Transcript of Don Lindblad's Testimony During Trial - Redacted

Page 1
1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF YAVAPAI
2
3 STATE OF ARIZONA, )
)
4 Plaintiff, ) Yavapai County
) Superior Court
5 vs. ) No. P1300CR201600966
)
6 THOMAS JONATHAN CHANTRY, )
)
7 Defendant. )
8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
9
10 BEFORE THE HONORABLE BRADLEY ASTROWSKY
11 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
12
CAMP VERDE, ARIZONA
13 August 9, 2018
14
15
16 TESTIMONY OF DON LINDBLAD
17 JURY TRIAL DAY 9
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
LISA A. STEINMEYER, CRR, RPR, CSR
25 Arizona License No. 50942
Page 2
1 A P P E A R A N C E S
2
3 FOR THE PLAINTIFF: Yavapai County
Attorney's Office
4 Ms. Susan Eazer
Deputy County Attorney
5 255 East Gurley Street
Suite 300
6 Prescott, AZ 86301
7
FOR THE DEFENDANT: Mr. John M. Sears
8 Attorney at Law
511 East Gurley Street
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 3
1 (Whereupon, the following testimony was

2 had:)
3 THE COURT: So that concludes the testimony
4 of that witness. Next, sir, you can call your next
5 witness.
6 MR. SEARS: I call Pastor Don Lindblad,
7 please.
8 THE COURT: Thank you. Good afternoon,
9 sir. If you wouldn't mind coming forward and having
10 you stand right at that podium there by the
11 microphone so we can hear you speak and then turn to
12 the clerk and she'll swear you in. Thank you very
13 much.
14 THE CLERK: Do you solemnly swear or affirm
15 upon penalty of perjury that the testimony you are
16 about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and
17 nothing but the truth, so help you God?
18 MR. LINDBLAD: I do.
19 THE COURT: Thank you, sir. Please come
20 over here and have a seat. Thank you, sir. Please
21 make sure the microphone is in front of you and
22 speak into it clearly and loudly.
23 DON LINDBLAD
24 having first been duly sworn to testify the truth,
25 the whole truth and nothing but the truth, testified
Page 4
1 as follows:
2 DIRECT EXAMINATION
3 BY MR. SEARS:
4 Q Would you tell us your name and what you do
5 for a living, please?
6 A My name is Don Lindblad and I'm a pastor of
7 Reformed Baptist Church in Kirkland, Washington.
8 Q And how long have you held that position?
9 A I've been a pastor there for 25 years.
10 Q And were you a pastor in other churches before
11 this particular church?
12 A Yes.
13 Q How long altogether have you been a pastor of
14 a Reformed Baptist Church?
15 A 46 years.
16 Q And in your -- in connection with your work as
17 a pastor, have you come to be aware of an
18 organization called ARBCA, the Association of
19 Reformed Baptist Churches of America?
20 A Yes.
21 Q How do you know about ARBCA?
22 A Our church is a member of ARBCA.
23 Q How long has your church been a member?
24 A We were one of the founding member churches.
25 Q In about what year?
Page 5
1 A 1997.
2 Q And was there a predecessor organization to
3 ARBCA to which your church belonged?
4 A Correct.
5 Q What was that called?
6 A Reformed Baptist Mission Services.
7 Q So in 1997 ARBCA came into existence and your
8 church was there at the beginning; is that right?
9 A Correct.
10 Q And is your church currently a member?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Have you held any positions, either formally
13 or informally, in ARBCA over the years?
14 A I've served in a number of capacities, on the
15 administrative council. I'm a trustee of our
16 seminary program and on the administrative council,
17 I either served on particular committees, different
18 committees or chaired them.
19 Q I know you're a modest man but would you
20 consider yourself one of the leaders of ARBCA over
21 the years?
22 A I'm not sure how to answer that.
23 Q Truthfully.
24 A Well, I've certainly been honored to have
25 served and to have been asked to serve.
Page 6
1 Q And does ARBCA have a headquarters?

2 A Yes.
3 Q Where is that located?
4 A Carlisle, Pennsylvania.
5 Q And do you know Tom Chantry sitting over here
6 at the table?
7 A Yes, I do.
8 Q How do you know Tom?
9 A I knew him towards the end of his seminary
10 career or around the beginning of his time at Miller
11 Valley Baptist Church.
12 Q So that would have been in the mid 1990s?
13 A Correct.
14 Q Do you know Tom's father?
15 A I do.
16 Q What is his name?
17 A Walt Chantry.
18 Q In addition to being a modest person, you are
19 also naturally soft-spoken. Could you be sure to
20 maybe tip the microphone up a little bit and keep
21 your voice up so those of us who have hearing issues
22 can be sure to hear you?
23 A Is that better?
24 Q It's much better. Thank you. So do you know
25 Walt Chantry to be a long-time Reformed Baptist
Page 7
1 pastor himself?
2 A Yes.
3 Q In what town?
4 A Pardon me?
5 Q In what town; where does Walt live?
6 A Oh, in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. Well, not now
7 but he did. That's where his church was.
8 Q And you knew him as a pastor in a church
9 there; is that correct?
10 A Correct.
11 Q And is it your understanding that that's where
12 Tom grew up?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Now, how long do you think you've known Walt?
15 A Well, I've known him to work with him since
16 1985. I met him in 1974.
17 Q So you have a long-time association with the
18 Chantry family; correct?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Okay, and you consider Walt Chantry a longtime
21 friend and colleague?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Going back to knowing Tom directly, you
24 certainly knew him as Walt's son over the years;
25 correct?
Page 8
1 A Correct.
2 Q But you said you had a particular connection
3 with him towards the end of his seminary time and
4 the beginning of his time as the pastor of Miller
5 Valley Baptist Church; correct?
6 A That's correct.
7 Q And tell us about the seminary. Where is the
8 seminary?
9 A It's Westminster Seminary California is where
10 he attended, and where I would have met him there is
11 at -- the Banner of Truth Publishing Company has a
12 pastor's conference every year and normally it's in
13 the East. In fact, it remains in the East, but they
14 had for about five years a West Coast conference,
15 and I would travel down to that conference, and
16 that's probably where I first met Tom.
17 Q Tom would have been a seminary student?
18 A Either a seminary student or just beginning
19 his ministry at some point at Miller Valley.
20 Q And where in particular in California is the
21 seminary?
22 A In Escondido.
23 Q In Southern California?
24 A Correct.
25 Q In connection with the beginnings of your
Page 9
1 relationship with Tom, did you come to consider him

2 a friend as well?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Okay, and you consider him a friend today?
5 A Correct.
6 Q Now, is there anything about that
7 relationship, either with Tom or with Tom's father,
8 that would cause you for any reason to come here to
9 court today and shade the truth or make false or
10 misleading statements?
11 A Not at all.
12 Q You're here to tell the truth?
13 A Correct.
14 Q Now, let's talk about a couple of different
15 things that you have some information about for the
16 jury here, and the first is the circumstances
17 towards the end of Tom's time at Miller Valley
18 Baptist Church. If I told you that the evidence
19 indicates that Tom was at Miller Valley in Prescott,
20 Arizona from June of 1995 until mid November of the
21 year 2000, does that ring true?
22 A Yes.
23 Q And you were aware during that little more
24 than five-year period of, in general, Tom's
25 activities at the church; correct?
Page 10
1 A Towards the end of that time, yes.

2 Q Did you have communication with Tom during his
3 pastorate in Prescott, that five-year period?
4 A I'm sure that we did. I don't remember how
5 much but --
6 Q Okay, and would it be fair to say that as Tom
7 entered into this new position, he was generally
8 excited and hopeful about this opportunity?
9 A Yes.
10 Q This was his first job as a Reformed Baptist
11 pastor; correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q So that would be an exciting time in the life
14 of any young pastor?
15 A Correct.
16 Q And in particular this church you knew to be
17 the church of a man named Bob Selph?
18 A Correct.
19 Q And how do you know Bob?
20 A His church or Miller Valley was a member of
21 the association and previously of RBMS, Reformed
22 Baptist Mission Services, and Bob was a member for a
23 time on the administrative council and then later
24 became coordinator, which is code for full-time
25 position, of our association, and he did that for a
Page 11
1 number of years, and so we worked together in that

2 context.
3 Q So in the Reformed Baptist movement
4 nationally, Bob Selph was a prominent person?
5 A That is correct.
6 Q And you knew him to be much respected and much
7 loved in his own church?
8 MS. EAZER: Objection, Your Honor, leading.
9 THE COURT: Overruled.
10 Q (By Mr. Sears) You knew him to be much loved
11 and much respected in his own church here in
12 Prescott; correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Now, moving ahead to a specific time period,
15 late October, early November of the year 2000, just
16 as Tom was about to leave his position in Prescott,
17 did you become aware that problems had arisen in the
18 church regarding Tom and allegations from children
19 of some of the families in the church; did you have
20 some information about that?
21 A The information I had was that there were
22 difficulties in the church. I don't remember that
23 it was that specific until the time of his
24 resignation.
25 Q And I'm thinking of November 8th, 2000 as a
Page 12
1 time connected to Tom's resignation. Does that date

2 have any significance for you?
3 A Yes. I knew that or I know that to be the
4 date that he resigned from his church, and later the
5 same day Rich Howe and Eric Owens called me on the
6 phone.
7 Q At your church in Washington?
8 A Correct.
9 Q Now, did you know Mr. Howe and Mr. Owens
10 before November 8th, 2000?
11 A Well, I certainly knew them by reputation as
12 elders in the church and I may have met them at one
13 of our association general assemblies, but I don't
14 remember, but I knew who they were.
15 Q So you get a call from them and the substance
16 of that call is about Tom's resignation?
17 A Yes. It's about difficulties in the church.
18 Q Is that the first word you had that Tom
19 actually officially resigned as pastor of Miller
20 Valley Baptist Church?
21 A I may have known the day before.
22 Q Through some communication with Tom?
23 A Correct.
24 Q So you were part of apparently a group of
25 experienced pastors that Tom was reaching out to in
Page 13
1 this time period; is that correct?

2 A Yes.
5 A Correct.
6 Q (By Mr. Sears) Were you aware of who else Tom
7 was trying to contact in addition to you about this
8 sort of end game at Miller Valley?
9 A I'm sure I was of some of them, yes.
10 Q Okay, and were they people you knew?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And was Tom seeking advice from you on what
13 could be done?
14 A He was seeking advice from a number of us,
15 yes.
16 Q And as a result of those conversations,
17 apparently you may have then known perhaps a day
18 before he actually resigned that that's what he was
19 planning to do?
20 A That's quite possible.
21 Q So when Mr. Owens and Mr. Howe contacted you,
22 it likely wasn't a complete surprise that they were
23 reporting that he had just resigned?
24 A Correct.
25 Q Did they act surprised; did they tell you
Page 14
1 anything that made you think that they were

2 surprised or flatfooted or caught off guard by Tom's
3 resignation?
4 A That I don't recall.
5 Q Okay, and as a result of this phone
6 conversation -- is that the first phone conversation
7 you remember ever having with either of them?
8 A Yes.
9 Q As a result of that phone conversation, was
10 there some understanding that something would happen
11 in the future?
12 A Well, they asked if they could meet with me
13 and some other men at a Banner of Truth conference
14 at the seminary in Escondido to be held that next
15 week.
16 Q So the 8th of Wednesday -- the 8th of November
17 was a Wednesday. You are saying this Banner of
18 Truth conference was the following week. The week
19 of the 13th would have been that Monday?
20 A Correct.
21 Q And you were planning to go down there for
22 that?
23 A Correct.
24 Q And do you remember who else was supposed to
25 be part of this meeting with Mr. Howe and Mr. Owens
Page 15
1 and you?
2 A Yes. Earl Blackburn, Steve Martin and Bob
3 Selph.
4 Q The same Bob Selph?
5 A Correct.
6 Q And are these other gentlemen also longtime
7 pastors and members of ARBCA?
8 A Correct.
9 Q And you were planning to see them; you
10 expected to see them at this Banner conference
11 yourself?
12 A Correct.
13 Q And so Mr. Howe, Mr. Owens essentially invited
14 themselves to come over and meet with this group,
15 including you; is that right?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Did they tell you what they wanted to talk
18 about?
19 A Yes.
20 Q What?
21 A Difficulties.
22 MS. EAZER: Objection, Your Honor, hearsay.
23 THE COURT: Sustained.
24 Q (By Mr. Sears) As a result of your
25 conversations with them, did you have an
Page 16
1 understanding about what this meeting was to be

2 about?
3 A Yes.
4 Q What?
5 A About the difficulties in the church and
6 seeking counsel as to a way forward.
7 Q And did that meeting take place?
8 A It did.
9 Q The same cast of characters you've told us
10 about: You, the two elders from Miller Valley and
11 the other gentlemen who were already going to be at
12 the Banner conference?
13 A Correct.
14 Q In Escondido near the seminary facility?
15 A On the seminary campus.
16 Q And was Tom Chantry there?
17 A I think so but he wasn't a part of the
18 meeting.
19 Q Okay. You remember seeing him at that
20 conference?
21 A He did come to the conferences but I don't
22 know if he was at that one or not.
23 Q Did you, these other gentlemen and the Miller
24 Valley elders have more than one meeting at that
25 conference?
Page 17
1 A No. Just one.

2 Q And did that meeting have a particular length?
3 Do you remember how long you all talked?
4 A Maybe a couple of hours.
5 Q And the subject matter was as you've
6 described; it was about Tom's resignation and the
7 situation at Miller Valley?
8 A Correct.
9 Q Did you form some impression from what you
10 were hearing from the Miller Valley elders that they
11 were concerned about the impact that Tom's
12 resignation would have on the church going forward?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Did they seem to be looking for ideas from you
15 and Bob Selph and the others about what might be
16 done to help that?
17 A Correct.
18 Q And at the end of that meeting was there some
19 plan of action that you were aware of that was
20 beginning to be put in place?
21 A I don't know that it took place at the end of
22 the meeting but within a very short time, within a
23 week or so a suggestion was made, yes.
24 Q By whom about what?
25 A Bob Selph to have an informal church council
Page 18
1 to investigate and make some recommendations.

2 Q At that time in November of 2000 was Bob Selph
3 the pastor of his own church somewhere?
4 A No. Bob was the coordinator for the
5 association.
6 Q He was the paid employee?
7 A Correct.
8 Q And so he was based out of Carlisle,
9 Pennsylvania?
10 A Carlisle.
11 Q So he would have been presumably doing this
12 planning of this church council on behalf of ARBCA;
13 correct?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And Miller Valley Baptist Church to your
16 knowledge was an ARBCA member in November of 2000?
17 A It was.
18 Q And at some point did you become aware that
19 this church council plan was actually being put into
20 effect, that council members were being picked and
21 dates were being selected?
22 A Correct.
23 Q At some point were you asked by someone to
24 become involved in this church council?
25 A Yes.
Page 19
1 Q By whom?
2 A By the Chantry family and Tom in particular.
3 Q Okay, and what were you asked to do?
4 A I was asked to go to be a support for Tom.
5 Q And did you agree to do that?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Why did you think Tom needed support in this
8 process?
9 A Well, he was all alone, and I concluded and
10 was actually asked by the investigators and Bob
11 Selph and others to fulfill this function, that it
12 would be a good idea to help him, to prompt him, if
13 necessary, to be an observer on his behalf.
14 Q When you say the investigators, are you
15 talking about the three men --
16 A Correct.
17 Q You have to let me finish before you answer.
18 The court reporter will just walk out.
19 A I'm sorry.
20 Q So these three council members are the
21 investigators?
22 A Yes.
23 Q And you knew all of them; correct?
24 A Yes.
25 Q They were also longstanding in ARBCA; correct?
Page 20
1 MS. EAZER: Objection, Your Honor,

2 irrelevant.
4 Q (By Mr. Sears) So were you coming to the
5 church council with Tom simply because he was your
6 friend?
7 A I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that.
8 Q Well, you gave us a bit of an idea about what
9 you thought the reasons were for having someone like
10 you come to be with Tom. Was the only real reason
11 that you were coming was because Tom was a friend?
12 A Well, I was there to -- I've used the phrase
13 to facilitate communication if something broke down,
14 if he didn't understand a question or perhaps he
15 might be frustrated with an answer he gave and they
16 didn't understand. That was a part of my perceived
17 role in and really requested role.
18 Q To your knowledge based on your association
19 with ARBCA from its beginning up until that point in
20 2000, were there official protocols for how these
21 informal councils were to be conducted?
22 A No.
23 Q And had you ever participated in one on behalf
24 of ARBCA?
25 A No.
Page 21
1 Q So this was a first experience for you?

2 A Correct.
3 Q And so at some point in mid December the
4 council members arrived in Arizona. Is that when
5 you and Tom came down?
6 A Correct.
7 Q At that point Tom was in Washington state as
8 well; correct?
9 A Correct.
10 Q So the two of you traveled down to Arizona?
11 A Correct.
12 Q Did you go straight to Prescott?
13 A I don't remember that we traveled together. I
14 don't remember that that was the case but we -- he
15 picked me up at the airport, so we did not travel
16 together.
17 Q In Phoenix?
18 A In Phoenix, correct.
19 Q And where did you go?
20 A We went to a hotel. My memory is in the north
21 Phoenix area.
22 Q And at any point during the next few days as
23 the council was doing its work, did you come to
24 Prescott specifically?
25 A No.
Page 22
1 Q Did you come close to Prescott?

2 A Yes.
3 Q Do you remember the name of the place that you
4 went to that was near Prescott?
5 A I'm going to mispronounce it but I think it's
6 Dewey-Humboldt. Does that sound right?
7 Q That's it. That's a town outside of Prescott,
8 correct. That's as close as you got to Miller
9 Valley Baptist Church?
10 A That's correct.
11 Q And the remainder of the time you were down in
12 the Phoenix area?
13 A Yes.
14 Q And during this period of time, was there ever
15 a time that Tom was with the members of the council
16 without you being present?
17 A No.
18 Q Did the members of the council speak with Tom
19 in your presence?
20 A Yes.
21 Q And was it your impression that they were
22 talking to Tom first before they talked to the
23 families and the children involved?
24 A Correct.
25 Q And also before they talked to the elders of
Page 23
1 Miller Valley Church?

2 A Correct.
3 Q So the first order of business was to meet
4 with Tom with you present; is that right?
5 A That's correct.
6 Q And was it your understanding that when they
7 were done meeting with you, then they would set
8 about interviewing families and children, talking to
9 the elders and talking to other people and then come
10 back to you?
12 Q And was it your understanding that that
13 actually happened over the course of the next few
14 days?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And if I told you that the records indicated
17 it might have started on the 13th of December, 2000;
18 does that sound about right?
19 MS. EAZER: Your Honor, leading.
21 A Yes.
22 Q (By Mr. Sears) And you stayed with Tom in
23 Arizona then for those few days until the work of
24 the council was concluded; is that right?
Page 24
1 Q And then at some point did the council members

2 come back to talk to Tom and you?
3 A That's correct.
4 Q And that was the end as far as you knew it of
5 whatever investigation they were doing; it was done
6 at that point; correct; that was the last thing, if
7 you know?
8 A Yes, in terms of the investigation, correct.
9 Q And then there was apparently some sort of a
10 session to -- with all hands on deck, being all the
11 people involved in this, to talk about how this was
12 going to come out; correct?
13 A Well, that was done separately, too.
14 Q And there were a series -- we've heard about
15 this, a series of recommendations to Tom and to all
16 the other people involved, the families, the elders,
17 Bob Selph; right?
19 Q Walt Chantry?
20 A That's also correct.
21 Q So everyone received the benefit of the
22 recommendations from this council?
24 Q And then that was the end of the council
25 process; correct?
Page 25
1 A That's correct.
2 Q And you and Tom left to go back to Washington
3 state; is that correct?
4 A He took me to the airport. It was about noon
5 on Saturday, and then he drove on to California to
6 drive up to Washington.
7 Q And you became aware at some point that Tom
8 had moved permanently from Arizona up to Washington
9 state; correct?
10 A Correct.
11 Q And you knew he was there for a period of
12 time?
13 A Correct.
14 Q And you maintained touch I assume with Tom
15 over the next months and years on some basis;
16 correct?
18 Q Now, I'm going to move on to the last thing I
19 really want to talk to you about. Actually, let's
20 finish up a couple of points about this church
21 council before we turn to this last topic. During
22 the time that you were with Tom in Arizona, did you
23 ever hear Tom make admissions about any bare
24 bottomed spanking of children in your presence?
25 A No, he did not.
Page 26
1 Q Did you ever hear Tom deny allegations of bare

2 bottomed spanking?
5 MR. SEARS: I'm asking the witness what he
6 heard, Your Honor.
7 THE COURT: If they are statements of your
8 client, they're hearsay.
9 MR. SEARS: Thank you, Your Honor.
10 Q (By Mr. Sears) Did you ever hear Tom make any
11 statements about admitting to excessive or brutal
12 beatings of children?
13 MS. EAZER: Objection.
14 THE COURT: Sustained. Can counsel
15 approach, please?
16 (Whereupon, the following bench
17 conference was had out of the hearing of the jury.)
18 THE COURT: Statements offered by the
19 defendant of the defendant's own statements by
20 someone other than the defendant is hearsay. So
21 help me understand why you are trying to introduce
22 this and how it's not hearsay.
23 MR. SEARS: If that's the court's ruling, I
24 agree. I'll move on.
25 THE COURT: It's the Rules of Evidence.
Page 27
1 It's not just my ruling.

