First of all, those who made comments under the thread "Dr. Eusebio Explains More About RMS" regarding the sexual allegations will not be published because I have closed the thread to all sexual allegations, so you would need to rewrite you comments under this OP. Apparently, an anonymous commenter made a comment about Mr. De Plata's testimony, and the thread was diverted away from the OP and into a new topic.
Secondly, my comments were misconstrued. I did not say that the alleged victim was a willing participant. I said that Ramon's testimony appeared to make the alleged victim a willing participant. Why? Because of the way his testimony went. According to Mr. De Plata, he got up to use the restroom. On the way to the restroom, he saw Father Antonio, an altar server about his age, and Archbishop Apuron (who was a seminarian at that time) engaged in oral sex. He then turned away and continued on his way to the restroom.
Many people would find this behavior odd. If, in fact, the young boy was in great distress, would the witness actually turn away and continue on his way to the restroom? The older brother who also saw everything obviously did the same thing. Why did these two ignore the 10 year old boy who was being abused?
This behavior is odd especially after hearing the testimony of Leo Tudela. Mr. Tudela stated that he was crying and shaking all over while he was being abused by a seminarian and by Father Louis. But in Mr. De Plata's testimony, he saw the 10 year old engaged in a sexual act. He said nothing about the boy crying, shaking, or anything of that nature. He saw the 10 year old performing oral sex. And then he turned away and continued on his way to the restroom.
Wow. So it's not that he was a willing participant, but rather the witness said he was a willing participant. That's not what you said. Now you're blaming the person who makes the report for accusing another 10-year-old boy of being willing participant. That's not what he said; he said that's what he saw. And your words not his were "willing participant." Shame on you. A grievous shame on you. You of all people as a blogger should know better. You know the effect your words have. Commenters may not understand this, but a blogger always does. How shameful of you This has nothing to do with NCW. The responsible thing to do, Diana, would be to delete that whole section and then say I made a statement that I probably should not of said because it did not capture what I intended. We of course pray for the victims. End of discussion
ReplyDeleteBut no you and your need to be right. As the spokesperson for father Pius you have now stepped in it once again, and I for one will not let it go whether you post this or not will not change one thing. These are the fruits of evil that I've been born from Kiko are boi you and your need to be right as the spokesperson for father Pius have no stepped in it once again, and I for one will not let it go whether you post this or not or change one thing. These are the foods of evil that blames the child for the sins of an adult, and you would rather scrutinize the report remembered by 10-year-old then get out of actual scrutiny to a sodomite.
Dear Glaucon Jr.
DeleteI was playing the Devil's advocate. Actually, the witness has more to be ashamed of for the fact that he did nothing to help the 10 year old child, but simply continued on his way to the restroom. Also, I am not the spokesperson for Father Pius.
Shame on the 10-year-old! Shame on the 10-year-old! Forget Apuron forget Cruz! shame on the 10-year-old its always the child's fault , actually a witness has more to be a shamed for the fact that he did
DeleteUnbelievable.
This is going to be fun when the public sees that you're trying to intimidate others from coming forward. Be prepared to be deposed because if that's not witness tampering I don't know what it is I'll be sure that Lujan and Tim see all of this
Dear Glaucon Jr.
DeleteThat 10 year old witness and his older brother was able to get themselves out of the rectory and went straight home. How is it witness tampering when I have not even spoken to the witness????
Glaucon, what Diana is saying in the OP is that the witness should polish up on his testimony more cuz it seems like he left out a lot of details if all he saw were 2 adults and a kid performing a sex act.
Deletefor being an advocate of the way and the catholic church, your initial reaction of lack of sympathy and regard for such an "alleged" minor victim is mind boggling. cant take back what you said now, but maybe you should have reread and thought about what you posted before you hit publish. is this how the way views every minor victim--regardless of the accused?
ReplyDeleteoh and thank you for your expertise and comparison on sexual assault victims handling their assaults in the same way.
Dear Anonymous at 11:33 pm,
DeleteAnd your sympathy goes to the person who did nothing to help the 10 year old being abused??? Those two boys could have shouted, awaken the others, and got everyone out. Instead, they got themselves out and left everyone else behind with the alleged abusers.
Once again, you're blaming young boy victims. Shameful.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 1:24 am,
DeleteIf you are referring to Mr. De Plata as being a victim, he is not a victim. He is a witness. However, this is what Mr. De Plata told to PNC news:
"PNC: "Do you consider yourself a victim at all?"
