Friday, April 6, 2018

Misconceptions Of The Appeals Trial

A canon law expert was interviewed by the Pacific News Center.  His name is Monsignor Frederick Easton, a judical vicar with the Archdiocese of Indianapolis and former president of the U.S. Canon Law Society.  According to Pacific News Center dated April 4, 2018 (the bold is mine): 
A canon law expert says the potential reversal could result from a process the Vatican refers to as “second instance,” in which the very merits of the case can be re-examined. This contradicts what most believed: that only the procedure of the canonical trial can be appealed.
Even before the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reached a judgment in the canonical trial of former Guam Archbishop Anthony Apuron, most experts said the penalty or judgment is not appealable and that only the process can be challenged.
It’s what Archbishop Michael Byrnes said, in a previous press conference, that he understood as well. 
So, where did this misconception come from that only the procedure of the canonical trial can be appealed?  It came directly from Tim Rohr's blog.  While it is true that Archbishop Byrnes also made that same misconception, his statement came on March 27, 2018 (See the news report here).  

However, someone else was spreading that misconception much earlier than Archbishop Byrnes.  According to Tim Rohr, he stated the following on March 17, 2018 (just the next day after the Vatican Press Release): 
However, an appeal can only review the proceedings of the trial. New evidence cannot be introduced.............And, by the way, Apuron can file an appeal, but that doesn't mean there is one. It will have to meet several conditions first before the Vatican will entertain it, and it will be the same five judges who have already found him GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY. 
Below is a screenshot of the above statement: 



Imagine that!  On March 16th, Rohr told news reporters that Archbishop Apuron was still the Archbishop of Agana because of the appeals.  And then suddenly, just the next day, he stated in his blog that even if Apuron filed an appeal, that does not mean there is one.  Then on March 19th, the Coadjutor Archbishop claimed the title for himself or was that a coincidence?

It was Rohr who made that first misconception, and he made more than one misconception about the appeals trial. Other misconceptions he made was that new evidence cannot be introduced in the appeals trial.  Canon Law 1639 Section 2 says that it can. He also stated that it would be the SAME five judges who will hear the appeals.  However, expert canon lawyers stated that it will not be the same five judges.  According to news report:
Assuming the archbishop has challenged the ruling, Easton and Morrisey said the appeal would likely be evaluated by the full cardinal and bishop membership of the congregation, or by a new tribunal formed of a number of the members.
Isn't that very interesting to find that Rohr was the first person to make that misconception about the appeals trial? Then we find Archbishop Byrnes making the same misconception to the media 10 days later or is that a coincidence?  Today, Rohr went on air in K57 pretending to know more that the expert canon lawyers.  The procedures of the Tribunal of Second Instance is listed in the Code of Canon Law, which you can find here.

All five expert canon lawyers agree that the guilty verdict was most likely not child sexual abuse due to the lax penalty. Rohr is the only one who disagree with ALL the expert canon lawyers.   

So, who should you believe?  The five expert canon lawyers who all agree that the guilty verdict was most likely not child sexual abuse.....or Tim Rohr, a real estate developer with no degree or experience in canon law?      

24 comments:

  1. If Byrnes can be influenced by Tim, how much influence did Tim have on Apuron’s accusers?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Anonymous at 6:35 am,

      This is what Doris Concepcion stated in a news report on March 27th. Sound familiar?

      "To me, this is a far greater punishment than being defrocked, because once defrocked, he is free to return to Guam and to do whatever he wants, free of any control from the Vatican," said Doris Concepcion, .....”

      https://www.guampdn.com/story/news/2018/03/27/questions-remain-after-apurons-guilty-verdict/452082002/

      Delete
  2. Tim is misusing canon 1442. The canon law is only saying that the Pope is the supreme judge and makes his decisions through the tribunal and judges he appointed. That's all it says. Tim misused that law by saying that Apuron is going against the Pope, which is wrong. An appeal is in no way a declaration against the Pope. An appeal is a right that was given to him by the Pope. If it's seen as an opposition against the Pope, why then have an appeal. By creating this kind of misinformation to the public, Tim is inciting only hatred against Apuron and the Way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Jane,

      Exactly. He quotes what canon law 1442 says and then INTREPETS it to mean that an appeal means to go against the Pope. By doing this, he misinformed the Catholics so as to incite more hatred against Archbishop Apuron. I wish that Archbishop Byrnes could open his eyes to see this.

      Delete
    2. Diana, you don't need to go into this wrestling with Rohr and gang. The appeal will proceed and this will override everything. You could reject this polemy about the interpretation of the current verdict! It seems to be temporary anyway. Once a new tribunal begins, these past squirmishes will lose all significance.

