obedience as a bishop, priest and son of the Church. I totally submit to the judgment of the Holy Father as I thank him for allowing me to continue serving as a priest and archbishop without insignia. This sentence exiles me from my beloved Guam: a penalty analogous to a death sentence for me. I lose my homeland, my family, my church, my people, even my language, and I remain alone in complete humiliation, old and in failing health.
Oh boo-hoo. Alone, old, and in failing health. Well here we are six years later and he looks just fine on his little personal TV station. He's being well cared for by his Neocat brethren. That was the deal from the outset. And he DID NOT "totally submit to the judgment of the Holy Father." If he did, he would not have immediately released this statement which functionally states that the Holy Father is WRONG.
I offer this suffering for the Holy Father: may the Lord guide him at this difficult time at the helm of the Church; I offer my suffering to my accusers and to those who have plotted for my removal: may the Lord fill them with everything they want and pray - Father, forgive them for they do not know what they do.
Oh, here we go again with Apuron mocking Jesus on the cross. And by the way, we did know what we did. Because we know what YOU DID.
I hope that one day new witnesses, who have been prevented from coming forward by the atmosphere of fear and intimidation, will yet fully vindicate my name. I also pray for my accusers and for those who have plotted against me. We will each meet before that final tribunal where the full truth will be laid bare before the Supreme Judge.
The only atmosphere of fear and intimidation - and this is on the record - was coming from Apuron who constantly threatened to sue us. And, as I already said, now's your time, Mr. Apuron. Now's your opportunity to bring forth those "new witnesses." I recommend you do it before you get to the Supreme Judge yourself.
I pray unceasingly for the Holy Church and I look forward to the justice that awaits me beyond this valley of tears: when I awake I will be satisfied with your face, oh Lord.
You'll see justice alright. And we didn't see any tears in your video.
By Tim Rohr
By Tim Rohr
Apuron's recent pathetic claim to "innocence" after the civil cases against him were voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs is made all the more stupid by the fact that guilt and innocence can only be adjudicated in criminal cases, and these were not criminal cases. They were civil liability cases.
The 2016 statute that permitted legal action against Apuron was a law that lifted the CIVIL statute of limitations on sex abuse of minors. This means that Apuron could only be found LIABLE or NOT LIABLE, not INNOCENT or GUILTY.
The only court that had the authority to find Apuron GUILTY was the Vatican court. And, as Archbishop Jimenez reaffirmed yesterday:
While the Archdiocese respects the decisions of the victims of the former archbishop to end their cases before civil authorities, it remains the fact that on 07 February 2019, he was found guilty of committing abuse against minors. That determination was made following a canonical investigation and penal trial conducted by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of Faith in Rome. That determination led to the former bishop losing his rank and duties as the leader of the Catholic Church on Guam, as well as a perpetual prohibition preventing him from returning to Guam or presenting himself with the insignia attached to the rank of bishop. Nothing about that determination has changed.
Apuron's attorney, Jacqueline Terlaje, knows this, yet she trotted him out onto the public stage to take a bow and proclaim that the voluntary dismissal in a civil case proved his "innocence!" What a joke! But why would she do this? Neocats, Neocats, Neocats. It's always the same answer.
+++++
By the way, the above picture of the "trained lawyer" (as she calls herself), is from a 2017 article titled: "Apuron not considering settling lawsuits till canonical trial is over." In the article Atty. Terlaje is quoted as saying:
"I am not considering, my client is not considering settling any cases until such time as a canonical trial is complete."
So, apparently as far back as 2017, the option to settle was already being considered by Apuron. Apparently he changed his mind after he got rid of his largest assets, if not all of them - as I set out in this post.
LINK to copy of Original
(Emphases added)
09 May 2025
To: Clergy and Religious Women of the Archdiocese of Agaña Re: Apuron Civil Proceedings
Dear Brother Priests, Deacons and Sisters,
The Archdiocese of Agaña has learned that the plaintiffs who maintained various civil claims before the District Court of Guam against former Archbishop Anthony Apuron have agreed, through a stipulation of their respective lawyers, to voluntarily dismiss those cases effective 07 May 2025. I have asked our legal counsel to explain what those dismissals mean, and our counsel has confirmed that a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) does not operate as an adjudication about the merits of a particular case, but is a mechanism that allows the parties to a particular civil case to mutually agree to end that legal matter. The decision of the parties to stipulate to a dismissal with prejudice means that the Plaintiffs have agreed to not pursue their claims in the future in any court. We are directing questions regarding the recently announced resolution of the civil court cases involving the former archbishop to the parties and counsels involved in those cases.