"Yes because I as a 10-year-old back then, I didn't need to see these. What if my brother wasn't there? What would have happened to me? I don't know what would have happened," he said."
http://www.pacificnewscenter.com/local/10804
Mr. De Plata was never molested nor raped by Father Cruz or Apuron, but he considers himself a victim because he saw the crime. He felt he did not need to see what he saw. Witnessing a crime does not make one a victim....it makes one a witness. And in all his testimony, where was the compassion for the victim whom he saw being raped? In fact, according to PNC news:
"We asked De Plata if he had ever spoken to the young altar boy about what he saw, but he says he wasn't sure if the altar boy knew that De Plata had ever walked in on them."
He was NOT SURE if the altar boy who was being abused knew if he walked in on them????? So what??? The fact is he knew about it. Was he not at all concern about the abused victim? Also, another fact is he admitted that the seminarian Apuron was aware that he was in the room. After all, it was not a very big room.
Furthermore, this is what I stated under the thread that got diverted from the OP:
DianaSeptember 12, 2016 at 6:48 PM
Dear Anonymous at 6:23 pm,
Actually, it was Ramon's testimony that made it look like he was a willing participant that he just casually turned his head and continued on to use the restroom, it does seem a bit odd. After all the 9 year old girl who was in an attempted kidnapping recently screamed and fought back. The only time a victim would not fight back would be when he has a knife at his throat or a gun to his head. Ramon did not mention any knife or gun.
It is incredibly disgusting and pathetic that you are criticizing a young child that walked in a room and witnessed a priest and a seminarian sexually abusing a child because he did nothing about it! Are you really that naive and clueless? This witness was a child himself! Use your brain for once! This was an innocent child who without any warning, walked in and was subjected to this vile image! How horrifying and shocking to the eyes of an innocent child to be a witness to such perversion by a priest and a seminarian! This child and his older brother were not only witnesses but victims as well. How dare you judge these young victims and yet, ignore the crime by those two adult perverts! Shame on you! Go to confession and NOT to a Neo presbyter! Your external salvation is at risk!
DeleteDiana,
DeleteHe was a 10 year old kid....he was shocked, horrified, embarrassed. Can you consider that? Can you just for one moment think that he did not react because he was in shock?! There are many stories of kids witnessing other acts less traumatizing, and not doing anything for different reasons. Kids knowing that bullying is taking place but not saying anything, kids seeing another kid stealing from a store and not saying anything, etc.
And you are wrong---he would most definitely be considered a victim. A soldier witnessing
war atrocities (whether or not he/she actually did the acts) is still considered a victim and in some cases diagnosed as PTSD. At 10 yrs old, witnessing what he did as well as the persistent propositioning he received (by a Priest no less), IS traumatic!
Dear Anonymous at 9:31 am,
DeleteThat 10 year old witness is now grown up and the only time he came forward is when the 10 year old victim was dead. He came forward too late.
Dear Anonymous at 11:16 am,
DeleteYour analogy to a soldier is a poor one. A soldier is not a witness during the confrontation with terrorists. He takes part in that conflict and in many cases receives injuries from it especially whe he is hit by a bullet.
The boy was a witness who could have shouted out and awaken the others. Instead, he turned and continued on his way to the restroom. After that, he and his brother left the rectory, leaving the rest of the other boys behind.
"Trauma comes in many forms, and there are vast differences among people who experience trauma. But the similarities and patterns of response cut across the variety of stressors and victims, so it is very useful to think broadly about trauma."
DeleteAnd
"Two people could undergo the same noxious event and one person might be traumatized while the other person remained relatively unscathed. It is not possible to make blanket generalizations such that “X is traumatic for all who go through it” or “event Y was not traumatic because no one was physically injured.” In addition, the specific aspects of an event that are traumatic will be different from one individual to the next. You cannot assume that the details or meaning of an event, such as a violent assault or rape, that are most distressing for one person will be same for another person."
https://www.sidran.org/resources/for-survivors-and-loved-ones/what-is-psychological-trauma/
And that 9yr old today did a good job because today children are TAUGHT to fight back and scream for help. In a society that left their doors unlocked and trusted their children to sleep over with another adult who isn't a member of the family speaks about the trust that most people had in their community. Nowadays, everyone is suspicious of everyone. Trust is not so easily gained. So you cannot blame this 10 yr old boy for not acting in a way another 10 yr old boy would today. The social environment is different. Again, children are taught to be wary of strangers and to report acts of abuse/sexual abuse to a trusted adult.
Why not leave the investigation to the professionals instead of gossiping about what "could" have happened, "should" have happened, or even "if" it did happen?
Dear Anonymous at 11:18 pm,
DeleteLet us be very clear about one thing. Mr. De Plata was not and never was an abused victim. Therefore, he did not EXPERIENCE any trauma. The victim is the one who experienced the trauma. That 10 year old boy and his older brother knew exactly what they saw. And they knew that what they saw was wrong because they made the conscious decision to leave the rectory and walk home.
