by Nick Delgado

Guam - Police Officers Anthony Quenga, Mario Laxamana and David Manila along with former Blue House Lounge owner Song Ja Cha and her employee Freda Esuen face additional charges that were contained in a second superceding indictment issued Friday. Cha was convicted in federal court for luring young girls from Chuuk and forcing them to work as prostitutes at the now-closed down club in Upper Tumon. Cha along with Esuen, who helped the U.S. Attorney's Office, now face local charges in the Superior Court of Guam along with the three police officers.

All five defendants in a nearly five-year-old prostitution and human trafficking case were named in a second superceding indictment listing additional charges of:

9 counts of kidnapping as a 2nd degree felony
9 counts of felonious restraint as a 3rd degree felony
attempt to compel prostitution as a 3rd degree felony
1st degree criminal sexual conduct
2 counts of criminal sexual conduct
aggravated assault
criminal facilitation

The three were indicted for allegedly aiding and abetting prostitution at the club between 2006 and 2008. The additional charges were announced during a motions hearing for the defendants before Superior Court Judge Anita Sukola this morning. The prosecution declined however to discuss the additional charges.

The judge said, "In light of the seven charges added to this new indictment that you may have to look at it and maybe some of your motions may be modified, altered or amended. So do you agree with the court to keep the motions in abeyance to give you opportunity to review the grand jury transcripts and police reports in this matter?" Counselor William Pole, representing Officer Manila, replied, "No, your honor. I believe the 48-hour rule has already been violated. In addition, on Friday I filed a sixth amendment violation based upon the 48-hour violation."

Instead an arraignment for the additional charges was scheduled for this Wednesday at nine o'clock in the morning.

Meanwhile discussion today did focus on the motions of the three officers who are seeking to have their cases dismissed with prejudice. Their defense attorneys' argue there rights were violated when their clients were not brought before a judge within 48 hours after being arrested. Peter Perez said, "If a defendant is arrested there are two options, one is bring the defendant before the court within 48 hours or you provide the defendant with a notice to appear.

Pole said, "The government cites its only an 11-hour violation but that does not conform to the statue, the due process rights that the government has guaranteed to a defendant. The only alternative I've ever read is you have to let them." Attorney Leevin Camacho added, "There was no emergency or no danger and the only danger they've cited is a general concern by the victims about the police department as a whole."

The prosecution claims an exception should be given in this case and filed a document transcription of the magistrate judge stating unavailability to hear the matter. The judge took the motion under advisement. Also discussed was a motion to dismiss the case for Officers Laxamana and Quenga, as the defense argues the court has no jurisdiction to hear a case that exceeded its statute of limitations. This issue was argued between Assistant Attorney General Nelson Werner and Quenga's attorney (Camacho) in the courtroom today.

Werner said, "A prosecution may be commenced against public employee or any person acting in complicity of a public officer for any offense based upon misconduct in office by the employee at any time while the employee continues public office," adding, "the date the offense occurred and this is what happened, they were police officers. They were arrested at the time and they were still police officers, they were indicted at the time they were police officers so the statue hasn't passed."

Camacho said, "The indictment itself draws no nexus between the official capacity of any of the defendants and the alleges actions and are just blanket assertions of things that happened over a two year period."

But Werner says it doesn't have to be and he will bring the issue up again during further hearings. Pole filed a similar motion to dismiss based off the statute of limitations argument. Judge Sukola meanwhile set jury trial for January 2 at 1 o'clock in the afternoon.