While the Archdiocese respects the decisions of the victims of the former archbishop to end their cases before civil authorities, it remains the fact that on 07 February 2019, he was found guilty of committing abuse against minors. That determination was made following a canonical investigation and penal trial conducted by the Dicastery for the Doctrine of Faith in Rome. That determination led to the former bishop losing his rank and duties as the leader of the Catholic Church on Guam, as well as a perpetual prohibition preventing him from returning to Guam or presenting himself with the insignia attached to the rank of bishop. Nothing about that determination has changed.
Until every obligation is met, the Archdiocese continues the important work of fulfilling the directives under the reorganization plan set in motion by Archbishop Michael Jude Byrnes. We will not forget that the 302 claims filed against the Archdiocese would not have been settled without the financial contributions from all Archdiocesan entities and the important work you all have done in the parishes and schools to identify real property that can be sold to fund the settlement trust fund. The Archdiocese subsequently resolved its role as a defendant in every civil case it was a part of when the District Court of Guam issued its Order confirming the bankruptcy reorganization plan for the Archdiocese in 2022.
It cannot ever be overstated or undermined the vigilance we all must have to protect our most vulnerable. I remain committed to carrying out the pledge expressed in my letter of 06 December 2024, to all our brothers and sisters “to walk in fidelity with the survivors and all concerned to the end when we see God face to face and our tears are no more.”
Finally, to my brother priests, my co-workers in our shared service to the People of God, let us be good shepherds and heralds of the Gospel. And, to all, in these remaining days of Easter, let us anticipate God’s love poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us by the Father and the Son.
Yours in Christ,
+Ryan P. Jimenez, DD Archbishop of Agaña
MY NOTES
"...a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) does not operate as an adjudication about the merits of a particular case, but is a mechanism that allows the parties to a particular civil case to mutually agree to end that legal matter."
- This means that there was no adjudication (judgment) in the matter and the dismissal does not operate as a judgment of innocence as Apuron is claiming - AND his attorney, Jacque Terlaje, knows this. Yet, she provided the video of Apuron's victory dance to the media and may have even written the script he was obviously reading.
"...the victims of the former archbishop..."
- There is no question. Archbishop Jimenez makes it clear that Apuron victimized the plaintiffs.
"...it remains the fact that on 07 February 2019, he was found guilty of committing abuse against minors...Nothing about that determination has changed."
- Actually, Apuron was found guilty by the court of the first instance on March 18, 2018. He lost his appeal when Pope Francis upheld the guilty verdict on Feb. 7, 2019.
- Now we shall see if Archbishop Jimenez can withstand the backlash of Apuron's Neo-backers.
By Tim Rohr
In the latest update on this story, the attorney for the plaintiffs, Delia Wolff, stated that despite the plaintiffs agreeing to dismiss their complaints against Apuron, the plaintiffs "continue to stand by their allegations that Apuron did horrible things to them."
It would be good to review once again those "horrible things." Following are the cases filed by Roy Quintanilla, Walter Denton, Mary Jane Quinata Cruz as Administratrix of the Estate of Joseph "Sonny" Quinata, Roland Sondia, Ramon De Plata, and Mark Apuron. There are three more plaintiffs but they only used their initials and not their names.
By Tim Rohr
As I've already set out in a previous post, this dismissal has all the signs and smells of "no money in it." The plaintiffs and their attorneys already got their money from the church bankruptcy case. There was no reason to continue except for the apology from Apuron which is what his initial accusers stated from the outset that that was all they wanted.
Maybe they got it. But then why is Apuron trumpeting his innocence if he said he was sorry? Well that's not hard to answer. Because he is Apuron. And the only thing that matters to Apuron is Apuron. Besides, with the case dismissed permanently, no one will ever know what really happened. That is unless the plaintiff's want to talk.
However, I don't think they will. If I can speculate further, I think the deal (we can't call it a settlement) may have included an apology on condition that the plaintiffs never speak of it. I wouldn't put it past Apuron - or his attorney to make such a deal.
You have to hand it to the "trained lawyer" * though. Delaying this case for nearly a decade was perfect strategy. It gave Apuron time to get rid of his assets (or hide them), as I set out in a previous post. It gave time for the bankruptcy case to go through which funneled money to the plaintiffs and their attorneys.
