Sunday, December 4, 2016

The John Toves Case

It is extremely disgraceful for a bishop to poison the minds of the Catholic faithful against another bishop, who still holds the title "Archbishop of Agana."  What is the purpose of Archbishop Hon coming out in the media to badmouth a brother bishop if not from hatred?  According to the Pacific Daily News: 
Hon said the January 2015 pastoral visit to Guam by himself, Archbishop Martin Krebs and the Rev. Tadeusz Nowak included checking on the November 2014 allegation by California resident John Toves that Apuron sexually abused Toves’ cousin. 
This is already a false statement along with many of the things he said.  So, let us go back and look at the John Toves case. (The dates are in red.) Those of us who have kept up with what has been going on for three years know that this whole conflict started with the removal of Father Paul in 2013 and Monsignor James in 2014.  The removal of Monsignor James was the last straw, and Tim Rohr came out in public on August 6, 2014 and called for the Archbishop's resignation.  See KUAM news here.  

As for John Toves, he was a regular poster at Tim Rohr's blog "Junglewatch."  On October 31, 2014, John Toves wrote in the jungle: (The bold is mine).
We all must do more. Not everyone is called to the same level of activism, but everyone must come up with their own resolutions to stop Apuron, Quitugua, and Cristobal. We must stop this cancer from spreading!
Be courageous, strong, and faithful. 
Let us all DO WHAT WE KNOW WE MUST DO. 
I know I WILL.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
Below is a screenshot of that statement:


 Toves admitted that he will do something, but he did not specify exactly what he will do.  Then on November 14, 2014, John Toves delivered an ominious video message to Archbishop Apuron and Father Adrian.  You can listen and view that ominious video message in the jungle here or in Youtube here. 

John Toves indicated that Archbishop Apuron will have regrets if he does something that he (Mr. Toves) considers a bad intention.  He warned the Archbishop to watch what he intends to do.  Three days later, on November 17, 2014, Mr. Toves went public in KUAM, saying that Archbishop Apuron molested his relative. This accusation was made PUBLIC while the Archbishop was in Rome in audience with Pope Francis.  This was reported in the jungle blog on November 17th, but KUAM did not air the allegation until the NEXT DAY.  Therefore, Tim Rohr knew about John Toves' allegation BEFORE it was aired in KUAM.  According to Tim Rohr:
As some of you heard, John Toves went "public" today on Jesse Lujan's show on KUAM. Of course, what John went "public" about is already very public in a different way. For years the accusations have been rumored. But since no one was willing to "talk", there wasn't much that could be done about it. John is willing to talk. And he has. What's next? I don't know. That particular "battlefront" belongs to John. 
Below is a screenshot showing that Tim Rohr knew about John's allegation BEFORE it was publicly aired in KUAM: 


After the sexual allegations was aired in KUAM on November 18th, three days later on November 21, 2014, Tim Rohr wrote his thoughts on the sexual allegations.  According to Tim Rohr: (The bold is mine.)
Fr. Wadeson is on record stating that no formal charges were ever brought forward, only an allegation. But Archbishop Apuron DID NOT NEED formal charges in order to remove Wadeson. By his own actions against Wadeson, Apuron demonstrated that all that was needed was the allegation, even if it was more than forty years old. 
 
There is now a similar allegation against Archbishop Apuron. Whether it is true or not remains to be proven. However, again, as per the Archbishop's implementation of his own policy in his actions against Wadeson, no proof or truth or formal charges are needed for the removal of a cleric, including himself.
 
Thus, Archbishop Apuron, by virtue of his own policy and his own example of its implementation, MUST REMOVE HIMSELF and permit an independent investigation to move forward. (A temporary diocesan administrator will be appointed by Rome during this process.) 
Below is a screenshot of the above statement:



Notice at that time in 2014, Tim Rohr did not appear to care whether the allegation was true or not.  The primary focus he brought up is that the Archbishop "MUST REMOVE HIMSELF."   

