Sunday, March 19, 2017

Guam's Law On Community Service

According to Guam's law on community service (the bold is mine):  
§ 80.90. Definitions. As used in this Article: (a) Alternative Community Service means repayment of the general public for the expenses incurred incidental to the crime. Repayment shall be by donation of time by doing public service work at entities or for persons so as to benefit the general public which includes: charitable agencies, governmental subdivisions, educational institutions, the handicapped, the elderly, the ecology, the church of the offender's choice and any other agencies that the sentencing judge deems reasonably rehabilitative to the offender, however, no work service shall result in gain to any private individual or corporation, other than the defendant. 
Did the Church have any say in making this public law?  It was Joseph Lastimoza who chose the church he wanted to have community service. It was the Guam Parole Board who ordered Joseph Lastimoza to do community service in the Dededo Parish.  According to Guam's civil law, the Guam Parole Board did NOT need Archbishop Apuron's permission to allow Lastimoza to do community service in the Dededo parish because the law itself already stated that it can. The Church was INCLUDED among the LIST of institutions where a person can do community service.  All the person had to do was choose the church.    

25 comments:

  1. Still trying to discredit Father Paul. No institution can be forced to accept the assignment of a parolee, especially given the separation of powers of church and state.

    Please show us the law where an institution or establishment MUST accept a court ordered "sentence of service".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 10:10 am,

      First of all, "separation of church and state" only applies to the First Amendment in the U.S. Constitution regarding "freedom of religion". This is not a case of freedom of religion.

      Finally, you stated that no institution can be forced to accept the assignment of a parolee. If what you say here is true, then where is the document showing that Archbishop Apuron approved the parolee to serve community service at the Dededo parish? It must be a document showing the Archbishop's name and signature. Where is the document by the Archdiocese RESPONSE to the Guam Parole Board????

      I showed you a document stating that the Guam Parole Board ORDERED Lastimoza to serve community service at Santa Barbara Catholic Church, and I showed you the law that the Guam Parole Board had the authority to make such order without the Archbishop's permission according to law. So, show me the RESPONSE of the Archdiocese to the Guam Parole Board signed by Archbishop Apuron.

      There are only two people on record who allowed a convicted sex offender and murderer to work at Santa Barbara Catholic Church. The first was the Guam Parole Board, and the second person was Father Paul Gofigan, who was on record stating that he allowed Lastimoza to work as a volunteer worker at the church.

      Delete
  2. But when Mr. Lastimoza was ASSIGNED to Dededo Church in 1999 there was NO FATHER GOFIGAN to allow that assignment.
    The burning question then is WHO ALLOWED MR. LASTIMOZA TO WORK EIGHT HOURS A WEEK AT THE DEDEDO CHURCH AS SHOWN IN THE DOCUMENT YOU ARE BASING YOUR POST ON?????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 12:46 pm,

      The FACT is there is no evidence or record of Archbishop Apuron giving permission to have a sex offender to work at the Dededo parish. However, there is a document signed by Archbishop Apuron telling Father Paul to remove the sex offender from the Parish. These are the FACTS.

      Delete
    2. Anon. 12:46 pm, The burning question for me is why didn't "that" priest notify the archdiocese of what the Parole Board did? There is no doubt that Fr. Paul allowed a sex offender and murderer to work at the Dededo parish.

      Delete
    3. Wasn't Fr. Raymond Cepeda the Parish priest before Gofigan? The same Fr. Ray Cepeda who was defrockef by Apuron after investigations found him guilty of sex abuse?

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous at 3:51 pm,

      According to KUAM:

      "The release states, "At the conclusion of an investigation of serious allegations of abuse...the Archdiocese had Fr. Raymond laicized in December 2009". Fr. Paul Gofigan replaced Cepeda at the Santa Barbara Church. Asked if he was aware of why Fr. Raymond left the church," Fr. Paul said, "No, he just it was supposed to be for medical reasons - that was what we were told there was not reason to suspect anything."

      http://www.kuam.com/story/12353891/archdiocese-confesses-priest-was-defrocked

      It appears that you are correct. Father Paul replaced Father Raymond Cepeda. Therefore, he accepted Lastimoza who came to see him with the Order papers from the Guam Parole Board. The question is "did Father Ray notify the Archdiocese about the decision of the Guam Parole Board regarding Lastimoza?" Is it possible that Archbishop Apuron was not aware of it until someone who knows Lastimoza brought it to his attention in 2011?