And most important, it gave time for the case to become a "loser" for the plaintiff's attorneys, Lujan and Wolff, as they had always been working on contingency, and, as Apuron had few assets after nearly ten years, they were essentially working for free. And attorneys don't like to do that.
Perfect, Jacque. Perfect. Bravo.
* "Trained lawyer." That's how Jacque Terlaje referred to herself back in 2015 when she was defending Apuron's canonically illegal alienation of what was then a 70 Million Dollar property and handing it over to the Neocats.
The Pacific Daily News updated its initial story after plaintiffs' attorney, Delia Wolff, made a statement. For my own better understanding, I am going to parse it out with my comments in red.
By the way, the PDN's choice of a picture for the story is ironic. "Louie," the neocat priest the cops found with an underaged girl in a car at an Agat beach back in 2015 - which his head in the wrong place - is the guy behind Apuron. After the story broke, Apuron rushed Louie off-island where he disappeared for most of the next decade. And, like Apuron, he was harbored by Neocats. Louie is back, by the way.
Former Archbishop Anthony Apuron on Wednesday broke his years of silence in a video message, maintaining he’s innocent of the clergy sex abuse allegations against him.
He issued a video message after plaintiffs initiated proceedings that sought dismissal of cases, according to his attorney. Apuron is required to agree to the dismissal, his counsel said.
"Required?" Required by who? That sounds like a settlement: "If we do this, then you do that." No court rule requires a party to agree to a dismissal, unless the court itself dismisses a case. And that's not what happened here. So maybe they're not calling it a settlement - probably because Apuron has no assets to settle with. But it certainly is an agreement - which is a functionally a settlement.
He did, and the parties filed a motion that dismisses with prejudice eight clergy sex abuse cases and one defamation case against him.
Delia Lujan Wolff, attorney for the plaintiffs, on Wednesday night said dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims against Apuron “is not evidence that Apuron did not sexually abuse or defame them.”
“To be clear, Apuron has not been vindicated by the dismissals and they do not affirm his innocence. While our clients have dismissed their claims against Apuron, after delays in taking his deposition due to Apuron’s alleged health problems and his claim that he has very limited financial resources, they continue to stand by their allegations that Apuron did horrible things to them,” Wolff stated. “In fact, our clients have already received partial relief on their claims.”
There's a lot here. But primarily it points to Wolff herself talking the plaintiffs into dismissing the case. I can't prove that. But it makes sense, especially when she says "he has very limited financial resources." As I already said, lawyers don't like to work for free. Nobody does. So it was a business decision.
Of course it was always a business decision. Wolff's father, David Lujan, took the cases back in 2017, after the law lifting the civil statute of limitations on sex abuse against minors had been enacted. Lujan is a smart businessman. I'm sure he knew that the real money would be in the suit against the archdiocese, not Apuron individually. And he was right. Now that the archdiocese case is settled - to the tune of many millions of dollars - why bother with a washed up 80-year old Apuron who has no money?
Meanwhile, though, to get the bill passed that would pave the way to many millions for the attorneys, the case needed a human face to stir the passions needed to see the legislation through. And those faces were provided by the initial four boys who "Apuron did horrible things to..." as Wolff says above.
Meanwhile, it's helpful that Wolff says "Apuron has not been vindicated by the dismissals and they do not affirm his innocence," but as you can see from Apuron's victory lap and what is obviously a campaign to return to Guam, Wolff's clarification means nothing - and the plaintiffs are now barred from ever bringing up the "horrible things" that happened to them ever again.
A federal judge has yet to act on the voluntary dismissal.
It appears the judge has to sign off on this. However, I often wondered why this same judge allowed this case to languish for nearly a decade - with only a bit of prodding here and there. I don't know about local District Court rules but according to AI:
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides tools for the court to actively manage cases and address delays by:
- Setting clear deadlines and allowing for extensions under specific circumstances .
- Using scheduling orders and case management conferences to ensure progress .
- Utilizing various motions to expedite resolution or address specific issues .
- Taking action against parties who are deliberately delaying the process .
However, none of this appeared to happen in this case. I wonder why?
Apuron, in his video message, shared by his attorney, Jacqueline Terlaje, said he can now speak freely about the canonical process.
