You are on page 1of 46

To: Grace Covenant Church (GCC) Membership

From: GCC Elders Pete Smith, Mark Flin, Joe Godal, Josh Rusev
Date: August 23, 2018
Issue: Pastor John’s Involvement in ARBCA’s Coverup of the Tom Chantry Scandal

Introduction
The elders of a church are referred to as “overseers” (Acts 20:28; Phil. 1:1; 1 Tim. 3:2; Tit. 1:7; 1
Pet. 2:25) and, as such, have the responsibility of oversight and protection of God’s people in the
local church. In Hebrews 13:17 we read that these overseers must “keep watch over your souls as
those who will give an account.” It is for that mandate and that for that account that the Grace
Covenant Church (GCC) elders named above have devoted themselves to seeking the truth in this
matter.
The elders named above are calling for Pastor John’s repentance for violating the mandates of
Scripture listed below:
Exodus 20:16 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
Leviticus 19:11 “You shall not steal; you shall not deal falsely; you shall not lie to one another.
1 Thessalonians 5:22 “Abstain from every form of evil.”
Psalm 82:3–4 “Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and
the destitute. Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”
Isaiah 1:17 “learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead
the widow's cause.

Format
This report begins with a two-page summary of the four allegations made by the GCC elders listed
above against GCC Pastor John Giarrizzo. Below each allegation is a summary of facts relating
to it. The remaining pages of the report are supporting documentation in the form of a detailed
account of how the elders came to the conclusions articulated in the Allegations and Summary
pages.
The report has been authored for the membership of GCC and has been written in a chronological
format to aid in grasping the timeline of many events. It is laid out mostly through the use of short
snippets of information, but where larger portions were necessary the formatting was slightly
modified.
GCC elders took an increased interest in the issue when GCC members Scott and Pam Weinland
first met with Pastor John on December 31, 2017 to express concern over ARBCA’s handling of
the Tom Chantry matter at Miller Valley Baptist Church (MVBC) in 2000. The Weinland’s lived
in Prescott in 2001 and had many friends that attended MVBC before moving to the Valley and
becoming a member at GCC.
Pastor John, as a founding pastor of ARBCA, served as the bridge for GCC elders between past
and present ARBCA personnel. This appeared to be an advantage to the elders because Pastor
John was knowledgeable of the ARBCA Administrative Council’s (AC) protocols, the
association’s culture, his significant institutional knowledge, etc. Pastor John had a good rapport
with all of the ARBCA pastors and the elders believed Pastor John’s esteemed standing within
ARBCA would provide the influence necessary to get the answers to questions posed by the
Weinland’s.
Since that time (nine months) GCC elders were exposed to increasing amounts of information by
way of public record, through shared documents and personal conversations and interviews. On
August 14, 2018 all GCC elders came to the unanimous conclusion that the ARBCA
Administrative Council (AC) withheld vital information from member churches in 2000 and 2016.
It was, and is, clear to the GCC elders that the ARBCA leadership connected with the 2000 and
2016 ARBCA ACs, had varying degrees of culpability that ranged from negligence for not taking
proper action to the willful attempt to coverup the facts. This range of culpability also extends to
members of the ARBCA 2016 Membership Committee (MC) that had knowledge of the criminal
investigation, which was initiated in 2015 by the Prescott Police Depart. It is not the intent of this
report to determine the level of involvement of individual leaders within ARBCA. It should be
noted that many of the pastors/elders in ARBCA, past and present, have no connection and
insufficient knowledge of the 2000 and 2016 Chantry investigations and the ARBCA officers’
subsequent coverup.
This report is focused on the deception and coverup of facts by ARBCA Pastor John Giarrizzo. It
should be noted that Pastor John was an active member of the AC since the inception of the
association in 1997 through 2002. Pastor John withheld this information from GCC elders until it
was discovered by the Weinland’s and reported to the elders on August 4, 2018. For eight months
GCC elders had been working off of the false premise, as communicated by Pastor John, that he
was not on the ARBCA AC in 2000, an administrative council that he, himself, condemned.

2
Abbreviated Timeline

December 2017 Weinland’s contact John to express concern about ARBCA’s handling of
Chantry investigation and the AC’s decision to let Chantry’s church into
ARBCA. John did not inform the elders.

February 2018 John tells Nick he was not on the 2000 ARBCA AC

February 2018 Weinland’s inform elders of their intent to resign membership due to lack of
integrity of ARBCA and lack of action by GCC elders

March 2018 Elders ask Weinland’s to wait, because the elders did not know about their
concerns. During the meeting John says he was not on the 2000 AC and does
not offer any additional details about the case.

The first letter is sent to ARBCA requesting an internal investigation.

April 2018 ARBCA refused to take action

April 2018 Weinland’s meet with GCC elders at the elders’ request to discuss the issue.
John does not offer any details about the case.

June 2018 GCC sends second request for action to ARBCA

July 2018 ARBCA refused to take action a second time

July 2018 Chantry criminal child molestation and child abuse trial begins

August 4, 2018 Weinland’s submit their resignation letter to GCC with an internet link to a
photo proving John was on the 2000 ARBCA AC

August 7, 2018 John informed the elders he was surprised to learn he was on the AC and did
not offer any additional details about the case

August 8, 2018 John commissions Nick to conduct an internal investigation at GCC. “…I do
agree with your statement that no one in ARBCA is competent to handle this
level of investigation - except you, and maybe Rich Jensen and Tom Hicks. I
trust your judgment on this Nick.” – John Giarrizzo

August 14, 2018 John admits to the elder board that it appeared ARBCA was involved in a
coverup and had something to hide. John votes to have GCC leave ARBCA
immediately. During the meeting elders agree they need to talk to Chris
Marley about the situation.

John volunteers to resign if elders believe it is in the best interest of the


church. Elders refuse his resignation.

After the elder meeting ends and others leave, John confesses to Nick that two
years ago (2016) he read the contents of a red binder from the 2000 Chantry

3
investigation. He explained that he got the binder from Chris Marley prior to
the 2016 GA and that the binder contained the victim, parent and witness
statements that detailed the allegations of child abuse. He said he took it from
Chris, read it and later returned it to Chris.

August 15, 2018 A meeting with everyone present from the August 14 meeting, except John to
discuss the new information and next steps

August 16, 2018 Prepared statement to the congregation regarding the investigation and
ARBCA resignation letter read to John

August 19, 2018 Statement to the congregation regarding investigation and ARBCA
resignation letter to congregation

August 20, 2018 Pastor Chris Marley confirmed he informed John of the police investigation of
the new child molestation charges in July of 2015, 9 months before the 2016
GA

Allegations and Summaries


Preface: Pastor John’s absolute knowledge of the coverup by other ARBCA officers at the
time of the 2000 investigation could not be established. There appeared to be an
“inner circle” of ARBCA AC members that knew the information and concealed
it from other ARBCA officers. It does not appear that Pastor John was part of the
2000 ARBCA “inner circle.”
Allegation #1: Pastor John was negligent in failing to ask probing questions after learning about
the inappropriate spankings of children from Tom Chantry and what he knew in
his role as an AC member in 2000
Summary: Pastor John Giarrizzo knew that ARBCA sent a 3-man investigative team to Miller
Valley Baptist Church (MVBC) to investigate the spanking of children by Tom
Chantry.

Pastor John had many opportunities to probe for the facts over the years, including
his conversation with Tom Chantry on the night his resignation letter was read to
the members of MVBC while Tom was having dinner in John’s home. Pastor John
had access to Mike McKnight and later to Ted Tripp, members of the 3-man
investigative team and co-members of the 2000/2001 AC. Pastor John also had
close relationships with a number of the members of MVBC which included the
parents of some of the children that were physically abused and molested. Pastor
John had a 2012 conversation with Pastor Chris Marley of MVBC who informed
Pastor John that the MVBC church could not overlook what Tom Chantry had
done in 2000 because he never reconciled with the families. Pastor John learned
in 2015 that the original case was being investigated by the Prescott Police
Department for not only child abuse allegations, but now child molestation.

4
In early 2016, Pastor John read the contents of a red binder with all of the child
abuse descriptions by victims, parents, and witnesses. On August 14, 2018, Pastor
John stated to the GCC elders, “I do accept culpability for not asking probing
questions about the spanking. I should have been more forthright on what I knew
and how I knew it. I would ask the congregation to forgive me of that.”

Allegation #2: Pastor John served continuously as a member of the AC from its inception in 1997
until 2002. Pastor John lied to the Weinland’s about his status as a member of the
2000 ARBCA Administrative Council
Summary: Pastor John had conversations about the 2000 Chantry incident with MVBC Pastor
Chris Marley in 2012, 2015, and 2016. These conversations culminated with
Pastor John reading the red binder in 2016 that contained the child abuse
statements from 2000.

Pastor John asserted that he forgot he was a member of the 2000 AC when the
Weinland’s originally inquired about it on February 13, 2018 and maintained that
assertion over the following months until the Weinland’s produced a photograph
of John on the 2000 AC. John responded to this discovery by the Weinland’s in
the following email response to Nick:

I must say that I was both shocked and embarrassed to discover that I was indeed
still on the AC - not only in 2000 but also 2001 (perhaps 2002 also)! I was honored
to be on the first AC in 1997. We ran for two-year terms. I can remember how
demanding the AC work was becoming and how I was getting so busy at GCC that
I had to resign before finishing out my term of office. For some reason I thought I
was off the AC by that time. I should have checked the dates before telling them
that. But being on the AC at that time I just don't have any recollection of ‘many
serious discussions’ on any of the AC conference calls. I don't recall there ever
being a single discussion over what to do about the serious sins of Tom Chantry?
I have a bad memory to begin with - but something this serious would definitely
have stuck out in my mind. I'm sorry to draw a big blank on that.

Allegation #3: Pastor John lied to the GCC elders about his knowledge of the 2016 criminal child
molestation investigation.
Summary: Pastor John told GCC elders that he received a phone call from Prescott Police
inquiring about Tom Chantry, but the investigator did not give much information
on what they were inquiring about. Pastor John attempted to explain his motive
for not looking into the allegations or contacting Tom Chantry based on a
conversation he had with elder Pete Smith, who at the time was a local police
officer. Pastor John ran a hypothetical situation by elder Pete and was informed,
based on the information provided by Pastor John, not to interfere with a criminal
police investigation. Pastor John gave his reason for not probing further into the
details as not wanting to interfere with the investigators.

Pastor John told the elders that the AC, in coming to their decision on whether or
not a church’s application into ARBCA should be considered, had discussed
whether it was the church or the pastor that was actually applying. The AC had

5
reasoned among themselves that ARBCA was determining the appropriateness of
the church separate from the pastor. Therefore, the AC reasoned that it did not
need to share any personal information about the pastor to the member churches.

In an email to Mark Flin, Doug VanderMeulen (2016 AC chairman) wrote, “In


July [2015], Chris Marley called to inform us that an individual who was not part
of the original situation but had been at Miller Valley was claiming a repressed
memory of inappropriate actions against him by Tom Chantry.” Doug also
explained, “John, Steve and Doug had many phone conversations about how to
handle this development.” Doug went on to explain, “It is important to understand
that at this point we had no knowledge if an actual investigation [was] being
opened or would be pursued. Months would go by with little or no information
coming from the police. Chris Marley expressed to me during this time doubts
about there being any actual investigation because what appeared to be the lack of
action by the police. Of course there was no way for us to know what the police
were actually doing.”
Chris told GCC elders that he informed Pastor John (2016 AC coordinator), Doug
VanderMeulen (2016 AC chairman), and Steve Marquedant (2016 Membership
Committee chairman) that the Prescott Police were investigating the new
allegations of child molestations and the old allegations of child abuse. Chris also
informed all three men that the police had copies of the entire contents of the red
binder which contained all of the victim, witness, and family statements and the
ARBCA Informal Council’s agreement signed by Chantry and elders of MVBC.
All three men agreed that Chris should keep the ARBCA officers up to date on the
criminal investigation.
Lastly, Pastor John admitted to pastoral intern Nick DeBenedetto after the August
14, 2018 elder meeting that he had obtained the red binder from Chris, read it, and
returned it without allowing anyone else to view it. It became apparent to Nick
that Pastor John had knowledge of the child molestation investigation which
started in July of 2015 and complete knowledge of all of the child abuse allegations
originally investigated by the ARBCA’s 3-man investigative team.

Allegation #4: Pastor John, as GCC’s official delegate at the 2016 GA, cast a vote on behalf of
GCC members in favor of receiving Tom Chantry’s church into ARBCA. Pastor
John was aware of the details of the original child abuse allegations from 2000 and
the ongoing criminal investigation of child molestation prior to the vote and
deprived GCC membership of that information.
Summary: Pastor John had complete knowledge of all of the child abuse allegations originally
investigated by the ARBCA 3-man investigative team. In early 2016, Chris
Marley, pastor of MVBC, provided John with a red binder that contained
statements by victims, parents, and witnesses that described the 2000 child abuse.
After the completion of the August 14, 2018 elder meeting, John told Nick that in
early 2016, he asked Chris for the red binder, read it, and returned it to Chris. Nick
reported the new revelation to GCC elders the following morning.

