L.A. Sheriff’s dep’t conducts criminal probe on Joel Bander

KFI reports that a criminal investigation was opened on the U.S. lawyer in 2010

By Rhony Laigo

(Editor’s note: The story below is the third of many articles that Balita has been publishing on Atty. Joel Bander, a U.S. lawyer who was accused of molesting a Filipina in the Philippines, and by hundreds of homeowners in the U.S. who claimed they were scammed by him. A newspaper tabloid claimed that the Filipina sexual assault victim was “fictitious” and that the events didn’t place. In our earlier articles, we produced evidence from the court to dispute those claims and we will continue to present to you, dear readers, legal documents and verified claims to show what his alleged victims say about Bander.)

“Preliminary Investigation: After a warrantless arrest, the arresting officer will submit the evidence to the Prosecutor (formerly known as a Fiscal) who will conduct a preliminary investigation to determine whether the available evidence merits the filing of formal charges. Evidence, in this case, may include testimony, complaints, and other sworn statements. The Prosecutor is required to file charges against you within twelve hours of an arrest for a minor offense like ‘oral defamation’ or ‘slander,’ or within 36 hours for serious offenses like ‘fraud, robbery, or rape,’ or to release you.  

If you have been arrested with a warrant, the Prosecutor will determine if probable cause exists and the execution of the arrest was proper. The Prosecutor then has 60 days to file the charges with the appropriate court. However, if the evidence presented by the police is not strong or sufficient to hold you, the Prosecutor can make a recommendation for your discharge and the dismissal of the charges.” (Embassy of the United States, Manila, Philippines: http://manila.usembassy.gov/wwwharst.html).

So as not to give any distinction that this article may be biased, this author extracted the paragraphs above from the U.S. Embassy in Manila which is part of its instructions for its citizens who may be facing criminal charges in the Philippines instead of from a Philippine law book that may not be easily accessible. With respect to this article, the person involved is Atty. Joel Bander, who, for some reason, was able to convince a few fake Filipino investigative reporters that the incident that took place on July 15, 2006 was “untrue” and “without basis.” The incident in question involved a Filipino woman, who accused Bander of sexually molesting her at a condo unit in Manila that led to her filing of criminal charges against Bander.

The case was dismissed but only last March this year. And thanks to the fake investigative reporters’ recent article, they showed that there was a dismissal hearing that took place and an order to return the bail that Bander might have paid to the court for his provisional release. They also said that the 2008 warrant of arrest we here at Balita presented to you, dear readers, was withdrawn. Yes, but, again, only last March, this year. 

The fake investigative reporters said “we were two years late,” while referring to the withdrawal of the arrest warrant. But what we only said was that there was in fact a criminal record and a warrant of arrest, both of which we presented in our previous issues. We did so because the fake investigators kept insisting that the incident was “untrue” and “without basis.” They even said that People’s Tonight retracted its own story. Hah, until now, these fake investigative reporters have yet to produce that People’s Tonight article.

We’re also at a loss why they still don’t understand that there should be “sufficient” evidence before a case is filed, not to mention that the Filipino woman swore before a prosecutor, and that the Philippine government has 60 days to file charges, meaning they have to investigate first, which involves tax payers’ money, before they go to the judge and file the case. As stated by the U.S. Embassy “the (Philippine) Prosecutor will determine if probable cause exists and the execution of the arrest was proper” prior to the filing of the case. The Embassy added that “the Prosecutor can make a recommendation for your discharge and the dismissal of the charges,” which means the prosecutor could’ve immediately ignored the case in 2006 when the complaint was filed, and yet it took Bander five years, in 2011, to have it dismissed by the court.

For them to tell us that this was “untrue” and “without basis” is the fake investigative reporters’ own problem. They should ask the prosecutor in the Philippines why they filed the case against Joel Bander, who was charged with “Acts of Lasciviousness”, in the first place. And if this molestation incident didn’t take place – because Bander claimed the complainant was fictitious – why did the court issued a warrant of arrest against their master, er, Bander, two years later? 