He was always free to speak about the canonical process (his Vatican trial). In fact, he did on many occasions: repeatedly swearing to his innocence even after the first court found him guilty and again after Pope Francis personally denied his appeal. In fact, Apuron repeatedly claimed that he was framed by "Tim Rohr and his associates" for the purposes of serving a Chinese gambling interest.
Here is what he said after the Vatican found him guilt as reported in the Guam Daily Post on March 19, 2018:
“I have been informed of the conclusion of the first instance canonical trial against me. While I am relieved that the tribunal dismissed the majority of the accusations against me, I have appealed the verdict. God is my witness – I am innocent, and I look forward to proving my innocence in the appeals process."
And here is what KUAM reported on April 4, 2019, after Apuron lost his Vatican appeal and the first guilty verdict was personally upheld by Pope Francis:
Apuron in a statement said he was “deeply saddened by the decision of the Holy Father to confirm the decision of the court of first instance. I lodged an appeal against that decision last year because I am innocent and the sentence of the court of first instance had vindicated me declaring non credible the majority of the charges made against me: I believe that the facts and evidence presented demonstrated my total innocence.”
(The same KUAM story contains a full press release by Apuron that will turn your stomach. I'll deal with it separately.)
Bottom line is that Apuron did not "suffer in silence" as he wants us now to believe. He has not only virulently and publicly protested his innocence, he has just as virulently and publicly threatened those of us who stood up to him. Just more lies and more lies.
“The canonical process did not result in my laicization. No priest or bishop who has been found guilty of these crimes has remained a priest or bishop as I have. This indicates my innocence,” he said.
Lies, lies and more lies. There's a long list of priests and cardinals who have been found "guilty of these crimes" and "has remained a priest of bishop." Cardinal Theodore McCarrick is one. Even though he was eventually laicized due to his gross disobedience, he was first simply removed from office as Apuron was. There was also Cardinal George Pell of Australia who was found guilty of the same crimes by an Australian court and spent 404 days in jail and had his nose broken before being acquitted by the High Court of Australia. Pell was never laicized and died a Cardinal in 2023 in the good graces of the Church - and truly innocent. He didn't just have the cases against him mysteriously dismissed.
Moreover, Apuron here is functionally calling Pope Francis a liar. It was Francis who personally upheld his guilty verdict upon Apuron's appeal and in doing so, clarified exactly what Apuron was guilty of: "delicts against the Sixth Commandment with minors."
‘Forever disgraced’
Apuron was stripped of his title, permanently removed from his post and was exiled, after a Vatican tribunal found him guilty related to sexual abuse of minors. He left Guam in 2016.
Note the dates, because his defenders are claiming that he was "ordered to leave Guam." Nope. Apuron ran away within one day of Roy Quintanilla coming forward with accusations against Apuron on May 17, 2016. He was not ordered to never return to Guam until the conclusion of the canonical trial in March 2018, two years later.
He lost his appeal and the Vatican tribunal in 2019 upheld the earlier guilty verdict.
The plaintiffs’ attorney, Wolff, said “as a result of the Vatican finding Apuron ‘guilty of delicts against the Sixth Amendment with minors’ and Apuron losing his appeal, Apuron was removed from the office of the Archbishop of Agana and perpetually prohibited from dwelling, even temporarily, in Guam.”
“That is huge for our clients. He has been forever disgraced and he cannot change that with a press release,” Wolff stated.
It's funny to read Wolff saying this now because in 2017, when Pope Francis sent Cardinal Burke to Guam to investigate this mess, I was told that Wolff's father, David Lujan, had advised his clients (Roy, Walter, Roland, and Doris), not to speak to Burke. Lujan's interest was his own case, not the Vatican's, so he had good reason to control his clients.
However, I knew then what has proven to be true now, that if the Vatican did not convict Apuron, then Lujan's case wouldn't matter. Lujan had the power to sue Apuron and hold him liable in behalf of his clients, but he didn't have the power to remove Apuron from the archdiocese. Only the Vatican could do that.
Also, at this point, things were growing very tense for me and my family. Apuron had publicly threatened to sue me. My family wanted me out of this, and understandably so. However, I had come too far at that point and my only hope for saving my family and myself was for the Vatican to find Apuron guilty and remove him.
So I went to see Mr. Lujan myself and pled my case: to let his clients participate in the Vatican investigation. Eventually, all four did participate, Apuron was found guilty and was removed. Unfortunately, it was too late for some members of my family, at least one of whom had been compromised by the Neocats. I have evidence of that.