6
In closing it should be noted that information came out during the August 14, 2018 elder meeting
from Pastor John that caused those in attendance to realize that more investigation was necessary.
At the close of the meeting Pastor John told those present that he is willing to resign if that would
be the best thing for the church. The elders told Pastor John they appreciated his concern for the
church, but that issue was not part of the discussion at that time. After the meeting ended, Pastor
John had a personal conversation with Nick in which Pastor John revealed that he had read the
contents of the red binder containing details of the original abuse.
Based on the information revealed during the August 14, 2018 elder meeting, including Pastor
John’s admissions regarding the red binder afterward, the following actions were taken:
Everyone present at the August 14 meeting, with the exception of Pastor John, took part in the
August 15 meeting to discuss the implications of the new information and next steps. On August
16 the statement to the GCC congregation and ARBCA resignation letter, was read to Pastor John
by Mark Flin in the presence of Joe Godal. He was also advised at that time that he would be
suspended with pay of all pastoral duties until the investigation was complete. He offered no
objections to the elders.

7
SUPPORTING DOCUMENATION

Timeline Narrative
Because the ARBCA coverup spans 18 years, this investigation required a timeline with limited
cogent information to aid the reader in developing a reasonable understanding of the many facts.
Because the scope of this investigation is limited to Pastor John’s knowledge and activities, many
questions regarding other ARBCA officers remain unanswered.
2000 Tom Chantry Incident
1995-2000 Tom Chantry took over the pastorate at Miller Valley Baptist Church
(MVBC) from Bob Selph. Self was the ARBCA AC coordinator in 2000
and closely connected to Walt Chantry, who was Tom’s Father and the
man credited with the modern-day resurgence of the Reformed Baptist
denomination in America.
The parents of some of the children became aware that Tom was severely
spanking their regularly compliant children while he was privately
tutoring them, an arrangement that Tom initiated with the parents upon
his arrival to MVBC. These spanking included severe bruising to the
buttocks and upper legs. These incidents had continued over a significant
span of time.
According to the Simpson Hearing conducted by the Superior Court of
Arizona in December of 2016, the parents were also concerned about
Tom’s closed fist punching of a 12-year old boy in which the boy was
knocked to the ground by the force of the punch. This occurred at a 4th
of July celebration within weeks of Tom taking the pastorate and it was
prompted by the 12-year old boy squirting Tom in the chest with a squirt
gun, something all of the children were doing to each other at the
celebration.
November 2000 The MVBC elders contact former pastor and current AC Coordinator,
Bob Selph, because they determined that Tom needed to apologize to the
families for his harsh treatment as a shepherd.
November 2000 Tom Chantry resigned from MVBC via a resignation letter which was
later read to MVBC. At the time the letter was being read to the MVBC
church membership, Tom was participating in a meal and a cigar with
Pastor John at his home in Mesa area. Tom explained to Pastor John that
some parents were upset that he spanked their children and he was unable
to reconcile with them. Pastor John said he did not ask any probing
questions in regard to the details that led up to Tom’s resignation. Pastor
John explained that Tom’s demeanor that evening was solemn.
December 13-16, 2000 Bob Selph, working under the influence of Walt Chantry, Tom’s father,
used his position on the AC to hand pick a 3-man investigative team
referred to by ARBCA as the Informal Council. Selph pastored MVBC
prior to Tom Chantry and was respected by the members of the church.

8
The council was housed in a hotel in north Phoenix along I-17. Some of
the interviews were conducted at those location and in the greater
Prescott area.
Tom Hicks’ notes from his interview of Bob Selph stated the following:
“Then Walt came to Bob, asking him to get a council going down there.
He agreed to put together a council, and Walt wanted it to be an informal
council. And they put it together to try not to report to churches at all in
terms of what a formal council would do. This was just to settle things
down and get people reconciled. Bob put together a process to form a
council. He ran the members of this council by the elders of MVBC and
also by Tom Chantry. And all the parties agreed to the men who were
selected.”
GCC elders’ interpretation of this statement is that by calling the council
an “informal council” rather than a “formal council,” Walt Chantry and
Bob Selph believed that this change in disposition would not require a
formal report to go to the member churches. What was reported to all
the churches and what was hidden from all of the churches was noted in
the January 2001 AC Meeting minutes.
January 4, 2001 The ARBCA AC had its first meeting since the completion of the
Informal Council investigation on January 4, 2001. This was a
conference call meeting with all of the AC members, which included AC
member McKnight, who was also a member of the AC and who also was
an elder at Walt Chantry’s church. The minutes of this meeting are a part
of this investigation. Note the first entry from pages 2-3, and the
confidential entry made on the last page, page 9.
Key to this “general report” on pages 2-3 is what is misrepresented and
deceitful. The general report refers to the focus of the issue being
“differences between the elders of Miller Valley Baptist Church and
Thomas Chantry.” There is no mention of children. In fact, there is no
information that would give any member church any reason to believe
the incident ever had anything to do with the inappropriate spankings of
the children by their former pastor, Tom Chantry.
AC Elder January 4, 2001 Meeting Entry from Pages 2-3
2. A difficulty has arisen between Miller Valley Baptist Church and their pastor, Mr. Tom
Chantry, which resulted in Mr. Chantry’s resignation. An Informal Committee went to
Arizona, interviewed the parties involved, and sought to effect reconciliation. They submitted
the following report to be distributed to all the member churches in the Association.
REPORT OF THE INFORMAL COUNCIL
Of the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America
December 13,2000 to December 16, 2000
Miller Valley Baptist Church
Prescott, Arizona

9
At the request of the Elders of the Miller Valley Baptist Church of Prescott, Arizona and
of Thomas Chantry, former pastor of Miller Valley Baptist Church and at the direction of the
Administrative Council of the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America, an Informal
Council consisting of Pastor Tedd Tripp of Grace Fellowship Church of Hazelton, PA, Pastor
Richard Jensen of Hope Reformed Baptist Church, Farmingville, NY and Elder Marcus (Mike)
McKnight of Grace Baptist Church, Carlisle, PA, was sent to Phoenix and Prescott, Arizona. Its
purpose was to investigate certain differences which had arisen between the elders of Miller Valley
Baptist church and its former Pastor, Tom Chantry.
The Informal Council was concluded and the differences between the Elders of the Miller Valley
Baptist Church and Thomas Chantry have been resolved and recommendations of the Council have
been adopted by the parties.
Mr. Vincent moved to receive this report.
Mr. Howell seconded.
Motion carried.
January 4, 2001 Important to the page 9 entry is the header which stated that the
information is confidential and not for general distribution.” Located in
middle of this confidential page is bullet point 2 which identifies, “3
levels of reports” and instructs all of the AC members to keep this
information confidential. A second exclamation point even accompanies
the end of the instruction of confidentiality, thus, emphasizing the
importance of confidentiality. Pastor John indicated he did not recognize
the last page of the minutes and thought it may have been added to the
original minutes. It should be noted that the first page of this documents
identifies the document as only containing 8 pages, but that is consistent
with the instructions on the top of page 9 which reads, “Additional
Commentary: Confidential (Not for General Distribution). Below is the
page 9 entry from the minutes.
AC Elder January 4, 2001 Meeting Entry from Page 9

ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY: CONFIDENTIAL (NOT FOR GENERAL


DISTRIBUTION)

1. Mr. Blackburn asked about concerns expressed about Brent Line’s wife’s struggles with the
culture. Mr. Selph responded that Amy has been in Bogota for two years, but she is living in
South Bogota, one of the most violent and dangerous locations in the world. His elders have
recommended Mr. Line seek more suitable housing in North Bogota. She believes that change
would help.

2. The AC received a report concerning the Council sent to Prescott, AZ, concerning the
difficulties between former pastor Tom Chantry and the church. Three reports will be
distributed: a general report to be sent to all the churches, a middle level report sent to all the
AC members (to remain confidential), and a much fuller report to be given only to nine
individuals involved.

Mr. McKnight is to e-mail the public statement to be inserted. Distinction of 3 levels of reports

10
is to remain confidential!! Only the public statement is to be sent to the churches or noted in
the public minutes.

3. Mr. Dykstra reports: The Membership Committee received a request from Grace Baptist
Church, Carlisle, Pennsylvania to assist them in a conflict resolution problem with one of their
former members. I spoke with the man and he refuses to have a part in this procedure. Our
committee agrees that in such a case, there is nothing more that we can do. I will be writing
to the man making it clear that Grace Baptist Church was willing to be investigated and
reported on by an impartial council, and that refusal to have a part in this procedure is refusal
to have a part in a bona fide offer to settle differences in the way our Confession suggests

4. Prospects for New AC member:


Tedd Tripp (1st choice), Jon Hueni (2nd choice). Mr. Blackburn to make the contacts & report
back to AC.
Recommendation passed by acclamation.

January 4, 2001 Of significant importance is the number of reports and status of the
reports that is to be distributed to all AC members. “Three reports will
be distributed: a general report to be sent to all the churches, a middle
level report sent to all the AC members (to remain confidential), and a
much fuller report to be given only to nine individuals involved.” Pastor
John told the GCC elders that he did not remember receiving the Informal
Council report, which here is identified as a middle level report. On
August 13, 2018, John reached out to Jamie Howell, the 2000 AC
secretary who would have documented the minutes for the meeting. The
following is an excerpt from Jamie’s email to Pastor John:

Dear John,

It was good to talk to you today, brother. I have missed your fellowship.

The minutes you sent me are the only minutes I have that mention the inquiry into Tom’s misdeeds.
Apparently we only mentioned it in 2 AC meetings, then never again (or at least never as a part of
minuted business). David Dykstra sent around a Membership Committee Report (not sure the date)
that simply states the council met and would submit its report for the AC members, and emphasized
that this report was not to go to the churches. I didn’t remember ever receiving that report, but I
scoured my hard drive about a year ago and found it. I don’t recall ever having read it, but I can’t
imagine that I did not. I have attached it below. It doesn’t give any specific details about the nature
or severity of the spankings. All we were told is that the children were “subjected to inappropriate
physical discipline” and that Tom confessed to "inappropriate outbursts of anger." As I now
understand it, that’s a very sanitized version of what was contained in the sealed report, which was
guarded quite closely.

I don’t have anything else about it. As I said on the phone, I’ve never seen the most detailed report.
I hope this is helpful. I think it shows that we (the AC) didn’t realize how serious the matter was
at the time.

11
January 4, 2001 Jamie told Pastor John that he didn’t ever remember receiving the report
(the Informal Council report) and was surprised to find it located on his
computer’s hard drive. He further indicated he didn’t recall ever reading
it, but also acknowledged that he “can’t imagine that I did not.” Jamie
assessed the report, which he attached for Pastor John, as it not providing
“any specific details about the nature or severity of the spankings. All
we were told is that the children were ‘subjected to inappropriate
physical discipline’ and that Tom confessed to ‘inappropriate outbursts
of anger.’ Jamie’s assessment fails to take into consideration the reports
disqualification of Tom Chantry as an elder and the following statement
that should have provoked further inquiry by all members of ARBCA
AC. Bullet point 7 states, “That there still remain serious factual
differences between Thomas Chantry and the four children he disciplined
during his ministry at Miller Valley. These factual differences include
the purpose, frequency and severity of the physical punishment.”
Jamie then stated, “As I now understand it, that’s a very sanitized version
of what was contained in the sealed report, which was guarded quite
closely.” Below is the Informal Council report that Jamie located in his
hard drive and the report in which the AC instructed to only be
distributed to the AC members.

It should be noted that Pastor John informed the elders that he had also
recently spoken with Dale Smith, the pastor of the church in Rockford,
IL, home of the church that planted CRBC with Tom Chantry as the
pastor. Dale was on the 2000 AC with Pastor John. Pastor John asked
Dale, who was in Arizona to watch the criminal trial, to call GCC elder
Pete Smith to give the elders a statement. The following is Pete Smith’s
statement of his conversation with Dale.

Dale said he had no relationship with Tom Chantry until Tom began
attending Dale’s church in Rockford. At some point during that time
Tom gave Dale a copy of the “informal council report that had all the
signatures.” That essentially communicated to Dale that Tom had
engaged in spanking situations “that were not wise.” Dale said he did
not know the extent of the spankings (as he does now), nor did he know
anything about the child molestation allegations.

Dale said that Grace Reformed Baptist later planted the church in
Wisconsin (Hales Corners) and Tom became the pastor. Eventually
GRB recommended the church for acceptance into ARBCA. According
to Dale, Chris Marley Jr. contacted the AC to tell them not to make
Tom’s church available to vote. Dale lamented that Chris Marley did not
call him directly, because if he had known what the AC learned from that
call, he would not have recommended the church join ARBCA to begin
with. He added that he has no idea why the AC, having spoken to Chris
Marley, would vote to make Tom’s church available to join ARBCA.

12
Dale said he did not originally believe that he had been on the AC in
2000 when the event took place in Prescott. He said he was reading
details about it and did not remember anything about the Chantry
situation so he made the assumption he had not been on the AC. At one
point he was recently visiting with John Giarrizzo about it when John
told him he was, in fact, on the AC. Dale was surprised to learn that and
said John produced a document that showed they were both on the
AC. Dale said that he is convinced that there was a smaller group of
people on the AC that had a greater level of knowledge about the Chantry
case. He told me he knew there were different letters sent to different
recipients, but that he never saw the “sealed” one. He said he has made
two requests to see the sealed letter. His second request he sent to Don
Linblad today.

I (Pete) asked only two questions when he (Dale) stopped.

1. What motivated him to travel to AZ and attend the trial? He said that
his fellow elder is Al Huber and that he knew Al could not be
objective about it all as it was his family member. He wanted to hear
it for himself and his church encouraged him to do so.
2. When did the conversation with John take place that made him
realize he was a member of the AC. He said it was “a couple weeks
ago.”

