“Childhood should be carefree, playing in the sun; not living a nightmare in the darkness of the soul.” ― Dave Pelzer, A Child Called "It" link
Today I am going to post three TWO shorter articles to get caught up on some interesting stories.
I received the following information from an alert reader who is closely following the Tom Chantry child abuse and molestation scandal. When we last left Chantry, he was sitting in a jail cell in Arizona awaiting trial. That trial is scheduled for March 27, 2017,
According to our reader (Thank you!) TWW has learned that Arizona has had a change in the law regarding certain sex crimes that allow for pretrial imprisonment if there is enough evidence to presume that the defendant is guilty. According to the Washington Times, in an article titled Arizona Supreme Court overturns part of no-bail measure, this law has changed.
It’s unconstitutional to categorically deny bail for people charged with sexual conduct with a minor under age 15 without first determining that the defendants are dangerous to somebody else or the community,
On March 8, On March 8, Chantry filed a "Petition for Special Action." It appears Chantry wants out of jail. His lawyer, John M Sears filed the petition on his behalf. However, it seems that the date to resolve this matter is in April.
On the other hand, his trial is set for March 27. I am having trouble figuring out if his trial will now be delayed. Can any of you legal experts or reporters help us out here? It doesn't make sense for him to wait until April to get out of jail if his trial is in March. There is something that I am obviously missing.
PS: When you send us information, we like to give credit to the person who spent the time to find it. Please let us know if you do, or do not, want your name to be posted in our thanks.
I had wondered what was going on with this case. Thanks for the update!
The trial, if goes as scheduled, is only 5 days, 3 business days, away. If Chantry is so innocent, what can he accomplish by being out of jail for such a short period of time? What is the point?
I don’t know, but in the meantime, I get bronze.
More seriously, I can understand that Mr Chantry (especially if innocent) would want to spend every day he can out of jail. I don’t know enough of the evidence to contribute to the trial, though; I can only hope it’s a fair one. Meaning, if he is innocent, then he is robustly cleared; and if he is guilty, any and all of his victims are robustly defended.
Nobody wrote:
Uh…I posted the court documents. They are usually precise. Nobody wrote:
The fact that you have not mentioned the victims means that you may be the one who is not following the way ofJesus.
One comment not approved: Another watchbloggers are evil because they are picking on my friend who is accused of molestation.
Nancy2 wrote:
If you read the pst carefully, the hearing on letting him out of jail is a few weeks after the trial date. Has that been changed? I don’t know.
Nobody wrote:
It’s not speculation when it’s in the court records, genius!
Nobody wrote:
Here are the rules on this blog. Unless you show where I was *dead wrong* you will not be allowed to comment and throw around stupid comments. This is the last comment you will be allowed to make without being moderated. Even then I may not approve your comments. Over and out.
@ Nobody:
PS You are such a wuss that you are hiding your name and your email.
@ dee:
All of these comments are particularly silly considering this post is simply about what has been filed! Which is undisputed and he doesn’t even try to dispute it.
I will not approve any further comments by *Nobody.*. Said person is even saying we wrote about a story in the 1980s. We were not blogging then. This person seems a bit unhinged.
To you, Nobody, we give you the TWW official send off.
https://youtu.be/4L_yCwFD6Jo
@ Lea:
He’s a troll. He probably is involved with Frank Turk.
dee wrote:
What, no “Bye, Felicia”?
I really hope that the alleged victims are truly supported during the situation, and during the entire process. I must admit that I’m very proud of the regulars, the pastor’s that post here, and the blog host. I truly hope that mr. Chantry receives a fair and impartial trial. But there is a lot of documentation concerning the situations that are involved in this case. Again every person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Even though we have to refer to the victims as alleged I tend to stand with them.
It is my great hope that there is another Reformation but it has to do with how people who have been victimized by the church are restored and believed by the power structure and that people realized that other people do not want to be victims of this kind of alleged situation.
Thank you for the update I hope everybody has a nice evening.