Today, these are facts that we know:
  • John Toves never witnessed any sexual molestation committed by Archbishop Apuron. 
  • John Toves claimed that his relative was sexually molested by Archbishop Apuron. 
  • John Toves' relative never came forward to make those allegations.
  • John Toves admitted that he never spoke to his relative. 
  • John Toves admitted that his relative never told him that he was sexually molested.
  • John Toves admitted that he heard the information from someone else.
On December 1, 2014, during his interview with Jesse Lujan, John Toves admitted that he never spoke to his relative and that he did not get the information of sexual molestation from him but from someone else.  You can listen to that interview in the Junglewatch blog here.  After admitting that, the media did not pay very much attention to John Toves.  Why?  The fact that he never spoke to his cousin and never even got the information from his cousin already indicated that the allegation is not credible.   

The John Toves' case took place in 2014. This then brings us back to Archbishop's Hon's statement today in the Pacific Daily News.  The pastoral visit took place on January, 2015.  By that time, Archbishop Hon already knew that John Toves' story was not credible for the simple reason.....that he never spoke to his relative, that he never got the information from his relative, and that his relative never came forward.  So, why badmouth Archbishop Apuron if not from hatred? 

33 comments:

  1. Bad mouth? Hon is stating facts, which just so happens to put "Brother Tony" in a negative light.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:29 pm,

      What facts did he use???? Even the lawyer whom Archbishop Hon hired stated that Archbishop Apuron did NOT call his accusers "liars". Now, Hon is going against the lawyer he hired for the Archdiocese.

      Delete
  2. John Toves also wanted to talk to the molester, ahem, I mean the archbishop but was denied access by Adrian. Why was that again? Because the archbishop only entertained people in the neocatechumenal way? Answer that one again Diana, I can't wait to see your pathetic answer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      It was because his lawyer told him not to speak to John Toves. The Archbishop would most likely have spoken to him had John Toves approached him privately. There NEVER were any private conversations with Apuron's accusers. Everything was made in the limelight of the media for sensationalism and attention.

      Delete
    2. It was also Tony's lawyers that threatened Mr. Toves to cease his attempts to slander tony or else he'd be sued. Mr. Toves didn't stop and was never sued. Why's that?

      Delete
    3. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      It was worthless to sue someone who already admitted that he never spoke to his cousin and never even obtained the information from him but someone else. As a matter of fact, even the media stopped taking John Toves seriously.

      Delete
    4. It was pure intimidation.John T did not have a private conversation because again it would be a 'he said' 'she said' issue again. So bring it to the public arena.
      If AAA had nothing to hide, why be afraid.

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 7:38 am,

      I find it hypocritical that folks like you see nothing wrong with John going public. But when Archbishop Apuron went public, you cry foul.

      Delete
  3. Diana, Your facts are facted up. lol!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Diana, don't contradict what u preached yesterday about forgiveness. U seem very diffensive on all ur blogs. Forgiveness can't happen if u can't forgive yourself. Practice what u preached. I do understand that so many things are happening back in Guam and all u have to do is pray. Why do u keep adding fuel to the fire. I can't seem to understand.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 1:52 pm,

      Archbishop Hon started it first by badmouthing Archbishop Apuron in the media. I am only relating facts by refuting his argument.

      Delete
    2. Please tell us the facts because weve seen the letter from Tony's lawyer to cease his smear campaign against tony boy by the Typhoon.

      Delete
    3. Dear Mr. Terlaje,

      These are the facts:

      Fact1: Archbishop Apuron never did anything to John Toves.

      Fact 2: It was John Toves who FIRST came out in PUBLIC, through the media that Archbishop Apuron molested his cousin.......a cousin he never even spoke to.....a cousin who never told him that he was molested. So, it was Archbishop's name that was FIRST smeared through the media.

      Fact 3: John Toves admitted that he heard about his cousin's molestation from someone who heard it from someone else.

      Delete
  5. Tim has deleted an article entitled: alpha is not Catholic. An out attack on the bishop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Alpha not important to Guam. we dont need more programs. we need the true faith.

      Delete
  6. excellent speech of the card. Muller Prefect of the Pontifical Congregation for the Doctrine, he is the guardian of doctrinal orthodoxy. If you can translate http://kairosterzomillennio.blogspot.it/2016/11/card-gerard-muller-presentazione-di.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hon's behaviour is extremely embarrassing for the Church. I would be very surprised to hear a bishop talk like this over coffee. But to read it in the secular media is outright scandalous. He would do so much less harm if he just kept silent...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Archbishop Hon didn't rape young altar boys.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous at 9:35 pm,

      I do not live in communist China. In my country, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

      Delete
    3. Make no mistake 8:17pm, that is the voice of Peter speaking to you all.

