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.

800 homeowners claim they were ‘duped’ by Atty. Joel Bander and his firm

Lawyers Geragos, Singer, Miller sue Bander Law Firm on behalf of its own former clients

By Rhony Laigo

It’s been two weeks and we have yet to hear from the pseudo investigative reporters of their claim that there exists a People’s Tonight story – Manila’s most popular afternoon tabloid – that the paper said they retracted their own story when they published an article that Atty. Joel Bander was criminally charged with “acts of lasciviousness” for allegedly molesting a Filipina.

While they try to deal with this problem, this author would like to clarify to Balita readers that the letter of inquiry submitted to the Philippine Bureau of Immigration as presented by the pseudo investigative reporters in their own newspaper was a mere request to find out why a foreigner who has a standing warrant of arrest can go in and out of the country.

In our past two issues, we presented real documents from a Manila court identifying Joel Bander as being accused in 2006 (Weekend Balita Oct. 15) and a warrant of arrest that was issued against him two years later, in 2008 (Weekend Balita Oct. 22). Again, we reiterate that Balita was forced to published the documents, one of which described the graphic sexual attack allegedly perpetrated by Bander against the victim, to dispute the claims of the fake investigative reporters that the victim was fictitious and that the events were “untrue and without basis.”

But what's truly amazing is the fact that despite the criminal case in the Philippines, these pseudo investigative reporters, who are Filipinos by the way, have chosen to defend an indefensible American lawyer, who was also accused by more than 800 American homeowners of committing what could be one of the biggest loan litigation scams in the U.S. Most of these homeowners are – listen up fake investigative reporters! – Filipinos, your own kababayans, here in Southern California.

For a clearer picture, these 800 homeowners were former clients of Bander himself. They were those who had signed up with the Bander Law Firm (BLF), which had advertised (in full pages in a broadsheet newspaper that he used to also represent as its legal counsel) that they(BLF) would sue their lenders and save their homes from foreclosure.

Among those who filed a complaint against Bander were  Antonio “Anjo” Sanchez of Coachella Valley, Grace Laurel of Victorville, Lisa Resuta, Joseph Parcacio, Daniel De Leon and Bach Quiaonza of Long Beach. There were also Korean victims, such as Carol In, Ji Chang, Ted Yoon and Chul Soo Kim. Ted Yoon claimed he paid the Bander Law Firm $26,000 for multiple properties, but was never given the legal service he was promised. 

If that's not enough, Atty. John B. Miller Jr. alone filed on September 9, 2009, a complaint to the California State Bar against Bander on behalf of 29 homeowners. This complaint at the State Bar prompted Bander to sue Miller for allegedly “soliciting his clients” but was dismissed by the court. Miller had told Balita that each had paid the Bander Law Firm (BLF) at least $8,000.

Ted Yoon and several others later sued the BLF for fraud and for violations of the RICO Act or the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which is a federal crime. For the benefit of the pseudo investigative reporters, Yoon was represented by Atty. Anne Singer, in case they choose to "investigate" this matter.

Another case – this time for breach of contract, fraud and deceit, negligence, etc. – were filed by another lawyer against Bander and his law firm by Shin K. Yoon, aka Lisa Yoon, and represented by Atty. Robert Mills.

The class action lawsuit filed by celebrity Atty. Mark Geragos on behalf of  homeowners against Joel Bander and his firm.

Yet another case was filed against Bander and the BLF filed by, are you ready for this?, Atty. Mark Geragos on behalf of Taguhi Hakobyan and Grigor Alemsharyan (two Armenian nationals) and “All Others Similarly Situated” homeowners – a class action lawsuit. Yes, he is the same Atty. Mark Geragos, the celebrity lawyer who once represented Michael Jackson and Winona Ryder – the same criminal lawyer you always see on CNN.

All these cases filed against Bander’s law firm may no longer proceed because the 25-year-old firm filed for bankruptcy in early 2010. Sadly, the homeowner victims may not get a single cent from the thousands of dollars they paid to the firm.