So, as I started off saying, it's funny to see Lujan's partner and daughter relying now on the Vatican verdict that may never have happened had I not intervened with her father all those years ago. I'm not taking credit for it. Maybe Lujan had planned to do it anyway.
‘Injustice in silence’
Apuron, who was the head of the Catholic Church on Guam for some 30 years, said he was unjustly condemned by the media and by public opinion because of false accusations made against him, and that he accepted the injustice in silence.
Actually, the "media" only reported what his accusers were saying. His accusers, the boys he molested and raped, accused him. So it's interesting that he doesn't call out their names here, but falls back on the generic "media" and "public opinion." If you're innocent, Mr. Apuron, why not name names?
Well, we know why. You're not innocent. And naming names could open paths to new litigation. In fact, why not name my name - like you did in so many press releases before? In fact, I was the only "media" (JungleWatch) that provided a forum for those accusations for most of the first couple years of this. If anyone could be accused of "unjustly condemning" you, it's me. So have at it.
And, as already demonstrated, he sure as hell did not "accept the injustice in silence." Here's one reminder of how he accepted the so-called injustice:
“Tim Rohr and his associates launched a 'vicious and calumnious attack' on the archbishop and the church,” the statement says...The archdiocese is in the process of taking canonical and legal measures against those perpetrating these malicious lies.” - Guam Daily Post, June 1, 2016
In fact, here is what his attorney said after Apuron was found hiding in his friends' house near San Francisco:
Attorney Jacque Terlaje provided a statement to KUAM: "As you are aware, I am legal counsel for Archbishop Anthony Apuron, OFM Cap. D.D. In response to your inquires regarding his whereabouts, the Archbishop is in a location where he is able to continue working on defending his innocence without distraction." - KUAM, Feb. 2, 2017
So according to his own attorney, Apuron wasn't suffering in silence and praying for his accusers, he was "working on defending his innocence without distraction." LOL.
“Today I pray to God to have mercy on those who smeared my reputation and destroyed my life for economic and political reasons...and also for those who judged me listening to them. United to the Lord I can say: Father, forgive them, they do not know what they are doing.”
Wow. To take the words of Jesus hanging on the cross and apply them to yourself! SMH. But beyond that, Mr. Apuron, please demonstrate how any of us who stood up to you benefitted economically or politically. You can't. In fact, several of us paid terrible prices while you danced around your "hill" singing "No one can touch me." Some of us gave up years of lives and had our own reputations smeared - by you and your goons - while we fought to end the "filth in the church" you and your friends smeared it with.
Apuron said many people have expressed their solidarity and support to him and that many people in the Archdiocese of Agana know the truth.
If any of that were true, then Apuron would have had his "day in court" as he so often said he wanted. He could have brought those "people" who expressed "their solidarity and support" and who knew "the truth." But he didn't. Instead, he ran away at the first accusation and was even found hiding in a house owned by the VP of the Bank of Guam in San Francisco. Never forget where he was found hiding.
Accusers locate Apuron - Guam Daily Post, Jan. 18, 2018
He said a climate of fear remains in the church of Guam, created, he said, by people who want to destroy Guam and have no shame using the church to gain money and power.
Well, he had ten years to prove that. But he didn't. Instead he stayed in hiding, claiming to be too old and sickly to show up for a deposition - though he had no problem romping about on video yesterday proclaiming victory.
“I pray that one day my exile may be lifted and that I may return to my beloved motherland. I keep living this time in prayer and offer my sufferings also for my enemies and for those who condemned me,” he said. “I pray also for the current Archbishop of Guam, may the Lord give him strength, discernment and courage to seek the truth and to do what is right.”
Ummm, Mr. Apuron. Your accusers accused you. They didn't condemn you. The POPE did.
Can’t bring same claims
Apuron’s counsel issued a press release following the filing of the stipulation.
“The claims against Archbishop Apuron have now been voluntarily dismissed with prejudice, meaning that these plaintiffs are prohibited from bringing the same claims against him ever again,” Terlaje stated.
She said these “voluntary dismissals bring to a close nearly a decade of protracted litigation.”
You gotta admit. Jacque is good. She sure as hell was careful not to say "my client has been vindicated" - something any lawyer representing the winning party would be happy to exclaim. But she didn't. Because he wasn't.
U.S. District Court Chief Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood, who has presided over the Guam clergy sex abuse cases and the Archdiocese of Agana bankruptcy case, has yet to act on the voluntary dismissal.