2 MR. SEARS: Well, I understand. I'll move
3 on.
4 THE COURT: Thank you.
5 (Whereupon, the bench conference ended
6 and proceedings continued in the presence of the
7 jury.)
8 Q (By Mr. Sears) Did you hear from any source
9 during your time here in Arizona at the church
10 council that anyone was making an allegation against
11 Tom Chantry of sexual misconduct?
12 MS. EAZER: Objection, Your Honor. May we
13 approach?
14 THE COURT: Okay.
17 THE COURT: What's the objection? Just yes
18 or no if he heard about --
19 MS. EAZER: Well, I think this gets into --
20 I don't know what was said. He has more information
21 than I do, and obviously we know what the report
22 said so -- and again sexual misconduct, rubbing of
23 the bottoms, was definitely reported by one or more
24 of the victims.
25 THE COURT: Well, I'll let him answer this
Page 28
1 yes or no. I don't know how much further I'm going

2 to let him go.
3 MR. SEARS: I just want a yes or no and I'm
4 done.
5 MS. EAZER: Oh, he's going to say no but
6 then I think I'd be allowed to go into the rubbing
7 of the bottoms.
8 THE COURT: That's fine. Well, if he knew
9 about it.
10 MS. EAZER: Well, he said he was there the
11 whole time, and it's in the reports, and he had the
12 reports.
13 THE COURT: There's a difference between
14 maybe what he knew at the time versus what he found
15 out later from the reports. I don't know. It's
16 something you can explore if this question is asked.
17 MR. SEARS: But if we're not going to have
18 to do this again, my view would be rubbing the
19 bottoms is not sexual misconduct. Sexual misconduct
20 has a particular meaning.
21 THE COURT: Well, you can ask him what he
22 means by it, how that term is being used.
23 MS. EAZER: And then follow up with rubbing
24 of bottoms, whether he considers that to be sexual?
25 THE COURT: Right, sure.
Page 29
1 MR. SEARS: Rather than go down this with

2 him, I'll just withdraw that question.
3 THE COURT: Okay.
4 MR. SEARS: We'll just move to something
5 else.
8 jury.)
9 THE COURT: Thank you. The objection is
10 sustained. Next question.
11 MR. SEARS: I'll withdraw the question.
12 THE COURT: Thank you very much.
13 Q (By Mr. Sears) Moving to the last topic, in
14 2005 were you contacted by Tom again about something
15 that had happened which was in some way connected to
16 his time at Miller Valley?
18 Q And what was that contact about, not what was
19 said but what was it about?
20 A In terms of the person?
21 Q Yes.
22 A M J had contacted him and wanted to
23 speak with him.
24 Q And Tom reached out to you for advice on how
25 to respond?
Page 30
1 A Initially Tom was hesitant and then thought it

2 was a very good idea and asked if I would reach out.
5 A And asked if I would contact M , which I
6 did.
7 Q (By Mr. Sears) By e-mail?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And so that contact took place over a period
10 of time?
11 A A couple of weeks maybe.
12 Q All right, and was it your impression after
13 having these contacts with M J that he was
14 trying to arrange a telephone call with Tom Chantry?
15 A He asked --
17 Q (By Mr. Sears) Try and just tell me what your
18 impression was. Did you receive some impression
19 from your back and forth with M about what he
20 wanted to do?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And was it that he wanted to speak to Tom?
23 A Yes.
24 Q And did you undertake to facilitate that call
25 to help set it up?
Page 31
1 A I did.
2 Q And did you know -- M J know that
3 that's what you were doing?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And at some point in March, March 2 of 2006,
6 was there a telephone call between Tom Chantry and
7 M J with you on the line?
8 A That's correct.
9 Q And did M J know and agree in advance
10 of that call that you would be on the phone as well
11 as Tom?
12 A Yes.
13 Q All right, and that call lasted about how
14 long, if you remember?
15 A Twenty minutes maybe.
16 Q And it happened late in the afternoon your
17 time?
18 A Correct.
19 Q And so Tom was where when the call was placed?
20 Do you know where he was generally; he was not at
21 your house?
22 A No. I think he was in Rockford.
23 Q Illinois?
24 A Correct.
25 Q So he had moved by that time?
Page 32
1 A Yes.
2 Q From Washington state to Illinois?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And do you know where M J was when he
5 placed the call?
6 A I believe he was in Boston.
7 Q What made you think that?
8 A The phone readout.
9 Q The Area Code?
10 A Yeah.
11 Q And so this phone call with the three of you
12 on March 2nd, 2006, appeared to you to have some
13 particular purpose?
14 A Yes. M said that he wanted to revisit --
16 MR. SEARS: Prior inconsistent statement.
17 THE COURT: Overruled. You can answer.
18 Q (By Mr. Sears) Go ahead, please.
19 A Yes. He indicated that he would like some
20 resolution, and also in a previous letter to me said
21 that he wanted to speak with him, would like an
22 apology and it didn't matter if it was a letter or a
23 phone call or in whatever way; he would like to
24 speak with him.
25 Q Okay, and so as this phone call began, that
Page 33
1 was your understanding of what it was to be about?

2 A Correct.
3 Q And, in fact, was that the subject matter
4 generally of the phone call?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And during this phone call I assume that Tom
7 said some things; correct?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And M spoke with him; is that right?
10 A Correct.
11 Q Do you remember saying anything yourself?
12 A No.
13 Q You just were listening quietly?
14 A Correct.
15 Q And in that phone call was there a discussion
16 between Tom and M , again without repeating
17 anything, about the subject of an apology from Tom?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And did you hear Tom make an apology?
20 A I heard Tom ask for M 's forgiveness.
21 Q And in your world as a pastor that is an
22 important concept; correct?
24 Q All right, and did you hear M give him his
25 forgiveness?
Page 34
1 A Yes.
2 Q And during the phone conversation, was there
3 any discussion of what it was that Tom was seeking
4 forgiveness for having done?
5 A Yes. For spanking him while tutoring.
6 Q And was there any discussion of any other
7 conduct by Tom for which Tom was asking M 's
8 forgiveness?
9 A No.
10 Q Did M J challenge Tom's version of what
11 it was that Tom had done?
12 A No.
13 Q All right. Did M seek assurances from Tom
14 that something like this would not happen again?
15 A Correct.
16 Q Did Tom give him assurances?
17 A Yes, he did.
18 Q Did M appear to be satisfied with those
19 assurances?
20 A Yes.
21 Q How do you know that?
22 A He said so. He thanked --
23 Q Go ahead.
24 A He thanked Tom for talking to him and for
25 the -- for his speaking with him and offering --
Page 35
1 asking for forgiveness and Tom wished him well and

2 wished him Godspeed.
3 Q Did M thank Tom?
4 A Yes.
5 Q All right, and did M give you the
6 impression that he was satisfied or pleased with the
7 outcome of this call?
8 MS. EAZER: Objection, speculation.
10 Q (By Mr. Sears) Was there anything about what
11 M said during the phone call that made you
12 believe that he was unsatisfied and still upset with
13 Tom at the end of the call?
14 A No.
15 MR. SEARS: No other questions. Thank you.
16 THE COURT: Thank you. Cross examination?
17 CROSS EXAMINATION
18 BY MS. EAZER:
19 Q Were you aware M tried to contact Tom again
20 years later again seeking an explanation for what he
21 had done?
22 A I have no record of that or --
23 Q Tom didn't call you in 1999 (sic) when M
24 was still trying to contact him?
25 A He might have.
Page 36
1 Q Do you think he did, sir? Do you think he

2 called you and asked you once again --
3 A It's quite possible.
4 Q No. Let me finish my question. Did Tom
5 contact you, and don't you remember even mentioning
6 this, in 2009; once again did Tom contact you again
7 to be his witness when he spoke to M J in
8 2009?
9 A I believe he contacted me and said that he had
10 been contacted --
11 Q Yes or no, sir. Did he contact you and ask
12 you to be his witness?
13 A No.
14 Q Did you make another call to M ?
15 A No.
16 Q But Tom wanted you -- wanted your counsel on
17 what he should do because M was still contacting
18 him in 2009 despite your statement today that M
19 was completely content with the explanation that Tom
20 had given him in 2005; is that your testimony today,
21 sir?
22 A Yes.
23 Q How come you didn't call him in 2009?
24 A I don't recall.
25 Q Well, what did the defendant tell you, sir,
Page 37
1 how come he didn't want to call M in 2009? If

2 everything ended with such great resolve in 2005,
3 why didn't Tom and yourself, as a Christian, want to
4 reach out to M --
5 MR. SEARS: Object to the form of the
6 question and ask it be stricken.
7 THE COURT: Counsel approach, please.
8 Actually we're going to take a brief five-minute
9 recess. Remember the admonition, please. Thank
10 you.
11 (Whereupon, the jury exited the
12 courtroom.)
13 THE COURT: If you want, you can step down
14 for a couple of moments, sir. Thank you.
15 Miss Eazer, why shouldn't I refer you to the
16 Bar for potential discipline for trying to invoke
17 someone's religion to address their veracity as a
18 witness? Because I think what you did was highly
19 improper. I want to have a discussion about it,
20 which is why I excused the jury. The objection is
21 well founded. We can't ask a witness as a
22 Christian, et cetera, et cetera. That was improper.
23 Would you agree or not?
24 MS. EAZER: Judge, I would agree that that
25 would be a question that in just about every other
Page 38
1 case, except for this one, would be improper. In

2 this one, and especially given the foundation of
3 this witness, given the leading -- not the leading
4 but the lead-in questions that counsel asked about
5 his role in ARBCA, his role in the church, his
6 position within the church and whether he would come
7 in here and bend the truth and given that the nature
8 just in general of this case, that he was
9 facilitating this conversation and M was
10 content with this conversation. Again, not a
11 question in any other case, Judge, that the State
12 would -- unless religion became important in some
13 other aspect, but in this case, I think, again,
14 given the role that this witness is testifying in, I
15 believe that's what he -- you know, what he said,
16 and let me be more specific, and I think I actually
17 wrote it down about the victim forgave him, that
18 that was -- that Tom asked for his forgiveness and
19 the victim forgave him and how important that was in
20 their religion, and that was really the question
21 right there and the answer right there that I think
22 made it pertinent. He's talking about he played the
23 role of facilitating Tom asking for forgiveness.
24 This court has heard and this jury has heard for two
25 weeks how forgiveness was the one reason why all of
Page 39
1 the State's witnesses were blackballing this

2 defendant and literally that that was the primary
3 topic. Well, why were you doing this, and Mr. Sears
4 has brought Miller Valley and this dispute between
5 ARBCA and Miller Valley into this to refute and to
6 discredit the State's witnesses because of this role
7 of repentance and forgiveness. This witness, much
8 to my shock because I'd never heard this before,
9 that Tom sought his forgiveness, which was a very
10 critical aspect of this case and of their religion,
11 and that M gave it. So I think in that
12 aspect, that's why I believe it became appropriate,
13 Judge. I certainly wasn't doing it to challenge
14 that he would be a liar because he's a Christian.
15 THE COURT: You are trying to get him to
16 make sure he answers the question in a certain way
17 invoking his religion. The direct examination did
18 go over his background and his positions, which you
19 can do with any witness. The direct examination did
20 go over what he did for ARBCA, et cetera, and I
21 think you are missing the connection that Mr. Sears
22 made in his direct examination concerning whether or
23 not this witness would lie for the defendant. It
24 had to do with the relationship rather than asking
25 him, well, as a pastor, you can't lie or as a
Page 40
1 Christian, you can't lie. That's not what Mr. Sears

2 did in direct examination, yet you are asking him to
3 answer a question, as a Christian, would you say
4 this. There's a difference in saying -- you know,
5 you didn't object to the forgiveness aspects of it.
6 I probably would have sustained it. So that came in
7 without objection. If you wanted to discuss and it
8 may be moderately relevant, if forgiveness is
9 important in religion, that's fine. It's a general
10 term. You can even ask questions about the
11 difference between -- you know, forgiveness within
12 the church is not the same as a free pass concerning
13 criminal violations of Arizona law because it's not.
14 Those are different concepts. That really hasn't
15 been explored. You try your case how you want to
16 try it. That's what I would do as a lawyer, but
17 that hasn't been explored. I think that would be an
18 appropriate line of questioning.
19 However, you invoked his Christianity to try
20 to get him to answer a particular question, and so I
21 think you crossed the line. As a result of same,
22 what I'm going to do so it's out in the open is -- I
23 don't know how to do it here -- I know how to do it
24 in my courtroom but I'm not exactly sure how I do it
25 in this courtroom, but the court is going to order
Page 41
1 the portion of the transcript and the FTR and I'm

2 going to refer it to the State Bar. I'm not going
3 to tell them what to do. I'm just going to say
4 here's the information; you do with it as you see
5 fit. We are not going to with this witness or any
6 witness try to invoke their religion and connect it
7 with their veracity and, in fact, no party is going
8 to be allowed to argue that, of course.
9 So if you want to talk about, you know, the
10 concept of forgiveness being important, that's fine
11 because that's general information. We're not going
12 to say as a Christian, answer me this question,
13 which is exactly what you did.
14 MS. EAZER: Judge, if I could just add.
15 THE COURT: Sure. Go ahead.
16 MS. EAZER: And I'm not going to disagree
17 with the court and I'm fine with the court referring
18 this to the State Bar, but I would ask -- and the
19 thing I would point out is I wasn't asking it as a
20 Christian, are you telling the truth. I was asking
21 it as a Christian in your church, why wouldn't you
22 reach out -- why wouldn't you respond to M 's
23 call in 2009; why didn't you reach out to him if he
24 wanted to speak to Tom. That's why he reached out
25 in 2005 and he said Tom wanted his forgiveness. I
Page 42
1 reached out to him on behalf of Tom. Again, I just

2 want to make the record clear, especially if this is
3 going to the State Bar, that it wasn't as a
4 Christian, are you telling us here today, sir. My
5 question was, when he reached out again in 2009,
6 since you said he had asked for M 's
7 forgiveness, M had given it. This witness in
8 the interview said M reached out again in
9 2009. I didn't get that letter but I'm sure it
10 exists. Why didn't you if he was so satisfied.
11 That's what this church would do. That is what he
12 as the leader, a leader in this church would do.
13 You have one of your people in this type of a
14 situation. Why wouldn't you reach back out to him,
15 and obviously I have one idea of why he didn't reach
16 back out to him, and so I wasn't asking it in the
17 context of truthfulness but wouldn't that be what
18 one would expect a leader of a church to do if you
19 have one of your former parishioners in a situation
20 like M . Why did he ignore him? May I at
21 least continue with that line of questioning, why
22 did you ignore M the second time if there was
23 nothing to worry about?
24 THE COURT: You can certainly ask him why
25 he didn't do that, but I'm not sure that it was as
Page 43
1 clean as you thought it was in terms of how you went

2 about it. I understand your point. I understand
3 your motivations. I appreciate that. Thank you for
4 the explanation, but we're not going to do that.
5 Certainly you can ask him why he didn't do something
6 or did do something. I think that would be fair.
7 Mr. Sears?
8 MR. SEARS: May I make one observation,
9 Your Honor, before we bring the jury back in, which
10 was I note that counsel for the State is at a high
11 energy level with this witness, who is I think
12 obviously a quiet and demure individual, and I
13 notice that she is moving forward regularly from the
14 podium often towards the witness and raising her
15 voice. I don't know whether it's to be heard
16 without the microphone, but it has the cumulative
17 effect of appearing to be moving towards a witness
18 as she insists that he answer questions. I would
19 ask that the court require both counsel to stay at
20 the podium.
21 THE COURT: I'm not going to do that. As a
22 former trial lawyer myself, I cannot stay at the
23 podium. I needed to pace and walk around. So I'm
24 not going to do that. I agree with you that the
25 demeanor wasn't necessarily what I would prefer, but
Page 44
1 I'm going to let people make their decisions in

2 terms of how they want to strategically handle the
3 case. I would suggest a different demeanor, but if
4 she wants to raise her voice and yell at the
5 witness, as long as it's not to a point where it's
6 inappropriate, I'll permit her to be a little louder
7 than her normal speaking voice. I don't know how
8 effective it is, but if she wants to do that, I'll
9 let her do that.
10 MR. SEARS: I simply wanted to note what
11 the printed record would not be able to observe,
12 which was the way I perceived counsel to be
13 questioning my witness.
14 THE COURT: Sure. I don't think she was
15 approaching it in a fashion to make him scared or
16 intimidated in any way. I don't think that was the
17 case, but we do have a video and audio recording of
18 it as well.
19 All right. Is there anything else we need to
20 address before we bring in the jury?
21 MR. SEARS: Not from the defense.
22 THE COURT: Thank you very much. Sir, you
23 can come back up on the witness stand.
24 MS. EAZER: Judge, there is perhaps one
25 other thing while we're waiting and that is, because
Page 45
1 of what I argued in my prior motions regarding this

2 witness, it was the State's intention to get into
3 that he had some documents, not referring, not even
4 giving an inference that there is anything we don't
5 have, but that he had some documents that he gave to
6 defense but that he would hesitate to give to the
7 police, again, in a very general sense and not
8 leaving any inference or impression that they are
9 anything more than what we all have in this case but
10 to show that bias and that he said he wanted to help
11 Tom Chantry and I just wanted to --
12 THE COURT: Ask the questions. I don't see
13 anything wrong with generally what you are talking
14 about. As the questions particularly come up, then
15 we can address them. Hang on one second. The jury
16 is coming back in.
17 (Whereupon, the jury entered the
18 courtroom.)
19 THE COURT: Thank you, everyone. Please be
20 seated. Thank you, everyone, for your time and
21 patience. Miss Eazer, go ahead.
22 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Sir, I was asking you why if
23 M was satisfied and Tom asked for his
24 forgiveness and had given him -- and M had
25 forgiven him back in 2005, why is it you and Tom
Page 46
1 didn't want to meet with M again in 2009, sir?

2 A I believe -- I believe we concluded or we
3 had -- we concluded that the matter was finished.
4 Q Who concluded that, sir?
5 A The fact that M had said he had forgiven
6 him.
7 Q Okay. So you concluded it was finished, but
8 when M wrote in 2009, he indicated it wasn't
9 finished, didn't he, sir?
10 A I don't know that I saw that. I know what
11 you're talking about but I don't know that I saw
12 that e-mail. I don't believe he wrote to me.
13 Q How do you know about the e-mail if you didn't
14 see it?
15 A Tom would have told me.
16 Q All right. So Tom told you that M was
17 still wanting to speak to him, that he still wanted
18 answers; is that correct, sir?
19 A No. He said he contacted him. That was all
20 he said to me.
21 Q Did he say M had contacted him to get
22 together for coffee sometime?
23 A No.
24 Q Did he tell you he was concerned because
25 M was contacting him and still was seeking
Page 47
1 answers for what had happened back in 1995 and 1996,

2 sir?
3 A I don't believe that we had that kind of
4 conversation. It was just that he had contacted
5 him.
6 Q So just out of the blue Tom says M
7 contacted me today; that's it?
8 A More or less. I think it was a communication
9 by e-mail anyway.
10 Q Well, did Tom say why he didn't want to
11 contact M back?
12 A No.
13 Q You said it's because you guys felt it was
14 concluded?
15 A I believe that's what we would have concluded
16 or we did. I can't recall all the particulars of
17 that particular conversation.
18 Q Well, you said the reason why you all didn't
19 reach out to M in 2009 is because you felt
20 everything had been concluded in 2005; did you not
21 just say that?
22 A I just said that, yes.
23 Q All right. So that would certainly imply that
24 you had some conversation with Tom about whether or
25 not you two would reach back out to M ?
Page 48
1 A If we did, it was very brief.

2 Q And you made a decision no need to because we
3 feel like the matter is concluded?
4 A I suppose so.
5 Q Well, you seem to remember the 2005
6 communication fairly clearly right down to M , you
7 know -- Tom asking for his forgiveness, M giving
8 it and M seeming content at the end of the
9 conversation. Why is it that 2009 is so difficult
10 for you to remember today, sir?
11 A Because I don't have any record of it.
12 Q Well, that's because you chose not to call
13 M back; correct, sir?
14 A I don't know that it was my responsibility to
15 call him back. He said that he had contacted him.
16 That's all he said.
17 Q Well --
18 A Or that's all that I remember being said.
19 Q But you said you guys didn't contact him back
20 because you felt the matter had been resolved?
21 MR. SEARS: Asked and answered.
22 THE COURT: Let her finish her question,
23 please. Go ahead.
24 Q (By Ms. Eazer) You just said that's all you
25 remember him saying, M contacted me, yet just a
Page 49
1 moment ago you said the reason you and Tom Chantry
2 didn't reach out to M in 2009 is because you felt
3 like everything had been concluded?
5 THE COURT: Overruled. You can answer.
6 A I don't see that the two sentences or cluster
7 of sentences are contradictory, but I may be missing
8 something.
9 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Well, it certainly implies
10 that you had some conversation with Tom about
11 whether in 2009 you guys should reach back out to
12 M , that you came to a conclusion we don't need to
13 call M this time because we consider the matter
14 resolved?
15 A I suppose so.
16 Q In 2005 or actually 2006, I think we've been
17 -- M reached out in 2005 but in 2006 do you
18 remember responding to a couple of letters that M
19 had written where he was wanting to meet with Tom;
20 he wanted some answers?
21 A Correct. That's what prompted the telephone
22 call.
23 Q Okay, but before that telephone call, you
24 wrote M a letter yourself; correct, sir?
25 A Yes, on behalf of Tom, yes.
Page 50
1 Q And among the things you said in that letter

2 is, you know, you indicated you were a friend of Tom
3 Chantry's and were writing on his behalf; correct,
4 sir?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And you said he, meaning Tom, asked me to
7 respond to the letter you sent him postmarked
8 December 17th, 2005, and you said though I have not
9 read the letter, I believe your intent is to
10 reestablish contact with Tom and to get current with
11 one another; correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q And you went on to say, sir, did you not, Tom
14 does not wish to revisit that part of his life and
15 asks that you respect his decision. He does not
16 believe that reestablishing contact is helpful. Tom
17 also wants me to assure you that he wishes you well
18 and he sincerely hopes you are flourishing as a
19 Christian. If there is something specific you wish
20 to communicate to him, of course, he would be
21 willing to receive it. I do hope you understand and
22 respect his position. Is that what you wrote?
23 A Correct.
24 Q Sir, do you know, being such a close friend of
25 Tom's and his father's, why Tom didn't tell M
Page 51
1 that himself, why he felt he had to have you answer

2 on his behalf?
3 A I believe that it was because it's such a
4 painful part of his life, that he didn't want to
5 revisit it and then, of course, eventually did.
6 Q Well, is that what he told you, this is so
7 painful, I can't respond to M on my own?
8 A Pretty much.
9 Q All right, and so when we say it's so painful,
10 we're talking about he spanked M a few times
11 over the pants; is that correct?
12 A I would say the whole experience of being in
13 the church, losing his first pastorate and all that
14 led up to that, the whole experience.
15 Q But it was your statements that he had gone on
16 to become this new person, right? I mean, he did
17 everything he was supposed to do; he's now on his
18 way; he's a new person. Did he tell you he just
19 couldn't contact M ?
20 A I think the letter speaks for itself.
21 Q One of the things you said when Mr. Sears
22 questioned you and you also said this in the
23 interview that I did with you back in March was
24 M never challenged Tom's version of the
25 events; do you remember that?
Page 52
1 A Correct.
2 Q So during this conversation between M
3 and Tom that you were I guess being a witness for,
4 sir, did Tom say, M , I am sorry, all I did was
5 spank you over the pants, I never spanked you bare
6 bottomed, I never spanked you with a paddle, I never
7 touched your genitals; did Tom say anything like
8 that, sir?
9 A Those words were not used.
10 Q You've said that Tom asked for M 's
11 forgiveness and M gave it to him; correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q What did he ask for M 's forgiveness for?
14 A For spanking him in a tutoring context.
15 Q So that's what he said, those were his words
16 and you remember that specifically today that Tom
17 said, M , I am sorry I spanked you in a
18 tutoring context?
19 A Correct.
20 Q Do you have any idea why Tom would say that, I
21 mean, M , I'm sorry I spanked you in a tutoring
22 context?
23 A Because that had been much of the issue all
24 along.
25 Q Go ahead. I'm sorry.
Page 53
1 A His tutoring him and in that context spanking

2 him.
3 Q Well, sir, but that wasn't the issue when they
4 formed a council in Prescott back in 2000?
5 A It certainly was the issue when the elders
6 from Prescott talked to us.
7 Q Well, sir, the issue at the council was Tom
8 spanking these children bare bottomed with paddles
9 and oars and other instruments to the extent where
10 marks and bruises were left; correct? Yes or no,
11 sir?
12 A No.
13 Q You don't remember that coming up at the
14 council?
15 A Oh, I do, but that's not where it began. The
16 council did not begin at that level.
17 Q I did not ask you how the council began, sir.
18 I'm asking what came out at the council. Would you
19 agree with me, sir, that the reason the council
20 began was because of a little boy named D L
21 whose mother discovered severe bruises in the shape
22 of a two by four on her son's bottom and the back of
23 his legs; would you agree, yes or no, sir?
24 A No.
25 Q You don't remember that coming up?
Page 54
1 A That never came up. That was never a part of

2 anything I heard.
3 Q Sir, do you know how and why a council was
4 called down to Prescott?
5 A Yes, to investigate. It was not a trial. It
6 was to investigate what had gone on that led to the
7 resignation of their pastor whom they wanted to
8 remain.
9 Q Sir, you're intimately familiar with what was
10 investigated by the council, are you not?
11 A The council --
12 Q Yes or no, sir. You know exactly why the
13 council was called down, do you not, sir?
14 A Yes, I know why it was called.
15 Q And you have read stacks of paperwork that
16 arose out of the council being called to Prescott in
17 2000, have you not, sir?
18 A Not then.
19 Q I'm not asking you about then. I'm asking you
20 about you know everything -- you've read all the
21 paperwork with respect to what this council was
22 formed for; correct?
23 MR. SEARS: Your Honor, may we approach?
24 THE COURT: Let him answer the question.
25 Is that a yes or no, sir?
Page 55
1 A Ask the question, again.