That is the summary of what Dale had to say and finished by saying,
“That’s pretty much it.”

According to Dale, he knew there were different letters sent to different


recipients, but he never saw the sealed one. Dale said that he is
convinced that there was a smaller group of people on the AC that had a
greater level of knowledge about the Chantry case. He told Pete that he
knew there were different letters sent to different recipients, but that he
never saw the “sealed” one. This information is consistent with the
confidential nature documented on page 9. Although neither John,
Jamie, nor Dale recall seeing the Informal Council Report, Jamie was
able to find it stored on his computer hard drive and reasoned that at some
point he must have read it.

At this point it is inconclusive as to whether or not Pastor John was


provided with the Informal Council’s report. However, Dale does state
that he knew there were different letters sent to different recipients,
which is consistent with the statement on page 9. It appears that an inner
group of AC members, knew more about the investigation than the other
members.

That being said, the knowledge of three levels of reports, with the one
going to the member churches having no reference to children, should

13
have caused any reasonable AC member to question what was in the
other two reports.

The fact that the general letter sent to the member churches said nothing
about the content or nature of the “certain differences” should have been
a red flag to all of the AC members not aware of the facts. Especially
when this vague summary report required a 3-man investigative team that
would have had expensive costs associated with sending, housing and
feeding that team for four days. In light of all this information, the AC
members who were not part of the inner group, were satisfied with not
learning or even knowing the other side of the issue. Below is a copy of
the middle level report officially called the Informal Council Report.

REPORT, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


of the Informal Council of the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America
Wednesday, December 13, 2000 to Saturday, December 16, 2000
The following are the conclusions and recommendations of the Informal Council of
ARBCA which have been agreed to and adopted by the Elders of the Miller Valley Baptist Church
of Prescott, Arizona and by Thomas Chantry, former Pastor of the Miller Valley Baptist Church.
These recommendations are made with the express hope and understanding that the parties to these
recommendations will from this date forward mutually support each other in prayer and refrain
from any further strife, gossip or contention regarding the subject of these recommendations.
It is the express hope and prayers of this Informal Council that the Elders and members of
the Miller Valley Baptist Church will be strengthened in their unity and blessed by the Holy Spirit
of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is also our express hope that by God’s abundant grace, Thomas Chantry
will be able in time to exercise those gifts in the service and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ
which he has manifested while pastor of the Miller Valley Baptist Church.
The Administrative Council of ARBCA, the Elders of the Miller Valley Baptist Church
and Thomas Chantry have all requested that the Informal Council establish certain facts regarding
the ministry of Thomas Chantry while at the Miller Valley Baptist Church and the facts involving
his resignation from the position as Pastor of the Miller Valley Baptist Church.
CONCLUSIONS
The Informal Council has conducted interviews with the parties involved in this matter and
has reached the following conclusions:
That Thomas Chantry was the Pastor of the Miller Valley Baptist Church from June 18,
1995 to November 8, 2000.
That during the period of his ministry, Thomas Chantry was well loved by his Elders and
the members of his congregation. His preaching and teaching were well received and used to build
the church.
That during his ministry at Miller Valley Baptist Church, Thomas Chantry did volunteer
to tutor four children from three separate church families. Each child was subjected to
inappropriate physical discipline in the course of their instruction. In addition, Thomas Chantry
did express inappropriate outbursts of anger which were a concern to the church.

14
From October 17, 2000 until November 8, 2000 the Elders of Miller Valley Baptist Church
attempted to address with Pastor Chantry the issues involving the inappropriate discipline of the
children by Pastor Chantry during his ministry at Miller Valley. Due to the series of providential
events, Thomas Chantry resigned as Pastor on November 8, 2000 which was accepted by the
Elders of Miller Valley Baptist Church. Under very difficult circumstances, both the Elders of
Miller Valley Baptist Church and Thomas Chantry acted in a manner that sought to protect the
church and honor Jesus Christ who they served.
In God’s providence, the resignation of Thomas Chantry was necessary and appropriate.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That Thomas Chantry and the Elders of Miller Baptist Church have resolved their
differences regarding the manner and timing of the resignation of Pastor Chantry from the church
on November 8, 2000 and are encouraged to seek to establish the love and trust for one another as
is appropriate between Christian brothers.
2. Any assertions of improper oversight of his ministry by the Elders of the Miler Valley
Baptist Church have been withdrawn by Thomas Chantry and will not be reasserted by him in the
future.
3. The Elders of Miller Valley Baptist Church will withdraw and will not in the future
assert church discipline against Thomas Chantry.
4. That due to the following conduct, Thomas Chantry is presently disqualified from
holding the office of Elder in any church until restored pursuant to paragraphs 5 and 6 of these
recommendations.
a) That while Pastor at Miller Valley, Thomas Chantry used inappropriate physical
discipline of four children from three families within the church.
b) The physical discipline was in some cases used without the consent of the parents
who were members of the church.
c) In all the cases, physical discipline was used in a manner and under
circumstances not anticipated by the parents.
d) Thomas Chantry has not expressed in these instances the love and care required
by Scripture of these four children each of whom he volunteered to tutor, train and teach
as their trusted pastor.
5. That Thomas Chantry undergo Biblical Counseling with a counselor trained to deal with
the issues presented by a case of improper physical discipline and inappropriate anger. The
counseling process will be subject to the Elders who assume oversight of Thomas Chantry.
6. That Thomas Chantry submit himself to the oversight of Elders from a member church
of ARBCA and refrain from any employment involved in the care of children or any position as
an Elder until he receives the recommendation of the Elders of his church to resume such positions
of employment in the ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is also recommended that the Elders
who assume oversight of Thomas Chantry consult with the members of this Informal Council. We
further recommend that the Elders of his church inform the Administrative Counsel of ARBCA
prior to the reinstatement of Thomas Chantry as an Elder or as a teaching Elder in any church.

15
7. That there still remain serious factual differences between Thomas Chantry and the four
children he disciplined during his ministry at Miller Valley. These factual differences include the
purpose, frequency and severity of the physical punishment. It is recommended that the Elders
who assume the oversight of Thomas Chantry address these differences because it is the opinion
of this informal council that his repentance may not be complete.
8. That Thomas Chantry endeavor to seek full repentance and the forgiveness from each of
the four children and their parents who have been the subject of physical discipline by him. It is
recommended that the Elders who assume the oversight of Thomas Chantry assist him with this
process.
9. Certain additional confidential recommendations have been made by this Informal
Council to the families of the children involved in this matter, the Elders of Miller Valley and
others interested in this matter.
10. If there are any questions or perceived failure to implement the recommendations as
set forth herein, either of the parties may contact the members of the Informal Council to seek their
assistance.
These recommendations are made by the members of this Informal Council of the
Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America with the express hope that they will be
blessed by our Heavenly Father to the benefit of the Elders and members of the Miller Valley
Baptist Church, Thomas Chantry and the families and the children directly impacted by these
recommendations.
Given in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ
This 16th day of December, 2000
__________________________________
(Seal) Marcus (Mike) McKnight
Chairman
__________________________________
(Seal) Tedd Tripp, Pastor
_________________________________(
Seal) Richard A. Jensen, Pastor
We the undersigned hereby agree to abide by and implement the above recommendations
made by the informal Council of the Association of Reformed Baptist Churches of America to the
Miller Valley Baptist Church, December 13-16, 2000.
Signed and sealed this 16th day of December, 2000.
___________________________ ____________________________ (Seal)
Witness Thomas Chantry
Elders of Miller Valley Baptist
Church, Prescott Arizona
___________________________(Seal)
Richard Howe, Elder

16
___________________________(Seal)
Eric Owens, Elder
___________________________
Witness

January 4, 2001 It should be noted that all of the written statements from the victims,
parents, and witnesses were placed in a red binder by the Informal
Council and turned over to MVBC elders. During the December 20,
2016 Simpson Hearing at the Superior Court of Arizona the following
testimony of the descriptions of Tom Chantry’s “inappropriate discipline
of the children” was testified to by Pastor Chris Marley of MVBC as the
following.
Simpson Hearing pages 24-25
Q. When we're talking about inappropriate spankings, can you give the Court a little bit better idea
of what spankings we're talking about?
A. It was documented that the spankings were with such as an oar, a paddle, a Whiffle ball bat,
switches from a willow tree and his bare hands. They also included spankings over the clothes as
well as bare bottomed and with excessive force.
Q. And did you learn from these documents that some of the spankings left severe bruising as
well?
A. Yes.
Q. (By Ms. Eazer) Was there also a suggestion or statements that -- of what the pastor would
sometimes do after the spankings?
A. Yes. There was documentation that provided that the defendant had rubbed the area that was
spanked. So the bare bottom of a child or clothed bottom of a child, that he would rub it and make
statements that he was doing that to make it feel better.
Q. Okay. Was there statements that said that -- one or more victims who actually indicated that the
defendant made statements about liking to see the bottom turned very red?
A. Yes
Q. All right. Would he allow the children to rub their own bottoms?
A. No
Q. And was that specifically told to the children that they could not comfort themselves and rub
their own bottoms?
A. I don’t recall that specific statement.
January 4, 2001 This concludes this investigation’s documentation of the pertinent
information learned by the GCC elders regarding the 2000 Tom Chantry
spanking. The investigation now shifts to the information leading up to
the 2016 GA church membership vote.

17
2015/2016 ARBCA Church Application Process and General Assembly Vote
2009 Chris Marley Jr. began his ministry at Miller Valley Baptist Church
(MVBC)
2012 In 2012, Chris received a phone call from Pastor John asking him if
MVBC would be willing to put the issues involving Tom Chantry in the
past. Chris told John that he would need to learn more about the issue
and get with the elders of the church. Chris read the contents of the red
binder and learned that there was some serious sin that Tom had done to
the children and their families. Furthermore, after talking with the elders
he learned that Tom had never followed through with the reconciliation
process. Chris explained to John that there would have to be
reconciliation initiated by Tom. Chris said that his general feel for the
conversation was that John was inquiring on behalf of a third-party, but
he does not know who that might have been. Chris believed that Tom’s
church, Christ Reformed Baptist Church (CRBC) in Hales, Corners, WI
was probably looking to become a part of ARBCA. Nothing further was
discussed regarding that issue.
It should be noted that Chris informed the GCC elders that he has had a
recent conversation with Pastor John regarding this conversation and
Pastor John had indicated that he didn’t recall having this conversation.
Chris is certain this conversation took place and that it occurred the year
before Stephan Lindblad had the same conversation with him at the 2013
GA.
April 23-25, 2013 In 2013, Stefan Lindblad approached Chris while at the GA in Indiana
and asked the same question that Pastor John had asked. Chris said his
conversation with Don went about the same way that his previous one in
2012 did with Pastor John.
April 14-16, 2015 In 2015, Chris saw Tom Chantry at the GA in Texas and was surprised
to see him all smiles and high-fiving everyone telling them it was good
to see them after such a long time. Chris said that the overall demeanor
of that GA was more serious because ARBCA was dealing with the
doctrinal issue of impassibility and ARBCA was losing a significant
number of churches. Chris said he initiated a conversation with Steve
Marquedant, who was the chairman of the Membership Committee
(MC), and commented, “I’m going to make a wild guess that Tom
Chantry is hear in order to do what he has to do so that he can apply for
membership with ARBCA. Chris told Marquedant that MVBC would
not support CRBC coming into ARBCA and told him that Tom needed
to reconcile with the MVBC families before he could support CRBC’s
entry. Marquedant seemed serious about Chris’ position and told Chris
that he would look into it.
Prior to July 8, 2015 Bob Selph informed MVBC that a young man who used to attend MVBC
with his family, came forward and was now ready to report that he had
been molested by Tom Chantry when he was four or five years old.