If these lawsuit don’t convince you, dear readers, that there’s something wrong with Joel Bander, it is our hope that the criminal case filed against him in the Philippines for allegedly molesting an innocent Filipino woman, who was seeking his help to get a U.S. visa, hopefully will. 

Even if Bander says that the case was dismissed, it wasn’t because she was “fictitious” as he claimed she was, it was because she didn’t appear in court, which was understandable given the fact that the humiliation she will have to face and against one of Philippines’ most popular and most expensive lawyers may be too much to bear. 

Who paid for Bander's expensive lawyer in the Philippines? Your guess is as good as ours, although the other lawyers claimed that Bander might have earned millions of dollars from the homeowners they said he “duped.” Try this: 800 homeowners multiply by $8,000. Answer: $6.4 million. And yet the BLF said it was bankrupt. 

Solving heavy backpacks that injure our children

(September 6, 2006) Early this week, as children were going back to school, a report on children getting injured because they have to carry heavy backpacks was again highlighted on a feature story of a leading TV news program. This is not new. In fact, before the end of the millennium, there have been studies that heavy backpacks cause injuries to schoolchildren, either suffering from a lower back pain or in the shoulders.

What’s troubling, however, is that many students, who always feel very proud of going to school, seem not to mind carrying heavy backpacks, as if these are the norms, especially when they are in higher grades. As if it comes with the responsibility of being a student of higher grade, and one should not complain because everyone in the class has to carry the same load.

In the school where my daughters go to, higher grades are classed on the second floor. Other schools go up as high as four storeys. And to think they have to carry their backpacks all the way up there.

Sensing trouble when I saw my younger daughter carry her loaded backpack, I took the liberty of speaking to the principal after school (she’s new) about what I think was a problem that is mostly overlooked by parents, who might think that because their children are bussed to schools or dropped off inside the campus, heavy backpacks are negligible. Well, I’m sorry, parents. But I needed to do this because I think there are better ways to improve the situation, and because, even if your child has not complained about it, many are suffering from injuries and that they only make it to the headlines on the first day of school.

According to the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, your child’s backpack should weigh less than 15 percent of their body weight. A 100-pound child shouldn’t be carrying more than 15-pounds of weight, the academy said, which doesn’t need explaining. And this the principal, thank God, already knew. She even said that it’s “ridiculous” for children to be carrying heavy bags. I told her I have no problems with children taking their books home and studying hard (hopefully), but there should be a better way to relieve the students of the heavy burden. She assured me that she will meet with the faculty on how to address the weighty problem, like perhaps they can alternate the days in which kids will bring home books from one subject at a time.

My wife has been suggesting that instead of books, children should be bringing home CDs as she thinks, with today’s technology, most books were already conceptualized in a computer even before they were printed. Ergo, an electronic copy should now be available. She found out from at least one publisher, McGraw Hill, that some books used by our daughters, which were published as early as 2003, are already available in a CD format. (Remember the advertisement where novels are already available on CDs, thereby allowing you to read them with your laptop? What’s more, some books on CDs can now be heard, no reading is necessary, all it takes is a set of head phones. Yes, my daughter told me that too. That everybody should learn how to read and that listening is not an option. Only for the seeing impaired, and maybe for old folks like me, who always needs to find his reading glasses in order to read. He..he...)

My daughter said that just like any file sharing software wreaking havoc on many recording companies, books on CDs can be copied resulting in copyright infringements. I responded that publishers can encrypt the formats so there will be no “illegal copying” (good luck!). I also told my daughter that we will even save on trees and freight cost since shipping heavy books, both hard and soft bound, is pricey as against a copy of a CD which can be sent by regular mail, if not totally downloaded from the publisher’s website, which means more savings for us. I also went as far as telling her that this will solve the problem of the lack of books in many countries, including mine back in the Philippines, where during my elementary days, we had to share books in class because there were not enough books. With CD copies or access to the internet, everyone should be able to read their assigned book, further enhancing literacy. 