It would be recalled that when these fake investigative reporters (who we earlier referred here as dogs to give semblance to their relationship to their newspaper that carries the same name, but because we probably touched a nerve so we will call them instead watch dogs) broke their “most celebrated” article against this author, they said they had a People’s Tonight story that retracted the Joel Bander sexual molestation incident. These watch dogs even said that the same story published phrases that stated Bander was involved in “illegal recruitment charges” and that the complaint was filed in “Branch 78, Taguig” which the watch dogs said “does not exist.”

We here at Balita are still wondering where the heck did this information come from, and where the heck is that People’s Tonight that they said published a retraction. In our first article regarding this matter, we presented a legitimate copy of the criminal information that stated that the case was filed in Branch 27, Metropolitan Regional Trial Court, City of Manila. We also presented a photo of the actual People’s Tonight copy that ran the Joel Bander sexual molestation story. 

The July 22, 2006 “The Price of a U.S. Visa” People’s Tonight article written by Allan Bergonia, which can be found on our website www.balita.com, didn’t mention any “Branch 78” nor “Taguig” nor “illegal recruitment charges.” (Hey, watch dogs, produce the People’s Tonight article that you guys have! You owe it to your readers, and so I can stop badgering you with this demand.)

But while Joel Bander and his watch dogs are busy trying to defend themselves on this People’s Tonight retraction, let us offer you another article – this time published here in Los Angeles – by Eric Leonard of KFI AM 640 Talk Radio (as shown in the photo). This is the same radio station you listen to when you hear Atty. Bill Handle and his morning crew report on current issues, and it is also where you hear the very popular conservative radio host, Rush Limbaugh, makes his daily rant against President Obama and all other liberals. 

Found on KFI’s website (www.kfiam640.com) is this article: “Loan Attorney Investigated” (http://www.kfiam640.com/pages/EricLeonard.html?article=6822105) by Eric Leonard who wrote that the L.A. Sheriff''s Department has opened a criminal investigation on Atty. Joel Bander

 

Found on KFI’s website (www.kfiam640.com) is this article: “Loan Attorney Investigated” (http://www.kfiam640.com/pages/EricLeonard.html?article=6822105). Lo and behold, it’s about Atty. Joel Bander!

According to Leonard’s article, “A criminal investigation has been opened into a lawyer already accused in civil court of ripping off loan modification clients. Attorney Joel Bander, named in two class-action lawsuits alleging malpractice and fraud, is also the subject of an L.A. County Sheriff’s Department investigation…”

The particular story, Leonard said, involved Bander’s alleged loan litigation scam, where he reportedly failed to act on the cases of 800 homeowners who signed up in the Bander Law Firm “Sue the Banks” program resulting in foreclosures to many Filipino, Korean and Armenian homeowners. Each homeowner paid at least $8,000, but claimed they did not get the legal services that they expected, and worse were not even refunded after they demanded that their moneys be returned.

So, our dear readers, Bander might have escaped from what he might have done against a Filipina in the Philippines, but he may yet have a pending criminal case here in the U.S. That shows you who this U.S. lawyer is.

Warrant of arrest issued vs Atty. Joel Bander in 2008

Above is a photocopy of the warrant of arrest issued against Atty. Joel Bander in 2008, two years after he was charged with "Acts of Lasciviousness" and "unjust vexation" for allegedly sexually abusing a Filipina in 2006 but has reportedly not appeared in court for months.

Two years after being accused of molesting a Filipina, the U.S. lawyer became a wanted man in the PHL

By Rhony Laigo

Last week, we here at Balita presented compelling evidence that may have disputed the pseudo investigative reporters’ claim in their new newspaper – which they call their new baby – that showed that there was an incident that allegedly took place on July 15, 2006 involving U.S. lawyer Joel Bander for reportedly molesting a Filipina client. The Filipina claimed the incident took place in a Manila when she came to the office of Atty. Joel Bander to help her secure a U.S. visa.