2 Q (By Ms. Eazer) You are familiar with all the
3 paperwork and have read all the paperwork about the
4 council?
5 A Correct.
6 THE COURT: Thank you. You can approach.
9 MR. SEARS: Judge, I don't see any basis
10 from the testimony of this witness so far that would
11 open the door as wide as the State thinks it's been
12 opened to go into the matters this court has for a
13 long time said were outside the scope of this case.
14 We are now going to take a deep dive into the
15 substance of the allegations and the work of the
16 council against everything the court has said. I
17 have tried as best I can to stay at the 30,000 foot
18 level and just talk about the process, but now we
19 have the stack of documents and counsel has already
20 indicated she wants to ask this witness questions
21 about the substance of those documents, what the
22 allegations are, what they were doing. He's
23 answered her questions. He's told her what his
24 opinion is as to why the council was called, and now
25 the State wants to confront him with all of the
Page 56
1 details, which the court has heretofore indicated an

2 unwillingness to hear, in an effort to get him to
3 change his story.
4 THE COURT: Sure. Well, I'm not sure what
5 her intent is. How far do you plan on going?
6 MS. EAZER: Oh, I'm not going into the
7 other report unless the door becomes open nor am I
8 trying to open that door. What this witness just
9 said, that the only reason he thought the council
10 was called down was for inappropriate discipline
11 during tutoring and that certainly isn't why the
12 council was called down.
13 THE COURT: Well, I think there's a
14 difference between what he knows now perhaps versus
15 what he knew at the time.
16 MS. EAZER: No. It was at the time, Judge.
17 THE COURT: I know, but that's what he is
18 saying. So I think -- that's how I'm taking what he
19 is saying. He is saying at the time I did not know
20 that but now he's since read everything. So you
21 might want to explore that a little bit.
22 MS. EAZER: Right, and just so the court
23 knows --
24 THE COURT: I'm sorry. I don't know that
25 the council records show what he knew at the time.
Page 57
1 If they do, then I think that would be appropriate

2 impeachment.
3 MS. EAZER: They do, and these letters were
4 presented to the defendant and his representative
5 before the council even met to do everything, the
6 letters that said about the bare bottomed spankings,
7 the bruises and everything else.
8 THE COURT: She can ask him because I think
9 it's proper impeachment. He said he didn't know
10 something at the time. She can ask him if she lays
11 a foundation, did you have this information at the
12 time, yes or no, and this information said that,
13 whatever it said, so you did know at the time.
14 MR. SEARS: Well, I don't want to say
15 slippery slope but slippery slope. I think we are
16 heading rights towards it here because the next
17 logical line past that would be a deep dive into
18 what the council's findings were and all the things
19 we've argued about ad nauseam in this case. My
20 understanding of the court's position heretofore is
21 we're not going there. We're not going to put the
22 church on trial. We're not going to put the
23 council's inner workings into play in this case, and
24 I've been trying to stay out of that with this
25 witness.
Page 58
1 THE COURT: Right.

2 MR. SEARS: Now we're at the place where
3 the grass is wet.
4 THE COURT: I appreciate what you are
5 saying and I appreciate your concerns, but I think
6 this is impeachment for an answer and I'll let her
7 go there. If you think she --
8 MR. SEARS: If she goes any further, I'll
9 be up here.
11 MR. SEARS: Thank you.
14 jury.)
15 MS. EAZER: Could I have the last question?
16 THE COURT: I believe you asked him if he
17 read the council documents and he said yes.
18 Q (By Ms. Eazer) I believe what I asked you,
19 sir, is you indicated that when you went down as
20 Tom's representative, your impression was this was
21 all about just some inappropriate spankings over the
22 pants, and I asked you about bruising of D
23 L and whether you knew that's how all this
24 started and I think you said no.
25 A Correct.
Page 59
1 Q Okay. So let me ask you sir, are you not

2 aware -- were you not aware that this whole thing
3 started -- before the council was even called down,
4 the whole thing started because of a report that a
5 little boy named D L in the defendant's
6 care came home with a bottom and a back side and
7 legs full of bruises in the shape of a two by four,
8 yes or no, sir?
9 A No.
10 Q So you as his advocate I'm assuming -- you
11 said you were with the council when they questioned
12 the defendant; right?
13 A They questioned him three times.
14 Q Okay. There were letters written by each of
15 the family members about what happened and why a
16 council was called to Prescott, sir, and are you
17 saying you never saw those letters or Tom was never
18 questioned about what was in those letters that were
19 written well before the council even arrived, sir?
20 A I never saw those letters.
21 Q You never saw them?
22 A Not until a year ago.
23 Q All right, and so you're saying that even
24 though there was testimony in this case that those
25 letters were written for the three-man council, were
Page 60
1 given to the three-man council, that -- let me

2 finish my question, sir -- that you were totally
3 unaware during this whole investigation, the whole
4 time you all were down there that there were
5 allegations of that Thomas Chantry had bruised D
6 L ?
7 A No. Initially -- could you rephrase the
8 question or ask it again?
9 Q Sir, when you came down to Prescott in 2000 to
10 act as the defendant's advocate and there were three
11 men here from ARBCA, are you telling me, telling
12 this jury that the topic of why the council was --
13 how this all started, the bruises on D L
14 never came up?
16 Q Tom Chantry was never asked about D L
17 and the bruises?
18 A I'm not saying that. I'm saying that the
19 purpose of the council, as I understood it, coming
20 to help Tom. To be honest, I did not know any of
21 that.
22 Q Sir, let me ask my question once more because
23 I'm confused by your answer. When you came down in
24 2000, isn't it true that Tom Chantry was confronted
25 with allegations of bruising D L 's bottom
Page 61
1 and his legs, yes or no, sir?

2 A Yes.
3 Q So safe to say you did know at the time the
4 council came down in 2000 that that was one of the
5 allegations against Mr. Chantry, sir?
6 A Those are two different questions. I'm sorry.
7 I'm not trying to be difficult. They are two
8 different questions. When I came down, that was not
9 on my radar.
10 Q I understand that, sir.
11 A Okay.
12 Q Go ahead. Go ahead.
13 A The question you are asking me is a question
14 that I feel I have to answer in an absolute sense
15 and I cannot do that.
16 Q All right. Well, I think going back to what
17 started this whole exchange was when I asked you
18 about the conversation with M and why the
19 defendant would say I'm sorry for spanking you
20 during discipline, if that was quite a different
21 allegation than what was made back in 2000, and I
22 think you said no, that that's what the council was
23 about, was spanking -- for inappropriate discipline;
24 correct, sir? I think that's what started all this.
25 A Tom has maintained throughout --
Page 62
1 Q I'm not asking you what Tom has maintained.

2 A Okay. Ask the question again, please.
3 Q All right. In 2000 when you came down as
4 Tom's advocate, would you agree -- I think you've
5 agreed -- the topic of terrible bruising to D
6 L 's buttocks and thighs came up, yes or no?
8 THE COURT: Overruled. She is trying to
9 lay a foundation to be able to ask the question
10 again that she didn't get an answer to.
11 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Correct? That was one of the
12 things that the council was addressing; correct?
13 A It did address that.
14 Q All right, and would you agree, sir, that the
15 topic of -- with M J was bare bottomed
16 spankings with objects and Tom rubbing M 's
17 bottom after these spankings, yes or no, sir?
18 A That came up.
19 Q And would you agree that that same topic came
20 up with respect to W W , bare bottomed
21 spankings and rubbing of bottoms, sir; correct?
22 A I haven't read the documents but I'll take
23 your word for it.
24 Q I'm not asking you about the documents, sir.
25 I'm asking you, all these things came up during the
Page 63
1 2000 investigation; correct, sir? It's a yes or no.

2 A No.
3 Q You don't think all those things came up?
4 A The line of questioning did not follow that
5 approach.
6 Q I wasn't asking the line of questioning. So
7 to be clear you now have said yes, bruises on D
8 came up, spanking bare bottomed of M and
9 rubbing of the bottom came up; correct?
10 A Correct.
11 Q I'm not misstating anything; correct?
12 A Correct.
13 Q And I think then I asked you and the same
14 thing came up with W W , spanking with
15 objects, spanking with bare bottom and rubbing of
16 bottom; correct? I'm not asking you what the
17 approach was. I'm asking you if these things came
18 up in 2000.
19 A Correct.
20 Q And despite those things coming up in 2000 --
21 well, let me ask you -- let me back up. Do you
22 think spanking a child bare bottomed with a paddle
23 or other object to the point where it leaves bruises
24 falls under the category of discipline, proper
25 discipline during tutoring?
Page 64
1 MR. SEARS: Relevance.

3 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Let me phrase it a different
4 way, sir. You said Tom specifically in this 2005
5 conversation said I'm sorry for disciplining you
6 during tutoring; correct?
7 A For spanking you.
8 Q For spanking you during tutoring. I think you
9 said as part of discipline during tutoring, but
10 either way. I'm sorry for spanking you during
11 tutoring, right; you said that?
12 A Correct.
13 Q And you would agree with me that's not quite
14 the same as I'm sorry for spanking your bare bottom
15 with a paddle and then rubbing it during tutoring;
16 right?
17 A Correct.
18 Q But you don't disagree those were the
19 allegations back in 2000?
20 A Those were allegations.
21 Q But you said, and I think we talked about this
22 in our interview back in March, you had some notes
23 that you said you took during that interview; right?
24 A (Witness nods head up and down).
25 Q Yes?
Page 65
1 A Yes.
2 Q And just as you've said today, M didn't
3 challenge Tom's version of the events?
4 A Correct.
5 Q So at that time in 2005 you knew that
6 M 's version of the events was bare bottom,
7 rubbing of the bottom and spanking with instruments;
8 correct, sir?
9 A Say that again, please.
10 Q In 2005, 2006 actually, when you had this
11 conversation with -- where you were kind of being
12 the witness on this conversation, you knew that
13 M 's version of events was quite different than
14 discipline or spankings during tutoring; correct,
15 sir?
16 MR. SEARS: Speculation. He's answered the
17 question what he heard in that phone call.
19 A I believe that Tom was clear enough and that
20 M understood that it was ordinary spanking,
21 clothes on and all of the rest.
22 Q (By Ms. Eazer) You believe that's what
23 M understood from that conversation in 2006?
24 A Correct, I did.
25 Q And so basically M was saying you're
Page 66
1 right, everything I said back in 1996 and 2000

2 during this investigation was my imagination?
3 MR. SEARS: Argument, speculation.
5 Q (By Ms. Eazer) You made a specific point of
6 putting in your notes that M never challenged
7 Tom's version of the events?
8 A Correct.
9 Q But in 2006 you didn't know M was saying
10 Tom molested him, did you?
11 MR. SEARS: Misstates the evidence.
13 Q (By Ms. Eazer) In 2006 were you aware that
14 M would come forward nine years later?
15 A No.
16 Q And talk about Tom fondling his genitals?
17 A No.
18 THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection as
19 to that question.
20 MR. SEARS: And my objection was to the
21 form.
23 MR. SEARS: Thank you, Your Honor.
24 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Sir, when -- well, all of the
25 allegations in 2000 that you went there and acted as
Page 67
1 an advocate for Tom for, none of them involved

2 regular over-the-clothing spanking, over-the-knee
3 type discipline during tutoring; correct, sir?
4 A Well, there were discrepancies.
5 Q Didn't ask you that, sir. Did any one child
6 talk about they got a swat over the clothing during
7 tutoring as part of normal discipline?
8 A I don't recall.
9 Q Would you -- do you recall that all of the
10 stories -- you said there were discrepancies but
11 that all of the stories were quite consistent about
12 pants down, spanking with objects and rubbing of
13 bottoms?
14 A No, I would not say that.
15 Q M , W , D . Tom was confronted
16 with allegations of rubbing, spanking each of those
17 boys bare bottomed; correct; he was confronted by
18 the council, all three of those boys, was he not?
19 A I recall one but I'll have to take your word
20 for it.
21 Q I don't want you to take my word for it, sir.
22 A It's been so long since I read that material,
23 but that's what I'm saying, that there were
24 discrepancies between -- which is why the council
25 ended the way that it did and giving the
Page 68
1 recommendations that it did.

2 THE COURT: You need to speak up a little,
3 sir.
4 A I'm sorry.
5 THE COURT: And we're going to take our
6 afternoon recess at this time. Remember the
7 admonition. Thank you.
9 courtroom.)
10 THE COURT: Stay here for a moment, sir.
11 Again, sir, just a couple of things. Would you do
12 us a favor and maybe speak up a little. We need to
13 make sure that the jurors all the way over there can
14 hear you, and that would be wonderful. In addition,
15 let me say this. If you don't understand a
16 question, it's okay to say I don't understand the
17 question and then either lawyer can rephrase the
18 question, but there's been multiple times now when
19 you've been asked a question and you haven't
20 answered the question. It might appear
21 intentionally so. I don't want to have to get
22 involved in witnesses and the examination of same.
23 The less I talk, the better during the trial. So if
24 you could please do a better job than you've done
25 thus far of listening to the question asked of you
Page 69
1 and answering the question asked, that would be

2 helpful. Can you do that for us, please?
3 MR. LINDBLAD: I'll try.
4 THE COURT: Thank you. You can go back
5 down, sir, and have a seat.
6 I want to address what just happened because
7 I'm concerned about where we go next from there.
8 Miss Eazer, let me ask you, because of what was just
9 said, how -- in terms of his last answer, that it
10 wasn't necessarily 100 percent responsive to what
11 you were saying and where he addresses that's why
12 the council ended the way it ended, where do you
13 intend to go from there and what do you think that
14 opened the door to? Let me understand that and then
15 I'll go to Mr. Sears.
16 MS. EAZER: Judge, I think it opens the
17 door for what the council did and how the council
18 ended, and I will tell the court I was not trying to
19 bait this witness. I really wasn't. I'm not trying
20 to get him to respond that way. I, quite frankly,
21 am shocked that he said, you know, A, that he hasn't
22 read the papers lately. This court read my
23 interview of him and it hasn't been that long ago.
24 It was all about these papers. This court knows
25 what happened with respect to the other report.
Page 70
1 This witness certainly knows what happened with that

2 report. I, quite frankly, was shocked he answered
3 that way. I wasn't asking what the council's
4 findings were. I never intended to ask what the
5 council's findings were. I was merely trying to get
6 an admission from this man that he knew exactly what
7 the allegations were and what the defendant was
8 confronted with.
9 THE COURT: I understand, and that's why I
10 gave this witness an admonition because I agree. I
11 think a reasonable inference would be potentially
12 intentionally evasive and non-responsive to you. So
13 I agree. I'm not saying -- I don't think you tried
14 to do anything. I'm not sure you phrased the
15 questions in the best way possible, which is why I
16 suggested to him that if he doesn't understand
17 anything, to say something because when you are
18 asking sometime in 2009 would you know nine years
19 later -- that's why I think I sustained an objection
20 before Mr. Sears even stated the objection. So
21 there were some confusing times, but I agree. He
22 was non-responsive, and that last answer I'm
23 concerned about.
24 So one way to handle it is for us to strike
25 his last answer and then try to attack it from
Page 71
1 another angle versus blasting open the door with an

2 atomic bomb, which that last answer might have done,
3 but I'm open to suggestions. So I've heard from
4 Miss Eazer. Let me hear from you, Mr. Sears.
5 MR. SEARS: I think the problem that we
6 have encountered collectively in the last twenty or
7 thirty minutes with Pastor Lindblad is that he has
8 been trying to say to a question that doesn't appear
9 to be accepting of his answer --
10 THE COURT: Let's do this. If Pastor
11 Lindblad, if you wouldn't mind stepping outside,
12 because you're still on the witness stand, so we can
13 talk. Thank you. I apologize. The rule of
14 exclusion of witnesses has been invoked so it's
15 probably better if you are outside. Thank you.
16 MR. SEARS: I'm sorry, Your Honor.
17 THE COURT: That's okay. I should have
18 said something sooner.
19 MR. SEARS: What I'm saying is that it was
20 clear to me what he was saying was there were two
21 different phases of his state of knowledge. That
22 when he came down here, he believed going all the
23 way back to when he was called by Miller Valley
24 Baptist Church out of all the people that they could
25 have called about this and when they came over to
Page 72
1 Escondido to have this meeting with him when this

2 council was put together, he believed wholeheartedly
3 that the purpose of the council was not to air the
4 grievances of the children or to adjudicate the
5 grievances or to conduct any sort of a trial or
6 adversary proceeding, but that it was entirely faith
7 based and designed to be a healing process, not for
8 Tom, but for the families and children and members
9 remaining at Tom's church in the wake of Tom's
10 resignation. That's what the witnesses that the
11 State has put on have said. That's what he said.
12 What the State wants him to say, I think, is that he
13 was aware of the nature and substance of these
14 allegations made against Tom and that that was the
15 real purpose of the calling of the church council
16 and the work of the church council, and he has
17 heretofore resisted agreeing with that, which may be
18 the basis for the court's belief that he is trying
19 to be intentionally evasive. I think he is still
20 trying to tell the same story, which is, yes, I
21 acknowledge, and he said that several times, I
22 acknowledge that that came up. I don't necessarily
23 agree with 100 percent of your characterizations,
24 ma'am, about what it was, but in general I was aware
25 of those allegations. She's asked that question
Page 73
1 over and over and over again, and I believe he has

2 sufficiently answered that question more than once
3 while trying to say at the same time but if you are
4 asking me what I believed when this whole council
5 process started as I appeared, it's something
6 different, it's something very different, and so it
7 would appear, if you didn't know the entire context
8 of what he was saying, that he was trying to avoid
9 and dodge questions about what he knew. I think he
10 has answered that.
11 My bigger concern is where this is heading.
12 If it takes striking his last answer to keep us
13 where I think the court has always been up to this
14 moment in this case, to keep away from the documents
15 and the hearsay problems with the church documents,
16 all the other things that are part of this and the
17 court's repeated statement that it doesn't want to
18 put the church and church council on trial or have a
19 trial within a trial about how that trial played
20 out, then I think we're going in absolutely the
21 wrong direction if we go further and deeper into the
22 church process, and so what I would suggest is if
23 the court thinks that the safest and cleanest way is
24 to strike that answer, I would not oppose such a
25 motion and move to a discussion that doesn't require
Page 74
1 asking him over and over and over again essentially

2 the same question, which I think quietly he has
3 tried to answer about what he knew and he grudgingly
4 agrees with the State that those topics came up. He
5 used the word discrepancy, and what he was trying to
6 say, and I think the court can see this and
7 understands it's coming, is it wasn't resolved;
8 there was a dispute. This was not an adversary
9 proceeding. The children and their families said
10 one thing. Tom was maintaining something else. The
11 outcome was, as we all know it to be, as the
12 evidence from many other witnesses establish, which
13 was that there was a coming together; these
14 recommendations were made; everybody went away with
15 their set of recommendations. That's all that
16 happened. That's the outcome of the council.
17 THE COURT: Sure. The problem was that his
18 answer was non-responsive, demonstrated a bias. He
19 wanted to get out there, I feel intentionally so,
20 there are discrepancies. He gave the impression in
21 his last answers that there were discrepancies with
22 what the kids were saying to the council because the
23 question was, was he aware that this was the
24 allegation at the time of the council investigation.
25 There were some inartfully asked questions prior to
Page 75
1 that, I grant you that, which is why I encouraged

2 him to say if he's confused, say so.
3 MR. SEARS: If I have a moment, I will tell
4 him precisely the same thing and not to answer
5 questions with questions of his own, but I think
6 with all due respect, what he was saying about
7 discrepancies was not among the children's stories
8 but between Thomas Chantry's version and the
9 children's collective version.
10 THE COURT: That may have been what was in
11 his mind but that's not how it came out because of
12 the context of which it was asked. It was asked
13 about was he aware of M J 's, you know,
14 allegations and W W 's allegations and the
15 information of D L at the time of the
16 council, and it's really yes or no, and then he
17 indicated, well, there was some discrepancies. So
18 in answering to that, it makes it appear as if
19 there's discrepancies in what the kids were saying
20 to the council and their allegations. That's how I
21 think it came out because of the context. Again,
22 I'm not saying what was in his mind but because it
23 was non-responsive and because it was in the context
24 of the questions asked, it gave an incorrect
25 impression I think to the jury.
Page 76
1 So my plan would be then to strike that last