Another argument my daughter raised though is that some still don’t have computers. I said, well, there are libraries, where computers and internet access are available. Also, with an electronic format, libraries won’t have to maintain several copies – one would be enough in the computer hard drive or in the network. Besides, it’s better to invest in computers, which has many uses, than purchasing volumes of books of the same title. Lastly, we prevent injuries to the back and shoulders because of heavy backpacks.(RFL)

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.)

Setting the record straight: Atty. Joel Bander was wanted in the Philippines for 'Acts of Lasciviousness'

A copy of People's Tonight disputes a claim by another newspaper regarding the alleged molestation incident by Atty. Joel Bander against a Filipina woman he claimed to be fictitious.

THE PROBLEM with pseudo investigative reporters is that they never verify any claims, especially if these are provided by their own boss. You may have recently seen a new tabloid in the market that “reported” on events that another newspaper had published, which happened to be us, Balita.

To set the record straight, we are providing here a copy of a People’s Tonight story, (“The High Price of US Visa”) dated July 22, 2006. In the story, you can see that Allan Bergonia wrote that the complaint was filed before the “Manila Prosecutor’s Office.” The complaint was filed, according to the story, “yesterday” or July 21, 2006.

Unlike what the other paper had printed, Bergonia didn’t write any other city or place other than Manila. Maybe the pseudo investigative journalists have a different People’s Tonight copy because they had stated that the complaint was filed in a fiscal’s office that “does not exist.” Also, Bergonia’s story didn’t say any word about “illegal recruitment charges” as published by the other paper.

But the next document that Balita possesses and that we are providing to you here tells a story that such person that the other paper said was “fictitious” may be a real person when she filed the complaint.

How, you may ask?

Above is the criminal information filed by the Manila Prosecutor's Office on October 17, 2006 against Atty. Joel Bander on behalf of a Filipina who claimed that she was molested by Bander. The case "People of the Philippines versus Joel Bander" accused the lawyer of "Acts of Lasciviousness" based on an alleged incident whereby the woman, who said she came to Bander to seek his help in acquiring a U.S. visa, was reportedly abused by Bander back in July 2006.

1. As stated, the case was filed at Branch 27 of the Metropolitan Regional Trial Court, City of Manila as so stamped. The case is docketed as Criminal Case # 433318 and filed on Oct. 17, 2006.

2. The case says “People of the Philippines” versus “Joel Bander” with the address Imperial Bayfront Tower, 1624 A. Mabini St., Ermita, Manila. As stated, Joel Bander, who Bergonia wrote was “An alleged trader who assists applicants in securing United States visas” is the accused.

3. 2^nd Assistant City Prosecutor Rector E. Macapagal, Chief of the Eight Division, so stated that the “undersigned Assistant City Prosecutor, upon sworn complaint fi led by the offended party CRISTINA SAN JOSE Y ALER…hereby accuses JOEL BANDER, of the crime of ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS...” In case you missed it, UPON SWORN COMPLAINT.

Now, for the benefit of all pseudo investigative reporters, before any prosecutor files a case, a police report is required. According to Bergonia, Ms. San Jose filed the complaint before the Manila Police District.

Bergonia wrote that Bander allegedly molested the complainant and that the incident allegedly took place on July 15, 2006. This means that the prosecutor and the police investigator worked for three months to verify if such complaint merits the filing of the case. To understand this better, perhaps an episode of Law and Order would be helpful, especially for those who never even covered the police beat (where most if not all cub reporters begin their professional careers to become full-fledged journalists) and the courts.

What we’re trying to say here is, the prosecutor doesn’t just invent a person to criminally prosecute any person, let alone a foreigner, which the Philippines has been courting to conduct business in the

Philippines, invest there and spend their dollars in the country. (But then again, U.S. Ambassador to the Philippines Harry Thomas revealed, albeit carelessly, that almost half of all Americans who come to the Philippines go there to engage in sex, but that is another story.)