Also named in the lawsuits were the Archdiocese of Agana, which settled the cases to exit bankruptcy; the Holy See; and several Capuchin Franciscan entities.
The cases included eight allegations of sexual abuse dating back to the 1970s, mostly from former Hågat alter boys and one defamation case.
‘Made a settlement offer’
Plaintiffs’ counsel earlier stated in a court filing that during a Zoom meeting, “Atty. Terlaje, on behalf of Apuron, made a settlement offer to the plaintiffs.”
“Thereafter, the parties have been engaged in settlement discussions to resolve the dispute between them. The parties’ settlement discussions are in line with what I recall and understood to be the Court’s previous encouragement to the parties to consider resolution and the financial burden of continued litigation,” the April 30 court filing stated.
Another April 30 filing stated that Apuron’s counsel “made a settlement offer to Plaintiff.”
Terlaje’s statement, meanwhile, echoed Apuron’s video message that he has never offered or entered into any settlement agreement with the plaintiffs, nor has he offered any money or other consideration to any plaintiff to resolve these cases.
“Archbishop Apuron has only asserted his willingness to execute a stipulation of dismissal to resolve the cases, as is required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure...to dismiss any case at this stage of litigation,” according to Terlaje’s statement.
In 2016, Apuron’s accusers said all they wanted was an apology from Apuron.
“Archbishop Apuron has always maintained his innocence in the face of these claims, and has continued to defend his good name within the process permitted under our laws,” Terlaje said in a Wednesday statement.”
Ummm, really? Defended his good name? That's what we were looking forward to: a solid defense at his "day in court." But Jacque, you were careful never to let that happen, weren't you. In fact, as the next line in the story says:
Apuron has not been deposed in any of the cases.
LOL. You say he "continued to defend his good name but he never even showed up for so much as a single deposition. So there was no defense, just his measly whining from whatever hole he was hiding in - and still is. And by the way, and once again, it was the POPE who trashed his "good name." And he did it personally.
“Unfortunately, due to extenuating circumstances beyond his control, the trial and discovery process was delayed partly by unwillingness of plaintiffs to comply with basic requests for information, which is the basis for motions to compel Archbishop Apuron’s unwavering dedication to due process and justice, in asserting his innocence, is affirmed by the plaintiffs’ decision to dismiss their claims today,” Terlaje said in a statement.
It's hard to wrap my head around this B.S. It appears Jacque is saying that the circumstances beyond Apuron's control was the plaintiff's unwillingness to comply with requests for information. That's bullshit. That is totally in Jacque's control. Requests for Admissions, Interrogatories, and other Discovery tools must be complied with or the "unwilling" party is subject to contempt of court. They can't just say no. That was totally in Jacque's control. Did she file motions to compel production? Did she file motions to show cause? Contempt? I don't think so. It's clear that Jacque and her buddy wanted to draw this out as long as they could, and they did. And they did it to tire out the opposition. It worked.
Apuron’s health concerns were among reasons cited earlier as to why the planned deposition did not go forward.
As already mentioned and demonstrated, Apuron certainly had no problem going on camera and celebrating. So much for the lies about his health.
“Archbishop Anthony Apuron continues to pray, in solitude, for the Church of Guam, his accusers, and all those victims of abuse in Guam and throughout the Church,” Terlaje stated.
What a joke. He's certainly not in solitude. He's living it up with the Neocats. That was the deal.
The archdiocese settled nearly 300 clergy sex abuse claims as part of the bankruptcy process.
And now comes the moment of truth for Archbishop Ryan Jimenez. In case he wants my advice, Jimenez would do best with sticking what Rome has decided, not what Jacque or Apuron is saying about this mixed up dismissal thing. In any event, Apuron's actions plunged this archdiocese into bankruptcy. And that's not the least of it. How many souls have been lost. How many? Apuron better be hoping for another dismissal. And in a much higher court.
By Tim Rohr
Apuron's lies continue to be staggering. In today's PDN he is reported as saying:
"Today, I can speak freely, also about the canonical process," Apuron said. "The canonical process did not result in my laicization. No priest or bishop who has been found guilty of these crimes has remained a priest or bishop as I have. This indicates my innocence."
The Holy See says differently:
In fact, Pope Francis himself found him guilty as the above statement was released after Francis personally heard Apuron's appeal.
By Tim Rohr
Now WHY would his accusers "seek dismissal" of cases they so painfully brought into the light nearly ten years ago?