      Delete
  3. If Archbishop Apuron is convicted of sex abuse he should be removed from his position without any mercy. Just as a repentany Lastimosa was removed from even volunteering at the church. He showed NO MERCY so NO MERCY should be given him.

    Do you agree Diana?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 6:46 pm,

      If Archbishop Apuron is found guilty in the canonical trial, I agree that he should be removed from his position as Archbishop of Agana.

      Now, Anonymous.......if he is found not guilty, then he will return as Archbishop of Agana with full authority. Do you agree, Anonymous?

      Delete
    2. AT 6:45 PM.... If Lastimosa bothers, Rape and Murder one of your Family Mother, sister,or Daughter,will you show him MERCY ?????? Anonymous 6:PM

      Delete
    3. Anonymous NOT 6:45 but still AnonymousMarch 20, 2017 at 3:22 PM

      Anonymous @ 12:25 PM: My answer is YES.

      If I hold on to the anger and don't give it up to God, I would be more like you instead of trying to do as Jesus said "Be merciful just as your father is merciful."

      It's hard to think of being merciful if it was my Family Member but Lastimoza has repented and has been able to live up to the conditions of his parole. So who am I not to be merciful?

      As far as Apuron goes he has been merciless. I know God will be merciful AND JUST to him if he would acknowledge his wrongdoings and repent. I'm not God so it's harder for me to be merciful to Apuron. But if he follows Lastimoza's example I would work hard to be merciful to him too while leaving JUSTICE to God.

      Delete
    4. The Brothers Rape her, they didn't have Mercy,did they have to took her ''LIFE''

      Delete
    5. @12:25, if brother tony raped your brother and took away his youth, would you have mercy? At least with death the victims wouldn't have to live to see their abuser everyday.

      Delete
    6. Matthew 5:7 Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.

      Mercy is not for the other person. It is mainly for us. Mercy is for our own healing and salvation. If we do not have mercy, then neither will God in Heaven have mercy on us.

      Delete
    7. I think there is a misconception here. The misconception is allowing a person to work in a public position as being equal to having mercy.
      It is true that we must always have mercy on those who repent for their sins. However we must also look at the bigger picture. According to Lumen Gentium, one of the Dogmatic Constitutions of the Catholic Church produced in Second Vatican Council. It is one of the Catholic Church's most important roles to be a source of light or beacon for people everywhere. The church is meant to be a guide for people towards Christ. This is why public, scandalous sins must be reprimanded. It is not a lack of mercy but rather a lack of mercy for the weakest souls who look towards the Church as a beacon of light for their life, if you allow people with such sins to hold any type of public service position in the Catholic Church.
      This, in no way should be misconstrued as a lack of mercy towards the sinner. The sinner must always be helped, and loved. This practice has always existed in the Catholic Church. In the early church, excommunication was used as a way to publicly shun people who had committed grave public sins or apostasy as a way to maintain the mission of the church. These same people where then welcomed publicly back into the Catholic Church after rehabilitation, and with a public welcoming during easter. Hence many countries still have traditions of penitents marching during lent. Part of the rehabilitation process was to correct wrong doings. Ask forgiveness from family members who where hurt etc. It is common sense that you are no longer a source of light if you act like you are good and no longer sinning, but neglect to ask forgiveness from those you have offended. This is in no way an accusation, just stating important facts.
      In other words, yes, if Apuron is found guilty, he should no longer hold his position. This in no way shows lack of mercy and love towards him. We must always help, heal and mend the damage.

      Delete
    8. 6:31PM that you Tim again?