18
Prior to July 8, 2015 Later that summer in 2015, Bob Selph (the 2000 AC Coordinator and
former pastor of MVBC before Tom Chantry), informed Chris that a
young man who used to attend MVBC with his family, came forward and
reported to him that he had been molested by Tom Chantry when he was
four or five years old. Bob Selph had been contacted by the victim’s
family and also informed that the victim had contacted Pastor Rydberg
of Cornerstone Church in Prescott, the location where the victim now
attended church. A meeting was arranged in which Rydberg, the victim
and his family, and the elders of MVBC attended. All agreed that the
allegations of child molestation had to be reported to the police. Rydberg
reported to the police first (July 8, 2015 per the police report). Chris took
the red binder to the police department, (July 21, 2015 per the police
report).
July 8, 2015 Rydberg reported to the Prescott Police Department that in 2000 Chantry
molested the victim on multiple occasions.
July 21, 2015 Chris turned the red binder over to Detective Barnard of the Prescott
Police Department and a copy of it was impounded as evidence, but the
original red binder and its contents were returned to Chris. According to
the police report, Chris informed Det. Barnard that the red binder
contained allegations that “Chantry would use instruments to spank
children, force the children to choose the instrument to be used in the
spanking, pull the child’s pants down for spankings, and offering to rub
the child’s bottom after the spankings.” It should be noted that no
molestations were alleged in 2000.)
July of 2015 Chris informed Pastor John Giarrizzo (the AC coordinator), Doug
VanderMeulen(the AC chairman), and Steve Marquedant (the
Membership Committee (MC) chairman) that the Prescott Police were
investigating the new allegations of child molestations and the old
allegations of child abuse. Chris also informed all three men that the
police had copies of the entire contents of the red binder which contained
all of the victim, witness, and family statements and the ARBCA
Informal Council’s agreement signed by Chantry and elders of MVBC.
All agree that Chris would keep the listed ARBCA officers up to date on
the criminal investigation.
It should be noted that Doug VanderMeulen’s email to GCC elder Mark
Flin’s account of what Chris stated above corroborates Chris’ statement
to the GCC elders as to various aspects. Doug admitted that “In July,
Chris Marley called to inform us that an individual who was not part of
the original situation but had been at Miller Valley was claiming a
repressed memory of inappropriate actions against him by Tom
Chantry.”
Doug also explained that “John, Steve and Doug had many phone
conversations about how to handle this development.” Doug went on to
explain, “It is important to understand that at this point we had no

19
knowledge if an actual investigation being opened or world be pursued.
Months would go by with little or no information coming from the police.
Chris Marley expressed to me during this time doubts about there being
any actual investigation because what appeared to be the lack of action
by the police. Of course there was no way for us to know what the police
were actually doing.”
It should be noted that Doug admitted that he, John, and Steve, all current
officers of ARBCA, each with authority within ARBCA and vested with
the responsibility to represent ARBCA with integrity, all knew that the
police department was investigating Tom for child molestation and “had
many phone conversations about how to handle this development.” The
“development” was a criminal investigation into the class 2 felony of
child molestation whereby Tom Chantry could possibly spend a
significant portion of the rest of his life in prison. Ultimately, when one
closely examines Doug’s statement about his, John’s, and Steve’s “many
phone conversations about how to handle this development” it was the
decision to withhold this information that was under discussion by these
three men, based on their decision to do just that.
Early 2016 Pastor John Giarrizzo asked Marley to see the content of the red binder
to get a better feel for them. Marley turned the red binder over to him
and Pastor John Giarrizzo hold on to the binder for two to four weeks.
Spring of 2016 The membership committee approved the application of Tom Chantry’s
church, Christ Reformed Baptist Church (CRBC), and sent the
application to the AC. The AC voted to have CRBC voted for inclusion
into ARBCA on the floor of the 2016 GA. The ARBCA coordinator is
the only person on the AC that does not officially vote. Pastor John told
Nick in conversation in early 2018 that he was present (unknown if in
person or by conference call) during the vote and heard the ARBCA AC
members arguments leading up to the vote and their actual vote. Pastor
Rob Cosby of Tucson Reformed Baptist Church is the only AC member
that Pastor John recalled voting no for CRBC to be considered for a vote
on the floor of the 2016 GA.
April 27, 2016 The member churches voted to accept CRBC into ARBCA, but were
deprived by the AC members, the MC members, and the MVBC delegate
who was present to cast his no vote, from knowing that Tom Chantry was
under investigation for multiple counts of child molestation and child
abuse. Pastor John also cast GCC’s vote as the official sent delegate of
GCC. Pastor John voted to allow CRBC entry into ARBCA without
telling the GCC members that he knew that Tom Chantry was under
criminal investigation for child molestation.
April/May 2016 MVBC resigned its membership from ARBCA due to CRBC’s entrance
into ARBCA and ARBCA’s nondisclosure of the child molestation
investigation to the member churches of ARBCA before the vote.

20
July 27, 2016 The Superior Court of the State of Arizona’s Grand Jury issued a “True
Bill” authorizing a warrant for the arrest of Tom Chantry for multiple
counts of child molestation and aggravated assault on a child.
GCC Elders Inquiry/Investigation of the 2000 and 2016 Incidents
November 12, 2018 On November 12, 2017, the Weinland’s, members of Grace Covenant
Church (GCC), first made GCC elder Joe Godal aware of their concerns
involving ARBCA’s mishandling of the Tom Chantry investigation from
2000. This investigation focused on Pastor Chantry’s inappropriate
spanking of multiple children at Miller Valley Baptist Church (MVBC)
in Prescott, Arizona. The Weinland’s used to live in that area and were
friends with a number of the families who had children that suffered
through the incident over the years.
In particular, the Weinland’s explained that they had a lack of confidence
in ARBCA due to their handling of this issue. Their concern was not
Chantry’s guilt or innocence, but the administrative handling of the
incident by ARBCA. They explained to Joe that they learned through
the testimony of Pastor Chris Marley from MVBC in a court hearing on
November 8, 2017 that a red notebook or binder had been on file at
MVBC before he took over the pastorate. Marley informed the court that
the red binder was the investigative work of ARBCA and its contents
alleged excessive spankings, spankings with various objects, bare bottom
spankings, enjoyment of seeing bottoms turn red, and rubbing bottoms
after spankings to make them feel better by Tom Chanty. Joe
communicated that his understanding was that there was only redness
and not bruising. Joe had attended some of the previous hearings with
Tom Chantry. The Weinland’s indicated they were concerned that
mandatory reporting laws were violated by ARBCA. Joe explained that
the children’s parents chose not to report. At the close of their meeting,
Joe said he would discuss this information at the next elders meeting.
It should be noted that the GCC elders had communicated with the GCC
members that they would allow Tom Chantry to worship at GCC during
the times he had to fly into Arizona to attend a court hearing. The
congregation was informed that Tom was criminally charged with child
abuse and child molestation and that Chantry would be staying with Joe
during these times. Joe would sometimes transport Tom to and from the
hearings in Prescott and sit in on the hearings.
December 31, 2017 After not hearing back from Elder Joe Godal, the Weinland’s sought out
a meeting with Pastor John Giarrizzo. The Weinland’s indicated that
they expressed the same concerns that they had expressed to Joe.
According to the Weinland’s, John said that ARBCA has no authority
over the member churches within ARBCA, referring to MVBC’s
handling of the 2000 Chantry allegations. John told them that ARBCA
doesn’t send an investigative council, but rather it is the responsibility of
the individual church to request help and then for an investigative council

21
to respond to the request. John made it clear to the Weinland’s that the
investigative council does not represent ARBCA. It is a volunteer
council that helps mediate issues. The council then makes
recommendations to the local church leadership that they may accept or
reject. In this case, the local leaders at MVBC agreed with the
investigative council’s recommendation. John further explained that the
AC only had a “sanitized” summary of the council’s findings and
recommendations, not the details of the investigation. John informed
them that ARBCA was not responsible because they did not have details
of the investigation.
The Weinland’s also had concern about the ARBCA member church vote
on the floor of the 2016 General Assembly (GA), which took place in
Rockford, IL, the location of the church that was recommending Tom’s
church for entrance into ARBCA. The Weinland’s were concerned that
ARBCA withheld from the member churches the information that Tom
Chantry was under investigation by the Prescott Police Department for
allegations of child molestation and child abuse. John explained to the
Weinland’s that the church is accepted and not an individual pastor, so
in essence the member churches were voting on the acceptance of Christ
Reformed Baptist Church (CRBC) in Hales Corners, WI. The
Weinland’s reasoned that they would not accept an elder or leader into
their church with the same pending charges. John explained that these
were allegations and that nothing had been proven. John stated that
ARBCA was taking the position that Tom was innocent until proven
guilty. During their meeting, John pointed out that the recommending
church, Grace Reformed Baptist Church was hosting the 2016 GA and it
was important to them to welcome their daughter church (CRBC) at that
time. It should be noted that Tom Chantry’s father-in-law, Al Huber, is
a pastor at Grace Reformed Baptist Church in Rockford, IL.
Twice during the meeting, the Weinland’s noted to John the inaccuracy
of AC’s public statement read on the floor of the 2017 GA indicating that
ARBCA had followed all laws. The Weinland’s informed John that the
statement was misleading because ARBCA was required to inform
Arizona law enforcement as required by the mandatory reporting laws.
Pastor John indicated that the Weinland’s should trust in the Lord with
all their hearts and not lean on their own understanding, citing Proverbs
3:5. Pastor John ended the meeting mentioning the need to refrain from
talking to others about this issue. The Weinland’s assured him that they
had only spoken with Joe Godal.
January 28, 2018 The Weinland’s next met with Pastor John and pastoral-intern Nick
DeBenedetto. It should be noted that Nick was invited to be a part of this
meeting after John requested prayer concerning an upcoming follow-up
meeting with the Weinland’s during John and Nick’s bimonthly meeting.
As a pastoral-intern, Nick expressed an interest to sit in on the meeting.

22
During the meeting later that week, the Weinland’s gave a short overview
of the two main issues: 1) John’s position in defending ARBCA’s actions
concerning the 2000 investigation and 2) John’s position in defending
ARBCA’s failure to notify its member churches of the child abuse and
child molestation allegations regarding Tom Chantry. The Weinland’s
indicated that Nick stated that it was right to bring this to GCC’s
attention. He also said that, providing that the evidence cited was correct,
it was wrong not to report the incident based on Arizona’s mandatory
reporting laws. He also said that due to the legal system needing a clean
trial, multiple parties should not be investigating it.
Nick explained to the Weinland’s that he was not sure if the state would
want an administrative investigation conducted at the same time that the
case was working its way through the criminal court system. Nick’s
concern was his lack of knowledge concerning the private sector’s
administrative investigation laws regarding the admissibility of
information into the criminal proceeding. In addition, Nick was
concerned about untrained investigators conducting a simultaneous
administrative investigation into Tom Chantry’s actions without the
expertise necessary in reducing the risk of tainting witness and victim
criminal interviews. Nick informed the Weinland’s he needed more time
to research the issue.
Nick’s recall of the meeting was a general sense that the Weinland’s were
disappointed at John’s initial response in defending ARBCA. The
Weinland’s indicated they wanted to see if John still held the same
position at the time of their second meeting. Before John could respond,
Nick asked for the Weinland’s to share what took place in the first
meeting between them and John. Nick explained to the Weinland’s that
it sounded serious and he asked if they would mind providing the
documents that they had read in coming to their assessment. Before the
end of the meeting, John said that he appreciated what was learned in the
second meeting and told the Weinland’s he wished he would have been
more open to their concerns in the first meeting. The Weinland’s seemed
more satisfied that the GCC leadership would take the appropriate action.
The following day, January 29, 2018 Scott Weinland sent the following
email to John and Nick.
Hi Nick & John,
Per our meeting last evening, I've attached a copy of the full transcript
from the Simpson hearing. As far as I know this isn't available on-line
but can be purchased from the court records office. I'm sure you'll want
to read the entire transcript but pages 22 through 25 reveal some of
what was known in 2000 based on the documents turned over
by Miller Valley.
I've also included the police report, including 14 supplements. There
may be more supplements but this is what I have.
Thanks again for taking the time to meet with us last evening.

23
Scott Weinland
PS If you don't mind, please respond back to let me know you received
the attachments. The police report is 6MB and I'm not sure it will go
through.
On February 8, 2018 Nick reported back to the Weinland’s that although
it was best at this time not to conduct a concurrent administrative
investigation into the actions of Tom Chantry. Nick stated that it would
be appropriate for ARBCA to conduct an administrative investigation of
its own policy violations and failures that would help them address the
deficiencies and provide best practices in the future, particularly as it
related to the well-being of children. Nick stood by his position that the
MVBC leaders and ARBCA both had a duty to report the abusive
spanking to Arizona law enforcement. Key to the February 8, 2018
phone call was the Weinland’s recall that Nick confirmed what John had
previously told him about his status on the 2000 AC. When Nick
inquired about the AC and any prior terms John had on the AC, John told
him that he was on the AC in the early to mid-teen years (2012-2014),
just prior to serving on a one-year AC Coordinator’s position. John
informed Nick that he had been on a number of other committees in
ARBCA, but he never mentioned any prior AC term. Nick, subsequent
to February 8, 2018, inquired with John about his status on the 2000 AC
and John informed him he was not on the AC at that time.
Sometime between meeting with the Weinland’s and the February 13,
2018 Elder meeting Nick inquired of John why the 2016 AC would allow
the member churches to vote on the entrance of CRBC if they knew he
was being investigated for child abuse, felony charges. John explained
that the AC only knew that the police were looking into something
involving the 2000 Tom Chantry incident but they never knew about the
specifics of the police inquiry before the GA met. John said that Chris
didn’t even know, which was why the AC was questioning MVBC’s
motive for not wanting to allow CRBC entrance into ARBCA. John said
that he talked to Pete, in generalities, about the fact that the Prescott
Police Department had called him because Chris had informed them that
as the coordinator he was the liaison between churches and could provide
additional information. John said he could not remember the questions
that the investigator asked but that he thought about talking with Tom
about the investigation but wasn’t sure if he would mess it up in some
way. Pete’s advice, not knowing the specifics of the information, was
not to “tip off” the suspect and to let the police continue with their
investigation. John mentioned that the other ARBCA officers that he
spoke with agreed with the advice, so he didn’t do anything further.
John continued to explain a second reason why CRBC was allowed to be
voted on for entrance into ARBCA. John explained that the AC talked
through the issue of whether the church or the pastor was being voted
into ARBCA. The AC decided that it was the church and not the pastor