In the People’s Tonight story, Bergonia wrote that Ms. San Jose said “she gave Bander $100 as partial payment for the visa application.” The story goes that Ms. San Jose had sought Bander’s “help” in getting a U.S. visa.

Several years later, the case was dismissed and Bander claimed that Ms. San Jose was fictitious and because the complaint was based on “trumped up charges.”

It should be noted, however, that Ms. San Jose was seeking Bander’s help for a visa five years earlier, back in 2006. This could mean that Ms. San Jose has been wanting to leave the country for greener pastures.

Balita, which, as mentioned by the other paper, had gone to the Philippines – because this is how an investigative story is conducted – had inquired from the prosecutor’s office about the Bander case. Indeed the documents showed that there was a case filed, that a certain Ms. San Jose swore before a prosecutor, and a People’s Tonight story was published.

Five years may have been too long and perhaps Ms. San Jose is no longer in the Philippines. Besides, how could the case progress when the accused was never present in the Philippines? And this we will present why in our next issue.

(Next week, we will publish here a copy of the warrant of arrest. We will also present more legitimate and legal documents in succeeding issues.)

Mt. Pinatubo@20 Photo Exhibit: More than just pictures, it was a reunion of survivors

(Standing from left) Nick Sagmit (formerly of Manila Bulletin), Mike Pusing (former PIO of then Mayor Richard Gordon, Olongapo City and organizer of Mt. Pinatubo@20 Photo Exhibit), Rhony Laigo (formerly of Times Journal), Myrna Aquitania (president of Filipino American Press Club of Los Angeles), Zen Lopez (curator and civic leader), Consul General Mary Jo Bernardo Aragon, City of Carson Mayor Jim Dear, Miss Beauty of the Philippines USA 2011 Erina Lightholder, Councilman Elito Santarina (City of Carson), Charie Villa (ABS-CBN Head of News and Online Business Regional Network), Tourism Director Annie Cuevas-Lim, Heraldo "Boy" Cabrido (formerly of Philippine Daily Inquirer), Joe Galvez (GMA-7 Online Editor and president of Press Photographers of the Philippines), Ted Aljibe (chief photographer of Agence France Presse, Manila Bureau), (seated from left) Val Handumon (photographer, European Pressphoto Agency, Manila Bureau), Ernie Sarmiento (current chief photographer of Philippine Daily Inquirer) and Angie de Silva (freelancer, consultant for YKL Fuji Film, Manila). Inset is Albert Garcia (current Manila Bulletin Photo Editor).

It’s been 20 years and yet the memories were still vivid in their minds. The photojournalists who risked life and limb to capture the moments of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption had only one thing in their mind: perform their assigned task to take the best picture possible in the best possible place.

It’s no wonder why a select group of Filipino photojournalists braved facing nature’s fury to work on one of the most daunting coverage ever. Not that they had little regard for their safety, but the urge to frame a picture that “tells it all” was much more compelling at that time as shown by the photographs now on display at the Mt.Pinatubo@20 Photo Exhibit at the Southbay Pavilion in the City of Carson. These pictures, chosen by a panel of Manila’s top press photographers, deliver reality, the truth, and the impact to humanity.

There are about 100 pictures in the City of Carson exhibit which were flown in by photojournalists from the Philippines that gave the awe-stricken and the curious a glimpse of how it was like during the eruption on June 15, 1991 and the days that followed. The Mt. Pinatubo eruption killed about 800 people, buried several towns around the volcano and destroyed properties worth billions.

Garbed in Barong Filipino, the photojournalists opened their initial U.S. leg of the photo exhibit in large formats sponsored by YKL Fuji Film in the City of Carson to celebrate the Filipino Heritage Month. The event was made possible through the invitation of the City Council led by Mayor Jim Dear and Filipino American Councilman Elito Santarina and the organizers of the Tambayayong Festival led by Sining Kambayoka president Edgar Lopez and project director Peter Calma.