      Delete
    9. AT 6:31 PM TIM she didn't get a Chance to Live

      Delete
    10. It is very low that Tim Rohr comes here as anonymous! :(

      Delete
  4. Mercy, mercy, mercy is all good, but there is a moral demand (putting the jar down) in the Woman at the Well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Diana, Do you know why was Roy Quintanilla removed from the jw blog? His name and picture is no longer listed on the top post. There used to be 4, now three, soon none I guess. All lies!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous @ 10:37 AM you think they're lying? Then check out what I found in the jungle:

      AnonymousMarch 28, 2017 at 2:20 PM
      Anon 8:44 AM..If you mean Defrocking Apuron then you are right we all want the same thing..If there is another way Please do tell. Are You a Victim to say the church is still trying to MANIPULATE us>,If not,kindly please keep your opinion to yourself..I AM A VICTIM and I did the right thing by testifying. YES,I TESTIFIED...I have a Conscience and cannot live with myself if I didn't do what is right..I admit, i was nervous and scared to be in there by myself but it was a chance I had to take.. And you know what ,it is NOT what everyone say or thought it would be..The Cardinal was not intimidating,..Nobody was. As a matter of fact,it was straightforward questions..there is NOTHING to fear but fear itself.f.. Unless you are a victim who has testified,then you might have a right express yourself otherwise, otherwise keep your offensive and derogatory comments outside the door.

      =======
      If even ONE of Apuron's victims was brave enough to testify I'm thinking it won't be too long before priests can stop saying "Anthony our Bishop" at Mass. And even if the picketers don't get Apuron DEFROCKed then at least their APURON OUT sign will come true.

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous at 8:53 am,

      I would not be too certain of that. The reason David Lujan did not want his clients to testify was because they could incriminate themselves without realizing it.

      Anonymous 10:37 am asked a good question. Why was Roy Quintanilla removed from the Junglewatch blog? Quintanilla was the first person to come out. Does this mean that Tim Rohr no longer see him as a victim of Archbishop Apuron?

      Delete
    3. Diana @ 11:41 AM as good as David Lujan is as a civil litigator he is EMPLOYED by those abused by your Brother Tony. They hired him but it was up to each of the victims to testify. We know that Roland Sondia did not testify when Cardinal Burke was here. We don't know whether he changed his mind afterward.

      I have no idea why Roy Quintanilla's pic isn't on Junglewatch. I can only guess that those who still have pix there decided to testify and Roy didn't. Tim Rohr has said that he believes all those who reported being sexually assaulted by Apuron were telling the truth. My guess is that Rohr is keeping the pix of Walter Denton, Sonny Quinata (RIP) & Roland Sondia up because they (or in Sonny's case Mom or Brother) testified and he wants people to remember their suffering.
      BTW: I think that Walter's mother was summoned to testify too when Cardinal Burke was here. But she got her summons too late. Maybe she was able to testify too. But we will never know who did testify. We can only guess.

      So I think Anon @ 8:53 AM is right. The picketers will get their wish and will be able to spend Sunday mornings at home soon. Cardinal Burke said he hoped to get the results by summer. I'm guessing Kiko and others are working hard to keep Apuron from being defrocked.
      But with Fr. Paul & Msgr. James restored to parishes (STRIKE 1)
      and the Yona property returned to the Archdiocese (STRIKE 2)
      the reports of his sexual abuse make it STRIKE 3 and Apuron will be OUT!

      Delete
    4. Dear Anonymous at 2:18 pm,

      First of all, the Yona property never left the Archdiocese. It had always been owned by the Archbishop of Agana.

      As for the canonical trial, we can only wait for the results. I do not know who testified and who did not. If Roy's photo was removed because he decided not to follow Tim Rohr, I am not surprised.

      Delete
    5. I don't get your "strikes" 2:18.

      1: Who has problem with Fr Paul and Msgr James being assigned as parish priests?
      2: Who did not want the Yona property to belong to the Archdiocese?
      3: You take something for granted that nobody knows if true or not.

      So who do you think your "strikes" are hurting?

      Delete