Judge raises potential conflict for AG hopeful Torres in Igisomar case

Superior Court Associate Judge Lillian Ada Tenorio has raised a potential conflict of interest involving attorney general candidate Joaquin “Jack” Torres, who may have to withdraw from representing a defendant in the criminal case involving Department of Lands and Natural Resources Secretary Sylvan O. Igisomar should he win the Nov. 20 runoff election.

During a hearing last Nov. 12, Tenorio raised concerns about Torres continuing to represent Rosemary C. Camacho, one of Igisomar's co-defendants, if he becomes attorney general.

The judge pointed out that Torres would then head the Office of the Attorney General, which is prosecuting his client. Special prosecutor Olga Kelley is handling the case for the Commonwealth on behalf of the same office Torres would lead if elected.

Tenorio indicated that the conflict would prevent Torres from continuing as Camacho's defense counsel and raised the possibility of her retaining another attorney.

Torres, who is facing Michael Norita Evangelista in the attorney general runoff, informed the court that he had already discussed the possibility with Camacho.

The issue arose as Tenorio considered motions to postpone the jury trial, originally scheduled for Dec. 7, 2026.

Torres sought the postponement partly because of his participation in the runoff, while public defender Robert McNeil, who represents another defendant, also requested more time to prepare.

McNeil informed the court that he was currently the only attorney handling cases at the Office of the Public Defender, with approximately 100 cases, and had only recently taken over his client's defense following the departure of previous counsel.

Tenorio acknowledged McNeil's situation and indicated that ensuring adequate legal representation weighed more heavily in her decision than Torres' election-related commitments.

Kelley opposed Torres' request, arguing that he was already aware of the possibility of a runoff when he committed to the December trial schedule.

The prosecutor, however, acknowledged McNeil's staffing difficulties while expressing concern about further delaying a criminal case that has been pending for more than a year.

Tenorio initially considered moving the trial to Feb. 1, 2027, but scheduling conflicts eventually resulted in a new trial date of June 21, 2027.

The judge emphasized that the postponement was necessary regardless of the attorney general runoff's outcome because McNeil still needed sufficient time to prepare his client's defense.

A written order reflecting the new trial schedule is still forthcoming.

Kelley also questioned why defendants continued occupying government positions despite facing criminal charges, including one reportedly working at the Department of Public Safety.

She raised concerns about their continued receipt of government salaries while the criminal proceedings remained pending and questioned whether applicable personnel regulations should have resulted in their suspension.

Tenorio reminded the prosecution that the defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty and emphasized the court's responsibility to ensure a fair trial.

Igisomar faces charges including misconduct in public office, theft of services, and child endangerment stemming from allegations that he improperly used government resources to transport himself and his two children between Saipan and Managaha Island on Sept. 28, 2024.

Prosecutors also allege that Camacho and another defendant participated in altering official records connected to the incident.

Igisomar's attorney, Viola Alepuyo, previously sought dismissal of three charges against the DLNR secretary, arguing that the government's amended charging document failed to sufficiently establish the elements of the alleged offenses.

Kelley opposed the dismissal request, maintaining that the charges were legally sufficient.

During the Nov. 12 hearing, Tenorio also indicated she was inclined to deny the Commonwealth's request to allow an off-island witness to testify remotely through Microsoft Teams because the witness was not an expert. The parties were given additional time to submit their arguments before a ruling.

The court will also move other pretrial proceedings, including the previously scheduled Daubert hearing, closer to the June 21, 2027, trial.