top of page

No response yet from airport or police on Mantanona case; Guam courts didn't recognize her TRO

By Johnnie Rosario

It's been three days since Kandit News asked Raymond Mantanona, his boss - airport executive manager John Quinata, and the Guam Police Department for comment about the criminal complaint of rape Mr. Mantanona's daughter, Rachel, made against him.

There still has been no answer to our requests for comment.

Mr. Mantanona is the fire chief at the airport's fire division. He was working for the airport throughout the time his daughter says he raped her (between 2006 and 2010, when she was between the ages of 12 and 16), and has not had a break in service to the government of Guam.

This means that, even if the statute of limitations on rape had expired, Mr. Mantanona still can face charges of misconduct while employed in GovGuam. [NOTE: The Guam Legislature in March 2011 passed into law a repeal of the former three-year statute of limitations on child rape. From March 2011 forward, any person who rapes a child can face criminal prosecution at any time. Because the last rape Ms. Mantanona alleges happened prior to March 2011, the former statute of limitations generally applies (see discussion below)]

Ms. Mantanona, who now lives in Hawaii and is 26, sought help from the Hawaii Police Department, which prepared a criminal complaint and forwarded the complaint to the Guam Police Department on July 22, 2020. On Wednesday, July 29, Guam police officer Frank M. Santos emailed Ms. Mantanona, telling her the case had been closed in consultation with prosecutor Christine Tenorio from the Guam Attorney General's Office due to the lapse in the statute of limitations.

Ms. Mantanona was not told about the official misconduct statute, nor was she asked whether Mr. Mantanona ever threatened her to remain silent about the rape after March 2011. Such an action, it may be argued, can pull the rape charge back into the statute of limitations.

"Since high school he would stalk me and make sure I’m at school and straight home after," Ms. Mantanona said. "He’d ask if I told anyone anything and just make sure I didn’t tell anyone what he did! I was stalked by him even after moving out of his home! And the only reason why I was able to move out of his home was because I told him, 'I don’t want to live with you in that house because of everything you did to me!' Then that’s when he yelled at me over the phone and told me to shut my damn mouth and asked me if I told anyone what happened. And I told him 'No,' then he said calmly, 'Okay you can move out and into your boyfriend's house.'"

Ms. Mantanona's fear for her life led her to seek a temporary restraining order against her father, even though they live thousands of miles away. The Hawaii court granted the TRO, but the Guam Superior Court did not honor it and never served the TRO on Mr. Mantanona.

Mr. Mantanona is very politically connected, and connected within the law enforcement community. His brother is John "Boom" Mantanona, the longtime former police officer awaiting trial on major witness tampering and drug conspiracy evidence and charges. His first cousin is Ken Mantanona, a recently-retired police officer who led the former Mandana Drug Task Force and now is a candidate for mayor of Inarajan.

"I was afraid of starting a case directly with GPD due to the connections Raymond Mantanona had in Guam," Ms. Mantanona said. "This was communicated to HPD also. This is also a reason why I was afraid to come out early on while I was being raped at the time."

Ms. Mantanona wrote about the process she went through in pursuit of justice, and how the Guam justice system has failed her. This is her testimony:

Below explains the complete process on how we moved forward with building a case from Hawaii (HPD) that ended up going nowhere once it was forwarded/receive to Guam (GPD)

I reached out to VARO in Guam, in the beginning because I didn’t know where to start in the first place.

First off, VARO were very very helpful with me. The young man that was so helpful, so supportive of my situation as I explained what I need assistance with. They pointed me in the right direction on who to file a complaint with which in my case is HPD.

I called 911 in Hawaii to report a non emergency complaint and HPD Officer showed up and took my statement.
Which was then forwarded to the Detective of the appropriate department.

The Detective then got ahold of me. Scheduled for a complete video and audio interview.

Which ended up being the first hardest step for me to explain to a complete stranger on what happened to me so many years ago.

One important information that I didn’t have to move forward with the case was an official ID of Raymond Mantanona. Which obviously I didn’t have.

This was provided to HPD a few days later once they established communication with GPD.

I then had to go back to the precinct to meet with the Detective on the case to fill out a form and to confirm Raymond Mantanona’s identity.

Once this was done, it was a waiting game to put together the case before it was forwarded to GPD.

In the mean time, I decided to file a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against Raymond Mantanona at the Family Court in Hawaii which was granted the same day.

I forwarded the information to the HPD Detective who forwarded it to Guam. Who was then told the restraining order forwarded by him could not be served to Raymond Mantanona.

And that in order for a restraining order to be served to him. We had to file with the Supreme Court Of Guam (SCOG)
Which could’ve been done online but I didn’t move forward with it because I wasn’t sure if I had to appear in court or not for the restraining order.

The only reason I would’ve went to Guam was to testify in court for the case not for one restraining order only.

We may live in different locations, but the reason why I wanted to file a restraining order was because I wanted to do everything in my power to keep him away from me and my family. And I did fear and still do fear that with Raymond Mantanona’s temper, he will harm me and my family regardless where I live.

Later on, the Detective got a brief phone interview from my fiancé Donovan. Then forwarded the case to GPD.

After not hearing from GPD for a week or two, I reached out through email to find out the status of the case.

THE REPLY BACK FROM GPD (E-Mail) ended up being the most disappointing news because I thought we had done enough to build a solid case especially the way HPD conducted their investigation.

This is what ultimately led me to reach out to Kandit News Group because I needed my story to be heard and to come out. I wouldn’t except that after all we had done out here with HPD, GPD would close the case as fast as they did.

My biggest frustration in all of this was finding out from you, Troy that an official misconduct charge is a possibility because it was not long ago that Larry Rupley went through the same situation that I did.

I don’t understand how GPD could miss this charge twice on a government of Guam official with a serious accusation against them such as Rape!

My second frustration is, after being told that the case was closed. All I was provided with was a Reference Number to my Closed Case. No resources were given to me in coping with this type of trauma or anything.

How is it that HPD went out of their way to provide a victim with the resources but GPD couldn’t.

At the end of the day, I truly want Justice and for Guam to have a better process in helping sexual assault victims considering the high rate of sexual assault on our Island of Guam.
2,616 views1 comment

1 Comment

Whatever happened to the prosecution of those responsible for authorizing the retroactive pay raises awarded during the Calvo Administration? 4 GCA 6218.1 provides: § 6218.1. Prohibition on Retroactive Pay Raise. Whenever a classified or unclassified employee of the Government of Guam, including all departments, agencies and instrumentalities, whether or not autonomous, receives an increase in pay resulting from step increase, pay range increase, promotion or any other cause, such increase in pay shall not be retroactive from the date of its authorization, unless so specified by law. Any person who authorizes a pay raise which is retroactive in violation of this Section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. For a timeline of the relevant events, see the…

bottom of page