The damage has been done. Indeed, in our society, a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Unfortunately, your Pastoral decree with Prot. No. 02-48 has done more damage than you realize. The moment you stated in your decree that Father Luis has been laicized, the media quickly took up the story and published the laicization of Father Luis. Now, that you have come out and admitted your error, do you think the media is going to publish your clarification? The damage has been done, and I am still waiting for the media to publish your clarification. According to an anonymous person who posted in the jungle:
AnonymousDecember 16, 2025 at 7:24 PMRegardless of whether he thinks Camacho is guilty, he should have given Camacho the benefit of the doubt until Camacho exhausted all his appeal rights. In this case, he knew Camacho intends to file an appeal. So, his announcement about Camacho being laicized was not only premature, but managed to destroy Camacho's reputation on the spot. Any attempt to backpedal not only looks foolish by showing his incompetence, immaturity, and ignorance, but prevented Camacho's reputation from ever being restored in any meaningful way should he win his appeal and reverse the verdict permanently. Camacho may have a civil case for damages.
Diana, the Guam Daily Post published Archbishop's clarification.
ReplyDeleteArchbishop says he 'acted in haste' in priest laicization announcement | Local News | postguam.com https://share.google/UcqiZqEkTJr7C6EMH
Dear Anonymous at 10:29 am,
DeleteThank you. I read the news article you sent me. The post was correct in that Father Luis was arrested for custodial interference. The only ones who made any kind of sexual allegation was Deacon Steve Martinez and the JungleWatch blog.
If you google Fr. Luis Camacho, AB Ryan's letter of laicization comes up first, so yeah the damage has been done.
DeleteDiana: What you fail to acknowledge is that Fr Luis was found guilty of sex abuse in a canonical trial. And the first appeal upheld the same guilty finding. Stop comparing the criminal issue with the government to the canonical issue with the Church.
ReplyDeleteApparently Deacon Martinez and JungleWatch were correct in the sex abuse allegations. You should be happy that they came forward to protect the Church and the people of Guam!
@Anon 11:17. Do you remember Cardinal Pell of Australia? He was found guilty. but later found not guilty in an Appeals Court. Did he apologize? No. Yet, Rohr wants Camacho to apologize. It seems that Rohr already found Camacho guilty. Like Diana said, Camacho deserves due process. As long as there is an Appeals, he is innocent until proven guilty regardless of the Vatican findings.. That's why AB Ryan had to backpedal his decree.🙄
DeleteAnon @ 11:17…good point about Cardinal Pell. Some similarities between Pell and Camacho. Both accused of sex abuse. Both found guilty at their first trial.
DeleteBut also some striking differences. When Pell was accused he requested a trial right away. When Camacho was arrested he resigned immediately, and then he became a fugitive. He fled from Guam and was acting as a priest illegally. Camacho tried for 9-10 years to avoid an investigation and trial.
Pell and Camacho appealed after the first finding of guilty. Unlike Pell, Camacho was found guilty in his appeal Yes, Camacho has one more appeal. But the fact remains that Camacho was found guilty of sex abuse, which was upheld in an appeal.
To further clarify my earlier post. Sex with a 17 yo is ok with GovGuam, as long as it is consensual. No doubt, so Fr Luis only was charged with custodial interference by GPD.
ReplyDeleteBit in Church law, sex with a 17 yo is sex abuse. And tjat is exactly what Fr Luis was found guilty of, and upheld in the first appeal.
Dear Anonymous at 11:17 am and 11:20 am,
ReplyDeleteThis is why Father Luis is appealing that verdict. He was arrested on custodial interference. That was on the police report. So, where did the sexual allegation come from? It came only from Deacon Steve Martinez and Tim Rohr's blog. Where did Tim Rohr and Deacon Steve get their information? Well, certainly not from the police department...that is certain. Would it come as a surprise if they gave their information to the Vatican. After all, Deacon Steve Martinez gave his information to Child Protective Services. And CPS revealed nothing.