2 answer so that we aren't trying the church council's
3 case and whether they did a good job or not and
4 whether ARBCA did a good job or not because -- and
5 then I think, Miss Eazer, you need to be more
6 careful about how you are crafting your questions to
7 avoid problems. So maybe more artfully asked
8 questions about the time periods you are referring
9 to because I think what happens is you begin with
10 one question and then midstream you kind of switch
11 to another thing and then it winds up being yet a
12 third question, and I could see how that could be
13 confusing to him or anyone as to what to answer. So
14 let's stick to one question at a time, one concept
15 at a time to make this cleaner. If you want to ask
16 some questions about during the church council
17 investigation, at the times you were present with
18 the defendant, did they ask him about this
19 allegation, that allegation, that allegation, yes or
20 no.
21 MS. EAZER: Judge, just if I can say,
22 number one, I wasn't trying to ask him about what
23 the defendant was asked because I don't want to open
24 the door to getting in a bunch of defendant's
25 hearsay. I'm just asking him why they were all
Page 77
1 there. He's made it -- and I have to say I disagree

2 when Mr. Sears says, you know, the whole purpose of
3 this was faith based; they were just looking for a
4 resolution. They had a real problem in the church
5 and they were asking for guidance from the
6 leadership.
7 THE COURT: Sure. Well, he answered the
8 question already what the council was about.
9 MS. EAZER: Right. One thing that I want
10 to say to the court is, A, I was really surprised
11 Mr. Sears called this witness based on the rulings
12 but what -- so what we have now, Judge, is a witness
13 who has come in and under Mr. Sears' questioning has
14 talked about how high leadership he is in ARBCA, and
15 now the jury already knows, too, that the defendant
16 was let back into other churches and was pastoring
17 again, and we have this witness saying I would never
18 bend the truth and with all due respect, because I
19 will tell the court this interview of this witness
20 upset me a lot because I'd like to think nobody, you
21 know, a man of the cloth isn't untruthful, but I
22 felt he was untruthful throughout my entire
23 interview with him, but we have this man who is
24 saying I'm a man of the cloth, I would never lie, I
25 would never shade the truth.
Page 78
1 THE COURT: He never said as a man of the

2 cloth, I would never lie. That's not what he said.
3 MS. EAZER: Well, but it was right after
4 Mr. Sears asked him about, you know, is he a pastor,
5 is he with ARBCA.
6 THE COURT: But that's his background.
7 MS. EAZER: I understand, but that's the
8 impression we're left with, and he is coming in and
9 saying and directly discrediting my most important
10 victim by saying M gave him forgiveness and,
11 you know, that my client asked for forgiveness and
12 M gave him forgiveness, accepted, granted him
13 forgiveness. That is one of the hugest issues that
14 one could do, and so for Mr. Sears to have this man
15 come in and that probably if this jury believes this
16 man, might as well -- you know, there goes my case
17 because M is my most serious victim. Now we
18 have him directly saying that's why the church
19 council found as they did when he knows the church
20 council found something quite different than what he
21 is trying to imply, and I understand what the court
22 is saying and I understand we don't want to get into
23 trying the church, but if this jury believes this
24 witness and my main victim directly lied about what
25 he was calling the defendant for, what was said
Page 79
1 during that conversation, that he didn't apologize,

2 that he didn't accept any apology and the jury gets
3 to just believe him because he is who he is and Mr.
4 Sears brought out that he won't shade the truth, he
5 would never lie, but he basically just did, Judge,
6 and this isn't a witness who did not have knowledge
7 that the council found something quite different
8 than what his last answer, which I can't unring the
9 bell --
10 THE COURT: Well, I think -- your argument
11 to me was faulty in the same way that a lot of your
12 questions have been faulty. It's like one of those
13 placemats you get as a child in IHOP or something
14 that says you get the rabbit home and you have to go
15 through this maze and it goes through all these
16 lines and turns. That's what it is. You are mixing
17 concepts and that's the problem with your question,
18 and I think that's why sometimes you get answers
19 that you're not expecting because you're not asking
20 good questions as clearly as you think it's being
21 asked. Number one, I must point out that the
22 testimony about giving forgiveness came without
23 objection, so I don't think you can complain now
24 that this testimony came out there because it was
25 without objection.
Page 80
1 MS. EAZER: I didn't think it was a good

2 objection, Judge, because he could have -- unlike
3 what the defendant said what M said, he's
4 doing it for impeachment of M because he asked
5 M about that when M was on the stand.
6 THE COURT: I don't know that I would have
7 allowed it but, anyway, it came out. But then
8 you're asking me to help you because if the jury
9 believes one person, then it might cause your
10 case -- I don't know that that's my role. That's
11 just with anything. Mr. Sears isn't asking, well,
12 Your Honor, if the jury believes M J , my
13 client is going to get convicted, help me. I can't.
14 That's not my role. Then you talk about that you
15 are surprised why he called him, which has nothing
16 to do with the question I asked you.
17 So we've been down this road a lot of times.
18 You know, you answer my questions in the same way
19 that this last witness was answering your question,
20 which is by not answering it. My question for you
21 is this: If I strike that answer and we move on and
22 now you ask clearer questions, why doesn't that
23 solve the problem?
24 MS. EAZER: Because I'm not asking this
25 court to help me. I'm requesting this court that I
Page 81
1 should be allowed to fully impeach this witness

2 because he has given damaging, untruthful testimony
3 and he is a critical witness. That's why striking
4 his answer isn't enough.
5 THE COURT: Help me understand. Say I
6 strike his answer. Are there still things you still
7 need to impeach him with and if so, what, so I
8 understand?
9 MS. EAZER: I'm going to impeach him with
10 the whole thing about the documents, that, you know,
11 he would have gave the documents to Mr. Sears but he
12 wouldn't have given them to a police officer without
13 talking to an attorney, that he's trying to help the
14 defendant but --
15 THE COURT: Fine, and he said that in his
16 interview, I understand that, and I think that's
17 relevant to talk to him about because that
18 demonstrates bias, but that is different than
19 impeaching him on this area. So help me out.
20 Impeaching on this area about the council and what
21 he knew that council was about and the information
22 he had, help me understand that and what in your
23 position he is lying about and what you want to
24 impeach him about on that topic.
25 MS. EAZER: What he said was this was just
Page 82
1 about discipline, and I obviously don't have the

2 quotes. I guess the court is getting realtime up
3 there.
4 THE COURT: I'm not.
5 MS. EAZER: Oh, I thought you were because
6 you've looked at it a couple of times.
7 THE COURT: Well, I have 56 pages of typed
8 notes. I type a lot of notes. I'm just looking at
9 my notes.
10 MS. EAZER: I thought maybe you were
11 getting realtime, but he said that -- the initial
12 question that I was trying to get back to was that
13 this was about inappropriate discipline and that's
14 why the council found what they did. He knows and I
15 mean this witness knows better than anyone the
16 council did not find this was inappropriate
17 discipline. The council, in fact, never -- you
18 know, said before he was to go back to the ministry,
19 that someone should check with the council. The
20 council found that this was --
21 THE COURT: Let me stop you because you're
22 not answering my question. If I strike this last
23 answer about the discrepancies, that does not,
24 therefore, open the door to asking about the council
25 findings, but you indicate he's lying about a number
Page 83
1 of things, so I want to know specifically concerning

2 the topic you were talking to him about in terms of
3 what he understood the council was about, what in
4 your opinion did he lie about so that you want to
5 impeach him with on those things?
6 MS. EAZER: Well, he initially was saying
7 this council was just about inappropriate discipline
8 and he knows that's not what this council was about,
9 and then he buttressed it with the statement that
10 I'm saying to the court does open the door because,
11 again, he can't unring the bell but he --
12 THE COURT: Well, I'm going to strike his
13 statement so, therefore, it doesn't open the door,
14 but are there things from the council documents that
15 you plan on using to impeach him concerning his
16 knowledge about what the council was about and if
17 so, let me know what those are so we can talk about
18 them now so we don't waste the jury's time with
19 bench conferences.
20 MS. EAZER: I'm trying to think. I'm
21 sorry. Ask it again, Judge.
22 THE COURT: Sure. No problem. On the
23 topic of what he knew the council was investigating,
24 all right, and he gave you some answers and you are
25 indicating that he was not, in your opinion not
Page 84
1 truthful. Is that fair?

2 MS. EAZER: Yes.
3 THE COURT: Is there anything from the
4 council documents that you want to use in your
5 impeachment of him concerning those answers?
6 MS. EAZER: The council had concerns that
7 the defendant -- about what the defendant's
8 explanations were. I mean, again we have --
9 THE COURT: Well, that's the end. I'm
10 talking about what the investigation was about, the
11 purpose of it. I'm not talking about their
12 recommendations. I'm not talking about their
13 conclusions at the end about things that are called
14 into question. I'm talking about the beginning.
15 That's what we're talking about. You asked him
16 questions about the investigation, what was it
17 about, that he didn't know about. Well, he knew it
18 was about this allegation and that allegation and
19 that allegation, and you are saying he lied about
20 that is what you said a few moments ago, and so my
21 question to you is, what from the council documents
22 do you intend to use, if anything, to impeach him?
23 MS. EAZER: Just to bring in, again, that
24 the defendant was -- my understanding is the
25 defendant was given and questioned about all of the
Page 85
1 letters, including M J 's letter, so he had

2 that information because he's there as the
3 defendant's representative.
4 THE COURT: So I think you can ask him if
5 as the defendant's representative during the
6 council, was he aware the defendant had these
7 letters, yes or no. I think that's fine.
8 MS. EAZER: I think I ought to be able to
9 ask, Judge, you know, about some kind of a curative
10 thing other than just striking it. This just didn't
11 end with the council going all is forgiven and all
12 is hunky dory here.
13 THE COURT: Well, the jury has already
14 heard about Recommendation No. 8, which is that --
15 isn't a recommendation that all is hunky dory to use
16 your words, but I don't know that we need to get
17 into everything.
18 MS. EAZER: But he said that M J --
19 that he fulfilled No. 8 and that's what, you know,
20 that's what Mr. Sears was arguing that he, you know,
21 did exactly as he was asked. Now, this witness has
22 said he did repent, he asked for forgiveness and it
23 was granted him.
24 THE COURT: He did say that. M J
25 said something different, and the jury will believe
Page 86
1 who they believe, just like in any trial. So what

2 else are you asking me to do? I'm trying to get
3 specifics because -- so I understand, and if there's
4 things from the documents you want to use, let me
5 know so we can talk about them and Mr. Sears can
6 know what your intentions are so if he has any
7 objections, we can deal with them now rather than
8 while the jury is in the courtroom. That's all I'm
9 trying to establish.
10 MR. SEARS: Judge, while the State is
11 looking through, could I make one quick point?
12 THE COURT: Sure. Go ahead.
13 MR. SEARS: Which is on the specific
14 question of forgiveness, I was using as an aid to
15 that direct examination this witness's
16 contemporaneous notes that the State has long had of
17 that conversation, and that language comes directly
18 out of Pastor Lindblad's notes. It's not something
19 that he is remembering all over again. He had
20 notes. He's remembering what was said in the
21 conversation. As the court accurately pointed out,
22 the State has a different position and presumably
23 different evidence to bring forth to present some
24 different view of what was said, including but not
25 limited to the testimony of M J on this
Page 87
1 very point about this call. If the court remembers,

2 he disagreed with a number of the observations of
3 Pastor Lindblad because I cross examined from the
4 same document, and there was some he agreed with and
5 some he disagreed with and some he just didn't
6 remember whether those things were said or not.
7 That's sort of beside the point. This witness, I
8 would submit, is entitled to his own opinions about
9 why things were being done. He has to answer
10 truthfully if he has percipient knowledge of some
11 fact, but if he's being asked an opinion question,
12 why was this being done, I think he's stated that
13 opinion. I think he's entitled to it and the State
14 can argue that it's untruthful or disingenuous, but
15 it's his opinion, and I think that there's a
16 distinction that could and should be drawn between
17 asking him about his opinions and then arguing his
18 opinions are invalid or a lie or something else
19 versus if he has some knowledge that could be proved
20 in a collateral way with impeachment evidence that
21 he denies, then he can be impeached with that and
22 the jury can draw their own conclusion about whether
23 he's being truthful on that point or truthful on all
24 points, but to say that this somehow permits the
25 State to go right to what they consider to be the
Page 88
1 finding -- remember, the State has argued this

2 continuously. They argued it in their motion, there
3 was findings and --
4 THE COURT: And we're past that. I'm going
5 to strike it and we're not going to get into the
6 findings at this time. What I'm asking about is --
7 because Miss Eazer indicated there were things that
8 he lied about from her point of view. So I wanted
9 to ask her, well, what documents are you going to
10 use to impeach him so we know what the documents
11 are. This way if there's an objection, which I
12 anticipate there might be if there's a use of
13 documents, we can address it now instead of in front
14 of the jury.
15 MR. SEARS: Very sound idea, and I'd like
16 to also know what the State is contending is a lie.
17 THE COURT: And that's why I asked that.
18 MR. SEARS: As opposed to something they
19 disagree with.
20 THE COURT: That's why I asked the
21 question. So are there any things from the council
22 documents that you intend to use to impeach this
23 witness, putting the findings aside for a second
24 because I'm going to strike his last answer.
25 MS. EAZER: Well, like I said, I want to
Page 89
1 refer to the documents in general, that he said they

2 went missing, that he got them, that he disclosed --
3 THE COURT: Well, hang on a second. That's
4 a separate issue.
5 MS. EAZER: Right.
6 THE COURT: I think that's an issue that
7 addresses his bias. It's relevant for bias. I'm
8 not concluding he's biased but I'm saying it's
9 relevant for bias information. But as far as what
10 he already said and testified to, excluding what I'm
11 going to strike, what, if anything, from the church
12 documents do you want to impeach him with to show
13 he's a liar from your perspective?
14 MS. EAZER: Would the court allow just a
15 general question that you would agree that the
16 findings of the council -- I'm just trying to think
17 of a way to be able to show that there were
18 concerns. This didn't all just end with everybody
19 went their own ways. There were concerns.
20 THE COURT: Let me stop you there because
21 we're having a different conversations here because
22 we're talking past each other I think. So let me --
23 maybe it's my fault. Let me try to bring this home
24 so we're on the same page. I'm going to strike his
25 last answer. As a result of me striking his last
Page 90
1 answer, the door is not going to be open to

2 discussing the findings of the council or
3 recommendations of the council. Put that aside.
4 Separate and apart from that, you indicated that
5 this witness lied, your words, not mine, concerning
6 what the council investigation was about or what he
7 knew at the time or what the defendant was
8 confronted with or whatever. I asked specifically
9 and you said, yes, he lied. So as to those areas,
10 do you intend -- what, if anything, do you intend to
11 use from the documents to impeach him? I'm on that
12 topic.
13 MS. EAZER: I can't think of anything
14 specific other than he said there were
15 discrepancies. The council did not find
16 discrepancies.
17 MR. SEARS: Isn't that just the answer you
18 just struck?
19 MS. EAZER: No.
20 THE COURT: Yes, that is the answer I just
21 struck.
22 MS. EAZER: No. I thought what his answer
23 was was that the council -- that's why the council
24 did what they did and found what they found, making
25 it -- I took his answer to be they found everything
Page 91
1 was fine, not that there were discrepancies with the

2 kids' statements. Maybe I misunderstood his answer,
3 Judge.
4 THE COURT: I'm very confused.
5 MS. EAZER: I am, too.
6 THE COURT: I apologize because in my mind
7 I'm being clear and in your mind you're being clear
8 but we're having two different conversations. The
9 answer about discrepancies, which you wanted to use
10 to open the door as to the findings of the church
11 council is being struck. Therefore, the door is no
12 longer opened to the findings of the church council.
13 That's a dead issue for now. Hopefully it won't be
14 opened again and we'll move on.
15 Separate and apart from that, you indicated --
16 and maybe you misunderstood me, but you indicated
17 before that he was lying at worst or inaccurate at
18 best concerning what the council was about, and
19 wanted to impeach him concerning that. So as to
20 those issues, I asked you what, if anything, from
21 the church council documents do you plan on
22 impeaching him concerning what the council was
23 about, in other words, what they were investigating.
24 Is there anything from those documents that you
25 wanted to impeach him with concerning what the
Page 92
1 council was about in terms of the allegations that

2 he knew at the time?
3 MS. EAZER: No, other than -- no. Just --
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 MS. EAZER: I -- never mind. I'm not going
6 to -- I'm clearly not understanding. My objection
7 was, he said that's why the council did what they
8 did, and it would be helpful if I could have the
9 answer read back because it wasn't just about the
10 discrepancies. My impression was he left -- his
11 answer left an impression that the council just sent
12 him along on his merry way and nothing happened to
13 Mr. Chantry and everybody said, you know, everything
14 was fine. That's why the council did what they did.
15 That was, I thought, the last answer that we were
16 talking about.
17 THE COURT: Well, if I strike it, then -- I
18 understand you don't think that's an appropriate
19 remedy and I appreciate that. But so this is clear,
20 why don't we do this: Lisa, if you won't mind
21 getting to the last question and answer before we
22 broke, that would be great.
23 (Whereupon, the court reporter read
24 back the previous questions and answers at Page 67,
25 Line 9 through Page 68, Line 1.)
Page 93
1 THE COURT: His last answer had nothing to

2 do with your question and he then attached your
3 question about what they were investigating to the
4 findings. That's why his answer is inappropriate
5 and that's why I'm going to strike it.
6 Does that -- now that you've had it read back,
7 does it change any of your arguments or is there
8 anything else you want to tell me or anything you
9 want to do?
10 MS. EAZER: Again, I was focusing on his
11 last answer, which is that's why the council ended
12 the way it did and they did what they did, which
13 again left the inference, and I understand the
14 court's ruling, I'm not bickering with that, but
15 when you were asking me -- so that was my argument
16 first. So now when you are asking what else, there
17 wasn't discrepancies and so that wasn't what I was
18 arguing initially. Maybe that's what the court
19 understood me to be arguing, but I was arguing that
20 the last statement opened the door to getting in
21 that the council didn't find this was okay and
22 found, in fact, something different, but as far as
23 the discrepancies, the report specifically says that
24 these kids were very consistent, that there wasn't,
25 you know, and that's that one paragraph I'm talking
Page 94
1 about so I'm racking my brain. When you are asking

2 me what else in the report, so I'm thinking about
3 that part now, that the council said the children
4 were very consistent in their descriptions of what
5 they said happened. I'm not talking about getting
6 into the whole thing but just touching on that for
7 that purpose.
8 THE COURT: Well, I appreciate that. He
9 wasn't a part of the kids' interviews. So the issue
10 that's relevant for this witness is what he knew at
11 the time concerning what the investigation was
12 about, the allegations that the investigation was
13 about. I'll let you explore that if you need, you
14 believe, to explore that further. We're not going
15 to have him talk about someone else's opinions as to
16 someone's veracity.
17 MS. EAZER: No, and I understand that, but
18 what I'm saying is he said there were
19 inconsistencies or there were discrepancies, so I'm
20 wondering would I be able to ask that.
21 THE COURT: I'm striking all of that. I'm
22 going to tell the jury anything this witness said
23 about discrepancies and the council findings are
24 struck for the record, you're not to consider it for
25 any purpose. If he answers again -- when you ask
Page 95
1 him a question about what the allegations were, was

2 there an allegation of bare bottomed spanking of
3 child X, it's a yes or no question. If the response
4 is unresponsive or, well, there's discrepancies and
5 that's why the church council, then I'm going to
6 consider striking his entire testimony, admonishing
7 him and thinking about contempt. Hopefully that
8 won't happen, but also if it's a clear question,
9 then I'm not going to have a problem imposing
10 sanctions. If it's an unclear question, you know,
11 it's a different issue, but I've already admonished
12 him to answer the questions asked. I think also
13 before the jury comes in, I'm going to admonish him
14 about not talking about the church council's
15 findings. I think that may be appropriate so he
16 knows to avoid that. Is that fair?
17 MR. SEARS: It is. Would the court allow
18 me a few minutes with him to advise him specifically
19 that the questions are going to focus on what he
20 knew, not what he thought about the church council
21 and those sort of things, and then if the court
22 wants to additionally admonish him, but I think to
23 bring him back into the courtroom cold, not knowing
24 what we talked about in the last twenty minutes,
25 would be difficult.
Page 96
1 THE COURT: I agree. That's why I'm saying

2 bring him in and we can do this on the record with
3 him present.
4 MR. SEARS: I would just ask for a moment
5 with him before we --
6 THE COURT: That's fine.
7 MS. EAZER: Judge, so I don't draw an asked
8 and answered because --
9 THE COURT: I'm going to let you ask some
10 questions that you may have asked before to lead up
11 into some things. Okay. That's why I overruled
12 asked and answered objections because I wasn't sure
13 you got -- because you weren't getting direct
14 answers to the questions, which is again why I
15 admonished him to answer the questions asked.
16 Any other questions, Miss Eazer? I want to
17 make sure that we have you all squared away.
18 MS. EAZER: No.
19 THE COURT: Thank you. And in the area you
20 are talking about in terms of the records and
21 handling the records and who is not giving records
22 to who, I think that's perfectly fine.
23 Anything else, Mr. Sears?
24 MR. SEARS: No. If I could have a few
25 minutes --
Page 97
1 THE COURT: Absolutely, sure. We need to

2 give the court reporter a little break anyway.
3 (Following a short recess at 3:37 p.m.,
4 proceedings continued on the Record at 3:51 p.m.)
5 THE COURT: Let the record reflect the
6 presence of counsel, and the witness is on the
7 stand.
8 Sir, I want to tell you a couple of things
9 before we bring the jury out and that is -- and if I
10 get anything wrong or if you think things need to be
11 added, let me know. And that is that, again, please
12 focus on the question that's asked and answer that
13 question and that question specifically, and then
14 we're not going to talk about the findings of the
15 church council or your opinions about the findings
16 of the church council. Okay, sir?
17 MR. LINDBLAD: Yes.
18 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Is that
19 fair or do we need more detail?
20 MR. SEARS: I think so. Judge, there was
21 one thing that occurred to me because we talked
22 about so many things simultaneously here, but this
23 question about -- another line of cross examination
24 about the interview that I think you read the
25 transcript of conducted by the State in this case
Page 98
1 and the lengthy arguments about documents that he

2 has and turning them over to me and should they be
3 turned over to the State and where he got them and
4 talking to a lawyer, that was the subject of a
5 motion, and whether or not that was an appropriate
6 way to disclose documents, my position was and
7 remains that the State has no ability and no right
8 to ask this witness to send documents directly to
9 the State, that the documents that were sent to me
10 were documents that I would review and determine
11 whether they were discoverable under Rule 15.
12 Ultimately documents were disclosed under there. I
13 thought that matter had been resolved. I thought we
14 had a resolution to the question of the extent and
15 nature of his disclosure. I am dismayed to hear
16 that the State thinks that that's an unresolved
17 issue and it's somehow ripe for cross examination of
18 this witness on this what I consider to be a very
19 collateral matter about the nature of his
20 disclosure, particularly given the outcome of that
21 motion practice.
22 THE COURT: Sure. Fair enough. I
23 appreciate that, but I think his answers make it
24 relevant because it addresses bias because when he
25 talks about in his answers -- I think I have a
Page 99
1 transcript but my recollection of his answers was

