Day Nine of the Thomas Chantry Trial

By | August 10, 2018

The court session picked up with the video of Dr. Deborah Davis, an expert witness on memory. We had about 2 hours 45 minutes left to watch, having started watching late in yesterday’s court session.

Dr. Davis was a witness for the Defense. As such, John Sears was utilizing her testimony in an attempt to undermine the testimony of the victims who have testified in this case. Dr. Davis talked of “Infantile Amnesia.” She is of the opinion that children generally are unable to remember anything prior to age 3 or 4. She further stated that as adults we generally are unable to remember anything before the age of 10.

When Susan Eazer cross-examined Dr. Davis she was able to restore some sanity to the conversation. The first thing Ms. Eazer did was to highlight the fact that Dr. Davis is a hired gun for defense attorneys. Dr. Davis has testified as an expert witness in approximately 150 cases. Of those 150 cases she has testified in, she has testified for the State a total of 1 time!  Ms. Eazer than asked Dr. Davis about her fee structure.  She charges $3,000 per day, $1,500 for a half day, or $300 per hour. Additionally, she charges $100 per hour while traveling, plus expenses. When asked how much she was charging John Sears for her services, she said $3,000.

In my opinion, Ms. Eazer did a good job of neutralizing the testimony of Dr. Davis. Her questions were direct and specific. When she asked a question that required a yes or no answer Dr. Davis would initially work to avoid the simple answer, preferring to get into a long-winded explanation. Ms. Eazer would shut her down saying that was not the question and then restate the question and ask for a yes or no answer. Dr. Davis was clearly frustrated by this, several times rolling her eyes. It was obvious it pained Dr. Davis to not be in control of the conversation.

Eazer quoted from Dr. Davis’ writings regarding trauma in child sexual abuse. Dr. Davis is of the opinion that unless there is violence or sexual penetration involved in the abuse it does not meet her clinical definition of traumatic. Eazer asked Dr. Davis asked how many sexually abused children she has interviewed. Her answer – zero! I thought this really damaged the credibility of Dr. Davis. My thoughts of her are that she is a scholar who has spent her entire 40-year career in the ivory tower of academia talking with like-minded peers, none of whom have any real-life experience with the working class.

Susan Eazer was able to get Dr. Davis to grudgingly admit that it’s possible that a 3-4-year-old child may be able to recall being sexually molested, that it was highly unlikely but possible. Likewise, she admitted that an adult who was sexually molested at 8-10 years of age could possibly remember that experience, but not with any great detail.

After listening to the three-plus hour interview with Dr. Davis my feeling is she had little impact on creating doubt about the credibility and validity of the testimony of the victims in this case.

I looked up student’s ratings of Dr. Davis and the one below accurately depicts my thoughts of her.

Next, the Defense called Pastor Don Lindblad to the witness stand. John Sears established the facts that Pastor Lindblad has been a pastor for 46 years, the last 25 he has been pastor of Trinity Reformed Baptist Church located in Kirkland, WA. His church was a founding member of the ARBCA in 1997, and he is one of the top leaders in ARBCA.

John Sears led Pastor Lindblad through a sanitized, obviously well-rehearsed recitation of his involvement with Tom Chantry which included the following:

The Chantry family asked Pastor Lindblad to attend the 2000 ARBCA investigation at Miller Valley Baptist Church as an advocate for Tom Chantry. As such, Pastor Lindblad sat in on all the meetings the 3-man investigative team conducted with Chantry.

Pastor Lindblad understood the purpose of the investigation was to bring about reconciliation between the Miller Valley Baptist Church and Tom Chantry by coming up with some recommendations to facilitate this.

In 2005 Tom Chantry contacted Pastor Lindblad concerning an email he had received from Victim 2. Lindblad contacted Victim 2 by email and eventually, a phone call was set up and took place on March 2, 2006. The phone call was a 3-way call between  Chantry, Lindblad and Victim 2. The call lasted approximately 20 minutes and Lindblad said nothing. Lindblad understood Victim 2 wanted an apology from Chantry. Chantry asked Victim 2 to forgive him for spanking him while tutoring him. Victim 2 thanked Chantry, Chantry wished him well in his future, bid him Godspeed and the phone call ended.