The idea behind the photo exhibit that began in the Philippines was conceptualized by Mike Pusing, who at that time was in charge of the journalists covering the event as far as providing them shelter and direction. Pusing served as the public information officer of then Olongapo City Mayor Richard “Dick” Gordon, whose office was turned into a barracks by the reporters and photographers both foreign and local covering the eruption. 

It was Pusing who reminded Heraldo “Boy” Cabrido, who used to cover for Philippine Daily Inquirer and who just like the other photojournalists may have forgotten the seemingly now dormant volcano, that it’s been 20 years since Mt. Pinatubo roared and changed the topography of Central Luzon.

At that time, Cabrido was with 10 other photojournalists in Botolon, Zambales. All 11 in three separate vehicles were the most celebrated, for the lack of a better word, among all those who covered the eruption. Among the 11 was Albert Garcia, now photo editor of Manila Bulletin, whose photograph in full color captured what turned out to be the most compelling shot that showed the power of Mt. Pinatubo while exploding, followed by a searing pyroclastic flow racing against its slope, enveloping everything in its path and was going after him and the rest of the photojournalists, most of whom thought would never see another day.

Garcia narrated that he was in the second vehicle. While the others sought cover and prayed that they’d be saved, Garcia was busy focusing his camera. He recalled that his 50 mm lens wasn’t quite right – too tight, he said. Not thinking that he too had to duck and put down the curtains, Garcia decided to change his lens for a wider shot. He said he put in his 24 mm lens and took a picture…the same picture that made the covers of Time Magazine which also declared it as one of the Greatest 

Images of the 20^th Century. The National Geographic Magazine also chose it as one of the Best 100 Pictures of the same century.

The other photojournalists who were in the same vehicle with Garcia also had pictures of the explosion, but not until Garcia convinced them to hold their camera and take their shot. If not for Garcia’s presence of mind, the panicked photojournalists may have missed the moment when Mt. Pinatubo was at its “best” – again for the lack of a better word. Sad to say, others in the two other vehicles were not as lucky to have another alert Garcia with them that they failed to take as good a photo as that of Garcia’s.

But that was only on June 15. There were other photos that were as dramatic as Garcia’s and may arguably have competed with Garcia for the covers of the prestigious magazines if that were possible given the tons of photos to choose from. Some of the are pictures didn’t even show the erupting volcano itself, but they showed the tragedy that was taking place, of people fleeing to safety, the desperation of those in the evacuation centers and the destruction that mudflows and ashfalls were causing that resulted to deaths to many.

These unforgettable moments were recalled when Garcia, Cabrido, who together with Ted Aljibe (now the chief photographer of Agence France Presse in Manila), Val Handumon (now a photographer of European Pressphoto Agency), Ernie Sarmiento (current chief photographer of Phil. Daily Inquirer), Joe Galvez (current president of Press Photographers of the Philippines), Angie de Silva (freelancer), Charie Villa (who serves as head of ABS-CBN News and Online Business Regional Network) and Pusing, flew in from Manila courtesy of Philippine Airlines and Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation or Pagcor at the insistence of fellow photojournalist Ed Galvez (who used to worked for Times Journal) that they come to Los Angeles join Nick Sagmit (formerly of Manila Bulletin) and this author (who used to cover for Times Journal) to hold the exhibit in the U.S. (Derek Soriano, now a freelancer, is on his way to join his colleagues, most of whom will proceed to San Francisco for a similar exhibit on Oct. 11-12.)

The reunion of the journalists, who call themselves the Mt. Pinatubo Media Survivors Group, had all the flavors of what it’s like to be a member of the Philippine media once again – beer, smoking, loud voices and cussing...and it was all made possible through the hospitality of Priscilla Sagmit, wife of Nick Sagmit, who accommodated almost everyone at her place in the City of Carson, and by Jess Fonseca and wife Raquel, who hosted a night of booze and laughter at their Garden Grove residence. 

View Rhony Laigo's news broadcast on Kababayan LA now available on Youtube.