2 that, you know, he gave them to one party but if the
3 police wanted them, he would have to talk to a
4 lawyer first; he wouldn't freely give them. I think
5 that potentially addresses the area of bias so I'm
6 going to allow it.
7 MS. EAZER: Just so the court knows, I'm
8 not intending to get into Mr. Sears -- his position
9 about giving them to me, that wasn't my intent, nor
10 is it.
11 THE COURT: It's about this witness and his
12 view and I think it addresses bias. Thank you.
13 That issue is over. Let's talk about anything else
14 comes up that I needed to tell him. Did I miss
15 anything?
16 MR. SEARS: No. I've explained to Pastor
17 Lindblad in some detail the court's concerns and I
18 have counseled him that he should not be afraid of
19 the State's questions, that in his mind he is trying
20 to be exceedingly precise and listening to the
21 questions carefully and trying to answer them. He
22 feels that he has been prevented by the State's
23 questioning technique from explaining answers by the
24 State's insistence that a particular question calls
25 for a yes or no as he's about to explain why he
Page 100
1 can't answer a question yes or no. I'm not sure

2 that that's proper and --
3 THE COURT: Well, like with any witness, if
4 the answer calls for a yes or no answer and he can't
5 answer it yes or no, he can say I can't answer that
6 yes or no is one way to handle it and then
7 there's the redirect examination, in which case Mr.
8 Sears can ask for explanations.
9 MR. SEARS: I've explained that to the
10 witness. I don't want the court to come away with
11 the impression that Pastor Lindblad is being evasive
12 if he politely resists the idea that a question the
13 State thinks is a yes or no question in his mind is
14 not. He's not trying to be evasive. He is trying
15 to be as absolutely correct and precise as he can.
16 THE COURT: If he can't answer a question
17 yes or no, he can just say I can't if that's his
18 answer.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Let's bring in the jury.
21 (Whereupon the jury entered the courtroom.)
23 seated.
24 Miss Eazer, please continue when you are
25 ready.
Page 101
1 MS. EAZER: Judge, did you want to strike

2 the --
3 THE COURT: Oh, thank you very much. Thank
4 you, Miss Eazer. The last answer that the witness
5 gave that referenced the words discrepancy and
6 findings of church council is stricken from the
7 record. It is not to be considered by you for any
8 purpose whatsoever during this trial. Again, it is
9 stricken from the record and you are not to consider
10 it. Thank you. Miss Eazer, thank you very much.
11 Please continue.
12 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Mr. Lindblad, I want to back
13 up and ask you specifically when you went down with
14 Mr. Chantry for this council meeting, whether you
15 knew it ahead of time or whether you were made aware
16 of it at the time you got to the place where the
17 meetings were being held, you became aware, did you
18 not, sir, that the allegations were a little bit
19 more than just inappropriate discipline during
20 tutoring?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And specifically you were made aware during --
23 at that time, if not before, that the defendant was
24 accused of paddling children with various objects
25 with their pants down; correct, sir?
Page 102
1 A Yes.
2 Q And with respect to at least three of those
3 little boys, rubbing their bottoms after he would
4 get done paddling them with various objects?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And when you arrived at this council
7 investigation, yourself and the defendant were given
8 a package of information, were you not, sir, which
9 contained letters from each and every one of the
10 parents, as well as a letter from M J ,
11 talking about what had happened?
12 A No.
13 Q Do you remember preparing some notes, sir,
14 regarding your attendance at that informal council?
15 A Yes.
16 Q At that time it looks like the notes were
17 maybe dated December 13th through September 16th of
18 2000. Does that sound right?
19 A That was the date of the council.
20 Q Do you think your notes that you prepared
21 referencing the council meeting might be a little
22 bit more accurate than your memory here today?
23 A It's possible.
24 Q All right. Let me show you what's been marked
25 as Exhibit 77, sir, and ask you if you recognize
Page 103
1 that as your typewritten notes regarding the council

2 meeting.
3 A Right.
4 Q And would you agree down on No. -- at No. 4
5 you talk about the reports and the letters of the
6 parents and the children being submitted at the
7 council meeting?
8 A I'm sorry. I was reading. Say that again,
9 please, I'm sorry.
10 Q That's okay. Did you in fact reference that
11 you received letters from the family members as well
12 as from the elders?
13 A Well, but it doesn't say I received them. It
14 says that these were submitted to the council, and I
15 was not a member of the council.
16 Q Well, you said see documents attached and
17 these are the notes you prepared?
18 A Correct.
19 Q I think you told me in my interview actually
20 that you prepared these right after the meeting,
21 correct, sir?
22 A Right.
23 Q Because you wanted to have an accurate
24 rendition of what happened?
25 A Correct. All I had -- may I respond?
Page 104
1 Q Yes.
2 A All I had were -- was a letter or -- not a
3 letter but a report submitted by Tom Chantry and
4 also by the elders. That's all I received.
5 Q Well, your report, your notes say --
6 A Correct.
7 Q -- three parties submitted documents to the
8 council: Tom Chantry, Rich Howe and Shorty Owens,
9 then parens, elders, along with the parents and
10 children, see documents attached.
11 A Correct, but I did not have that one set from
12 the parents and the children. All I had personally
13 were the two. That's a report of the council.
14 That's what was delivered.
15 Q Okay. So despite saying see documents
16 attached --
17 A Correct.
18 Q I got to finish my question. So despite
19 saying see documents attached, you're saying you
20 didn't have the letters?
21 A Correct.
22 Q But you, nonetheless, were very well aware
23 of --
24 A Correct.
25 Q -- what M J was saying?
Page 105
1 A Correct.
2 Q To include that M J was saying that
3 the defendant made him pull down his pants or take
4 off his pants, bend over, grab his ankles while he
5 spanked him with a handmade paddle he made for just
6 that occasion and said he wanted to see his butt
7 turn red; correct?
8 MR. SEARS: Compound question.
10 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Correct?
11 A Yes.
12 Q So you would agree this wasn't just about
13 perhaps improper discipline during tutoring;
14 correct, sir? The allegations were a bit more
15 serious than that?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Now, you also prepared notes about the phone
18 conversation that you joined in on with M and
19 the defendant on March 2nd of 2006; correct?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Is that a yes?
22 A Yes.
23 Q And did you prepare them near in time?
24 A Right afterwards.
25 Q All right. Now, you said here today that the
Page 106
1 defendant -- I think when Mr. Sears was questioning

2 you, you said when M said he wanted to talk to
3 him, Tom thought it was, and I put in quotes, a very
4 good idea. Do you remember saying that when Mr.
5 Sears was asking you questions?
6 A After thinking, correct.
7 Q But that wasn't what you wrote in your letter
8 to M ; correct, sir?
9 A Well, that was one of two or three letters.
10 The first -- may I respond?
11 Q Yes.
12 A The first letter -- that was the first letter
13 when Tom asked me if I would have contact with him
14 and he would rather not talk. M wrote back
15 and said this is very important, I don't think --
16 how did he put it -- that's possible or that's a
17 good idea. I really want to have some closure; I
18 want to talk to him. I passed that on to Tom. Tom
19 then said, yes, let's talk to him. So that was the
20 first of at least two, if not three, letter
21 exchanges between us.
22 Q All right. So let me just break it down.
23 When Mr. Sears was questioning you, he asked about
24 you receiving information that M wanted to speak
25 with the defendant and I think you said, and tell me
Page 107
1 if I'm wrong, Tom thought it was a very good idea.

2 Do you agree you said that?
3 A Yes.
4 Q All right. Now, in fact, again, I read you a
5 portion of one of your letters where you indicated
6 Tom didn't want anything to do with speaking with
7 M ; correct, sir?
10 A There are two letters.
11 Q (By Ms. Eazer) I understand. We're going to
12 get to the second one, but you indicated Tom did not
13 want to speak to him; correct?
14 A Correct.
15 Q And that if M wanted to address anything
16 specific, he could write you and you would pass it
17 along to Tom; does that sound about accurate?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And then M wrote you a letter where he
20 indicated he understood Tom's wish to put those
21 issues behind him and to begin anew and I, too, wish
22 one day to leave all that behind me. Do you
23 remember that?
24 A Uh-huh.
25 Q Is that a yes?
Page 108
1 A Yes.
2 Q And that he did not believe Tom is currently
3 in the position to begin anew. Does that sound
4 familiar?
5 A Correct.
6 Q And, furthermore, he said that he wanted an
7 explanation, did he not, sir?
8 A Correct.
9 Q That he wanted to see if Tom had any remorse
10 for his sins?
11 A Correct.
12 Q And that while he would prefer to leave it to
13 Tom to initiate this, that he would ultimately leave
14 him no choice, quote, as I have no intentions of
15 dropping this issue; do you remember that?
16 A I actually don't but if you have it, I'm
17 certain it's accurate.
18 Q Well, I mean, just take -- I don't want to
19 mislead anything. I'm going to show you what's been
20 marked as Exhibit 65, sir, and would you read that
21 last sentence of that last -- second to last
22 paragraph?
23 A I do understand --
24 Q I didn't mean -- just down here. Would you
25 agree he says I ultimately leave him no choice as I
Page 109
1 have no intention of dropping the issue; correct,

2 sir?
3 A Right. There's also an underline mark.
4 Q Now, after you got that letter where M
5 made it clear he had no intention of dropping the
6 matter, is that when Tom thought it would be a very
7 good idea to speak with M ?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And that's when you write him a letter on
10 February 9th and you said your response to my letter
11 was forwarded to Tom as I'm sure you assumed I
12 would. Upon reflection, he has agreed to speak with
13 you by phone. Do you remember that?
14 A Uh-huh.
15 Q Now, you didn't say anything about Tom thinks
16 it would be a very good idea to meet or to speak
17 with you or he's looking forward to speaking with
18 you; you said upon reflection, he has agreed to
19 speak with you by phone; correct?
20 A Correct.
21 Q Now, in your notes -- you told us here today
22 that Tom specifically said I apologize for spanking
23 you during tutoring; correct; is that right?
24 A The context of the letter is about tutoring,
25 yes.
Page 110
1 Q And you wrote in your notes Tom apologized for

2 spanking M in the context of parental-approved
3 tutoring. He believed he was doing the right thing
4 but since discovered he did not have enough
5 experience or understanding of children. He really
6 wanted M to know that, wished him well and hoped
7 M would forgive and get on with his life
8 flourishing before the Lord. Does that sound
9 like --
10 A Correct.
11 Q -- what you remember Tom saying?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Next thing you wrote in your notes was, M
14 asked why Tom spanked him and you put in parens,
15 M never challenged Tom's version of the events?
16 A Correct.
17 Q Now, if this was a call, as you say, where
18 M was seeking an apology, Tom was seeking
19 forgiveness and M was granting of forgiveness,
20 why did you feel it was necessary to put in your
21 notes that M never challenged Tom's version of
22 the events?
23 A Again, because the allegations -- how do I
24 word this -- the allegations of years before were
25 different than what Tom apologized for in that
Page 111
1 letter. That's what I meant.

2 Q All right. So you knew that M had
3 steadfastly claimed in 1996 when the whole matter
4 first started and in 2000 when the matter was
5 investigated that Tom had beat him with his pants
6 down; correct; you knew that?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And that Tom would then rub his bottom; right?
9 A Correct.
10 Q And I think by now you certainly had seen the
11 letter from M where he talked about Tom was a
12 perverted, sick, twisted monster; correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q But you're saying in this conversation when
15 Tom said I apologize, M , for spanking you in
16 the context of parental-approved tutoring, M said
17 I accept your apology and forgive you?
18 A That's what --
19 Q Is that your recollection?
20 A That's what took place.
21 Q Now, you further note that M asked what
22 assurances there were that this would not happen
23 again; right?
24 A Correct.
25 Q So if it was just spanking in the context of
Page 112
1 parental-approved tutoring, do you know what M

2 was asking for assurances for?
3 MR. SEARS: Speculation.
5 Q (By Ms. Eazer) You went on to note that in
6 response to that question that Tom assured M that
7 he had not nor would not ever put himself again in a
8 position of one-on-one tutoring because he did not
9 believe that was wise?
10 A Correct.
11 Q Did Tom ever tell you why, if it was just
12 spanking in the context of parental-approved
13 tutoring, he felt twenty or actually at this time it
14 would have been sixteen years later that he should
15 never tutor -- be in a position of one-on-one
16 tutoring of a child again?
17 A I'm sorry, could you ask the question again?
18 I think I understand but would you ask it again,
19 please?
20 Q If all this was was parental-approved
21 tutoring, discipline in the course of
22 parental-approved tutoring, did you ever ask Tom why
23 he would make sure and never put himself in a
24 position to do such tutoring again if that's all
25 that it was?
Page 113
1 A He perceived it to be an unwise decision.

2 Q Now, you said that conversation ended,
3 everybody was happy, but you don't know why the
4 defendant wouldn't want to talk to M again after
5 such a happy ending; correct, sir?
6 A Correct.
7 Q Now, to be very clear, Mr. Sears asked you if
8 you were friends with the defendant and friends with
9 his father. You would agree, sir, you are very good
10 friends with Walt Chantry; correct?
11 A I would say we're friends. I don't know what
12 close means, but that's fine. We're good friends.
13 Q Do you remember telling me during the
14 interview you were very good friends with Walt
15 Chantry and his son Tom?
16 A I don't remember the exact phrase but if
17 that's what I said, that's accurate.
18 Q And Walt Chantry was a man of considerable
19 esteem within ARBCA; correct?
20 A Correct.
21 Q He held a position of a lot of authority;
22 correct?
23 A Well, he wasn't in ARBCA very long. He
24 retired, but he had a lot of respect within our
25 movement, yes.
Page 114
1 Q Now, speaking of ARBCA, you were one who wrote

2 a lot of letters in response to Miller Valley
3 objecting to Tom bringing a church into ARBCA;
4 correct, sir?
5 A I wrote a lot of letters?
6 Q Voicing your objection -- voicing your
7 opposition to Miller Valley.
8 A No, I wouldn't say that.
9 Q Did you write some letters saying that you
10 thought this was ridiculous, that they should --
11 they shouldn't be objecting to Tom Chantry bringing
12 his church into ARBCA?
13 A I didn't write letters to anyone except for
14 the membership committee as I recall.
15 Q And did -- in those letters were you voicing
16 an opinion that Miller Valley really, you know,
17 shouldn't be objecting to Tom getting back into the
18 church?
19 A I wouldn't word it --
20 Q Or into the organization?
21 A I wouldn't word it that way.
22 Q Well, did you write letters in support of Tom
23 getting back into the organization?
24 A To answer that question, I would have to refer
25 to the council again and I can't do that, so I would
Page 115
1 say I wrote letters, yes.

2 Q You were strongly supporting Tom bringing his
3 church back into ARBCA; correct?
4 A Correct.
5 Q You were not happy with Miller Valley voicing
6 an objection to it; correct?
7 A I suppose, yes.
8 Q I want to ask you about some documents and
9 such in this case, and I'm not asking you about
10 what's in the documents or to talk about anything
11 that might be considered hearsay, but you would
12 agree, sir, would you not, that after this council
13 investigation in 2000, there were a number of
14 documents generated; correct?
15 A Correct.
16 Q And you had most of those documents because
17 you keep documents; correct, sir?
18 A Correct.
19 Q And at one point you came into possession of
20 some other documents that pertained to that
21 investigation; correct?
22 A Correct.
23 Q And even -- you didn't receive those in an
24 administrative position; is that true, sir; I mean
25 it wasn't like you were the administrator of ARBCA
Page 116
1 and thus kept track of all the archives. You

2 received them in your personal role?
3 A Correct.
4 Q And I think when I asked you about why you
5 would get the documents, you said just because you
6 keep documents and that way they would be safe;
7 correct?
8 A Correct.
9 Q And you had even opined that some of the
10 documents may have disappeared from ARBCA's office?
11 A Correct.
12 Q All right. Now, at one point when I
13 interviewed you, you indicated that you had given
14 all of the -- after you got these documents, you had
15 given them all to Mr. Sears on behalf of Tom
16 Chantry; correct, sir?
17 A Correct.
18 Q And when I was interviewing you, I asked you
19 if a policeman were to show up and ask you for those
20 documents, would you have just handed them over to a
21 policeman and do you remember you said you would
22 want to consult with an attorney first, sir?
23 A Correct.
24 Q And do you remember when I asked you why is it
25 that you would give the documents freely to Mr.
Page 117
1 Sears but you would have an issue perhaps giving

2 them to a police officer, you asked -- you answered
3 I don't have an answer for that. Do you remember
4 that?
5 A Correct.
6 Q And I said are you trying to help Mr. Chantry
7 and you said I would say yes; correct?
8 A Correct.
9 Q And do you remember at one point when I asked
10 you if you thought it might -- when I asked you, do
11 you think it might look a little bit fishy that you
12 would hand the documents over to Tom Chantry's
13 attorney but you would think twice about giving them
14 to a police officer and I said do you think that
15 might look a little fishy since you're such good
16 friends with Tom and Walt Chantry, do you remember
17 you answering in this fashion: We -- our
18 association has gone on record as believing that the
19 subsequent charges are not true. Do you remember
20 saying that during our interview, sir?
21 A Probably something along those lines.
22 Q Not something along those lines, sir. Do you
23 remember saying, we -- our association has gone on
24 record as believing that the subsequent charges are
25 not true?
Page 118
1 A Yes.
2 Q Do you remember saying those words?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And the we and the our association was ARBCA;
5 correct, sir?
6 A Correct.
7 Q And the subsequent charges you were referring
8 to as ARBCA not believing as true were the charges
9 that have to do with what we're here on today, sir;
10 correct?
11 A Correct.
12 Q When I asked you who the we was and whether
13 you were sure that ARBCA, the association, would go
14 on record as saying the charges were not true, you
15 kind of changed your statement a little bit, didn't
16 you, sir?
17 A I don't know.
18 Q Do you remember then when I said who is
19 included in the we and then you said, well, our
20 association has taken the position that there was no
21 coverup, which has been the charge. Do you remember
22 that?
23 A Correct.
24 Q Because would it be accurate today, sir, for
25 you to stand there and say ARBCA has gone on record
Page 119
1 as believing these charges are not true?

2 A Well, it would be again difficult to answer
3 that question that way without referring to
4 documents, but I can say this -- well, the
5 association --
6 Q I'm not asking you what you think the
7 association thinks about Tom Chantry. I'm asking
8 you, would the association -- would the association
9 go on record today and say that you believe the
10 charges in this case -- which the jury is here to
11 decide; you understand that?
12 A I understand.
13 MR. SEARS: Foundation, lack of knowledge.
14 He's not an officer.
16 Q (By Ms. Eazer) That the association believes
17 all these kids -- that these allegations are not
18 true?
19 A The association took a position in 2017 with
20 regard to --
21 Q Sir, I'm not asking you what the
22 association thinks.
23 A Okay. Ask the question again.
24 Q Would the association go on the record -- when
25 you said we have gone on the record as believing the
Page 120
1 subsequent charges are not true, we're talking about

2 the charges, sir, not what you believe about Mr.
3 Chantry or his church and whether he should be able
4 to join ARBCA but that the charges are not true.
5 A Yes.
6 Q Is that the statement that ARBCA would make
7 today, yes or no?
8 A Yes.
9 Q You also, when we were talking about the
10 documents, kept insisting that one of the documents
11 contained in that packet had been signed by all the
12 parents and all the elders and had been given to
13 everybody, and when we -- when I was interviewing
14 you, you said you had that document sitting in front
15 of you. Do you remember that, sir?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Have you had a chance to go back and look at
18 that?
19 MR. SEARS: Could we approach?
20 THE COURT: Yes.
23 THE COURT: Thank you for objecting. What
24 are you planning on getting into?
25 MS. EAZER: That no document was signed by
Page 121
1 the parents. That was it. He kept saying that the

2 parents signed this one document and there was no
3 signatures of any parent.
4 THE COURT: He didn't testify during this
5 trial that the documents were signed by the parents.
6 So you're impeaching his -- his statement that he
7 made in his interview?
8 MS. EAZER: Yes, that he lied about it. He
9 said it was signed by all the parents and no
10 document was signed by all the parents.
11 THE COURT: But he has to make that
12 statement today for it to be impeached on that and
13 he didn't make the statement today.
14 MS. EAZER: Well, I was impeaching him with
15 the inconsistencies, just like with his statements
16 throughout the interview that I just got done with,
17 about the documents and he would give them to Sears
18 but not the police.
19 THE COURT: Give him an opportunity to --
20 if it's just who signed it, I think you have to give
21 him an opportunity today to answer the question did
22 the parents sign the church documents and that's a
23 yes or no question. If he says yes, it stops there,
24 but there's a relevance issue to it as well, and you
25 may even have some other objections.
Page 122
1 MR. SEARS: Again, at the risk of repeating

2 myself, which doesn't seem to be much of a risk
3 because I do it all the time, I thought we weren't
4 going into these documents. I thought we had an
5 understanding here that the documents were out and
6 now these are the ultimate conclusions. That's what
7 they are. So how is it relevant who signed it and
8 then doesn't that just -- we've talked endlessly
9 about the exhibit list. We've talked about
10 documents every day all day. There are previous few
11 documents that --
12 THE COURT: Let me just stop you there
13 because I understand where you are going. I got the
14 same impression that Mr. Sears did, that we weren't
15 getting into the documents. So that's why I was
16 paying particular attention when you asked, but if
17 it's about who signed them or not, how is that
18 relevant?
19 MS. EAZER: Just he told me that he had the
20 document in front of him and all the parents signed
21 it. There was no signatures by the parents. Just
22 to show again he was kind of making stuff up. And
23 the deeper reason I can't get into because he was
24 trying to say the parents had that document and this
25 is the document that none of the parents saw. It's
Page 123
1 just another inconsistency.

2 THE COURT: If we're not getting into the
3 context, I'll permit you to ask him did the parents
4 sign the church documents and then impeach him with
5 what he said prior, and that's it. Just who signed
6 them, not getting into the content of them.
7 MR. SEARS: He doesn't have the document in
8 front of him.
9 THE COURT: Right.
10 MR. SEARS: You are asking him in a vacuum.
11 If the State wants to impeach him, show him the
12 document. Do you see the parents' signature on
13 these documents? Well, no, I don't.
14 THE COURT: Right. She could do it that
15 way, too, if he remembers or not. Depends on what
16 he says.
19 jury.)
20 THE COURT: Thank you. Please go ahead and
21 ask your question.
22 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Sir, do you remember when I
23 was interviewing you, you referred to a certain
24 document and said it had been signed by all the
25 parents and you indicated you had that document in
Page 124
1 front of you at the time. Do you remember that?