      Delete
    3. I agree with 9:47 AM Anonymous. Getting worked up over the fact that Tim Rohr feels free to state his opinion gets people nowhere He is entitled to express what he thinks Whether or not people believe him is up to them.
      I was listening to KOLG on my way to work. It seems someone sent him my earlier comment from this blog and he was open to receiving calls. But nobody bothered calling. Instead of getting so worked up and complaining on this blog, someone should get on the phone and let Tim Rohr know what you think of what he's doing.

      Delete
    4. Dear Paula, 

      In the past, there were a few of us who tried speaking to Rohr in a civil manner, but it did not work. Because of his pride, there is no reasoning with him. We can only pray for him.

      Delete
    5. Diana, I don't want to take side, I don't know who has the 100% truth. But you know men are just men and they want to dictate what is important. Shun them! Show them the femina spirit that always suspects foul play when men argue in a loud voice! This is so typical and boring male business... I don't even have to say more.

      Men would go to blood to beat up and overpower each other! That is their game. Who cares, really? Men want to shout the stars down from the sky! But just let them cook in the stew of their own anger, showing how futile their manners are. Yes, pray for them, they surely need divine intervention to overcome their own stup... (oops) male trait of competing, fighting and just being loud.

      I tell you, dear Diana, don't believe them. Men are just men under all circumstances, they cannot behave like reasonable beings when they cock-fight. Let them destroy each other. Then it will be the time for the femina spirit to come and show herself victorious.

      Only we can bring peace. There is a reason why the palm branch of peace is held by a women and not a men.

      https://jesustrail.com/blog/palm-sunday-in-nazareth

      Delete
    6. Diana atleast their is some good news fr.paul is no longer the rector of the cathedral the temporary administrator is fr.jeff

      Delete
    7. Dear Femina,

      I am not against men. After all, I am married to a man.

      Delete
    8. Dear God is one, 

      Where did you hear that? And why a temporary administrator? Who is taking over Father Jeff's position?

      Delete
    9. Dear Diana, I am not against men either. I just see their pettiness and limitations. But in good hands they can learn how to behave... Haha. :)

      Delete
    10. Father Paul is heading to Yigo, Father Jon is on vacation right now but as I mentioned prior, he is one who will not be staying on Guam. It is not known yet whether Fr. Paul will become pastor, for now, not.
      Apparently Father Paul is happy to leave, the atmosphere at Cathedral has changed drastically, the Chancery Officials are taking over, locks have been changed here and there already.

      Jeffs assignmnent is temporary, James will return to basilica and Mike moves from Toto to Tamuning.
      It'll be interesting to know the financial situation of Tamuning now.

      Pas!
      -Jokers Wild

      Delete
    11. Jokers Wild at April 6, 2018 9:20 PM,

      You got good sources. As reported in today's umatuna si yu'os, Father Paul to Yigo and Father Jeff to Agana.

      Regarding the other Aviso, Father Edwin will seem to have his hands full as chaplain to GMH, GRMC, DOC and DYA.

      Where is Father Michael Jucutan being transferred to? And what about the other priests?

      Delete
    12. Joker's Wild, how are the transition antics going down at the Agana Cathedral Rectory? What kind of new fiascos?

      Delete
    13. Regarding the chancery office moving to the Agana Cathedral. Two quotes come to mind:

      1) "Easier said than done."
      2) "After all is said and done, more was said than done."

      Delete
  3. Diana, Rohr is deliberately spreading misinformation to confuse you. Don't believe him. He is saying this one day and the opposite the next day. Don't care about his rambling.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Exactly! Don't play into TR's nonsensical charades. It's not worth your time and energy.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ROhr's K57 interview is unbelievable, WE showed the middle finger to Archbishop Byrnes? When we are the one who obeyed and we are not giving him the Cathecatical directory. Ask the Vatican yourself. LOL and he said ( Rohr) that we are done for. LOL.

    Gino - Sinajana

    ReplyDelete
  6. I remember Timmy saying that I have a fetish with Monsignor James. Well look who has a fetish with Archbishop Apuron..... Haha. Timmy is a joke. Also, he is continuing his meeting St. Anthony's Church under Monsignor James' Parish. Haha. Sounds familiar like when James was at Cathedral?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Guamboy,

      I have heart about those catechists meetings that Tum Rohr was having. I heard him call up the talk show once and told Archbishop Byrnes that he was having those catechists meetings for 13 years.

      So for 13 years, what fruits did he produce? Did his catechists meetings inspire anyone into vocations of being a priest and nun? For 13 years, what fruits has it produced?

      Delete
  7. Mr. Rohr does not know canon law.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mr Rohr not a canonist; but he plays one on tv.

    ReplyDelete