We also know that Tim and Deacon Steve wasn't in the backseat of the car watching the whole thing. 🤣 So yeah, where did they get their info.
DeleteLet's not forget the media. They also made the sexual allegation following JungleWatch. It did not come from any police report. The speculation of a sexual allegation came from JungleWatch.
DeleteSo you have seen the police report Diana? How did you get a copy? Why not share it with us all so we can see for ourselves that the arrest was only because of custodial interference, and the police report says that no sex was taking place. Come on Diana, how did you get to see the police report? I thought the record was expunged.
DeleteDear Anonymous at 3:02 pm.
DeleteThe police report was covered by the media. It says that he was arrested for custodial interference. No mention of sexual misconduct was ever mentioned except by the Jungle and Deacon Steve Martinez. Those are facts. The media only mentioned sexual allegation AFTER Deacon Martinez reported the allegation to the media. Again, those are the facts. I go by facts, not speculative fantasies.
Anon at 3:02 pm, All you're doing is trying to convict Fr. Luis without a trial. All you're doing is taking away his right to due process. Diana never said that he's innocent. All she did was logically laid out the facts without saying he was guilty or not guilty.
DeleteHer message to AB Ryan is that an accused individual has a right to due process. And of all people, Rohr should understand due process. Afterall, he was also accused of sexual abuse and beating his wife.
Premature victory lap from Deacon Steve and Tim Roth. LOL, they deserve a defamation law suit! Hahaha
ReplyDeleteAnon at 5:33pm. Thanks for pointing out due process. Don’t you realize he has already been judged by the facts, of what I have to assume was a competent party. And we now know for a fact he was found guilty of sex abuse. And then he had an appeal and guess what? They concurred with the first verdict…guilty again.
ReplyDeleteSo I guess he now has a right to a third hearing. We will wait on that as well.
But as far as I can see the facts showed he was guilty of having sex with a 17 year old girl. No speculation there! So as someone else commented, Tim Rohr and Deacon Martinez were right all along.
Im just waiting for Diana to admit that he has been convicted by a canon court of sex abuse
I really don’t care what the civil court says. This issue has always been a Church issue.
Dear Anonymous at 9:51 pm,
DeleteThird hearing? This was his FIRST appeal; therefore, there was only 1 hearing. Previously, the Vatican concluded that there was no sufficient evidence. Therefore, new evidence must have risen. Since Father Luis plans to appeal, there will be an investigation as to what evidence was submitted. We will simply wait for the investigation to be done.
For all we know, JW may have planted the false allegation to the Vatican.
DeleteSince we have a new Pope, maybe Bishop Apuron can have his case reviewed by the new Pope. Apuron's case is very exceptional and inconsistent with everyone (both priests and bishops) who were laicized for an offense that the Vatican claimed Apuron committed.
ReplyDeleteDiana, you say the Vatican previously found no sufficient evidence. Doubtful or it would have been big news. Are you talking about the fake letter from bishop Ballon in 2016? All lies by a kiko Bishop. He claimed the Vatican had thoroughly investigated the case and was able to absolutely clear Luis. We now know that was a lie because the Vatican would not have allowed the trial this year if they had already fully cleared him in 2016.
ReplyDeleteBut we have come to expect lies from Neo leadership, so we are not shocked.
Lies? You mean like when Rohr kept telling everyone that Apuron was not seeking a canonical trial in Rome. Then suddenly, news came out that Apuron did request for a canonical trial in Rome.
DeleteThen, Rohr convinced you that the letter from Bishop Ballen was a fake. Where is Rohr's evidence that it was fake?
Then, there is the lie that Rohr told you that the RM Seminary did not belong to the Archdiocese. But lo and behold, the title from Land Management says that the property belonged to the Archdiocese. And what did Rohr do? He demanded that Land Management remove the name "Archdiocese of Agana " as the owner of the property simply because it did not fit his narrative. Look at yourself in the mirror first before you speak to me about lies.