2 A It wasn't signed by the parents. It was
3 signed by the councilors or the investigators.
4 Q My question to you, sir, was did you
5 repeatedly during my interview say it was signed by
6 all the parents?
7 A I don't recall that, no.
8 Q All right. Do you dispute that you said that?
9 A The document I was referring to was signed by
10 the investigators.
11 Q All right. My question was --
12 A So I made a mistake.
13 Q Okay. Well, all right.
14 A Made a mistake.
15 Q Okay. You don't disagree you said that more
16 than once during your interview, that the parents
17 had signed the document?
18 A If you say that I did, then I did.
19 Q Now, you took it upon yourself when this --
20 when these charges were filed to in fact go and
21 speak at other churches to set them straight about
22 this case, did you not, sir?
23 A That's not exactly accurate, no.
24 Q Well, did you say you went to different
25 churches to tell them what was fact and what was
Page 125
1 fiction about the allegations going on in this case?

2 A No.
3 Q You didn't use those words, fact and fiction?
4 A No.
5 Q I'm going to show you what's been marked as
6 Exhibit 76, sir, and ask you to kind of look at a
7 few pages of that and see if it looks familiar.
8 MR. SEARS: May I see what the witness is
9 looking at, Your Honor?
10 THE COURT: Sure. Take it and show it to
11 Mr. Sears, please.
12 MS. EAZER: I'll take that back from you
13 and I'll bring it back.
14 THE COURT: What page are you going to
15 refer to?
16 MS. EAZER: I'm looking for that right now.
17 MR. SEARS: What page?
18 MS. EAZER: 36 I think.
19 THE COURT: 36?
20 MS. EAZER: I have to look to see if my
21 notes are accurate.
22 THE COURT: I'm not sure those are the
23 right pages.
24 MR. SEARS: I had to stop and look and see.
25 I didn't bring it with me.
Page 126
1 THE COURT: You can borrow mine if you

2 want.
3 MR. SEARS: Thank you. Once we know what
4 pages we're talking about -- thank you.
5 MS. EAZER: I'm sorry. My note is
6 incorrect.
7 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Let me back up and ask you,
8 sir, are you saying you took certain documents and
9 you used them to go out and speak to some churches?
10 A I didn't use the documents. Well, to answer
11 the question -- may I speak?
12 Q Yes.
13 A To answer the question, I have to refer to the
14 council, which I can't do.
15 Q Sir, did you go out and speak to churches
16 about this case and the allegations against Tom
17 Chantry? That's yes or no.
18 A Yes.
19 Q And were you trying to clarify to them things
20 you felt you knew about this case?
21 A No.
22 Q You weren't trying to clarify -- were you
23 going out just to preach about this case?
24 A Not about the case but what had happened in
25 2000.
Page 127
1 Q Right. So you were going out to clarify to

2 these churches what you felt you knew about the
3 case, the investigation and so forth; correct, sir?
4 A Okay. Yes.
5 Q Yes, and I can't find my page number because
6 my notes aren't correct, but you don't remember
7 saying you need to separate fact from fiction for
8 these churches?
9 A I don't remember saying that.
10 THE COURT: Why don't we take our evening
11 recess at this time. Ladies and gentlemen, a
12 reminder, we do have trial tomorrow even though it
13 is a Friday. We'll have a regular day beginning at
14 9:00 a.m. Thank you very much for your time,
15 patience and consideration today. Enjoy your
16 evening and remember the admonition.
17 (Whereupon the jury exited the
18 courtroom.)
20 seated. I don't have an index in my copy so I can't
21 look things up, but it is what it is. If she finds
22 it, she can talk to him about it tomorrow if it's an
23 appropriately asked question.
24 MR. SEARS: I'll track down my copy. I
25 think that came from the County Attorney's Office
Page 128
1 and I don't think we got an index with it either.

2 THE COURT: Do you have a copy so you don't
3 need to borrow mine overnight?
4 MR. SEARS: I have one back in my office in
5 Prescott.
6 THE COURT: Sure. No problem.
7 Ms. Eazer, you wanted to address something as
8 applies to this witness?
9 MS. EAZER: Judge, I guess I have a
10 question with the way he keeps answering.
11 THE COURT: Yeah, I agree. I know what
12 you're saying.
13 Sir, if you wouldn't mind coming up here so I
14 can have a conversation with you. Thank you very
15 much. I appreciate it. And thank you again for
16 your time today. I apologize if I wasn't specific
17 enough.
18 In answering questions with I can't answer
19 that question without referring in essence to
20 something that the judge won't let me refer to is
21 not a good answer and, in particular, it wasn't even
22 responsive to the question asked. The question
23 asked -- for example, the last question, did you or
24 did you not go to churches after the charge was
25 filed and talk about this case. It's a yes or no
Page 129
1 question. Did you or didn't you? I don't know if

2 you -- if you did, yes. If you didn't, no. That
3 answer is the answer. So I don't see where bringing
4 in the church council investigation had anything to
5 do with it unless you were asked specifically what
6 you talked about. Did you go to the churches? Yes
7 or no. So let's try to refrain from referring to I
8 can't answer that question because of the documents.
9 Does that make sense, sir?
11 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Mr.
12 Sears?
13 MR. SEARS: Can I take the heat directly on
14 that one? In trying to explain to Pastor Lindblad
15 the court's rulings and the theories behind the
16 court rulings, I emphasized to him repeatedly that
17 the council was off limits, and it sounds like I
18 probably went a bit too far in that so -- I can tell
19 from his answers, knowing Pastor Lindblad as I do,
20 that he is immediately thinking somehow this deals
21 with the council, I've been told not to say it, and
22 that's why he did not. Not that he was trying to be
23 evasive or be difficult to the State. He genuinely
24 wanted to comply in every possible way with the
25 court's stated views. I'm sure he understands.
Page 130
1 We'll work with him overnight about that

2 particular --
3 THE COURT: Sure, I understand because he
4 can understand why there's a problem if we -- you
5 know, I serve -- I'm not a fact finder in this case.
6 I don't make a decision in this case, but I serve as
7 the gatekeeper for the evidence for the jury, to
8 make sure they get appropriately admissible
9 evidence, and if I rule something is inadmissible,
10 the jury, we'll have discussions with them. That's
11 why we excuse the jury when we have those type of
12 discussions, but then when we're in front of the
13 jury and we say, well, I can't talk about this
14 stuff, you're kind of giving the impression that
15 we're hiding something from the jury, and I don't
16 want to do that. Does that make sense, sir?
18 THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Sears, and thank
19 you for your time. Sir, you can step down. I
20 appreciate that.
21 Was that the issue you wanted me to address,
22 Miss Eazer?
23 MS. EAZER: Yeah.
24 THE COURT: Anything else?
25 MS. EAZER: No.
Page 131
1 THE COURT: As to this witness?

2 MS. EAZER: No.
3 THE COURT: Thank you, Miss Eazer, and
4 thank you for bringing that to our attention.
5 Is there -- I'll let Pastor Lindblad leave the
6 courtroom because you're still on the stand. Thank
7 you, sir. We appreciate your cooperation.
8 Was there anything you wanted to bring up
9 before we broke for today?
10 MS. EAZER: No.
11 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Mr.
12 Sears?
13 MR. SEARS: Well, just to note the obvious,
14 that we were a bit behind in schedule.
15 THE COURT: It's a good thing we have
16 another day.
17 MR. SEARS: We had a fair amount of time,
18 longer than we thought. There's still more cross
19 and redirect, but we intend to go right into Mr.
20 Chantry's testimony when we're done, subject to the
21 normal court breaks tomorrow, but now I can't avow
22 to the court that we will absolutely be finished by
23 the end of the day tomorrow with that. My previous
24 best estimates were that we would be ready --
25 perhaps have some even spare time tomorrow to settle
Page 132
1 instructions so that we could go to closings and get

2 the case, but we may now just be a little behind. I
3 don't think it's too much longer, but there we are.
4 THE COURT: I hope we'll have some time
5 tomorrow, but we'll see. I'm going to be the
6 optimist.
7 Is there anything substantively you want to
8 address?
9 MR. SEARS: No.
10 THE COURT: All right, and also to clarify
11 the record before, I'm going to look at the
12 transcript concerning the question as it applies to
13 the as a Christian question. I'm going to consider
14 that and the context of the same and the argument of
15 same before I make a decision if there's any further
16 action to take because I'm going to give it a second
17 look because I'm -- I appreciate what Miss Eazer
18 indicated and I wanted to give her the benefit of
19 the doubt and read some of that before I do
20 anything. Thank you, everyone.
21 MR. SEARS: I didn't realize we had FTR
22 capability in the courtroom that's working. Am I
23 the last person to know that we do?
24 THE COURT: Well, I'm assuming we do
25 because this is -- that clock is what For The Record
Page 133
1 provides and I got a couple of --

2 MR. SEARS: Is that what we are doing?
3 MS. EAZER: I didn't know we get video.
4 Will there be a video preserved?
5 THE CLERK: It takes up so much space, I
6 don't know.
7 THE COURT: Audio is?
8 THE CLERK: Yes.
9 THE COURT: Apparently there's maybe audio
10 but not necessarily video, but I made the assumption
11 because I'm used to having it in my courtroom.
12 MR. SEARS: So this is now just a shop
13 clock?
14 THE COURT: Well, it indicates that the
15 audio recording is on. The recording is on, whether
16 it's saved is a different --
17 MR. SEARS: And I know I've learned that
18 from time to time various proceedings, in Prescott
19 in particular, they use FTR in lieu of a live court
20 reporter for some kinds of proceedings.
21 THE COURT: Exactly.
22 MR. SEARS: Maybe that's what this was set
23 up for.
24 THE COURT: Perhaps. I know in my current
25 calendar I don't get a court reporter; I only use
Page 134
1 FTR.
2 All right. Thank you, everyone. Have a good
3 night.
4 (Whereupon, the proceedings were
5 recessed at 4:38 p.m.)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 135
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3 STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
4 COUNTY OF YAVAPAI )
5
6 I, Lisa A. Steinmeyer, a Certified
7 Reporter in the State of Arizona, do hereby certify
8 that the foregoing 134 pages contain a true and
9 correct transcript of the testimony of Don Lindblad
10 held in connection with the aforementioned action;
11 that my stenograph notes were thereafter transcribed
12 and reduced to typewritten form under my
13 supervision, as the same appears herein.
14 I further certify that I am not attorney
15 for or relative to any of said parties, or otherwise
16 interested in the event of said action.
17 WITNESS MY HAND this 27th day of August,
18 2018.
/s/ Lisa A. Steinmeyer
19 _____________________________________
LISA A. STEINMEYER, CRR, RPR, CSR, CR
20 Certified Reporter
Certificate No. 50942
21
22
23
24
25
Page 1
1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF YAVAPAI
2
3 STATE OF ARIZONA, )
)
4 Plaintiff, ) Yavapai County
) Superior Court
5 vs. ) No. P1300CR201600966
)
6 THOMAS JONATHAN CHANTRY, )
)
7 Defendant. )
8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
9
10 BEFORE THE HONORABLE BRADLEY ASTROWSKY
11 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
12
CAMP VERDE, ARIZONA
13 August 10, 2018
14
15
16 TESTIMONY OF DON LINDBLAD
17 JURY TRIAL DAY 10
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
LISA A. STEINMEYER, CRR, RPR, CSR
25 Arizona License No. 50942
Page 2
1 A P P E A R A N C E S
2
3 FOR THE PLAINTIFF: Yavapai County
Attorney's Office
4 Ms. Susan Eazer
Deputy County Attorney
5 255 East Gurley Street
Suite 300
7
FOR THE DEFENDANT: Mr. John M. Sears
8 Attorney at Law
511 East Gurley Street
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 3
1 (Whereupon, the following testimony was

2 had:)
3 DON LINDBLAD
4 having previously been duly sworn to testify the
5 truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth,
6 testified as follows:
7 CONTINUED CROSS EXAMINATION
8 BY MS. EAZER:
9 Q Good morning, sir.
10 A Morning.
11 Q I want to back up and ask you a few questions
12 about your, I guess, membership to ARBCA. Is it a
13 membership or --
14 A It's an association of churches, so churches
15 are members of the association.
16 Q And you are on the administrative council or
17 were you?
18 A I have been.
19 Q All right. When did you first become a member
20 of ARBCA?
21 A In 1997, when it began.
22 Q That's when ARBCA was formed?
23 A Correct.
24 Q And you said something yesterday I think,
25 unless I misunderstood you, that Walt Chantry had
Page 4
1 not been a member for very long?

2 A He retired shortly thereafter.
3 Q Okay.
4 A Maybe 2000. I don't remember.
5 Q Okay. Was he one of the founding members as
6 yourself?
7 A Yes. Well, his church was.
8 Q Okay. Go ahead.
9 A Churches are members, not individuals.
10 Q Was he -- well, let me ask it a different way.
11 Did you and he create ARBCA?
12 A No.
13 Q Who created ARBCA?
14 A A number of individuals, pastors came
15 together, called for -- their churches then voted to
16 become a part of the association and we had a first
17 General Assembly.
18 Q But who created the association or came up
19 with the idea for the association?
20 A Well, there was a predecessor organization,
21 Reformed Baptist Mission Services, and ARBCA evolved
22 out of that.
23 Q All right. Were you a member of that prior
24 organization?
25 A Yes.
Page 5
1 Q Was Walt Chantry a member of that prior

2 organization?
3 A Yes.
4 Q How long were you and he members of that prior
5 organization?
6 A From the beginning.
7 Q And when was that?
8 A 1985.
9 Q All right. Was there a prior organization
10 before that that --
11 A No.
12 Q So 1985 you and Walt Chantry are members of
13 the prior organization. The initials of that are?
14 A RBMS.
15 Q RBMS, and were you and he both on the
16 administrative council for that association?
17 A At different times.
18 Q All right, and did RBMS cease to exist once
19 ARBCA was formed?
20 A No. They were separate organizations for
21 about two years and then RBMS was folded into ARBCA.
22 Q Okay. So when I asked you if you and Walt
23 created ARBCA and you said no, it evolved out of
24 RBMS?
25 A Correct.
Page 6
1 Q It actually for a while was its own

2 association?
3 A Correct.
4 Q All right, and kind of a split-off
5 association?
6 A No. There were some churches that did not
7 want to belong to ARBCA but wanted to belong to
8 RBMS.
9 Q Okay.
10 A And that took a couple of years to work
11 through.
12 Q But just so I've got this correct, were you
13 and Walt Chantry the main founders of ARBCA when it
14 formed its association?
15 A No.
16 Q Who was?
17 A There were a number of men, fifteen to twenty
18 men that were involved.
19 Q Okay. Were you and Walt Chantry among those
20 fifteen to twenty men?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And you said that you were on the association
23 in the beginning of ARBCA?
24 A Our church was.
25 Q Your church was. I'm sorry. I meant the
Page 7
1 council, the actual administrative council.

2 A I was on the steering committee and then
3 became a part of the first administrative council,
4 yes.
5 Q And was Walt Chantry, likewise, on the
6 steering committee and then on the first
7 administrative council as well?
8 A Yes.
9 Q How many people, if you recall, were on that
10 administrative council in the very beginning of
11 ARBCA?
12 A Twelve, I think.
13 Q Now, you said Walt Chantry retired some time
14 in 2000 or shortly thereafter?
15 A Uh-huh.
16 Q Is that a yes?
17 A Yes. I'm sorry.
18 Q Only because she can't take down uh-huh.
19 A I know.
20 Q And even though he resigned, he still remained
21 active with ARBCA, did he not?
22 A No.
23 Q No?
24 A He retired.
25 Q Okay. Well, when he retired -- I guess what I
Page 8
1 mean, did he still -- would he still get invited to

2 functions?
3 A He did not attend any. He never attended any.
4 He moved out of the area.
5 Q All right. So as of 2000, your contact with
6 Walt Chantry was minimal?
7 A A whole lot less, yes.
8 Q Okay. Well, how many times after 2000 in any
9 given year do you think you would see or speak to
10 Walt Chantry?
11 A Less than one.
12 Q Less than once a year?
13 A Uh-huh.
14 Q Is that a yes?
15 A Yes. I'm sorry.
16 Q Did that change at some point throughout the
17 years?
18 A Not really.
19 Q All right. Now, were you contacted initially
20 in -- well, let me just ask you, do you know if Walt
21 Chantry was planning on resigning from ARBCA prior
22 to the 2000 investigation involving his son?
23 A I do not know.
24 Q Do you know if his retiring had anything to do
25 with the 2000 investigation of his son?
Page 9
1 A I do not know.
2 Q Were you asked by Walt Chantry to come and act
3 as Tom's advocate?
4 A No.
5 Q Who asked you?
6 A Tom did.
7 Q All right, and I think you had indicated that
8 he was asked to -- he asked you to be his advocate
9 for a number of reasons but one of which was
10 potentially to be a future witness for him regarding
11 all the meetings in Phoenix?
12 A I believe so, yes.
13 Q So you weren't asked individually by ARBCA to
14 be there; it was Tom Chantry who --
15 A Correct.
16 Q And ARBCA allowed that; correct?
17 A Correct.
18 Q I want you to think back and tell me, was Walt
19 Chantry still a member of ARBCA at the time the
20 investigation began?
23 Q (By Ms. Eazer) At the time in December of
24 2000 was he still a member of ARBCA?
25 A I think so but I'm not positive.
Page 10
1 Q All right. Do you recall Walt Chantry voicing

2 his opinion on one or more occasions during the
3 process of this investigation by the informal
4 council?
5 A I do not remember.
6 Q Do you remember him writing a very angry
7 letter to the elders of Miller Valley Baptist
8 Church?
9 A I do.
10 Q And do you remember him either writing or
11 expressing very angry thoughts to the three-man
12 council when they came to investigate?
13 A I have no recollection of that.
14 Q Sir, are you saying that after the
15 investigation had been done and the children
16 interviewed, you don't remember Walt Chantry
17 speaking up about --
18 A Yes, I remember that but I do not remember
19 them -- at the time Walt speaking to them.
20 Q You remember him voicing some opinions? You
21 said you did remember or didn't?
22 A No. After the fact, yes.
23 Q All right. You became aware after the fact?
25 Q And so after the fact, you became aware that
Page 11
1 after this three-man council had done their

2 interviews, done what they had come to do, Walt
3 Chantry in fact expressed some very angry thoughts
4 about what had taken place; correct, sir?
5 A That's correct.
6 Q Would you agree, sir, that Walt Chantry was
7 someone who people listened to when he spoke?
8 A He was respected.
9 Q And he was one of the founding -- the founders
10 of ARBCA; correct?
11 A Yes.
12 Q In that position, sir, would you agree that he
13 assisted many pastors in either starting up new
14 churches or going to new churches?
15 A Yes.
16 Q He played a big part in that, did he not, sir?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Now, in 2015 -- let me back up. When do you
19 recall the issue of Tom Chantry bringing a church
20 back into ARBCA first arose?
21 A In 2015.
22 Q All right, and were you at -- and I'm sorry if
23 you answered this yesterday, but were you at the
24 General Assembly in 2015 where Tom Chantry was
25 present?
Page 12
1 A Yes.
2 Q And do you recall there being some discussions
3 at that time about whether or not his church should
4 be allowed membership into ARBCA?
5 A No.
6 Q You weren't part of any such discussions?
8 Q But at some point you became aware that there
9 were some people dissenting as to whether or not
10 that should be allowed; correct?
11 A Correct.
12 Q And I think you told us yesterday that you in
13 fact wrote at least one letter saying let's just let
14 this Miller Valley thing go, that's in the past, he
15 should be allowed admission into ARBCA now?
16 A No, that's not exactly correct.
17 Q Did you say that the Miller Valley matter is
18 over and done, it's resolved, words to that effect?
19 I'm not quoting you but is that the general gist?
20 A Later in the year, yes.
21 Q And did you voice a strong support for Tom
22 Chantry bringing a church back into ARBCA?
23 A I voiced a strong position that the church
24 ought to become a member of ARBCA.
25 Q All right, and it was the church that not only
Page 13
1 was Tom pastoring but it was one that he began?

2 A No. It had -- it had a series of -- it was
3 actually begun as a mission work out of the church
4 in Rockford and so it had a series of men coming up
5 and preaching on the weekend and that sort of thing.
6 Q What does it mean to say one is sent somewhere
7 to plant a church?
8 A A church may identify a particular location
9 either strategically or a group of people want to
10 start a church and ask an existing church for some
11 help. That church then would help with resources,
12 pulpit supply, until the church is organized as a
13 church and then they would call their own pastor.
14 Q Was there plans ahead of time to -- and again,
15 I apologize if I'm not using the terminology
16 correctly, but to plant a church in Hales Corner
17 that Tom would ultimately pastor?
18 A No. There was a plan to plant a church there
19 for a number of years. So it was not a church plant
20 with Tom in mind.
21 Q That was never discussed?
22 A I'm not a member of that church but it's my
23 understanding that that is correct.
24 Q Did Walt Chantry have anything to do with the
25 planting of that church?
Page 14
1 A Not to my knowledge.
2 Q Possibly?
3 A It was the responsibility and the work of the
4 church in Rockford, so I would say no.
5 Q And speaking of the church in Rockford, Tom
6 was there at one point; correct?
7 A Correct.
8 Q And while he was not the pastor of the church,
9 he preached there; correct?
10 A I believe so.
11 Q How long do you think Tom was preaching in
12 Rockford; how many years?
13 A As the pastor?
14 Q Yes. Well, yes.
15 A It's a little rough but I think ten years but
16 I could be wrong.
17 Q All right. So you've just said as the pastor.
18 Was Tom the pastor of the church in Rockford?
19 A Yes -- oh, no. I'm sorry. Not in Rockford,
20 no. Tom -- could you repeat the question? I
21 thought you were talking about Hales Corners. I
22 apologize.
23 Q He was in Rockford prior to Hales Corner?
24 A Correct.
25 Q He preached there occasionally, correct, even
Page 15
1 though he wasn't the pastor?