I'm going to hazard a very good guess. But before I do that, here is the mind-boggling part of the PDN report:
Plaintiffs' counsel earlier filed in court that during a Zoom meeting, "Atty. Terlaje, on behalf of Apuron, made a settlement offer to the plaintiffs."
"Thereafter, the parties have been engaged in settlement discussions to resolve the dispute between them. The parties' settlement discussions are in line with what I recall and understood to be the Court's previous encouragement to the parties to consider resolution and the financial burden of continued litigation," the April 30 court filing stated.
Another April 30 filing stated that Apuron's counsel "made a settlement offer to Plaintiff."
Terlaje's statement, meanwhile, echoed Apuron's video message that he has never offered or entered into any settlement agreement with the plaintiffs, nor has he offered any money or other consideration to any plaintiff to resolve these cases.
"Archbishop Apuron has only asserted his willingness to execute a stipulation of dismissal to resolve the cases, as is required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure...to dismiss any case at this stage of litigation," according to Terlaje's statement.
So we have, in the court record, a record, several records, of Apuron making "a settlement offer to plaintiffs." And we have, specifically on April 30, a record that Apuron's counsel (Jackie Terlaje) "made a settlement offer to Plaintiff."
But then today we have Apuron saying that he never offered to settle, and the same Jackie Terlaje backing up Apuron's denial of a settlement.
The gobble-de-goop that catches my attention is this paragraph:
"Archbishop Apuron has only asserted his willingness to execute a stipulation of dismissal to resolve the cases, as is required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure...to dismiss any case at this stage of litigation," according to Terlaje's statement.
So wait a minute. The headlines says that Plaintiffs are seeking the dismissal, but here it implies ("asserted his willingness to execute a stipulation of dismissal") that the stipulation was put forth by Apuron.
And then there's the "as is required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure." Huh? The Rules do not require the dismissal of a case - unless a deadline was missed or some other procedural thing.
The most interesting thing here though are the words "at this stage of litigation." Interesting. Well, we're nearly ten years into this. Is the case too old to continue?
Note: As far back as 2017, Apuron's counsel, Jackie Terlaje, was reported to have asked the court to for time to work on a settlement:
Apuron’s attorney, Jacqueline Terlaje, and attorneys representing the accusers asked Chief Judge Frances Tydingco-Gatewood to delay her decision until Dec. 31 to give them time to work on a possible settlement. - USA Today, Nov. 15, 2017
Now, WHY would they be discussing "settlement" if Apuron was innocent?
Meanwhile, I'm not surprised. I expected something like this. And here's why.
There's no money in it for the attorneys. Lujan and Wolff already made their money in the church bankruptcy case. And Terlaje was just fighting to protect her interests in the Neocatechumenal Way.
Apuron had no personal assets. He did at one time. But as things began to heat up back around 2014 I noticed that he sold his home in Vegas, and then another home in California. And it appears that he got rid of his local property in Adacao in 2020 AFTER the cases were brought against him.
On January 16, 2020, a Special Power of Attorney was recorded showing Apuron giving Jackie Terlaje Special Power of Attorney to execute the sale of his property (Tract 1535, Lot 5-R3, Mangilao) on his behalf.
On the same day, a Warranty Deed for the Adacao property was executed by Apuron as Grantor and Raymond Benavente and Eleanor Bongato as Grantees. (Apuron sold the property to these two.)
On the same day, Benavente and Bongato recorded a mortgage on the property.
So Apuron, with his cases already in court and liable for millions of dollars, with the help of his attorney, sold his property.
And there is another interesting twist. Less than two months ago, Raymond Benavente quitclaimed his share of the property to Eleanor Bongato. I don't know if it's coincidence, but it is certainly interesting timing given today's news.
Also very interesting. Throughout this nearly 10 year long ordeal, Apuron's counsel, Jackie Terlaje has been making excuse after excuse for Apuron claiming he's too old and sickly to even sit through a single deposition.
However, from what we can see in the video he posted, Apuron, too sickly to sit through a deposition, has no problem spending quite a bit of time and energy proclaiming his innocence and mocking his accusers.
He sure looks healthy to me.
Bottom line is this though. Apuron ran. He ran. And he ran after only one accusation. That's not what an innocent man does.
Apuron says he praying for his accusers. No thank you, Tony. You had better spend your time praying for your own lying soul...and your attorney's.
