Frances Quichocho resumed her testimony Tuesday afternoon in the racketeering lawsuit filed against her and her husband, attorney Ramon K. Quichocho, by businesswoman Jung Ja Kim.
\nFrances admitted that she and her husband took furniture and other items when they moved out from the unit they were renting from Kim in 2010. Frances, however, stated that the items they took were stuff she either purchased or were given to her as gifts by Kim.<\/p>\n
Frances\u2019 testimony came shortly after their rebuttal expert witness, Guam attorney Jacqueline Taitano Terlaje, completed her testimony.<\/p>\n
Frances said they moved to the Sign Arts Building in San Jose upon Kim\u2019s encouragement after their rented house in Dandan was burglarized in April 2008. She said they brought furniture and purchased many other items needed for their apartment and her husband\u2019s law office.<\/p>\n
Shown many receipts by her lawyer, Michael Dotts, Frances identified the receipts as for items that she bought such as a sink, plumbing materials, air-conditioning unit, lumber, plywood, and several others.
\nFrances said she paid Kim $50 for the mirror and $150 for the sink. She said Kim gave her a bedroom set, a leather couch, and karaoke machine as gifts.<\/p>\n
Kim earlier testified, among other things, that when the Quichochos left Signs Arts Building between January and February 2010, the couple took the furniture, and other items\u2014all worth about $23,500\u2014that she provided them. She said one of the items allegedly stolen were the couch and the sink.<\/p>\n
Kim also claimed that the Quichochos refused to pay her $21,077.42 in rental for their law office and the apartment.<\/p>\n
Terlaje completed her testimony late Tuesday afternoon as the Quichochos\u2019 rebuttal expert witness.<\/p>\n
In her report, Terlaje concluded that it is unlikely that there was a violation of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct as the record does not support a finding that Ramon Quichocho had a sexual relationship with his then client, Kim. Terlaje stated that there is no clear and convincing evidence to support Kim\u2019s allegations of rape and consensual sex with Quichocho and Frances.<\/p>\n
Terlaje also pointed out that the report of Kim\u2019s expert witness, Guam assistant attorney general Benjamin M. Abrams, was a limited review of the record, and did not include the volumes of depositions and formal responses provided by Ramon Quichocho in the disciplinary proceeding, \u201call which when taken together as a whole, provide a more objective review of the evidence available.\u201d<\/p>\n
During cross-examination by Kim\u2019s counsel, Robert T. Torres, Terlaje stated that Ramon Quichocho worked for Kim in an organizational capacity and that she does not recall Ramon Quichocho representing Kim\u2019s in his individual capacity.<\/p>\n
Torres then showed a document prepared by Ramon Quichocho on Nov. 2, 2007, in which the lawyer wrote that Kim was his client. Terlaje said she does not recall if that letter was among those over 4,000 pages of documents that the Quichochos gave her to prepare her report.<\/p>\n
Torres showed a couple more documents that Ramon Quichocho himself prepared, and Terlaje replied that she did not dispute based on those documents that Kim was his client.<\/p>\n
Terlaje also pointed out that in her report, credibility has no bearing on her and that she just looked at the facts presented to her at that time.<\/p>\n
Terlaje is currently a member and chairperson of the ad hoc disciplinary committee for the Supreme Court of Guam. The Quichochos retained her to provide a rebuttal opinion on attorney conduct and the application of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct to the facts in the case.
\nAbrams had already testified. In his report, he concluded that Ramon Quichocho not only committed ethical transgressions but likely even criminal acts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Frances Quichocho resumed her testimony Tuesday afternoon in the racketeering lawsuit filed against her and…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":23,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[51],"class_list":["post-29807","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-local-news","tag-guam"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29807","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/23"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29807"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29807\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29807"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29807"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29807"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}