2 A I believe so.
3 Q Well, do you know so?
4 A I'm not in that church. I would assume so. I
5 think so. I believe so.
6 Q Do you remember telling me he in fact did
7 preach at the Rockford church during our interview?
8 A If I did, then my memory was better then than
9 now, so I would say he did preach there.
10 Q And how long to your knowledge was Tom at the
11 Rockford church?
12 A I believe about four years.
13 Q All right, and where was he before that?
14 A In Washington state.
15 Q And where was he -- he would preach
16 occasionally at a church there; correct?
17 A After he had been there over a year.
18 Q He preached; correct?
19 A Yes.
20 Q Frequently?
21 A I don't think so.
22 Q How long was he in Washington state?
23 A A year and a half.
24 Q Was that the first place he went to after he
25 left Miller Valley?
Page 16
1 A Yes.
2 Q And, in fact -- well, let me ask you, at some
3 point Tom was even a teacher at a Christian academy;
4 correct, sir?
5 A That was after he left the area.
6 Q What area?
7 A Yes. Washington.
8 Q So he was in Washington for a year and a half?
9 A That's correct.
10 Q After leaving Miller Valley?
12 Q He then went to where?
13 A Well, to University Place, which is a suburb
14 of Tacoma.
15 Q And in Tacoma, is that where he started
16 teaching at the Christian academy?
17 A No.
18 Q What church was he with in Tacoma?
19 A Providence Reformed Baptist Church.
20 Q And did he preach there on occasion?
21 A I believe a couple of times in a year and a
22 half.
23 Q So he's at Providence for another year and a
24 half, and then where does he go?
25 A Well, that's when he moved to Rockford from
Page 17
1 Tacoma.
2 Q Okay, and in Rockford, Tacoma, and now he's
3 teaching at the Christian academy?
4 A No. From Tacoma to Rockford.
5 Q I'm sorry. Tacoma to Rockford. I got mixed
6 up. Then he's teaching at the Christian academy.
7 A I believe so. Well, yes.
8 Q He was in fact teaching fifth graders, wasn't
9 he, sir?
10 A I believe so.
11 Q And how long was he teaching fifth graders?
12 A I'm assuming the entire time he was in
13 Rockford but I do not have that information.
14 Q Now, yesterday when I was asking you about
15 M 's conversation over the telephone that you
16 witnessed, you indicated the defendant promised he
17 would never be alone with a child except for his own
18 in the future; correct?
19 A That he would never tutor a child
20 individually, that he would never tutor children.
21 Q Do you remember in fact saying that Tom had
22 promised not just M but he also made promises as
23 part of -- after this investigation was complete
24 that he would not tutor a child alone, he would not
25 be alone with a child other than his own?
Page 18
1 A Could you repeat that?

2 Q Do you remember at some point saying during an
3 interview that Tom had made a promise not only to
4 M but also to the council or to the people
5 involved in supervising Tom after the council that
6 he would not be alone one on one with any child
7 except for his own?
8 MR. SEARS: Your Honor, may we approach the
9 bench?
10 THE COURT: Yes.
13 MR. SEARS: I'm not sure where counsel is
14 getting this information. If she thinks it is in
15 one of the church council documents, which I don't
16 think is true, then we're doing just what we were
17 told not to do, which is diving into the findings of
18 the church council and the recommendations. If she
19 says this promise by the defendant is from someplace
20 else, I don't know where that would be.
21 MS. EAZER: In his interview. It's not in
22 the council. It's in his interview.
23 THE COURT: This witness's interview?
24 MS. EAZER: Yes. I'm asking if he
25 remembers saying that.
Page 19
1 MR. SEARS: Can we have a page and line

2 number?
3 MS. EAZER: I'm asking if he remembers. If
4 he doesn't remember, then I will show him the
5 document. The rule says I don't have to show him
6 the document at first. I can ask him if he recalls.
7 THE COURT: That's not what he said. For
8 his purpose, can you provide it to him?
9 MS. EAZER: Yes.
10 THE COURT: Do it on the way back.
11 MS. EAZER: All right.
15 jury.)
16 MS. EAZER: If I could have just a moment,
17 Judge. I have to look at another -- here. Page 72,
18 Counsel.
19 MR. SEARS: I don't have a transcript with
20 me. Does the court have a transcript I could
21 borrow?
22 THE COURT: Sure.
23 MR. SEARS: Thank you. My apologies. I
24 didn't bring it with me.
25 THE COURT: Sure.
Page 20
1 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Sir, do you recall in your

2 interview telling me that Tom had promised M
3 J as well as a counselor that he would not be
4 alone, would not discipline any children other than
5 his own and would never be alone with any children
6 subsequently?
7 A I believe the statement was that he would not
8 be alone with a child.
9 Q Okay. I'm going to show you what's been
10 marked as Exhibit 76, sir. I had you look at that
11 yesterday and ask you if that looks like a copy of
12 the interview you did with me back in March of this
13 year.
14 A Is there a particular page?
15 Q I'm just asking you the first question, does
16 that appear --
17 A Yes, yes. I'm sorry.
18 Q You have to wait until I finish my question.
19 This appears to be a transcript of the interview we
20 did; correct?
21 A It does.
22 Q All right. Could you turn to Page 72, please?
23 A (Witness complied).
24 Q And I want you to look down to Line 21 and
25 make sure I'm reading this correctly. Let me know
Page 21
1 once you are there.

2 A Page 72?
3 Q 72, Line 21. And this is you answering, and
4 Tom's promise to M J later as well as to
5 the counselor that he would not be alone, uh, would
6 never, going on to the next page, would never
7 discipline any children other than his own and would
8 never be alone with any children subsequently. Are
9 those the words that you said?
10 A Yes.
11 Q All right. Going back now to my questions --
12 now I'm on a different page. Now, just to be clear,
13 sir, nobody was supervising Thomas Chantry 24 hours
14 a day when he went to Rockford, Washington state,
15 Tacoma, Providence Baptist, all these places that
16 we've talked about, sir; correct?
17 A Well, he was super -- well, yes, that would be
18 true.
19 Q And how many years was he teaching fifth grade
20 students?
21 A I'm guessing four years but I don't know
22 because he was out of the area.
23 Q All right. Four years is what you recall;
24 correct?
25 A Doing the math, between 2002 and 2006.
Page 22
1 Q And again, nobody is supervising Tom Chantry

2 during those four years, correct, I mean supervising
3 him at the school? Let me be a little clearer with
4 my questions.
5 A I don't know.
6 Q Now -- well, do you think somebody was
7 standing by Tom's side each day as he went to school
8 and taught these kids?
9 A I wouldn't know. Probably not.
10 Q You have no reason to believe that Tom had --
11 A Correct.
12 Q Got to wait until I finish my question. You
13 have no reason to believe that Tom had a personal
14 supervisor attending his functions with him;
15 correct?
16 A Correct.
17 Q Now, when this all came out in 2015, and
18 specifically I'm referring to a police report and
19 then the information about the investigation back in
20 1995 to 2000, of incidents from 1995 to 2000, that
21 caused some waves in the community of Reformed
22 Baptist Churches, didn't it?
23 A Would you repeat the question?
24 Q When the criminal charges -- when Tom Chantry
25 was arrested for child molestation, that created
Page 23
1 some waves within the community of Reformed Baptist

2 Churches?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And let me back up a minute because I
5 neglected to ask you, you not only supported Tom's
6 admission into ARBCA back in 2015 but you were one
7 that really pushed for it, were you not, sir?
8 A No.
9 Q You didn't really push for his admission?
10 A I supported the church's admission.
11 Q Forgive me. I didn't use the right phrase.
12 You supported the church that Tom Chantry was
13 pastoring admission?
14 A Correct.
15 Q All right, and you were one of the strong
16 supporters, were you not?
17 A I had contact -- yes.
18 Q And tell us again the process for a church
19 becoming a member at ARBCA.
20 A Representatives need to attend a General
21 Assembly. They need to fill out an application
22 form. They're interviewed by a membership
23 committee. Membership committee recommends it to
24 the administrative council and the administrative
25 council then presents it to the churches at the next
Page 24
1 General Assembly.
2 Q Now, at the time were you on the membership
3 committee?
4 A No.
5 Q Were you on the administrative council?
6 A No.
7 Q How did you come into play as recommending
8 Tom's church be admitted to ARBCA?
9 A I left one other piece out and, that is, that
10 an incoming church must have a sponsoring church or
11 recommending church.
12 Q And who was the recommending church?
13 A The Rockford church.
14 Q And who was the pastor at the Rockford church?
15 A Pastor Dale Smith.
16 Q Now, were you -- what role did you play in all
17 this; were you present at the various stages of
18 Tom's church being admitted into ARBCA?
19 A No.
20 Q Never?
21 A Never.
22 Q What role did you have?
23 A I had a conversation with the chairman of the
24 administrative council -- I'm sorry, the chairman of
25 the membership committee.
Page 25
1 Q All right. Why were you writing letters to

2 say that Tom's church should be admitted if you
3 weren't part of any of this?
4 A The only letters I recall writing were to the
5 membership committee.
6 Q And maybe I'm misstating or not choosing my
7 words carefully enough. E-mails, are you
8 considering that correspondence?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Did you write -- you wrote an e-mail to Steve
11 Marquedant I believe?
12 A Correct.
13 Q Who was Steve Marquedant?
14 A Chairman of the membership committee.
15 Q Okay, and in that letter you were advocating
16 strongly for the admission of Tom's church, were you
17 not?
18 A Yes, yes.
19 Q And then you followed up with a letter after
20 that e-mail, did you not?
21 A I believe so.
22 Q And in that letter you went through a lot of
23 reasons why you think Tom's church should -- that
24 Tom's -- actually your words, not church, but Tom's
25 application for membership into ARBCA, you believed
Page 26
1 it's appropriate and it should be accepted; correct?

2 A Correct.
3 Q Now, going back to when all this came out in
4 2015, when I said -- the arrest itself created
5 waves. Then information came out about what
6 happened in 2000 with the investigation done by a
7 three-man council of ARBCA people; correct?
8 A Came out?
9 Q Information, you know, about that
10 investigation came out?
11 A Yes.
12 Q All right, and there was a pretty significant
13 wave when that information came out? And I'm using
14 wave kind of loosely as a term. There was a lot of
15 clamor about this amongst various churches; correct?
16 A Yes, yes.
17 Q People were wondering how could this happen;
18 right?
19 A Yes.
20 Q People were voicing that perhaps ARBCA had
21 covered this all up back in 2000, were they not?
22 MR. SEARS: Relevance.
23 MS. EAZER: Goes to bias.
25 Q (By Ms. Eazer) Were they not?
Page 27
1 A Yes.
2 Q And you indicated that you actually went out
3 and spoke to some churches to try and smooth things
4 over or answer their questions, did you not, sir?
5 A I spoke in one church.
6 Q You only spoke in one?
8 Q And that would be Hales Corner; right?
9 A Yes.
10 Q Where Tom Chantry was the pastor at the time
11 of his arrest?
13 Q Now, one of the things that the church in
14 Hales Corner was upset about was they had never been
15 told about what happened back in 1995 to 2000;
16 correct, sir?
17 A I believe the officers had been told.
18 Q You do?
19 A Yes.
20 Q You think the officers were told about what
21 the allegations were, sir?
22 A I believe at least one of the officers, an
23 elder, was informed -- had been informed of the
24 process that had taken place in 2000.
25 Q Okay. So let me ask my question again. The
Page 28
1 church had not been told prior to Tom's arrest about

2 the accusations and what had been investigated in
3 2000; correct, sir?
4 A I believe that may be true but I wouldn't have
5 that information.
6 Q Well, we talked about this in your interview.
7 Do you remember that, sir?
8 A I suppose we did. I'm not trying to be
9 evasive. It's been awhile, lots of pages.
10 Q Well, some of the parents and members of that
11 church were concerned that they never knew about
12 what happened from 1995 to 2000; correct, sir?
13 A Correct, yes.
14 Q And you went there to try and explain things
15 to them; correct?
16 A I was asked to go there.
17 Q Okay, and I'm going to not ask you to talk
18 about what -- anything that was said, but you took
19 the -- some documents from that investigation and
20 used those documents to help explain to those folks
21 at the church where Tom had been pastoring certain
22 things; correct, sir?
23 A They were my documents, yes.
24 Q And I wasn't suggesting you took them
25 wrongfully. I meant you took them with you.
Page 29
1 A Yes.
2 Q And would you agree with me, sir, yes or no,
3 you were selective in the information that you
4 provided that church; correct; you didn't tell them
5 everything, did you, sir?
6 A Ask the question so I know if it's yes or no.
7 Q You were selective in what you talked about
8 from the documents; in other words, you didn't tell
9 them everything, did you, sir?
11 Q Now, in the last two years this controversy
12 has only grown larger, correct, sir, as far as why
13 weren't we told about this and was it a coverup and
14 so forth?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And has it even resulted in some churches
17 leaving ARBCA?
18 A Yes.
19 Q A fair number?
20 A No.
21 Q Is it safe to say that you, as one who
22 advocated for Tom to become a member, it wouldn't
23 necessarily look -- this doesn't necessarily look
24 too good as far as why churches weren't told about
25 what happened back then for you, sir; correct? That
Page 30
1 was a very poorly worded question. Let me try that

2 again. ARBCA allowed Tom's church membership;
3 correct?
4 A Correct.
5 Q The churches where Tom had pastored previously
6 or had preached, if not was the pastor, likewise had
7 never been told the full story about what happened
8 in 2000; correct, sir?
9 A Could you repeat the question? My brain just
10 flew.
11 Q It's okay. Mine does that all the time. The
12 churches where Tom went after he left Miller Valley,
13 they were never presented with all of the
14 information about the investigation in 2000, were
15 they, sir?
16 A Yes, they were.
17 Q Everything?
18 A Yes.
19 Q To be clear, sir, was some of the information
20 from the investigation to remain confidential?
21 A It was confidential given the list of persons
22 to whom it would be given.
23 Q Okay. So my question, and I'm trying to ask
24 this very specifically, the information that was to
25 remain confidential, you would acknowledge that was
Page 31
1 not distributed to all the churches where Tom went

2 after leaving Miller Valley; correct, sir?
3 A I wouldn't have that information.
4 Q Sir, did you not tell me in the interview that
5 it was not distributed, that only certain people had
6 that information?
7 A And certain churches did.
8 Q You didn't say that in the interview, did you,
9 sir?
10 A I don't recall.
11 Q Well, do you recall saying --
12 A Yes, I did say that in the interview. I'm
13 sorry.
14 Q So, again, let me ask my question. Is it safe
15 to say that those churches at various places that
16 Tom Chantry went after leaving Miller Valley were
17 not provided with all of the information, sir?
18 MR. SEARS: Form of the question.
20 A The church to which he went with the
21 council -- the church to which he went when he left,
22 the church to which everyone knew he was going
23 received a copy of it as a part of the council's
24 provision or recommendation, and that's actually all
25 I know.
Page 32
1 Q (By Ms. Eazer) How about the church after

2 that and the church after that and the school where
3 he taught?
4 A I would not have that information.
5 Q You have absolutely no reason as you sit here
6 today, sir, to believe that those folks received any
7 of the confidential information; correct?
10 Q (By Ms. Eazer) A lot of people are not happy
11 with ARBCA because they feel like they weren't told
12 things that they feel they should have been told
13 about Tom Chantry; is that safe to say, sir?
14 A Within the association or outside or both?
15 Q Both.
16 A Within the association, no.
17 Q None of the churches in the association are --
18 A I'm sorry. I believe you said a lot and I
19 would say that's inaccurate.
20 Q Overall are there a lot of people voicing
21 significant displeasure with ARBCA right now over
22 Tom Chantry?
23 MR. SEARS: Foundation as to a lot.
25 Q (By Ms. Eazer) More than dozens of people are
Page 33
1 voicing displeasure with ARBCA right now over issues

2 relating to Thomas Chantry; correct, sir?
3 A Please ask the question again. I'm sorry.
4 Q There are more than dozens of people
5 expressing significant displeasure with ARBCA over
6 matters --
7 A Outside of the association, I believe so. I'm
8 sorry, finish your question.
9 Q Over matters relating to Thomas Chantry?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Now, I forgot to follow up on a question I
12 asked you yesterday. I asked you if you went to one
13 church and to use your words -- and this was Hales
14 Corner -- to set them straight on fact and fiction,
15 and you said you didn't think you used those words.
16 Remember, sir?
17 A I wasn't sure, yes.
18 Q Okay. Do you still have your statement in
19 front of you?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Can you turn to Page 7, please?
22 A To page which?
23 Q 7. And do you recall starting on Line 12
24 saying the following, you talked about the materials
25 you were given by Pastor Lyon because I was asked to
Page 34
1 help a church that was struggling and -- and, um,

2 um, with what was going on and it was -- had the
3 potential for splitting the church and I was asked
4 to come in and to -- and to help them sort out fact
5 from fiction at least as far as the documents, but I
6 never revealed -- I never printed them, I never
7 revealed them, nobody else. Do you remember saying
8 that, sir?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And, again, when you went to this church and
11 set apart fact from fiction, it was what you
12 believed to be fact and what you believed to be
13 fiction; correct, sir?
14 A With regard to what -- with regard to Thomas
15 Chantry, not with regard to the children.
16 Q With regard to what Thomas Chantry had done
17 and what ARBCA had done; right, sir?
18 A But I did not speak about the children.
19 Q Didn't say you spoke to the children but --
20 A About --
21 Q -- you were telling these folks what you
22 believed to be true and what you believed not to be
23 true; correct, sir?
24 A What I believed the documents that I had been
25 given originally said, yes.
Page 35
1 Q But you didn't give them those documents, sir,

2 right? You said that in the interview.
3 A It was not -- I was not to distribute any
4 documents, which I have not done.
5 Q Okay. So you separated fact from fiction
6 based on, again, my question was, your
7 interpretation and your truth; correct?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And you told us yesterday that you have
10 officially taken the position on behalf of ARBCA
11 that all of these allegations are not true; correct,
12 sir?
13 A May I clarify that, sir?
14 Q Just --
15 A Yes, I said that.
16 Q Go ahead.
17 A In thinking, in reflecting overnight, what I
18 should have said is that my position and ARBCA's
19 position with regard to Thomas Chantry is that a
20 person is innocent until proven guilty and that is
21 our position. We have not taken any position at all
22 upon the court case, what is taking place now, and
23 we are Christians who support the civil government
24 and we are supportive of this venue, and that's what
25 I should have said, and so I apologize.
Page 36
1 Q And thank you for apologizing, sir. But you

2 would agree what you said during the interview was
3 you have taken the position that these allegations
4 aren't true; that's what you said then; correct,
5 sir?
6 A If that's what I said, then that's what I
7 said.
8 Q Well, you're not denying you said that, are
9 you, sir?
10 A No.
11 Q And at the time that you said that -- and you
12 have never listened to the interviews of these now
13 adults who are named victims in this case; correct,
14 sir?
16 Q And you've never -- with the exception of
17 acting as a witness when M J wished to
18 speak to the defendant, you've never spoken with any
19 of these adults who are named victims in this case?
21 Q You didn't sit in on their interviews when
22 they were little kids back in 2000, did you, sir?
24 Q And those interviews weren't tape recorded; is
25 that correct?
Page 37
2 Q You don't have any transcribed statements or
3 details about what they said back in 2000; correct,
4 sir?
5 A Only after the fact, yes.
6 Q Well, after the fact, the letters; right?
7 A Correct.
8 Q But you don't know everything that they told
9 those three men behind closed doors, do you, sir;
10 you weren't there?
12 Q And you certainly weren't here when M
13 and W and J and J came into this court
14 and told these jurors about what happened to them
15 when they were in the defendant's care, sir; you
16 didn't hear that; correct?
18 Q And you weren't here to hear C L 's
19 description of the bruises and welts and blisters
20 that covered her son's buttocks and the back of his
21 legs when she picked him up from tutoring by Tom
22 Chantry; correct, sir?
24 Q And in your apology today, you certainly
25 aren't presupposing what you believe about this
Page 38
1 close dear friend of yours as to what the jury might

2 find after hearing all of the evidence; correct,
3 sir?
4 A Could you rephrase that?
5 Q In your apology today, it sounds like you're
6 saying I may have my own beliefs about what my dear
7 friend did or did not do, but you're not
8 presupposing or aren't going to second guess what
9 this jury decides in the end; correct, sir?
11 Q Thank you.
12 MS. EAZER: No further questions.
13 THE COURT: Redirect?
15 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
16 BY MR. SEARS:
17 Q Good morning. Let's start with one of the
18 topics that we just heard about here, which is the
19 official position apparently of ARBCA regarding the
20 charges against Tom Chantry. Let me ask you this:
21 Is ARBCA organized so any one person speaks on
22 behalf of ARBCA for all matters?
23 A No.
24 Q How is ARBCA organized?
25 A ARBCA is organized as an association of
Page 39
1 churches, and the churches together in General

2 Assembly make all of the decisions apart from the
3 day-to-day sorts of things, and then there's an
4 administrative council that meets about six times a
5 year, most of it teleconference. Two of the
6 meetings are usually face to face where they work
7 through the various issues that have come to them,
8 difficulties in churches or missions, seminary,
9 whatever, and then they bring recommendations to the
10 General Assembly. All of these matters are minuted,
11 including administrative council minutes are
12 minuted. So a letter was read at our General
13 Assembly in 2017 in which we said, as an
14 association, pretty much what I just said and that
15 has been minuted and, therefore, approved by the
16 churches. It doesn't mean somebody can't object or
17 vote against it but that's how we are organized.
18 Q So when you are telling us here today about
19 the official position of ARBCA, that's what's in
20 your mind, this letter that was put in the minutes
21 of the General Assembly in 2017 after Tom had been
22 arrested and charged in this case?
23 A Correct. Again, entrusting him, ourselves and
24 everyone else involved to a jury of his peers.
25 Q As you said, respecting the process?
Page 40
2 Q This process?
4 Q Now, were you on the administrative council in
5 2017?
6 A No.
7 Q But you were at the General Assembly?
9 Q So you heard this letter being read by someone
10 from the administrative council?
12 Q And was there a vote of the membership present
13 in the general council to adopt or otherwise ratify
14 this position?
15 A I believe there was but my memory is fuzzy at
16 this point on that.
17 Q But if what you're saying -- if I understand
18 what you are saying, you're saying even if this, I
19 would call it some sort of an initiative or
20 statement were ratified and put into the minutes,
21 there's nothing in the way the churches at ARBCA are
22 organized that would prevent some church from saying
23 not me, I don't agree with that?
24 A There was no opposition to it.
25 Q In order to oppose that, I suppose some
Page 41
1 individual church would have to say they don't think

2 people are entitled to the presumption of innocence?
3 MS. EAZER: Objection, Your Honor, leading,
4 speculation.
6 A That's how -- that's correct.
7 Q (By Mr. Sears) Now, do you know of any other
8 official position of ARBCA regarding any aspect of
9 the charges pending against Tom Chantry?
10 A Would you please repeat that?
11 Q Yeah. Do you know of any other position that
12 the churches in ARBCA would have taken officially
13 about Tom Chantry and these charges other than what
14 you've just told us about?
15 A No.
16 Q Jumping back a little bit here to this
17 interview that Miss Eazer conducted with you which
18 was back on March 21 of this year as a telephone
19 interview; right?
21 Q Okay, and she was reading you at Page 72 and
22 73, if you have it there, of the transcript that she
23 had prepared, this business about Tom promising that
24 he would never be alone with children other than his
25 own. Do you remember that's what she was asking you
Page 42
1 about?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Now, you talk about at the bottom of Page 72,
4 and she had that read, that Tom made a promise to
5 M J later. That would be the promise in
6 the 2006 telephone call we've heard so much about?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And then as well as to the councilor,
9 councilor spelled with a C in the middle; right?
10 A Line --
11 Q Line 23.
12 A Yes.
13 Q So was it your understanding she was asking
14 you about the church council, with a C, as opposed
15 to a counselor, a therapist or someone else which
16 would be spelled with an S; right?
17 A I'm assuming it was the therapist.
18 Q Okay. Do you think he made -- that he was
19 seeing a therapist?
20 A Yes, he did.
21 Q Okay, and did you have actual knowledge that
22 he made some promise to his therapist that he would
23 not be alone with any children -- he would not
24 discipline, I'm sorry, Page 73, Line 1, discipline
25 any children other than his own; is that your
Page 43
1 understanding?
2 MS. EAZER: Objection, misstates the
3 interview, relevance and hearsay.
4 THE COURT: Sustained on relevance grounds.
5 Q (By Mr. Sears) Miss Eazer did not read to you
6 the next question and answer on Page 73 after the
7 one she did read, and if you would look at Line 3,
8 the next question from Miss Eazer after that topic
9 was, but he was with -- alone with children at that
10 church, wasn't he, and your answer was, I don't
11 believe so. Do you remember hearing that question
12 and giving that answer?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Did you know what she meant about that church?
15 A I believe it was Providence in Tacoma.
16 Q The first church he went to?
18 Q After he left Prescott?
20 Q And your information at that time was that he
21 wasn't alone with children at Providence?
23 Q And she asked you a series of questions about
24 whether Tom was being supervised when he was in
25 Illinois in Rockford or in Wisconsin at his church.
Page 44
1 Did you know what she was talking about?