24
that was being voted on by the other member churches, so information
that the Prescott police were looking into Tom Chantry’s original 2000
incident was not necessary. John went on to reason that sharing that
information without knowing the facts of the inquiry by the Prescott
Police Department could even be viewed as gossiping or slandering Tom
and the AC had to balance that issue as well.
Of significance to Pastor John’s reasoning is that it is consistent with
2016 AC chairman Doug VanderMeulen’s email to GCC elder Mark Flin
as it relates to the argument of slander. However, Pastor John’s logic,
which was also communicated to the GCC elders at one of the elder
meetings that followed, is not consistent with Chris Marley’s statement
that he informed the board in July of 2015 of the police department’s
investigation into allegations of child molestation and child abuse.
Furthermore, this is not consistent with Chris’ statement that in early
2016, before the 2016 GA, John asked for and took possession of the red
binder and its contents for two to four weeks. The red binder identified
the 2000 Tom Chantry child abuse allegations in early 2016, before the
GA. Most importantly, this is inconsistent with John’s admission to Nick
immediately following the GCC elders meeting on August 14, 2018,
when he informed Nick that he had obtained the red binder from Chris
and read its contents and returned it to Chris. Pastor John’s August 14,
2018 statement to Nick after the completion of the elder meeting is
consistent with Chris’ statement. Thus, Pastor John lied to Nick, and the
elders of GCC, about having no knowledge of the nature of the Prescott
Police Department’s investigation. This also means that Pastor John
withheld this information from the 2016 GA member churches. This also
demonstrates that Pastor John deceived the GCC members by depriving
them of this knowledge and casting their vote, by official representation
in allowing CRBC and its preaching pastor to be voted into ARBCA,
knowing that Tom Chantry was under investigation for child molestation
and child abuse.
February 13, 2018 The Weinland’s first met with the GCC Elder Board to read their first
resignation letter. Below are the GCC Elder Meeting minute except of
this agenda item.
Item: Scott & Pam Weinland
Elder: PS
Discussion: The Weinland’s asked to speak to the Board about the
ARBCA/Chantry situation. They forwarded documents to be reviewed
prior to the meeting. They were instructed to be at the meeting at 7:15
pm.
Issues:
#1 ARBCA authorized 3-person investigative team failed to notify law
enforcement of child abuse by Pastor Tom Chantry after conducting an
internal investigation in 2000.
#2 ARBCA failed to notify the voting member churches of Tom
Chantry’s active felony investigation for child molestation prior to the

25
association voting to allow Tom Chantry’s church in Wisconsin to
become a member church in 2016.
#3 ARBCA’s letter read at the 2017 GA communicated a spirit of
downplaying the severity of the issue and distancing itself from any
wrongdoing. The letter came across as defensive and short on material
issues, rather than transparent and appropriately detailed to better inform
members of past actions. Ultimately, the letter lacked a humble need for
constant self-examination that promotes a desire to improve on past
practices, especially as it relates to those wronged in our
communities. Examples include: 1) Failing to identify the “past
allegations” stemming from 1995-2000 as child abuse. 2) Failing to
accurately identify Tom Chantry’s current child molestation
investigation as such and only referring to it as an incident or allegation
3) Suggesting that the 3-person investigative team followed all proper
protocols required by the state of Arizona, when in fact they were
considered by Arizona to be mandatory reporters to law enforcement
due to the suspicion of child abuse, 4) There was no acknowledgement
of concern for the children or a need to examine protocols in order to
determine best practices for the future.
Action: A letter will be authored by the elders of GCC to ARBCA
asking them to answer the above-stated allegations for the purpose of
identifying and taking responsibility for past practice error and resolving
to make tangible changes for the future. An apology statement should
be authored and read by ARBCA to the General Assembly asking for
forgiveness for these failures and expressing their desire to be vigilant
protectors of children and those oppressed in our communities.
ND will obtain the material issues tied to the misrepresentation from
Scott and then forward the information to JG so that he can write the
draft for the letter to ARBCA.
(Initials – PS = Pete Smith, JG= John Giarrizzo, ND = Nick
DeBenedetto)
During the meeting, the Weinland’s asked John a number of questions
regarding AC protocols. Ending that discussion, the Weinland’s asked
John if he was on the 2000 AC and John told them he was not.
After the elder meeting, Pastor John asked Nick to write the draft letter
to ARBCA based on Nick being the official scribe for the GCC elder
meetings and Nick’s rapport with the Weinland’s since the first meeting.
The first letter sent to ARBCA contained the items listed above that were
discussed with the Weinland’s based on their observations of the trial
proceeding that they attended, and the Prescott Police Department report
along with the Simpson trial report that they provided to the GCC elders.
A copy of that letter is a part of this investigation.
March 9, 2018 The GCC elders’ authored their first letter to the ARBCA AC requesting
that ARBCA conduct an internal investigation into their own handling of
the Tom Chantry incident as it related to the 2000 incident and the 2016
GA vote.

26
March 11, 2018 The GCC elders read their letter addressed to ARBCA to the GCC
church membership after the morning church service.
April 3, 2018 GCC received the ARBCA (AC) response letter which informed the
GCC elders to wait for the completion of the criminal trial. The letter,
which was signed by Earl Blackburn and informed the GCC elders that
MVBC is the only authorized church to investigate this matter. Further,
Blackburn stated, “Consequently, any public statements or actions on the
part of any entity, other than the state of Arizona, during any part of the
ongoing process of this matter would have been and would be not only
inappropriate and, at some stages, illegal, but also unbiblical.”
Blackburn also indicated that taking action “tends toward gossip, slander,
libel, or schism amongst Christians and churches.” The GCC elders
never asked for an investigation into Tom Chantry’s guilt or innocence.
The GCC elders wanted ARBCA investigated, not Tom Chantry.
April 10, 2018 The minute entry from the elders’ next meeting after they received the
first ARBCA response letter is listed below.
GCC Elder Meeting minute entry from April 10, 2018
Item: ARBCA Response to Chantry Letter
Elder: PS
Discussion: Much discussion was had by all the elders. The elders
decided that ARBCA’s response was unacceptable, but the elders would
like to gain input from the Weinland’s before officially responding back
to ARBCA.
Action: ND forwarded the ARBCA response to the Weinland’s and
asked that they be present at the next elder’s meeting on the 24th of April
to gain their input.
(Initials – PS = Pete Smith, ND = Nick DeBenedetto)
April 24, 2018 This was the Weinland’s’ second meeting with the GCC elders. This
meeting was initiated by the GCC elders to keep this family informed of
GCC’s assessment of ARBCA’s current response to the elder request for
an investigation, as well as to gain their assessment and input as the
notifying family whose inquiry was originally marginalized by the GCC
elders. Below is the Elder Meeting minute excerpt.
Item: Weinland’s Response to ARBCA (Blackburn) Letter
Elder: PS
Discussion: Open discussion about Scott & Pam’s thoughts along with
the Board’s
Weinland’s Talking Points: ARBCA is failing to separate their issues
of wrong doing from those of Tom Chantry. The Weinland’s believe
ARBCA can move forward and address those areas in which they are
responsible for their own actions. ARBCA’s letter came across as an
admonishment to the GCC Elder Board. ARBCA continues to not take
responsibility for their past improper actions.

27
Suggestions by JSG: 1) ARBCA should communicate to its membership
that mandatory reporting should be followed. 2) If ARBCA has
information of concern in regard to issue of this nature in the future they
should report that information to the specific church. 3) ARBCA should
assign a committee to establish future protocols to observed by ARBCA
and all of its member churches.
Suggestions by JR: That ARBCA change its protocols concerning
member churches receiving adequate information on potential member
churches, including its leadership.
There was general discussion by all concerning ARBCA’s
responsibilities in their actions beginning in 2016. It would be right to
have ARBCA address these issues now and make a general statement of
the need to report abuse cases to the proper authorities.
JSG motioned that ND write another response to ARBCA. MF
seconded the motion and all approved.
Action: ND will craft a response and run it by the elders for their editing
and approval.
(Initials – PS = Pete Smith, JSG = Joe Godal, JR = Josh Rusev, MF =
Mark Flin, ND = Nick DeBenedetto)
April 24, 2018 Pastor John received important information from Tom Hicks’ recent
interview of Bob Selph in the last year that was conducted in his church’s
desire to determine the facts regarding the Tom Chantry investigation.
This information was withheld from the GCC elders until the GCC elder
meeting on August 14, 2018 where the elders asked a number of
questions of Pastor John after learning on August 4, 2018 that he was on
the 2000 AC. Below is the information that Hicks wrote down during
his conversation with Selph.
Bob Selph
• The issues were not just about the children, but there were pastoral matters as well. And there
were elders besides Tom, and they determined that Tom needed to apologize to the whole
church for harsh treatment as a shepherd. He was going around to all the families at the church,
apologizing.
• Then Tom bolted.
• Then Walt came to Bob, asking him to get a council going down there. He agreed to put
together a council, and Walt wanted it to be an informal council. And they put it together to
try not to report to churches at all in terms of what a formal council would do. This was just to
settle things down and get people reconciled. Bob put together a process to form a council. He
ran the members of this council by the elders of MVBC and also by Tom Chantry. And all the
parties agreed to the men who were selected.
• The informal council interviewed everyone. And it ends up being “he said,” “he said.”
o It depends on who you were inclined to side with as to who you believed. It was left at the
sealed confidential level because no one knew for sure what the facts were. The council
even told the parents that if they wanted to go to the police, they were free to do that.

28
o They thought this would be an amazing council to investigate this. The 3 were incredibly
qualified.
• When the 3 man team came back, they were ecstatic, and believed they had really solved the
problem faithfully. Walt felt great that Mike McKnight had gone. But all 3 were convinced
that Tom was the problem. When he reported that at Grace Carlisle, he never recovered. The
council was confident that they had real clarity.
• The council had 3 levels of reporting.
o First, to all the churches. Very brief.
o Second, a brief letter went to the AC. There was nothing having to do with child abuse in
this letter at all. They didn’t know of anything in the investigation and were not told. And
they were told that it was inappropriate to ask as to the details of the situation between Tom
and the church.
§ Tom had repented and apologized, and it was accepted by the church.
§ The AC was not culpable for having any reason to suspect that there might have been
any foul play. This AC is innocent.
o Third, the most confidential and detailed report. One copy went to MVBC, one to Tom
Chantry, and to Tom Lyon, and one to Walt, and one to Bob Selph, which he put in the
ARBCA archives. He thinks he’s remembering all of them.
• Don Lindblad was never there with the children or the parents.
o Tom and Don met with the council at an undisclosed location in the Phoenix area. The
team
went back and forth between Prescott and Phoenix.
o Fred didn’t know anything. He had nothing to do with this.

June 6, 2018 The GCC elders’ second letter to the ARBCA AC. See the attachment
to this investigation.
June 12, 2018 GCC received ARBCA’s current Theology Committee chairman Doug
VanderMeulen’s email to GCC elder Mark Flin deflecting responsibility
away from ARBCA. See the attachment to this investigation.
July 17, 2018 GCC received the ARBCA AC’s second response letter elders. The AC,
under the leadership of Brandon Smith, the new AC, reiterated its
position to stand by their decision communicated in their first response
letter.
August 4, 2018 Nick received a call from the Weinland’s informing him of their decision
to resign and asking him to forward their resignation onto the elders,
which Nick did later that afternoon. Documented in the resignation letter
is information that the Weinland’s had located a 2000 AC photo on the
internet which showed John in the photo with the other AC members.
This was the first time that GCC elders learned that John was on the 2000
AC.

29
During Nick’s conversation with the Weinland’s, they informed him that
they had attended the Chantry trial earlier in the week. The Weinland’s
gave a rundown of the events that they were eyewitnesses to on Day 7 of
the Chantry trial. Particularly, the Weinland’s were upset that Tom
Chantry and his lawyer desperately tried to not allow the testimony of
one of the victim’s mother regarding the severe bruising she witnessed
on her son’s buttocks and legs. Tom and his attorney appeared angry
that the judge allowed the testimony. The mother testified that she first
inquired about the injury to her son, who was 10 or younger, when she
noticed he appeared to be in pain and having difficulty walking. The
mother looked at his upper legs and buttocks and was able to see the
impression of the grain of a wooden object imprinted in the bruise, which
she described as severe.
The Weinland provided additional details and their account of the
hearing was consistent with the journaled account from the blogger at
www.thouartheman.org. Nick researched the bloggers journaling of the
trial and noted the testimony already testified to in previous court
hearings, along with statements given to the police department was
accurate and consistent with what the blogger was journaling. Nick
began researching all that the blogger had written on his site as it relates
to the Tom Chantry days in his current trial. Below is the resignation
letter provided by the Weinland’s.

August 2, 2018

To the Elders of Grace Covenant Church

Unfortunately, Pam and I have become thoroughly convinced that we can no longer be associated
with ARBCA, or its member churches. The men who lead ARBCA have made grievous decisions
time and again relative to the Tom Chantry scandal and have refused to be accountable and address
the issue in a timely and God honoring manner. We do appreciate that the elders have sought our
feedback on initial correspondence to and from ARBCA. However, we have generally felt that
GCC has not responded with the same sense of urgency and expectation for decisive action that
we believe is warranted given the seriousness of the situation. What follows is a brief summary of
events which hopefully convey our concerns in a respectful way, while explaining our decision to
leave.

Pam and I first brought our concerns to GCC regarding ARBCA's serious mishandling of the Tom
Chantry issue on November 12, 2017. Subsequent meetings were held on December 31, 2017 and
January 28, 2018. Initially, the concerns were minimized and were not given adequate attention
though they had been discussed in detail with two elders. With no resolution after 3 months of
waiting, we determined that we had no choice but to leave GCC. After reading our resignation
letter at the February 12, 2018 Elders Meeting, we were asked to give the elders the opportunity
to address the issue with ARBCA. It was clear that some of the elders had just recently heard of
the allegations and seemed as concerned about them as we were. We were happy to do this with

30
the hope that timely and decisive action would be taken if ARBCA leadership refused to be
accountable.