The Cross-Examination is where things began to fall apart for the ARBCA leader. Prosecutor Eazer came out with both guns blazing. She asked Lindblad series of rapid-fire questions about the purpose of the 2000 investigation, the 2006 phone call and then a 2009 email he received from Victim 2. Victim 2 felt the matter between he and Chantry had not been concluded in 2006 and wanted to speak with Chantry again. Lindblad responded to Victim 2 by saying Tom does not want to revisit the issue at this point in his life. Eazer asked him why, as a Christian, he would not want to speak with Victim 2? At this point, Judge Astrowsky stopped the proceeding and excused the jurors.

The Judge then admonished Pastor Lindblad saying he was intentionally evasive and non-responsive to Eazer’s questions. He told him if he did not understand a question he should state that, otherwise he needed to answer her questions. He then asked Lindblad to step down and leave the courtroom.

Judge Astrowsky then admonished Eazer for her question, “why, as a Christian…” He said bringing anyone’s religion into a question was inappropriate and he would be referring her conduct to the State Bar. He was also clearly upset with Pastor Lindblad’s conduct on the stand. He stated that if his evasive and non-responsive answers continue he would admonish him again and perhaps cite him for contempt of court and strike him as a witness! He said he would make this clear to Lindblad when he came back into the courtroom and John Sears said he would also speak to him.

Eazer told the Judge that her line of questioning was intended to impeach Lindblad for giving damaging, untruthful testimony.

Once court resumed Lindblad did marginally better answering Eazer’s questions. It was evident he was still not being truthful on several subjects, other times he grudgingly answered.

Eazer got him to admit that he knew the 2000 ARBCA investigation was about more than reconciling the two parties for some light spankings Chantry had administered during catechism class. He admitted that the ARBCA was investigating bare-bottom beatings administered to three boys with hand-crafted paddles, a boat oar and other instruments and Chantry then rubbing their bare butts.

Eazer stated to Lindblad that you were very well aware of what Victim 2 had said. Lindblad said “yes.” And you were aware that the allegations against Chantry were a bit more serious than administering a spanking during a catechism class. Lindblad said “correct.”

Eazer then introduced Exhibit 65, a letter Victim 2 had written to Lindblad. Eazer said, “You knew Tom had beaten [Victim 2] with his pants down and rubbed his bottom.” Lindblad said “yes.”

Eazer got Lindblad to admit that he strongly supported Tom bringing his church into the ARBCA and was not happy that Miller Valley Baptist Church was opposing it.

Eazer drilled Lindblad on a statement he had made in an interview with her where he said, “We (ARBCA) believe the charges were not true.” Eazer asked Lindblad if ARBCA would take that position today. Lindblad said “yes.”

Eazer then introduced Exhibit 76 and asked Lindblad if he went to other ARBCA churches to tell them “what was fact and fiction in the Chantry case.” Lindblad responded “no.” You don’t remember saying that? Lindblad said “no.” Eazer was looking for the place in the document where Lindblad said that and then the Judge brought the trial to a recess. I am sure she will confront him with the evidence once court resumes tomorrow.

Below is a comment from a reader of this blog that proves Lindblad did visit at least one church to spread the news that the ARBCA company line is that the criminal charges against Tom Chantry are not true. CRBC is Christ Reformed Baptist Church, the church formerly pastored by Tom Chantry.

After the jurors were excused for the day Judge Astrowsky said he was going to reconsider referring Eazer’s conduct to the State Bar. He said he appreciated her response given in defense of her line of questioning. My personal opinion is the continued evasiveness of Lindblad on the witness stand may have played a part in the Judge changing his mind.

I have really not done justice to the exchange between Eazer and Lindblad. She asked many questions which I have not recorded where Lindblad attempted to artfully dodge the truth. He is clearly not used to having his word questioned. He concocts what he thinks are clever answers which may fly in a meeting with his church members, but don’t cut it in a court of law. Once the trial is over I intend to get a transcript of this session to let the world see the behavior of this “man of God,” one of the ARBCA’s most respected leaders!

Friday’s trial will resume with Susan Eazer cross-examining Pastor Lindblad. That will be followed by Tom Chantry taking the stand.

Submit Comment

newest oldest
Notify of

Readers now need to start calling his church and demand answers to his agregious behavior and still undying support of Chantry! What a disgusting human being!!!

Regarding bitterness, the book “Untwisting Scriptures” ( contains all the Biblical references to bitterness and distinguishes between sinful (poisonous) bitterness and nonsinful (grieving) bitterness, of course addressing the infamous “root of bitterness”passage in Hebrews and showing how it connects back with the Deuteronomy passage.

People who are grieving and traumatized are accused of sinful bitterness when the sinful bitterness is the problem of the one who did the traumatizing. Should be obvious, but to many people, it isn’t.