2 A Not really. I don't have -- I was out of the
3 loop. He was out of our area.
4 Q Are you aware of any promise, requirement,
5 direction, suggestion that Tom would forever after
6 leaving Prescott always be supervised at all times
7 so he couldn't be alone with children?
8 A No.
9 Q In the further discussions we had about ARBCA
10 and the position of ARBCA and how this all took
11 place, looking back at the timeline, the decision
12 that was ultimately made official to admit Tom's
13 church in Wisconsin into ARBCA would have been made
14 at the General Assembly in 2016; right?
16 Q And we've heard testimony that was in April of
17 that year?
19 Q All right, and we know that Tom was arrested
20 in the latter part of July 2016; correct?
22 Q So would it be accurate that ARBCA made a
23 decision to admit Tom's church without any knowledge
24 that charges were being investigated in Arizona; the
25 times don't add up?
Page 45
1 MS. EAZER: Objection, speculation.

3 A That would be correct.
4 Q (By Mr. Sears) Was the first time that you
5 knew personally that some criminal investigation had
6 taken place in Arizona after you learned that Tom
7 was arrested?
8 A Please repeat that.
9 Q Did you have any idea personally that there
10 were criminal charges against Tom being investigated
11 in Arizona until you learned that he was arrested in
12 Wisconsin?
13 A I believe I did.
14 Q What did you know?
15 A The chairman of the administrative council
16 called me and asked if I -- did I know and I said,
17 no, I have no knowledge at all.
18 Q Let's back up. When did that call take place
19 if you remember?
20 A That would have been in the fall of '15.
21 Q When you say something was going on, what was
22 the substance of that conversation; what were you
23 being asked if you knew about?
24 A Did I know charges were being brought or going
25 to be brought against Tom. I don't know where he
Page 46
1 got his information. I said I knew nothing about it

2 at all, and that was the last I heard until on into
3 the next year personally.
4 Q When Tom was arrested?
5 A Yes.
6 Q So you didn't know -- was that Steve
7 Marquedant; is that the person that called you?
8 A No. That man's name is Doug VanderMeulen.
9 Q You'll probably have to spell that for the
10 court reporter. Can you spell his last name?
11 A Capital V-A-N-D-E-R, capital M-E-U-L-L-E-N
12 (sic), and there's no space between Vander and
13 Meulen.
14 Q Let's talk about the visit you made to Tom's
15 church in Wisconsin in this little town which is
16 near Milwaukee, Wisconsin; correct?
18 Q And you said you were asked to go there. Who
19 asked you?
20 A The elder of the church on behalf of the
21 church.
22 Q And what were you asked to come and do?
23 A To ask -- to come and give an overview of the
24 council.
25 Q So this was after Tom was arrested; right?
Page 47
1 A Yes, yes.
2 Q And the church was leaderless for a period of
3 time; correct?
4 A They had one non-vocational elder but, yes.
5 Q That's a new term to me but I've also heard
6 the term teaching elder. Are there different
7 classes of elders in the Reformed Baptist Church?
8 A There are at least two major views, but simply
9 a vocational pastor is usually the pastor of the
10 church. There is a board of elders who are equal in
11 authority but usually do not or most of the time do
12 not have theological training but serve with him,
13 and so a teaching elder, a pastor would do most of
14 the teaching, most of the teaching, and there are
15 different shades of that, but that's essentially the
16 view.
17 Q So by way of example, Rich Howe and Shorty
18 Owens would have day jobs and not be vocational
19 elders?
21 Q But they would assume all the other duties and
22 responsibilities?
24 Q Okay. Now, back to Hales Corner, so you were
25 told -- you were asked to come by this senior
Page 48
1 remaining elder at Tom's church after Tom had been

2 arrested to come help out?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Was that because the senior elder believed you
5 had knowledge and some information about what
6 happened back in 2000, the allegations against Tom
7 and the workings of this church council?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And so you took them up on the offer and went
10 to Wisconsin; is that correct?
12 Q Now, did you go there with some agenda that
13 you were going to mislead and persuade these people
14 to a point a view?
15 A No.
16 Q You brought some documents with you, as you
17 said, from the church council; is that correct?
18 A Correct.
19 Q And Miss Eazer was asking you questions about
20 whether you brought all of the documents. You
21 picked some; right?
22 A I was selective in my explanation. I don't
23 know if I brought all of them or not but probably
24 did, maybe did.
25 Q Were you trying to stay away from discussing
Page 49
1 and revealing information in this sealed document

2 we've heard about?
4 Q Because you didn't think it was your place or
5 your responsibility to divulge that information?
6 A Not only that document but all of the other
7 documents.
8 Q And is that why you didn't bring copies for
9 everybody in the church to pass out?
11 Q But you were going to talk about what was in
12 them; is that right?
14 Q Were you also taking questions from the people
15 in the church when you were there?
16 A Most of the evening was taking questions.
17 Q And your discussion would have been limited,
18 as I understand it, to what you knew from your
19 involvement with Tom and this church council all the
20 way back in 2000; right?
21 A And what I could speak about.
22 Q There were some things you thought just
23 weren't appropriate to talk about?
24 A Well, and the council put a muzzle on all of
25 us, as it were.
Page 50
1 Q At the time back in 2000?

3 Q Said we're done and this is our business?
5 Q Now, in this little time -- this is one day at
6 Tom's church in Wisconsin?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And do you remember saying anything to any of
9 the people in Tom's church that you knew at the time
10 was either false or incomplete or misleading in any
11 way?
12 A No.
13 Q Was it your intention to share with them to
14 the extent you thought you could what the council
15 was about, what the allegations were about and in
16 general terms what the outcome was?
17 MS. EAZER: Objection, leading.
19 A What I was eager to share with them and told
20 them was the process, not the defense of a person or
21 challenging but the process.
22 Q (By Mr. Sears) Did you talk about or were you
23 asked questions about what Tom did in the 18 months
24 he was in Tacoma and what that might have to do with
25 the workings of the church council?
Page 51
1 A Please repeat that. My mind again --

2 Q Okay. I know you're a little nervous. This
3 is not an ordinary --
4 A It's not nervous. I'm trying to keep all of
5 this in my head.
6 Q Thinking back to your session with the people
7 at Tom's church in Wisconsin, did you expand the
8 scope of what you were talking about with them to
9 include a discussion of what Tom did during the 18
10 months he was in Tacoma?
12 Q And in your mind was that connected to the way
13 in which the church council was structured and the
14 outcome?
16 Q And they had questions about what he did;
17 right?
19 Q And did you try to answer those questions?
20 A I did.
21 Q Did you shade your answers, give false
22 information or mislead the people at Tom's church
23 about what you knew had happened in Tacoma?
24 A No.
25 Q At the end of your time with the people at
Page 52
1 Hales Corner, were there people left at Tom's church

2 that seemed visibly still upset and unsatisfied with
3 the information you gave them?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And did you have any follow-up conversations
6 with those people?
7 A No.
8 Q Okay. Did you have a discussion with the
9 elder about the fact that it didn't seem like
10 everybody there understood what you were trying to
11 tell them?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And were you asked to do anything else about
14 that?
15 A No.
16 Q Have you been contacted individually by any of
17 the members of Tom's church since you went there?
18 A No.
19 Q You were asked a number of questions about
20 this general uproar in the community, and one of
21 your answers you, it appeared to me, tried to
22 differentiate between churches that are members of
23 ARBCA and churches that are not, which leads me to a
24 couple of questions about ARBCA. So we understand,
25 membership in ARBCA is voluntary; that's correct?
Page 53
2 Q That means a church that calls itself a
3 Reformed Baptist Church can do that without being a
4 member of ARBCA?
5 A There are many in that category.
6 Q And that's different, for example, than
7 practicing law or medicine in most states where you
8 can only do that if you're licensed by some
9 authority?
10 A That is correct -- well, I don't know.
11 Q And by example, Tom's church in Wisconsin
12 apparently for some time after it started up was
13 operating as a Reformed Baptist Church; is that
14 correct?
16 Q And then at some point decided that they
17 wanted to apply for membership in ARBCA; correct?
19 Q And then some churches, notably Miller Valley
20 Baptist Church, resigned from ARBCA; correct?
21 A That was the only one.
22 Q But it's still a Reformed Baptist Church?
24 Q And the same thing for pastors; there's no
25 general licensing standard to be a Reformed Baptist
Page 54
1 pastor, right, a non-ARBCA Reformed Baptist?

2 A There's an ordination process generally but in
3 our world, the church ordains, not an association or
4 denomination or -- it's the local church that
5 ordains.
6 Q I don't mean to be impudent here, but anybody
7 could organize a church tomorrow, call themselves
8 Reformed Baptist ordained, one of the founders, and
9 go into business; correct?
10 A It happens all the time.
11 Q Right, and then sometimes they join ARBCA and
12 sometimes they don't?
13 A There's an admission process, so, yes.
14 Q One of the goals of ARBCA, I would imagine,
15 would be to encourage non-member churches to come
16 into ARBCA and abide by the standards and practices
17 of ARBCA regarding ordination of pastors; right?
19 Q So if you want to be an ARBCA church, there
20 are rules you have to follow as to who can be a
21 pastor and those sort of things; correct?
22 A To a certain degree, yes.
23 Q Again, if ARBCA decides that they're going to
24 try to enforce those, the church can back out and
25 say we're just not going to do that, we'll leave?
Page 55
2 Q And that's happened?
4 Q All right, and in ARBCA -- in the way that
5 ARBCA is organized and run, it would appear from
6 what you have said to questions from Miss Eazer that
7 dissent and disagreement is not uncommon on lots of
8 points?
10 Q It's not that the Tom Chantry situation is the
11 only issue; correct?
13 Q I have been told and I still don't understand
14 but I've been told that there was a very long
15 disagreement in the church over some church
16 doctrine, for example?
18 Q Called impassability?
20 Q And that has nothing to do with Tom Chantry;
21 right?
23 Q Except that Tom was part of the debate that
24 went on for some time in the church; right?
Page 56
1 Q And did churches leave ARBCA over their

2 perceived disagreement over this doctrine of
3 impassability?
4 A We lost a third of our churches.
5 Q So you lost one church over Tom Chantry and a
6 third over impassability?
8 Q And that -- the impassability dispute wasn't
9 the first doctrinal dispute in the history of ARBCA;
10 right?
12 Q It's one of the things ARBCA does is it gets
13 together and brings people of like mind to talk
14 about all kinds of complex and deeply personal
15 ideas; right?
16 A That's correct. It's a growing environment,
17 growing intellectually and spiritually, yes.
18 Q But the Tom Chantry situation was different
19 because this was a very specific set of allegations
20 and denials involving one of the emerging prominent
21 members of ARBCA; correct?
25 Q (By Mr. Sears) I think you told us this.
Page 57
1 It's been a bit, but you were at the General

2 Assembly in 2015 in Texas when Tom came as a visitor
3 in advance of his application; correct?
5 Q And did you tell us you had been contacted
6 there by Pastor Chris Marley, the younger, from
7 Miller Valley Baptist Church?
8 A That's correct.
9 Q And you knew who he was?
10 A Oh, yes, yes.
11 Q And he wanted to know why Tom was there?
13 Q And what was your response?
14 A I said you'll need to ask him.
15 Q Okay. Did you see him go over and ask Tom?
16 A No.
17 Q Do you know whether he ever talked to Tom
18 about Tom's possible application?
19 A No.
20 Q Did Pastor Chris Marley, the younger, also in
21 that same conversation ask you directly whether you
22 knew whether Tom's church in Wisconsin was applying
23 for ARBCA membership?
24 A He did ask.
25 Q Did you know?
Page 58
1 A I did not.
2 Q Did you likewise suggest he would have to ask
3 Tom about that?
5 Q And, again, you don't know whether he asked
6 Tom about that?
7 A I did not personally know that.
8 Q Was there any discussion during the General
9 Assembly in a public way of Tom's application or
10 because it had not been filed yet, was that deferred
11 until some later date?
12 A He had not applied by -- they had not applied.
13 Q The process you described about going through
14 all these committees and things, that sounds fairly
15 typical of any organization, and to be clear, you
16 were not a member of any of the committees or
17 councils at ARBCA at that time that would have been
18 responsible for approving or rejecting the
19 application of Tom's church?
21 Q But it was well within your experience that
22 various people would chime in on one side or the
23 other, correct, including you?
25 Q And that's what you did?
Page 59
1 A Correct.
2 Q And you thought it was a good idea at the
3 time?
4 A Correct.
5 Q And this was all done before Tom was arrested;
6 right?
7 A Correct.
8 Q And it was done by you even though you knew
9 what had been said about Tom all the way back in the
10 year 2000?
12 Q In writing these e-mails and possibly a letter
13 to the various committees and councils at ARBCA that
14 were evaluating Tom's application, did you
15 intentionally mislead or make false statements in an
16 effort to get them to agree that Tom's church should
17 be admitted?
18 A No.
19 Q Did anyone from any of those councils or
20 committees contact you directly for more information
21 or background about Tom and in particular the
22 council investigation?
23 A Just Steve Marquedant.
24 Q And what was his position at the time?
25 A Again, he was the chairman of the membership
Page 60
1 committee.
2 Q And so that's the first place that Tom's
3 application gets --
4 A That's correct.
5 Q And what did he want to know from you?
6 A Again, just more about the process in 2000 and
7 beyond, and that's what I was attempting to share
8 with him.
9 Q Much the same information you gave Tom's
10 church after Tom was arrested?
11 A Precisely the same.
12 Q Again, when you were talking to Steve from the
13 membership committee, did you make false statements
14 or misleading or incomplete statements in order to
15 persuade him or try to persuade him to a particular
16 point of view?
17 A I did not.
18 Q Is there anything about your relationship with
19 either Tom or Tom's father, looking back now, that
20 put you in a position, just this friendship and this
21 relationship, not the things that you knew, just the
22 relationship itself, was it so strong and so
23 powerful that it would cause you to make false or
24 misleading or incomplete statements for any reason
25 about anything connected to Tom?
Page 61
1 A No.
2 Q Is it fair to say that your relationship with
3 Walt Chantry was as you described, that you had a
4 professional relationship and that relationship was
5 always cordial and friendly?
7 Q Did you take long family vacations with the
8 Chantry family?
9 A No.
10 Q Did you entertain each other in your homes?
11 A In 35 years I've been in his home twice and
12 he's been in my home three times.
13 Q Did you spend Christmas holidays together?
14 A No.
15 Q This is just somebody you knew and respected?
17 Q And that would extend to Tom as the son of
18 Walt?
20 Q And you knew Walt for many more years than you
21 knew Tom?
22 A Correct.
23 Q Thank you.
24 MR. SEARS: No further questions.
25 THE COURT: Any members of the jury have
Page 62
1 questions? I believe there are. Bailiff will get

2 them and then counsel can approach.
5 THE COURT: This is Juror Question No. 10.
6 I'm not sure we can ask this.
7 MS. EAZER: I don't believe we can because
8 it would bring in other acts.
9 MR. SEARS: I'm sorry?
10 MS. EAZER: I don't believe we can ask it
11 because it would bring in other acts.
12 THE COURT: Perhaps other people that were
13 investigated I think.
14 MR. SEARS: I don't know. If it's so vague
15 I don't know how it would be answered, particularly
16 by this witness.
17 THE COURT: Right. So I think there's
18 really a 403 objection. Would you agree, sir? You
19 want to see it again?
20 MS. EAZER: I think I read it wrong maybe.
21 THE COURT: Go ahead.
22 MS. EAZER: I was reading it like he was
23 asking has there been other allegations against Tom,
24 which there was another victim brought forward in
25 the one investigation, but I can see what you are
Page 63
1 saying.
2 THE COURT: Other people that were
3 investigated.
4 MS. EAZER: I think it would be irrelevant.
5 MR. SEARS: I can't guess what they're
6 asking, whether the history of ARBCA or in the
7 history of the United States of America, other
8 churches.
9 THE COURT: Right.
10 MR. SEARS: More specifically, I can't tell
11 whether it's Tom specific or ARBCA specific.
12 MS. EAZER: Either way, it wouldn't be
13 admissible I don't think.
14 THE COURT: Why don't I -- I'm not going to
15 invite him to rewrite it. I'll just sustain the
16 objection.
17 MR. SEARS: I don't think you can.
18 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
21 jury.)
22 THE COURT: Any other questions from
23 members of the jury? Thank you. May this witness
24 be excused?
25 MR. SEARS: Yes.
Page 64
1 THE COURT: All right.

2 MR. SEARS: May he remain, Your Honor?
3 THE COURT: Sure because he is excused. Is
4 this an exhibit?
5 MS. EAZER: Judge, I am going to say this
6 witness is subject to rebuttal.
7 THE COURT: Subject to recall then?
8 MS. EAZER: Yeah.
9 THE COURT: Thank you. So he can't remain
10 in the courtroom then. Thank you. So it's about
11 time for our morning break so why don't we take it
12 now before the next witness is called. We'll take
13 fifteen minutes. Remember the admonition. Thank
14 you.
16 courtroom.)
17 THE COURT: Anything we need to address at
18 this time?
19 MR. SEARS: No.
20 MS. EAZER: No.
21 THE COURT: Thank you, guys. See you in
22 fifteen minutes.
23 (This concludes the testimony of Don
24 Lindblad.)
25
Page 65
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2
3 STATE OF ARIZONA )
) ss.
4 COUNTY OF YAVAPAI )
5
6 I, Lisa A. Steinmeyer, a Certified
7 Reporter in the State of Arizona, do hereby certify
8 that the foregoing 64 pages contain a true and
9 correct transcript of the testimony of Don Lindblad
10 held in connection with the aforementioned action;
11 that my stenograph notes were thereafter transcribed
12 and reduced to typewritten form under my
13 supervision, as the same appears herein.
14 I further certify that I am not attorney
15 for or relative to any of said parties, or otherwise
16 interested in the event of said action.
17 WITNESS MY HAND this 27th day of August,
18 2018.
/s/ Lisa A. Steinmeyer
19 _____________________________________
LISA A. STEINMEYER, CRR, RPR, CSR, CR
20 Certified Reporter
Certificate No. 50942
21
22
23
24
25

Transcript of Don Lindblad's Testimony During Trial - Redacted

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Transcript of Don Lindblad's Testimony During Trial - Redacted

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Page 1

1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

1 (Whereupon, the following testimony was

1 Q And does ARBCA have a headquarters?

1 relationship with Tom, did you come to consider him

1 A Towards the end of that time, yes.

1 number of years, and so we worked together in that

1 time connected to Tom's resignation. Does that date

1 this time period; is that correct?

1 anything that made you think that they were

1 understanding about what this meeting was to be

1 A No. Just one.

1 to investigate and make some recommendations.

1 MS. EAZER: Objection, Your Honor,

1 Q So this was a first experience for you?

1 Q Did you come close to Prescott?

1 Miller Valley Church?

1 Q And then at some point did the council members

1 Q Did you ever hear Tom deny allegations of bare

1 It's not just my ruling.

1 yes or no. I don't know how much further I'm going

1 MR. SEARS: Rather than go down this with

1 A Initially Tom was hesitant and then thought it

1 was your understanding of what it was to be about?

1 asking for forgiveness and Tom wished him well and

1 Q Do you think he did, sir? Do you think he

1 how come he didn't want to call M in 2009? If

1 case, except for this one, would be improper. In

1 the State's witnesses were blackballing this

1 Christian, you can't lie. That's not what Mr. Sears

1 the portion of the transcript and the FTR and I'm

1 reached out to him on behalf of Tom. Again, I just

1 clean as you thought it was in terms of how you went

1 I'm going to let people make their decisions in

1 of what I argued in my prior motions regarding this

1 didn't want to meet with M again in 2009, sir?

1 answers for what had happened back in 1995 and 1996,

1 A If we did, it was very brief.

1 Q And among the things you said in that letter

1 that himself, why he felt he had to have you answer

1 A His tutoring him and in that context spanking

1 A That never came up. That was never a part of

1 A Ask the question, again.

1 details, which the court has heretofore indicated an

1 If they do, then I think that would be appropriate

1 THE COURT: Right.

1 Q Okay. So let me ask you sir, are you not

1 given to the three-man council, that -- let me

1 and his legs, yes or no, sir?

1 Q I'm not asking you what Tom has maintained.

1 2000 investigation; correct, sir? It's a yes or no.

1 MR. SEARS: Relevance.

1 right, everything I said back in 1996 and 2000

1 an advocate for Tom for, none of them involved

1 recommendations that it did.

1 and answering the question asked, that would be

1 This witness certainly knows what happened with that

1 another angle versus blasting open the door with an

1 Escondido to have this meeting with him when this

1 over and over and over again, and I believe he has

1 asking him over and over and over again essentially

1 that, I grant you that, which is why I encouraged

1 So my plan would be then to strike that last