Since the February 12 meeting, the GCC elders have sent two letters to ARBCA requesting that
they take responsibility for their actions. Despite the two appeals, which clearly lay out very
serious allegations of wrongdoing, ARBCA has refused to deal with the issues in a God honoring
way. In ARBCA's written response dated April 3, 2018, they claim that the concerns of the GCC
elders are "from information lacking sufficient facts." No details or evidence to substantiate this
claim is offered. The letter goes on to lecture the GCC elders regarding authority and jurisdiction,
basically telling the GCC elders that they have no business bringing up the issues. The letter
contains no admission of wrongdoing despite an abundance of compelling evidence to the
contrary. It does indicate that after the criminal trial, "it will be appropriate to provide a
comprehensive report to all ARBCA churches concerning this matter".

Pam and I were asked to attend the April 24, 2018 Elders Meeting to discuss ARBCA's response.
From what we could tell, the elders were not pleased with the response and wanted to follow up
with a second appeal. However, it wasn't until June 7, 2018, that a follow up letter was sent to
ARBCA. We were given the opportunity to comment on an initial draft of the letter and expressed
concern that the appeal was not strong enough. We have consistently believed that ARBCA needs
to be confronted in a stronger way than what it appears the elders have felt is appropriate. We
believe this includes the need to notify other ARBCA churches of ARBCA's mishandling of the
Tom Chantry issue. We also expressed our view that at this point any meaningful investigation
would need to be carried out by an independent third party.

To our knowledge, ARBCA has not responded in writing to GCC's second letter. However, Nick
has advised us that ARBCA is planning to prepare and submit a report to the member churches
after Tom Chantry's criminal trial. This is the same thing they offered to do in their April 3 letter,
that the elders agreed was inadequate.

It has now been over 8 months since we first brought the concerns to the elders attention. It has
been over 5 months since the elders asked us to give them an opportunity to confront ARBCA. We
believe this has gone on far too long and ARBCA continues to make excuses. Over the long history
of this scandal they have been given one opportunity after another to respond honorably and each
time have only dug themselves in deeper.

• ARBCA had the opportunity to report the child abuse by Tom Chantry to the police in 2000,
but didn't do the right thing. Instead, they broke the law and handled it on their own. Tom
Chantry went on to teach in an Christian elementary school and pastor another church.
• ARBCA had the opportunity to deny or at least delay Tom Chantry's church admission into
ARBCA membership in 2016, but didn't do the right thing. Instead, ARBCA's Membership
Committee and Administrative Council recommended Tom Chantry and his church for
membership in ARBCA despite the fact that he was under a criminal investigation for child
molestation. ARBCA knew of this investigation but concealed the information from the
ARBCA member churches.
• ARBCA had the opportunity to give accurate and truthful information in their statement to
the 2017 General Assembly, but didn't do the right thing. Instead, they whitewashed the

31
charges against Tom Chantry, referring to them as "incidents" or "difficulties". They also
lied when they reported "a process was followed that conformed to biblical, confessional,
and constitutional parameters," and that there was no conspiracy to "conceal."
• ARBCA had the opportunity to respond in a God honoring way to the GCC Elders' appeals,
but didn't do the right thing. Instead they continue their refusal to address the allegations,
telling the Elders that they don't have the facts.

It appears ARBCA wants to continue to make the excuse that they can't talk while there's a criminal
trial in progress. This refusal to act is unnecessary as we discussed at the April 24th meeting. It
simply reflects a continued obstinance to do the right thing when there's a potential high price to
pay. It may be that they think they can minimize their liability for future civil actions, but it has
been at the expense of their integrity.

To our knowledge, no remorse or repentance has been expressed, no accountability has been taken,
and a lack of humility has been keenly evident in ARBCA's handling of this situation. There has
been no concern expressed publicly for the victims which is appalling. At this point, we have lost
all respect and trust for ARBCA and are unable to be associated with them in any way. This is
due to their own repeated unwillingness to handle a very severe grievance in a godly manner.

Last week we came across a statement made by David Platt, President of the International
Missionary Board (IMB). Please take a minute to read his statement here,
https://www.imb.org/imb-statement-from-platt, and compare it to how ARBCA has responded.
The statement demonstrates accountability, humility, and concern for others when confronted with
a similar situation as ARBCA. Please keep in mind David Platt made this pubic statement within
a few weeks of becoming aware of the situation. He didn't let the criminal investigation or the
possibility of civil action stop him. Instead he did what was right and acknowledged the problem
and committed to resolve it in a godly way. This includes an independent third party investigation.
He also stood up for the victim, something it is too late for ARBCA to do.

Even though we've made a final decision to leave GCC, we feel compelled to ask you to be more
transparent with the members. We appreciate that the first letter from GCC to ARBCA was read
to the members, but they also need to be kept informed regarding ARBCA's response and other
details as they occur. We also believe that any GCC elders who had knowledge of ARBCA's
wrongdoings, and did not speak out and stand against them, be accountable to the other ARBCA
churches and to GCC's members as well.

Before closing, we need to mention a couple things that have recently come to our attention. First,
we attended one day of the trial and heard testimony given by Rich Howe, Eric Owen, and Carolyn
Ladner. Their testimony was compelling and completely settled in our minds that ARBCA knew
of the bare bottom spanking with objects which resulted in severe bruising. We also learned that
there are actually two ARBCA reports from the investigation that occurred in 2000. One of them
was to remain "sealed". It is very similar to the one that Miller Valley Baptist Church (MVBC)
turned over to the police, but with more concerning information. The "sealed" report notes an
additional victim and also includes a statement that "...the Elders who assume oversight of
(Defendant) should consider the possibility that on some level he punished children for his own
pleasure." Neither the elders of MVBC or the victims families were ever provided a copy of the

32
"sealed" report. This information regarding the "sealed" report came from the transcript of an
interview of Don Linblad by the State prior to the start of the trial.

Second, we were told by Pastor John at an Elders Meeting and in a phone conversation with Nick,
that Pastor John did not serve on the ARBCA Administrative Council in 2000. However, the
Internet Archives show that Pastor John did serve on the ARBCA Administrative Council in 2000.
This can be verified at https://web.archive.org/web/20030210074600/http://arbca.com/ (follow the
link, and then select "News" in upper left had corner, then near the bottom of the list is a link to
"2000 GA"). This is a serious concern on many levels, and one we hope the elders can sort through
in a God honoring way.

We love you all and will continue to pray for you and the members of GCC.

Scott & Pam Weinland


August 5, 2018 Pastor John made a comment to Nick while waiting for the other elders
to show up for the elder prayer before the morning service that he was
not sure if the Weinland’s had a case for resigning from the GCC based
on their argument provided in their resignation letter. Nick informed
Pastor John that he was struggling with the elders just now learning that
Pastor John was on the 2000 AC. Pastor John told Nick that he was
surprised to learn that as well.
August 7-8, 2018 Nick sent the following email to Pastor John asking for his permission to
forward it on to the elders. Pastor John responded to the questions posed
by Nick and gave Nick permission to forward it onto the elders or to even
read his comments to the congregation, if necessary. Below is Nick’s
inquiry and Pastor John’s response.
me
to John Aug 7
John,
This is a draft that I would like to send to all of the elders. It is extremely sensitive and it involves
you. Would you please look it over and advise on how to proceed? Thank you, brother. I love you
and I am praying for you, the victims, and ARBCA.
Men,
Since a response is being requested, with your permission. I'd like to pose some concerns that I
have as an investigator. It does not mean that there are not plausible explanations, but these are
areas where more information is needed. I will take them in the order they are listed in the
resignation letter.
1. ARBCA made their decision not to investigate the facts of their handling of this "incident"
after two pleas for diligence by the GCC elders, and this was before they knew that the trial
would take place in July of 2018. Compare this to the Southern Baptist Convention and
their willingness to have it investigated by an outside body and I believe that their (the
AC's/ARBCA's) judgment and ability to objectively investigate this "incident" is now
questionable.

33
2. GCC's slow to respond demeanor also indicates a lack of diligence on our part to support
the seriousness of the allegations. I include myself in this.
3. The AC's categorization of our position as stemming "from information lacking sufficient
facts" is somewhat nonsensical sense that is the very reason why an investigation was being
requested in the first place.
4. In talking with the Weinland’s, they observed Tom Chantry and his attorney try to not
allow Carolyn Ladner from testifying last week at the trial because her son refused to be a
victim and take the stand. Why would somebody who is innocent want to refuse testimony
by a mother of his prior congregation when she was asked to testify to the extent of the
injuries she witnessed to her son's buttocks and upper legs? According to the Weinland’s,
both Tom and his attorney were visibly angered by her testimony of severe bruising on
multiple occasions.
5. Don Linblad, a highly respected pastor in ARBCA, and a member of the AC during the
early 2000's, stated in an interview with the prosecutor that there was a sealed, aka-hidden,
second report provided by the investigative council that AC members received which
informed the AC members that "...the Elders who assume oversight of (Defendant) should
consider the possibility that on some level he punished children for his own pleasure." It
would appear that this second report was sealed due to this and possibly other damning
assessments by the ARBCA investigative council as to Tom Chantry's motives and
behaviors.
6. The AC members from 2000 continue to suggest that the investigative council was a rebel
act by Pastor Self, the previous pastor of Miller Valley Baptist Church. It is clear that the
investigative council was reporting directly to the AC in an open fashion in providing an
official assessment and a secondary hidden assessment. Investigative bodies or councils
write assessments to those who authorize their actions, not to third-parties.
7. John, this is particularly sensitive to ask, but I must ask. This is not an accusation, but it
logically came to the minds of the Weinland’s and it will most likely do so with others who
are supplied with the facts. Why are we just now learning that Pastor John was on the 2000
AC? I understand that memory fades, but this is no small matter. It was so important and
potentially scandalous that a hidden secondary report was authored? Even if all of the AC
members did not have access to both of the reports, this was the most serious and
devastating news to ARBCA since its inception. It dealt with the integrity of the son of the
man who helped organize the Reformed Baptist churches in America today. Everyone on
the AC would have known the seriousness of this "issue" to ARBCA if the facts were true.
There had to be many serious conversations by the AC, particularly if the AC
JOHN GIARRIZZO
to me Aug 8
Hi Nick,
Thanks for your work on this. I appreciate your help and investigative expertise. You have my
permission to pass this on to the elders and even read it to the members of the church.
In looking over your draft based upon the W's resignation letter, I was tracking with you up to
point # 4, which wasn't reflected in their letter. So this is new information that came from your

34
phone conversation with the W's. Since they were eye-witnesses in the courtroom that day I assume
this is what they related to you on the phone. It just didn't come out in their letter.
As for # 5 and Don Lindblad, I know that he has told me in the past that he is like a pack rat who
never throws anything away. This would mean that he would have hard copies of all the Minutes
from the beginning of ARBCA. I have some records of various meetings and Minutes but they are
spotty and scattered in different places. I was thinking of calling Vickie tomorrow at the ARBCA
office to see if she could send me a copy of all the meeting Minutes from mid-2000 thru 2001. I'm
sure Don has them all too. I mention all this because if Don says the AC received the report from
the Investigative Council, then we must have received it. I will have to dig around in my files a
little deeper.
As for # 6, I had always assumed that the investigative council was authorized by the AC and had
briefly reported the results to the AC. It wasn’t until this year that I heard from Earl the version
that Bob Selph (not 'Self') had arranged & orchestrated it. I was aware that those three men were
coming into Phoenix for a council with Tom and the MVBC elders. It seems that we on the AC
received some communication about the results of the council and they were accepted into the
Minutes somewhere. But they were sanitized of all incriminating information. It would be nice to
see just what was communicated to us back then. If there had been information passed on to us on
the AC that Tom had sexually molested children or physically abused them, that would have left
a huge impression on the AC that would have to be addressed. I don't remember that ever
happening in any of our conference calls (meetings). This is odd when I think that two out of the
three council members (McKnight and Tripp) were also AC members at that time. An AC
conference call might have been a good opportunity for them to gush out all that happened when
they went to Phoenix. I just don't recall hearing it. I didn't always make every AC meeting. The
Minutes will show who was present and absent at each conference call. I am attaching 2 letters,
that I just found tonight in a 3-ringed binder, from Jon Hueni to all the ARBCA churches. They
convey information pertaining to a 2006 Church Council that was conducted at Dave Dykstra's old
church in New Jersey. The one dated Jan. 23, 2007 is the cover letter attached to the 4-page report
by the 3-man Council. It states that "If your situation requires it, a more detailed account of the
council's findings is on file and may be obtained from me." The one dated July 25, 2007 mentions
that this was "the first formal church council that our association has conducted." There are still a
lot of questions to be asked and answered.
As for # 7, I must say that I was both shocked and embarrassed to discover that I was indeed still
on the AC - not only in 2000 but also 2001 (perhaps 2002 also)! I was honored to be on the first
AC in 1997. We ran for two-year terms. I can remember how demanding the AC work was
becoming and how I was getting so busy at GCC that I had to resign before finishing out my term
of office. For some reason I thought I was off the AC by that time. I should have checked the dates
before telling them that. But being on the AC at that time I just don't have any recollection of
"many serious discussions" on any of the AC conference calls. I don't recall there ever being a
single discussion over what to do about the serious sins of Tom Chantry? I have a bad memory to
begin with - but something this serious would definitely have stuck out in my mind. I'm sorry to
draw a big blank on that.
What information, rumors, (hearsay) about what happened came from sources other than the
Council. One of the earliest sources of information about this matter came from Tom himself. He
called me in early November of 2000 to ask if he could stop by in the evening for fellowship. We
had him join us that night for dinner and then we had a cigar on the patio. He informed me that the