Though graphic in nature, the photocopy of the criminal information we published last week described how Atty. Joel Bander allegedly committed “Acts of Lasciviousness” against the person of one Cristina San Jose Y Aler at the Imperial Bayfront Tower, where Bander allegedly was entertaining clients. The same criminal information was the basis for the People’s Tonight story and its reporter, Allan Bergonia, when he wrote that Bander was slapped with the criminal case for committing “acts of lasciviousness” and “unjust vexation.” A photocopy of the same People’s Tonight story of Mr. Bergonia was also published in our midweek edition, which can be read in its entirety in our website balita.com.

The main reason for presenting the documents in our previous issue was to dispel the claims of the pseudo investigative reporters, who we will refer here as dogs so we can all identify them as being staffmembers of their newspaper which bears part of the same name. Two weeks earlier, these dogs published a story claiming that this author based his letter to the commissioner of the Bureau of Immigration of the Philippines on a “People’s Tonight story” that they said was later “retracted by People’s Tonight.” According to the dogs, People’s Tonight deemed it “untrue and without basis” and that the complainant was “fictitious.” Even the subhead of their article said that this author “was unaware” that the complaint “was filed by (a) fictitious accuser.”

Perhaps, the dogs didn't know that such criminal information did exist that stated that a certain Cristina San Jose swore before a prosecutor when she filed the complaint back in July 2006.

Therein lies the problem of the dogs. The real People’s Tonight story stated that Bander was facing criminal charges based on a true incident report and a true complaint filed before a Manila Prosecutor’s Office, specifically at the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 27, as written by Bergonia.

The dogs claimed in their so-called investigative reporting that the same newspaper, People’s Tonight, published the same incident, but the dogs stated that People’s Tonight published it as being filed in Taguig, Branch 78. However, as we presented here last week, and as posted on our website, the story of Mr. Bergonia didn’t make any mention of Taguig, nor Branch 78. Bergonia also wrote that the complaint was filed at the Manila Prosecutor’s Office.

At this juncture, Balita poses this challenge to the dogs – who may have been FED not with “dog food” by their master/owner but maybe RAT POISON (but since they’re animals they ate them anyway not even thinking that they didn’t have the actual documents with them) – to produce their own copy of People’s Tonight that stated otherwise.

Be that as it may, as we have promised last week, we are presenting here another document that may eventually kill whatever credibility these pseudo investigative reporters have (if they had any) for being careless, unprofessional and unworthy of their claim to be the dogs of the community.

As you can see, the warrant of arrest issued against Atty. Joel Bander on July 10, 2008 was based on the same July 2006 incident. Although the dogs reported that Bander attended the initial hearings against him, there were no succeeding appearances made on his behalf or by him in person that warranted his arrest, the Manila prosecutor’s office told Balita.

According to the court, Mr. Bander could no longer be located and that his attorneys could no longer make representations on his behalf. The warrant of arrest was signed by Judge Joel A. Licuanan of Branch 27, Manila, Metropolitan Trial Court.

In 2011, Bander appeared before the same judge, or five years after the 2006 alleged molestation incident and a year after erstwhile BID Commissioner Marcelo Libanan issued a watchlist order on Bander in 2010.

Libanan reportedly found out that Bander made trips to the Philippines at least five times in 2009 but never faced the courts nor inquired about his case, when he knew for a fact that a criminal case was filed against him. He apparently never even informed his lawyers that he’s been to the Philippines several times.

But what’s funny was that the dogs also wrote about the dismissal of the case – a stark evidence that there was indeed a case and has been pending since 2006. For these dogs to infer that People’s Tonight – the most popular afternoon daily tabloid in the Philippines – retracted its own story because it was “untrue” and “without basis” was ill-advised and laughable to say the least. And did we mention that the warrant of arrest was issued in 2008 or two years after the case was filed in a criminal court?

(Next week, we will publish parts of articles that will portray the character of Atty. Joel Bander and why several Filipinos filed a complaint against him at the California State Bar.)