” ….Arizona has had a change in the law regarding certain sex crimes that allow for pretrial imprisonment if there is enough evidence to presume that the defendant is guilty”
well, I hope the ‘enough evidence’ to get this man into imprisonment pretrial will also be ‘enough evidence’ to save people from letting him out even now ….
let him be tried, then let the courts seek justice for all concerned
but that ‘enough evidence’ in the meantime establishes a reason for the state to keep this man locked up and the people of the state possibly less vulnerable to one more sick predator during this waiting period
dee wrote:
Help me out here: how many blogs actually existed in the 1980s???
BTW Dee, how are you doing? Are the meds helping? Kitchen problem fixed with hopefully no major damage? Pug’s mouth healing well? Update, please?
dee wrote:
Who apparently lives in my backyard too. Avoid!
@ Nancy2:
You are so kind. The meds will take about 6 weeks to kick in. But I am sleeping a lot her on vacation so it is wonderful. The dishwasher is fixed, the mess cleaned up and we found anther leak in the basement which is fixed. Sweet Lily is feeling better.
@ Lea:
Nobody is such a troll that he is trying different IP addresses to break on in to continue to insult me. He is a naughty, obnoxious, wussy troll.
Prediction:
Chantry will not get out of the hoosegow.
He’s in there to stay for a spell.
dee wrote:
Remember when Mark Driscoll used to troll blog posts? He would sign on as “William Wallace II” to post naughty and obnoxious comments. He finally confessed to this misbehaving; it was so unbecoming of Pastor Mark.
dee wrote:
Would you like to borrow my SSB dog house? It seems to be empty at the moment.
Chantry’s court date of March 27th no longer appears on the court schedule for Superior Court of Yavapai County in Prescott, AZ.
The initial judge assigned to the case recused herself and a judge from Maricopa County presided over the case on 9/6/2016 for preliminary hearings. The Arizona public record on the Chantry case lists 7 criminal counts Chantry has been charged with and under the heading of “Disposition” for each count it says “DEF TO ANOTHER COURT FOR PROS.”
I read that the Maricopa judge who presided over the case in September has been assigned the case. I am guessing the trial will be held in his courtroom in Phoenix, but I can find no public record to verify this.
I am also uncertain whether Chantry remains incarcerated in the Yavapai County jail, or if he would have been transferred to the Maricopa County jail.
It would make sense that the trial date has been pushed back to sometime after the hearing in April scheduled to get Chantry out of jail. BTW, I know a man who spent about a year in the Maricopa County jail while awaiting his trial. He said his time there was much more dangerous than his time in state prison. I can understand anyone wanting to get out of jail, even if for only 1 day.
In my opinion, Chantry would embrace a trial if he were innocent. This appeal only delays his trial. That makes no sense if you have a strong defense to offer a jury. I think he has a weak case and the alleged victims have a strong case based on the police offense reports. Therefore, Chantry is doing all he can to get out of jail now and delay the trial for as long as possible knowing a day is likely coming when he will be found guilty and sentenced. And if he is likely to be found guilty by a jury, I assume his lawyer will work out a plea deal with the judge to avoid a trial altogether. As a lawyer, you don’t want a case like Chantry’s going before a jury. Ordinary people don’t take kindly to the violent beating of children by a “pastor” and the cover up that ensued. A jury may find him guilty on all seven counts. A judge may accept a guilty plea to a lesser number of counts.
Max wrote:
Never realizing that Braveheart was HIGHLY fictionalized.
Brent Detwiler wrote:
Which also makes him a flight risk.
When “the Chantry Affair” surfaced earlier in this blog, someone commented that Sky Harbor Airport in Phoenix isn’t that far from where Chantry is currently jugged. And that this might have been a reason he got returned to the stony lonesome after being out on bail.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I also think he’s a possible flight risk. It’s a very serious crime, and from his statements, from the fact that he kept moving around, and the things my aunt from Prescott said about him, it wouldn’t surprise me.
And it’d be just as easy to drive out of Arizona.
Tom Chantry’s friends seem determined to make him look as guilty as possible. The way they have responded to the story being aired by attacking and accusing others, they probably don’t realize this but it’s classic guilty behavior.
ishy wrote:
Probably easier. No paper trail.