35
elders were reading his resignation letter to the church that very same night. I don't remember
much of what we talked about, just that he seemed very serious and somber.
Some time afterwards I vaguely recall hearing something from Rich Howe, maybe Larry Jolly,
who was then living in Mesa (in Nathan Johnson's present neighborhood). I was friends with these
elders long before Tom ever appeared in Prescott. I also recall hearing something from Pastor
Randy Jamison, who was Tom's replacement at Miller Valley before Chris Marley came. We had
a sweet family from MVBC join our church shortly about that time (Tony and Kellene Elley). And
I remember Tony telling me that some “really bad” things happened with Tom at MVBC but he
didn't go into it and I didn't press him on it. He gave me the impression that it was confidential and
could not be shared. Tony's wife, Kellene, is the daughter of Carolyn Ladner. So this was literally
close to home. Tony never said what happened, just that it was really bad. This left an impression
upon me because it suggested a different side to the story that I had heard from Tom. Up to that
time everything I had filtered anything heard about Tom through Tom's version of the story (which
never included the sordid details that have now come to public light).
One other thing I would say, (in light of being transparent) is that I was not educated about the
mandatory reporting law until we had an incident in 2008 with a young single woman in our church
who was arrested for sexual conduct with a minor female outside our church. I'm not saying this
as any kind of excuse, just that I didn't know about it before then. I think if I knew the law’s
requirement to report such things, I would have tuned in a lot better to what was being said back
then. I hope this is helpful brother. If I possessed information back then that should have been
reported, I need to take responsibility for it and answer for it. I will repent of any and every sin I
have committed, God helping me. So don’t be hesitant in asking me the tough questions, brother.
For the most part, I do agree with your statement that no one in ARBCA is competent to handle
this level of investigation - except you, and maybe Rich Jensen and Tom Hicks. I trust your
judgment on this Nick. I would be glad to assist you in conducting an “in- house” (GCC)
investigation. Maybe the Weinland’s could join us in this - they seem to be pretty good
investigators so far.
thanks, John
From: Nick Deben <ndeben4488@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 8:51 PM
To: John Giarrizzo
Subject: Re: Weinland’s

August 7-8, 2018 Significant to this investigation are the following statements by Pastor
John:
As for # 6, I had always assumed that the investigative council was
authorized by the AC and had briefly reported the results to the AC. It
wasn’t until this year that I heard from Earl the version that Bob Selph
(not 'Self') had arranged & orchestrated it. I was aware that those three
men were coming into Phoenix for a council with Tom and the MVBC
elders. It seems that we on the AC received some communication about
the results of the council and they were accepted into the Minutes
somewhere. But they were sanitized of all incriminating information. It
would be nice to see just what was communicated to us back then. If
there had been information passed on to us on the AC that Tom had

36
sexually molested children or physically abused them, that would have
left a huge impression on the AC that would have to be addressed. I don't
remember that ever happening in any of our conference calls (meetings).
This is odd when I think that two out of the three council members
(McKnight and Tripp) were also AC members at that time. An AC
conference call might have been a good opportunity for them to gush out
all that happened when they went to Phoenix. I just don't recall hearing
it. I didn't always make every AC meeting. The Minutes will show who
was present and absent at each conference call.
Pastor John received some level of communication from the AC and he
was aware of the 3-man investigative team. However, it cannot be
established with specificity what Pastor John knew in regard to the
Informal Council’s report.
Concerning Pastor John recollection of position on the 2000 AC he stated
the following.
As for # 7, I must say that I was both shocked and embarrassed to
discover that I was indeed still on the AC - not only in 2000 but also
2001 (perhaps 2002 also)! I was honored to be on the first AC in 1997.
We ran for two-year terms. I can remember how demanding the AC
work was becoming and how I was getting so busy at GCC that I had to
resign before finishing out my term of office. For some reason I thought
I was off the AC by that time. I should have checked the dates before
telling them that. But being on the AC at that time I just don't have any
recollection of "many serious discussions" on any of the AC conference
calls. I don't recall there ever being a single discussion over what to do
about the serious sins of Tom Chantry? I have a bad memory to begin
with - but something this serious would definitely have stuck out in my
mind. I'm sorry to draw a big blank on that.
Although Dale Smith, who was also on the AC informed the elders that
he also did not recall being on the 2000 AC, it is difficult to believe Pastor
John’s statement in light of all the communication about the 2000
Chantry incident being addressed with the Weinland’s. The Weinland’s
had inquired about this incident for the previous 8 months and Pastor
John gave response after response in regard to the incident. All of his
responses were based on some level of recall. He would later inform the
elders on August 14, 2018 that he recalled eating a meal in his home with
Tom Chantry on the night that Tom Chantry’s resignation letter was
being read MBVC and then later smoking a cigar with Tom and noting
his solemn demeanor.
As it relates to the reasoning why or how it came about Nick being the
lead investigator in this issue, Pastor John’s email response should clarify
his desire to see Nick investigate this issue, with his full cooperation.
For the most part, I do agree with your statement that no one in ARBCA
is competent to handle this level of investigation - except you, and
maybe Rich Jensen and Tom Hicks. I trust your judgment on this Nick.
I would be glad to assist you in conducting an “in- house” (GCC)

37
investigation. Maybe the Weinland’s could join us in this - they seem to
be pretty good investigators so far.
August 9, 2018 Nick received a private email from Pastor John with the January 4, 2001
AC Meeting Minutes attached. The email did not have any narrative text.
The subject line of the email read, “You gotta read page 3!” Nick opened
the document and read it completely and then called Pastor John to find
out the significance of page 3. Page 3 contained the General Summary
report that was sent by the AC to all of the member churches and is
already documented in this report. John was excited and told Nick that
this proved that the AC members did not know anything about the 2000
incident involving children. Nick asked him what he was getting at and
Pastor John explained that this information absolved he and the other AC
board members from knowing anything about children.
Nick asked Pastor John if he had read page 9 yet and he wasn’t sure.
Nick explained that he would wait for Pastor John to read the page while
he waited on the phone. Pastor John stated, “What is that doing there?
That’s not supposed to be there. It reads that it is confidential and not
supposed to go out. I don’t remember seeing that. I think it might have
been added by somebody.” Nick explained to Pastor John that the page
9 entry indicated all of the AC members were emphatically notified of
three levels of reports and instructed to keep the “distinction of 3 levels
of reports is to remain confidential!!” Nick explained to Pastor John that
the two exclamation points made it pretty clear that the AC wanted this
information concealed and that is what people do when they are involved
in a coverup. Nick pointed out to Pastor John that his name is all over
the report. Nick asked him if he was present for the whole meeting and
he said it was a conference call but he was there the whole meeting.
Nick told Pastor John that he couldn’t come up with any other
conclusion, after reading the minutes, then there being a coverup and he
was a part of it. Nick explained to Pastor John that this is very serious
and if he felt he was innocent, he needed to start communicating with
other AC members to put all the pieces together. Nick suggested that
Pastor John contact Jamie Howell, who was listed as the secretary, to
learn what he remembers. Nick explained to Pastor John that if page 9
was added, it would be up to him to find the man or men that authored
and added that page. Nick explained to Pastor John that he should no
longer stay passive and take the position of not knowing or lack of recall
because this information was just too convicting.
The call ended, but it did prompt Pastor John to contact Jamie Howell.
Jamie Howell’s email response indicated that he didn’t remember
reading the Informal Council Report, but he was able to find it on his
hard drive sometime in the last year. Jamie further indicated that he can’t
imagine not reading it. Dale Smith was also contacted by John and Dale
didn’t remember receiving or reading the report until Tom Chantry gave
it to him when he started attending his church some years ago.

38
What was confusing to Nick was Pastor John’s attempt to use this
document to completely absolve him of knowing that the 2000 Chantry
investigation had anything to do with children. The fact that Pastor John
attempted to take that position at that time in the investigation when so
much was so rapidly being discovered about what the AC members knew
and particularly what Pastor John had already stated he knew was
perplexing. Pastor’s John’s defense before this phone call was that he
only knew that it involved something to do with Tom Chantry’s
involvement with children. Now Pastor John was using this document
to support the position that he didn’t know the 2000 Chantry incident had
anything to do with children. Pastor John now was stating that the
General Summary report that went out the churches proved the whole
incident was about mediation and reconciliation between the MVBC
elders and Tom Chantry.
August 14, 2018 The GCC met for their regularly scheduled bimonthly elders meeting.
One item on the agenda was
Item: JG’s Response to GCC
Elder: JSG
Discussion: JG’s involvement in the ARBCA-Chantry situation.

ND asked if any clarification of the supplied documents from an email sent to the elder board on
Monday, needed explanation. The clarification of the three documents identified in the January 4,
2001 AC minutes was discussed as well as what is known about their potential distribution.

What is referred to as the sealed or concealed envelope was the 3-man investigative team’s original
report including their assessment of Tom Chantry. Because Walt Chantry was given provided this
report by Ted Tripp or Bob Self. Walt demanded that a new, sanitized version be created (and
therefore the original would necessarily be covered up). That new version is what is referred to in
the 2001 AC minutes as the Informal Council Report, it was an edited but not completely sanitized
account which was also covered up from the public record. According to the minutes, that report
was distributed by Jamie Howell, the AC secretary to all AC members, under expectation of
secrecy. The sanitized report that went out to the churches, which was a vague summary, was
listed in the 2001 AC minutes. There is still confusion over what exactly is the fuller report
reference in the 2001 AC minutes. Is this the red binder that Chris Marley turned over to Prescott
PD?

JG explained that he never received any of the three level letters and he believes none of the letters
were ever distributed. The secretary, Jamie Howell, has a copy he provided to JG yesterday. Dale
Smith did not remember receiving any letter from the AC either. (ND editorial - Although JG and
Dale Smith do not remember getting a copy from Jamie, Jamie told JG he found his electronic
copy on his hard drive about a year ago (2017). Jamie does not remember reading it but cannot
imagine that he didn’t.)

JG feels the weight and the stress of the situation because his family has been identified in recent
photos posted on line. JG indicated he was aware of the 3-man investigation. They were trying
to bring about reconciliation between Tom and the elders in the way he left. JG stated that the

39
night MVBC was reading Tom’s Chantry’s resignation letter to the congregation, Tom was having
dinner at JG’s home and the two were later smoking a cigar together. Tom explained that some
parents were upset that he spanked their children and he was unable to reconcile with them. JG
did not ask probing questions that led to Tom’s resignation. JG explained that Tom’s demeanor
that evening was solemn.

ND asked if the 3-man investigative team was located in Phoenix during the investigation. JG
explained that they were staying in a hotel along I-17 on the north end of Phoenix so that it would
be a shorter drive for those traveling from Prescott to be interviewed by investigative team. ND
asked if JG ever had any communication with the 3-man investigative team. JG explained that he
never had any communication with the 3-man investigative team before, during, or after their
investigation. JG does not recall any contact or conversation about this incident with McKnight
who was a member of the 3-man investigative team and a member of the AC with JG. JG did
speak with Don Lindblad later, JG could not recall specific content from the conversation, but he
learned that Tom was upset that McKnight denied him the opportunity to speak to the MVBC
congregation. McKnight seemed to have the greatest influence on the investigative team and was
an elder in Walt Chantry’s church. JG knew that when Walt Chantry read the original report he
was upset with the wording of the team’s assessments about Tom. (It was not asked how JG new
that information.) JG mentioned that McKnight never recovered from his relationship with Walt
Chantry and his standing in that church. JG could not recall when he learned about this
information.

JR asked if Tom ever indicated he had sinned? JG made note of Tom’s heaviness of demeanor
but did not recall him admitting to sin. RRN inquired about the seriousness of Tom’s actions. JG
did not think of them as a serious matter that required the police, but more of an ecclesiastical
problem or disagreement. One of the GCC elders asked JG, “After reading the January 4, 2001
minutes, do you believe that it looked like a coverup. JG responded, “Yes.” JG agreed that he
was there for the duration of the 2001 AC meeting but may have “zoned out” at some period of
the meeting (conference call). JG’s opinion of the seriousness of the situation at the time of the
meeting was that it was not alarming or serious. JG acknowledge that as of today he realizes the
seriousness of the original spanking issue. RRN asked if “Even without the report, was there an
expectation of seriousness and responsibility to follow up by the AC members now recognized by
JG? JG indicated he does see the seriousness now and the responsibility to follow up by AC
members. JG did not remember discussing the details of the three reports at the AC meetings and
he does not know if it was discussed. He agreed it was serious, now, looking back.

JR and ND both commented on the difficulty in grasping that JG could not remember the
discussion of the incident by the AC at the 2001 AC meeting. JR pointed out that McKnight was
a member of the 3-man investigative team and was at the meeting when it came up on the meeting
agenda. Even if some members did not have access to the sealed report, they had access to
McKnight and he certainly would have commented about the investigation at the meeting. JG said
that he didn’t recall any conversation on the topic other than what was going to be communicated
to the member churches about the reconciliation process.