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous at 8:43 am,

      Francis is the Pope, not Hon. And it was Francis who removed Hon within a month after we complained. The fact that Cardinal Filoni intervened when LFM tried to enter the seminary is proof of that.

      Delete
    5. Hon is goner. He won't ever visit back to Guam for his own peace of mind. But Archbishop Michael Byrnes is a stayer, we'll have him for the years coming. I am more concerned about what he is thinking than about Hon.

      Delete
  8. For sure, the orchestrated daily attacks on the Catholic Church of Guam continue on the pages of the Freemason Pacific Daily News. Haidee Eugenio and Tim Rohr are unifying their forces to bring Archbishop Byrnes down to his knees. More and more lawsuits will be filed against the Archdiocese. Basically, everybody can freely pillage the Catholic Church if that person is old enough to claim abuse by someone like Fr. Brouillard of 40-50 years ago. This defenseless situation for the Catholic Archbishop of Guam was artificially created by a joint effort of different branches of the Freemasonry who came together in the prospect of looting unlimited damages from Catholics, especially from local people who will have to stand the expenses of the lawsuits.

    The Catholic Church is on trial by Public Law 33-187, a premeditated, sophisticated piece of legislation that was designed to undo the Catholic faith on Guam. Typical of Freemasonic senseless attitude, Tim Rohr is bragging about the fate of Senators Rory Respicio and Frank Blas Jr. who both co-authored this Freemason bill together. Rohr claims that throwing these Senators under the bus is just okay, "so what" he keeps repeating. In fact, not only them, but other members of the Guam Senate who supported this bill were sent home from the Legislature by voters so that they cannot cause more damages to their constituents. But for Rohr, it is only the outcome that counts, that free unlimited charges can be made by charging Archbishop Byrnes's office by demands of ten and ten millions dollars! What greed, what rotten hunger for money! Simply astounding! Talk about easy money some for trouble makers. Exception, of course, are those who might have made valid complaints based on messy situations from the last century.

    Talking about sergeant Haidee of the Freemasonic association of high ranking women officials, she has never had any urge to substantiate her wicked inventions and lies that she spreads every single day in her private newspaper, the PDN. No wonder she has no clue about what INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM might be, because she has never had to investigate anything in her life as journalist to make her progress on her Freemasonic ladder walk higher and higher. It is just not her way to investigate anything when lies can be spread easily and freely without anyone questioning her "special arrangement", actually wicked distortion, of facts.

    Her latest claim is that the teaching and practices of the NCW is "in conflict" with the majority of Catholics on island. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a big, fat dirty lie! Heidee Eugenio has zero knowledge about the teaching and practices we have in our communities. First of all, these things cannot be in conflict because these things agree 100% with the teaching and practices approved and promoted in the official Catechism of the Catholic Church! Second of all, it is only a handful of gullible, uneducated old people who were misled to believe there is a true conflict here. There in none! The majority of Guam Catholics do not believe Tim Rohr and his allies, because they are led by their natural instincts and became abhorred by these things emanating from the Freemasonry. Third of all, therefore, PDN opens itself up to innumerable defamation lawsuits in connection to her lies about the Neocatechumenal Way that are published and smeared all around the Pacific region on a daily basis.

    It is time to stop Freemasonic trouble making. It is time to stand up for truth and honesty against those who want to destroy our Church! It is time to support Archbishop Byrnes in his efforts to push back trouble makers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I found it troubling that the PGN article interviews all enemies of the NCW, but allows no opinion from those who support or are members of the NCW communities. It is a very unprofessional journalist practice. It looks like PDN became a slavish mouth piece of David Sablan and CCOG.

      Delete
    2. Pope Francis on AAA:
      “People can ‘smell’ it — the people of God have God’s nose. People can ‘smell’ it and they move away when they see narcissists, manipulators, defenders of their own causes, and bandits of vain crusades."

      Delete
    3. Dear Anonymous at 7:41 am,

      It sounds like the Pope was thinking of Archbishop Hon. After all, he wanted to shut down the type up and send away the seminarians.