Now, why they did not shout out and awaken the others is what is so odd about this whole thing. This is the same thing that happened to Roland Sondia. He was 15 years old. He fought back and left, slamming the door behind him. How was it that none of the other boys did not hear the slamming door and woke up is beyond me. It appears that where ever Archbishop Apuron was placed as an abuser, the other potential witnesses were either sleeping (such as the other boys in the retreat) or dead (such as Father Jack, the victim, and Father Antonio).
Thank you Diana for the response, but I honestly believe that it is not for anyone except trained professionals to determine who does and does not experience trauma and neither is it for anyone but those professionals to argue what could, should, or would have happened.
DeleteWhat does this thread have to do with providing insight on the NCW and abuse?
In the intrestests of disclosure, I have a keyboard problem. That's explains obvious typos
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that these accusers are coming out only to accuse archbishop Apuron cuz all the others are dead. AB Apuron went to a seminary off-island for many years, and there was no report of sexual abuse while he was there.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 11:34--
DeleteBe careful what you ask for. At one time is was said, 'only Agat? What about the other churches he was assigned to?' And now we have Chalan Pago. Need more? Keep doubting the truth and more of them will come out to set you straight. The question is: how many will it take for you to believe?
Anonymous @ 5:21 PM, you ask How many will it take for you to believe?
DeleteAfter reading this blog for over a year, I can tell you that if Our Lord Himself came down to tell Diana that her beloved Brother Tony had done as Roy Quintanilla, Walter Denton, Roland Sondia and Ramon de Plata said, Diana would still proclaim that Brother Tony is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. That's how loyal she is to her Brother Tony.
Dear Anonymous at 10:26 pm,
DeleteActually, I would believe God because is above human law and He knows the heart of man. For now, I will stand by the rule of law and the democratic principles of our society.
And you know this how?
ReplyDeleteThe same way we know that Fr. Jack never filed a sex abuse report because no report existed.
DeleteDiana your calling 10 to 12 year olds shameful for not reporting these alleged incidents, or not shouting and screaming for all to hear. Think about that. Your statements are shameful. I have seen you try to tear apart every accuser that has come forward, playing the so-called "devils advocate". You really have no shame when it comes to defending your brother at all costs. Sad. Very Sad.
ReplyDeleteDear Anonymous at 2:52 pm,
DeleteI must admit that the 9 year old girl who was almost kidnapped did a much better job. She screamed, and her screams woke up her parents who came to her rescue.
Ok. And what about the thousands of children who have been abused, some their whole lives, without the shouting and screaming you apparently believe is automatic.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 8:40 pm,
DeleteChildren of abuse always cry unless they have a knife to their throat or a gun pointed to their head. They are no different than abused adults.
Right, Diana. Abused people ALWAYS cry (NOT)!!
DeleteSome abused people REMAIN SILENT believing they deserve the abuse.
Some abused people end up DYING because they never once spoke out and ended up being killed by their abuser or taking their lives to escape the abuse.
Dear Anonymous at 11:17 pm,
DeleteEvery person who has been hit or abused always cry. Raise a fist against any child or even yell at them and you will see them cowering, crying in tears, or struggle to get away. Reporting the abuse is a different thing because of threats, insecurity, etc.
Let us be clear about one thing. Mr. De Plata was not an abused victim. He was a witness. And he was a witness who did not report the crime until the victim and the perpetrator are dead.
You are so wrong. You have NO idea what you are talking about. As for mr De plata the priest masturbated in front of him 2 times. That's sexual abuse
DeleteDear Anonymous at 6:30 pm,
DeleteHe witnessed the priest doing that in front of him two times.
Has no one ever read the crucible? What is happening to Apuron is nothing new in history. There's a guilty party who is trying to cover up a misdeed and so he organizes a witch hunt. As in Salem 400 years ago the innocent will be victim to mass hysteria, the manipulated will spin incredible stories and the mastermind of this lie will get away with murder.
ReplyDeleteSince when do people not question the statements of children? Especially when those children have grown up into adults with an ax to grind. So if I question their veracity I'm not being "sensitive" to their pain? Oh boo-hoo. A man's life, his reputations and his good name are at stake. Not to mention the damage done to the church. Those "victims" better be prepared to be asked much more invasive and detailed questions than any I've read here. And if they cannot answer I call them liars.
I agree anon 1:22pm... all this orchistrated attacks which makes me start to believe that now they are made up.... hope they are ready for the tough question without reading a script......study hard folks....
ReplyDelete