ND commented that JG’s lack of recall is very difficult to find reasonable in light of the seriousness
of the issue. ND explained that he contact Darrell Gustafson earlier in the day after being advised

40
to talk to him by JG based on Darrell’s recollection of that time frame. Darrell was a fellow pastor
with JG at that time and is currently the staff administrator at GCC. ND informed JG that Darrell
said that he and Rich Howe (one of the MVBC elders in 2000/2001) talked by phone one day and
Darrell inquired about what was going on at MVBC. Howe explained some pornography was
found hidden in the parsonage after Tom Chantry left and that Tom left due to an incident involving
over-spanking or some type of wrong spanking of some of the children. Darrell did not know
more than that. ND explained that even Darrell knew that the issue was a serious matter involving
spanking and even added a pornography issue that had never been known or communicated to the
GCC elders. ND continued by explaining that JG had been on the AC from the start of ARBCA
in 1997 and never left the board, but JG told the Weinland’s that he just didn’t remember being on
the AC at that time. ND asked how JG could account for such a memory loss. JG explained that
he had been working hard ramping up for the start of ARBCA since 1996. ARBCA was
established in 1997 and he had been on consecutive 2-year terms. He knew at one point he was so
tired and overwhelmed that he had to inform the AC that he could not finish out one of his terms.
JG said he assumed, when talking to the Weinland’s, that he wasn’t on the AC during this incident
and had left due to the workload. ND asked if this was the same reason for JG not disclosing his
involvement on the AC to the GCC elders when they initially became aware of it in December of
2017? JG responded, “Yeah.” ND asked, “Is there more information that you know that you
haven’t shared with the GCC elders regarding Tom? “No. I didn’t have any communication with
Tom.”

RRN asked, “Is it your opinion now that there was a cover up at some level by AC members?”
“Yes.” What is your belief or theory on how this happened? JG began to give a historical context
and informed the GCC elders that Tom came from seminary to MVBC when Bob Selph left. JG
was part of Tom’s ordination. JG used to have a reformed pastors’ luncheon and Tom would come
down and take part in that quarterly. JG knew a number of the MVBC families and had even
officiated one of the weddings. JG even knew the parents of some of the victims. JG reiterated
that he knew he had not been able to commit his final term on the AC and was surprised when he
learned that he was on it (the AC) from the Weinland’s, at the time of issue. MF pointed out that
JG had not answered the question by RRN.
When asked again by RRN about JG’s theory of who was behind the AC coverup, JG continued
by stating that he knew the elders of MVBC, and he was the closest AC member geographically
to MVBC, but does not recall any additional knowledge. JG stated he talked with Earl before the
2017 GA and learned that Bob Selph was leading the effort to put together the 3-man investigative
team back in December of 2000.

RRN talked to JG about the 2000 AC board members all having access. awareness. and authority
as it related to this incident. RRN informed JG, “These three were available to you and because
of these not being acted upon there is some level of negligence (the only question is to what
degree?). This is what the GCC elder board must assess.” RRN asked JG, “Do you believe that a
tighter group from the AC had these high-level discussions without the rest of the AC? “It is
possible. Dale suggested that possibility.” (Referencing the communication JG had with Dale
Smith earlier that day or the day before.)

ND’s questions: Was Bob Selph identified by Earl as being a rebel or rogue in his actions not
because he orchestrated the 3-man investigative team but rather that he took possession of the

41
AC’s sealed report and therefore took control away from the AC? “Earl told me that Bob Selph
handpicked the men, arranged for them to go to Prescott, called Earl and told him the day before
the trip to Prescott, and when the investigation was complete Bob gave the report to Walt Chantry.
Bob Self refused to provide the AC the sealed report and took the sealed document.” Was Earl
upset because Bob had a hardcopy that he would keep outside of the control of the AC. “I believe
so.”

ND asked JG where Bob Selph took the document. JG explained that he kept it at ARBCA, in its
archived records. ND asked for that location and JG explained that it was originally located in the
basement of Bob’s church but later moved to the ARBCA off-site location when ARBCA could
afford to house the coordinator and the secretary in their own location. ND asked JG if as a
member of the AC board he had the authority to get a copy of that sealed document at any time.
JG said he didn’t know for sure because he never tried to get something from there. ND explained
that JG had called the ARBCA office on Thursday, August 9, 2018 and asked the ARBCA
secretary to send him the AC minutes from December of 2000 through 2001 and he was able to
do so. ND asked if the same logic would hold true for his ability to gain access to the sealed report
any time after Bob Selph put it in the ARBCA archives. ND further explained that he believed
that Bob Selph was the ARBCA coordinator for the first eight years of ARBCA. JG said that it
may have been possible for him to get the document but he never thought to do so. JG also
explained that Bob Selph took the sealed copy from the archives after he left the coordinator
position.

JG explained that Earl confronted and "upbraided" Bob telling him he did not have authority to
seal a report but Bob would not give in to Earl. RNN asked, “If Bob acted outside his authority as
ARBCA Coordinator he should have been publically reprimanded by Earl and the AC, what was
his response to Bob's refusal?” JG responded to RRN’s question, “Earl said, ‘This might come
back and bite us.’” JG also explained that Bob’s actions were never addressed, and Bob continued
in his role as coordinators for several more years. RRN asked JG if he recognized this statement
by Earl as an awareness on JG’s part of the situation. “Yeah, they have something to hide.” The
first JG heard of a concealed or sealed letter was in his 2017 conversation with Earl. The above
stated conversation took place with Earl sometime before the 2017 GA.

JG was asked what else he knew about the cover up. JG explained that Tom Hicks, Fred Malone’s
fellow pastor, interviewed Bob Self eight months ago, after Malone and Hick’s wanted to learn
more about ARBCA’s involvement. Bob Selph told Tom Hicks that the AC was innocent and did
not really know what was going on. JG told the GCC elders that Tom Hicks had forwarded him
the bullet points that he made in Tom Hick’s conversation with Bob Self. JG took the time in the
GCC elder meeting to forward the bullet points to those present at the meeting, but the bullet points
were not accessed by the GCC elders during the meeting. I will attached Tom Hick’s bullet points
to the minutes of this meeting.

ND questions cont’d: Were you present for the “clean bill” status vote of Tom Chantry by the AC
in 2002? “Yes.” Do you remember McKnight voting no? “No.” Were or are you now part of the
coverup? “No.” I do accept culpability for not asking probing questions about the spanking. I
should have been more forthright on what I knew and how I knew it. I would ask the congregation
to forgive me for that.” JG told the other GCC elders that he is willing to resign if that will be the

42
best thing for the church. The elders informed JG that they appreciated his concern for the church
but that issue was not part of this evening discussion.

JR made the motion for the GCC Elder Board to continue to investigate GCC’s involvement in the
ARBCA coverup. FU seconded the motion and it was approved by all.

Action: The GCC Elder Board will continue to investigate GCC’s involvement in the ARBCA
coverup.
August 14, 2018 Pastor John was questioned by the GCC as to his involvement with the
ARBCA coverup. The significant statements by Pastor John included:
1. Pastor John stated that Tom, while eating dinner at Pastor John’s
home, explained that some parents were upset that he spanked their
children and he was unable to reconcile with them. Pastor John did
not ask probing questions that led to Tom’s resignation.
This is significant because it demonstrates that Pastor John has
known since 2000, through personal knowledge and interaction with
Tom Chantry, that the inappropriate spanking of children was always
the main issue.
2. Pastor John recognized that the January 4, 2001 AC Meeting notes
appear to indicate a coverup. Pastor John indicated he now sees the
seriousness of the 2000 Chantry incident and the responsibility to
follow up by members of the AC.
3. Pastor John was asked, “Is it your opinion now that there was a cover
up at some level by AC members?” Pastor John responded, “Yes.”
4. Pastor John informed the elders that Earl Blackburn’s stated, “This
might come back to bite us.” Blackburn made this comment in regard
to Bob Selph’s refusal to turn over the sealed report. A follow up
question was asked as to whether or not Blackburn’s statement
demonstrated an awareness of the situation by Pastor John. Pastor
John stated, “Yeah, they have something to hide.”
5. Pastor John explained his memory loss as it related to his
participation on the 2000 AC and being the product of not
remembering. It is important to note all of the elements in Pastor
John’s life that would make this an issue of extreme significance.
6. GCC elders learned through Tom Hicks that he forwarded on April
24, 2018, at Pastor John’s request, the document of his interview with
Bob Selph. Pastor John had that important information critical to the
investigation for over three months and only revealed it to the elders
during their questioning on August 14, 2018.
7. Pastor John denies to this day that he was involved in a coverup. He
stated, “No.” “I do accept culpability for not asking probing
questions about the spanking. I should have been more forthright on

43
what I knew and how I knew it. I would ask the congregation to
forgive me for that.”
Pastor John, immediately after acknowledging some level of
culpability the stated he was willing to resign if that would be the
best thing for the church.
August 14, 2018 It is important to note that Jamie Howell sent an email response to Pastor
John of his inquiry into the January 4, 2001 AC meeting in which Howell
was the secretary. Toward the close of the letter, Howell gives this
assessment of ARBCA’s coverup.
Another issue. To be honest, I was shocked when I heard that the AC
allowed Tom Chantry’s church to be voted on by the ARBCA churches,
knowing that Tom was about to be indicted as an accused pedophile, and
did not think it necessary to inform the churches before they voted on
his candidacy. To me, that is scandalous. That screams cover-up. It is no
wonder that the bloggers have decided that ARBCA is complicit in
covering up Tom’s abuse. I am convinced, from all that I’ve read, of
Tom’s guilt; if he didn’t fondle the children’s genitals as accused, he
surely is guilty of aggravated assault in the bare- bottom beatings he
inflicted; I read that he denied doing that under oath today. I believe the
sealed report, which I think Tom signed, contained details about bare-
bottom spankings. I could be wrong on that point. I do not understand
how the AC could justify their decision. That boggles my mind. Again,
enough said.
Dale Smith called GCC Elder Pete Smith on Tuesday, August 21, 2018,
to provide a statement to the GCC elders at the request of Pastor John.
As it related to ARBCA’s coverup Dale informed Pete of the following:
According to Dale, Chris Marly Jr. contacted the AC to tell them not to
make Tom’s church available to vote. Dale lamented that Chris Marley
did not call him directly, because if he had known what the AC learned
from that call, he would not have recommended the church join ARBCA
to begin with. He added that he has no idea why the AC, having spoken
to Chris Marley, would vote to make Tom’s church available to join
ARBCA.
August 14, 2018 After the elders meeting, Pastor John and Nick had an incidental
conversation in the men’s room. Nick informed John that he would
inform the elders of the conversation. Below is Nick’s statement written
to the elders the day after the elders meeting.
August 15, 2018, 11 am
Nick DeBenedetto, Pastoral-intern of GCC
Elders (excluding John), and including Rob-roy,
Last night after the elders meeting I went to use the bathroom before locking up the church and
heading back to Phoenix. I was surprised to find John still at the church and bumped into him in
the restroom. John was still solemn and quiet after having shared his heart about being willing to

44
resign if that what the elders felt was best for GCC. In the compassion of the moment, I shared
with him my assessment of the investigation as of tonight’s meeting into his actions.
I explained that I did not currently believe or at least could not presently substantiate that he was
actively a part of the ARBCA AC coverup of Tom Chantry’s actions in 2000. That being said, I
told him that I had a big problem with his lack of transparency with the GCC elder board and its
attempts to obtain and understand the facts from him. I also told him that Rob-roy did a good job
laying out a case of John’s negligence in failing to act in 2000. I informed him that I believed he
made some very poor decisions concerning the welfare of the children in not doing more to probe
the situation. I explained that there was still much to investigate and reiterated that his lack of
transparency was a big issue with me.
John then stated that as the men were talking tonight at the meeting, he remembered something
and wanted to tell me about it. John then proceeded to tell me that he remembered contacting
Chris Marley in 2016 to see why MVBC was going to leave ARBCA if Tom Chantry’s church
was allowed in. Chris told John that he had learned new information and told him about the red
folder. I asked John if it was a red folder or a binder and John told me it was a folder. John stated
that Chris turned the red folder over to John and John read the contents. I asked if he provided
anyone on the AC with the red folder and he said he read it and returned it to Chris without telling
anyone. I asked what the red folder contained, and he explained that it was the investigation of
the spanking by the investigative team.
I informed John that I would need to follow up with Chris and that I also planned to tell Rob-roy
tonight about our conversation so that it stayed “above board,” with somebody else knowing the
timing of the information he provided. John said he understood and then he left to go home as I
locked up the church.
August 14, 2018 The Weinland’s were present in the courtroom when the presiding judge
in the Tom Chantry trial commented to the court, while in recess, “If
ARBCA were on trial for a coverup, they would be convicted.” The
judge went on to name say something to the affect that Bob Selph, Don
Lindblad, Walt Chantry, and the ARBCA AC were guilty of covering up
the depth and content of the physical assaults they discovered in 2000.
All of them hid this information from the victims.
August 15, 2018 The elders, minus John, held an emergency meeting to discuss the new
information that John provided after the elder meeting to Nick. This
information, coupled with John’s admission the night before that there
appeared to be a coverup by an inner group of men he believed had
already left ARBCA, had to be further assessed. John believed these men
to be Bob Selph and the 3-man investigative team.
August 19, 2018 The GCC elders read a statement to the members regarding the
investigation process and the need to remove John from his elder duties
while the investigative report was completed. The elders also informed
the members that the GCC elders would be resigning its association with
ARBCA effective Monday, August 20, 2018.

45
August 21, 2018 The jury convicted Tom Chantry on two counts of aggravated assault on
a child. Chris Marley informed me that the prosecution plans to retry
him on four counts of child molestation.

46