I agree with you about flight risk, it depends on how bad the evidence is (and the fact that he’s sitting in jail rather than on bail makes it seem likely to be pretty bad). I also think a plea deal might be attempted, particularly if he swing something based on time served. I don’t know how likely AZ is to go for that.
siteseer wrote:
If they had any real arguments that he was actually innocent you’d think that they might present them instead of being mad that people are reporting…legal court documents and public information that is not in dispute!
Terrible to hear of his story, but am grateful to God’s grace for getting me out of those circles. Was friends many years ago with folks who hung out with his dad, and was a friend of someone who is still tight in Tom’s circle. The folks in those churches have way to much unhealthy adoration and trust in those pastors. Not really surprised this stayed subsurface for so long with the good-ole boy mentality that exists.
Lea wrote:
Just more spin on “TOUCH NOT MINE ANOINTED!!!!!”…
“If you question what I say or do
YOU REBEL AGAINST THE FATHER TOO!”
— Steve Taylor, “I Manipulate”
siteseer wrote:
All that’s missing is the Got Hard hysterical denials “NO! NEVER!”
I just checked the Yavapai County online inmate search and Chantry’s still there.
Lea wrote:
Right, they are just trying to intimidate people. It looks so bad.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
“never! ever!” hah
siteseer wrote:
They’re not his friends if they’re blindly circling wagons round him based on his protestations alone, they’re not his friends even if they have personal knowledge of his innocence (which to me would seem to be impossible under the circumstances) if their idea of friendship is to do some of the reprehensible things they’ve done in his defense. They’re closer to being his worst enemies.
siteseer wrote:
I remember when that surfaced, someone in these threads cited a source that the more hysterical and vehement the denials (“NO! NEVER! EVER!”), the more likely they’re guilty. And this is something that police interrogators are trained to look for — unusually or excessively-vehement denials.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I think that’s true. Also, there’s no specific denial of the exact charges, just vague protestations that you are supposed to interpret to mean a denial. Like he doesn’t say, “I didn’t molest [so-and-so]” he just exclaims “No! Never! Ever!” which could just as well mean he ‘never ever’ wanted to be called out or to have this conversation.
siteseer wrote:
Whenever we get someone on here who comes here to say, “Just stop talking about it!”, I know it’s something we definitely should be talking about. It’s like a giant blinking neon sign at night that we’ve found a problem.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote [of Marc Driskle]:
Or that “Braveheart” was the historic nickname of Robert Bruce, not of William Wallace (the significance of Wallace in Scottish history notwithstanding).
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
When you see a suspect interviewed on TV and instead of “I didn’t kill Mabel” it’s “I could never hurt Mabel” you know they’ll take a closer look. And if it’s followed by, “I could NEVER hurt ANYONE!” you know they have their guy..
Brian wrote:
Good idea.
Just heard a story on NPR of how an “entrepreneur” enticed young ladies https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/against-their-will/. Now in jail, he talks about the state-of-the-art and commonplace tactics used to manipulate, entrap, and exploit. No force needed – he says just find the vulnerable and use the right words. Chilling.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
How about, “Touch not the innocent children with evil.” Where did that go with the “Touch not my anointed” folks? What happened to commonplace decency and moral choice among the “anointed” leadership?
Chantry’s church still has that video of him on its main page: http://crbc.us/
You’d think they would take it down while he is facing charges and awaiting trial, even if they truly think that he’ll be found “not guilty.”
Still quite a bit of Chantry material online, uploaded by people who I’m sure by now have seen the news and should really take all this stuff down:
http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?SpeakerOnly=true&currSection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=Tom%5EChantry
http://confessingbaptist.com/tag/tom-chantry/
If I ran the “confessingbaptist” blog, I would delete the Chantry material and post a notice about the arrest and charges, with a link to the news story.
siteseer wrote:
I remember a Cold War spy thriller from long ago (Night Flight from Moscow) where that “Beat the Box” trick was an important plot point. Fake defector (played by Yul Brynner) on a lie-detector test uses a sudden vehement outburst like that to camouflage the actual polygraph reaction to the disinformation he is passing.
JYJames wrote:
“One man with a briefcase can steal more than a hundred men with guns.”
— Don Vito Corleone, The Godfather
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
Again, chilling.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Guess they found their MO and unfortunately, it works, serves their purpose of entice, entrap, exploit, to line their pockets.