      Delete
    4. Maybe because he saw that the Guam RMS was more intent on getting the numbers for show?
      Santo Papa also said, “Do not let yourselves be tempted by numbers and by the quantity of vocations; rather look for the quality of discipleship. Neither numbers nor quantity: only quality” ....

      Delete
    5. Dear Anonymous at 12:39 pm,

      That does not apply to RMS. As someone pointed out the priests on Guam accused of sexual molestation are outside RMS. Perhaps, they should look into their formation.

      Delete
    6. Diana,
      You and I know that the whole investigation into Apuron goes way beyond the sexual allegations. Remember, it all started with his inability to handle things here and the trouble grew and grew. The sexual allegations provided the last straw.

      The argument over the Yona property brought attention to the RMS here which led to more investigations.
      You kept gloating over the number of seminarians being introduced to the world coming from Guam and how we should be proud of all the new priests coming from here. Well, Rome heard you--- as well as all the complaints that came from the other side as well.
      I have no doubt that Santo Papa did some investigation and came to some of his own conclusions: "look for the quality of discipleship...neither numbers nor quantity: only quality".

      Delete
    7. Dear Anonymous at 5:19 pm,

      The canonical trial is on the sexual allegations and that is it. The Vatican is already aware that Archbishop Apuron did not give the Yona property away. Rome heard us because it took only only a month to get rid of Hon. Rome did not hear you because the NCW continues on with its celebration and the RMS is still in operation.

      Delete
  9. When was the pastoral visit scheduled? Post that date with a credible source to prove that Archbishop Hon lied about the reason for the visit at the time the pastoral visit was scheduled.

    INNOCENT until proven guilty.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The PDN article from December 2014 states that CCOG sent letters to the Congregation of the Evangelization of Peoples, and the Secretary of that congregation came to Guam in January of 2015. Now whether those letters really were sent to that congregation can't be proven with just a PDN article, but IF it is true then it is REASONABLE to believe that Hon was sent in January 2015 in regards to the letters of complaint sent by CCOG.

    And it is also REASONABLE to think that perhaps not much care was done into the credibility of the accuser because November 24 and December 22 is almost one month. Doesn't the church has take seriously sex abuse accusations? Would it be right of the church to NOT do anything if an accusation is brought up, especially if it is brought up to Rome? Innocent until proven guilty, BUT who decides when a case should and should not be investigated even if the accusation was only hearsay?

    Can we not then judge that the result was a hasty decision and not a "spiteful" decision?

    Don't go judging a person's action as hate towards Archbishop Apuron. If Archbishop Hon had already decided that immediate action needed to be taken then he did what he thought was best for the diocese. Whether or not it acheived that goal is a completely different story.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 8:14 pm,

      John Toves' accusation was announced through the media on November 18, 2014, not November 24th. It was on January 4, 2015 when the Vatican delegation arrived. According to KUAM:

      "Guam - On Sunday, January 4th three archbishops from Rome will arrive on island to conduct a pastoral visit. According to a release from the Archdiocese of Agana, Archbishop Savio Hon Tai-Fai, Reverend Father Tadeusz Nowak, and Archbishop Martin Krebs will be on Guam with the hope of fostering reconciliation and mutual understanding in the archdiocese. The chancellor of the Archdiocese of Agana Father Adrian Cristobal says they do plan to meet with the clergy, religious, members of the laity and various groups during their one week stay."

      http://www.kuam.com/global/story.asp?s=27745478

      Documents were given to the Vatican delegation at that time. CCOG claimed that they gave a 64 page report to Archbishop Hon when they met with him in January 8, 2015. That 64 page report mentioned Father Brouillard.

      However, when news reporters questioned Archbishop Hon on August 5, 2016 about Father Brouillard, he appeared not to know anything about Father Brouillard other than that the Archdiocese was paying him a stipend. This means that he never bothered to read any of the documents that was submitted to him in January, 2015.

      Yet, TODAY, he claimed that he submitted a report to the Pope back in January, 2015, recommending that Archbishop Apuron be removed and a new bishop installed. So, the question is......how did he submit such a recommendation when it was obvious four months ago that he never bothered to read any of the documents given to him when he was here last year??????????

      Delete