Amen to all of that, Rae! I, too, came to the conclusion that it was laziness, or perhaps the desire to not take personal responsibility, that leads so many to give their mind over to others, and let them, or him, dictate what they should think and believe.

I’m not trying to judge or be self righteous.; I am just tired of fighting for my God-given right to think, seek truth and look to his Spirit to lead me onto ever fuller understanding. But no, that is ‘rebelling against the divinely instituted authorities ‘. And we can’t have that, now can we?


There is a term called “passing the trash”-used by institutions with leaders with aberrant behavior that they won’t face or can’t face. I was in a church where the pastor had affairs in the two previous churches he was in. Then we got him. Our leadership did the same thing and passed him on, and he did it all over again in the next church. That church took action, but he was still able to find another pastorate!


If you wanted to supplement your income by becoming an expert witness and your expertise is on the subject of memory, where would the money be? Working for the desperate defense of accused child abusers and rapists. I mean, who else would be needing to hire such a witness? Her testimony is absurd just based on each of our own experiences of what we remember. Personally, I think she’s the Gaslighter in Chief.

Thanks Todd and JLC.
I am flabbergasted at Dr Davis’s testimony! She sounds like a complete idiot.

And Don Lindblad — I’m going to be very interested to read the transcript of him being interviewed by Eazer. I’m glad she held his feet to the fire.

I echo others who are wondering about who is paying for Chantry’s lawyer. I wonder it daddy Walt has deep pockets??

Marsh, if you go to and type BITTER into the search bar, you will find several posts which might help you disentangle all the nonsense about ‘bitterness’ that is taught in churches.

When the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain, when the kings of the earth set themselves and the rulers take counsel together against the LORD and against his Anointed, saying, “Let us burst their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us,” God holds them in derision:

He who sits in the heavens laughs;
the Lord holds them in derision. (Psalm 2:4)

Van Helsing

Tom Chantry is a very sick man. He has NPD or Narcissistic Personality Disorder. This disorder affects people in positions of power or authority – CEOs, politicians, lawyers, doctors (surgeons) and YES clergy. Recent research has suggested that as many as 1/3 of pastors now in active ministry may have NPD. It is my contention that men like Joel Osteen, Benny Hinn, Robert Tilton, Jim Baker, and Jimmy Swaggert have it or elements of it. These are the “wolves in sheep’s clothing” that Paul warned about. Much of Tom’s behavior appears to suggest that diagnosis – disordered love of self, lack of a conscience, superior to others, extreme arrogance, laws do not apply to him, blames others for his mistakes, irresponsible, shallow personality with few deep relationships, authoritarian, and mean spirited. I think that many of the men in ARBCA, besides JUST being arrogant and elitist, also have NPD or elements of it.

Artur Smuthers

“Eazer then introduced Exhibit 65, a letter Victim 2 had written to Lindblad. Eazer said, “You knew Tom had beaten [Victim 2] with his pants down and rubbed his bottom.” Lindblad said “yes.””.

What kind of back-water practice is this; not only was he spanking other people’s kids; he was pulling their pants down and rubbing their bare bottoms (at a minimum, likely more). This is crazy. Is that even legal; legal or not it should have been made known to the whole congregation what this creep was doing, I’d never stand for it and any parent that would has brain problems. There is nothing in scripture that advocates non-parents spanking other people’s kids……….let alone pulling their pants down. Any creep that would take it upon himself to pull someone else’s kids pants down is capable of much more I’d say. Any association, and any man, that would have tolerated bare bottom spanking and not exposed Chantry, at that point, should be called to account. Are we trying to create an atmosphere for pedophilia here?

Going by pictures and things that they have said, Everybody that I have seen that is an advocate for Chantry seems to have a creepy aspect about them.


I was reading my Bible today and came across this in my reading:

A fool’s lips enter into contention, And his mouth calls for blows. A fool’s mouth is his destruction, And his lips are the snare of his soul. The words of a talebearer are like tasty trifles, And they go down into the inmost body.”
‭‭Proverbs‬ ‭18:6-8‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

At first I was thinking to myself, “Alright, boy this applies to Changtry and Linblad!

Then I was cut to the quick when I read the last part about the words of a tale bearer are like tasty trifles, and they go down into the innmost body.

My son came to me this morning and asked me not to talk about ARBCA, our old church, the Chantry trial etc. because with all the focus we have had on it, he said that he apparently brings it up frequently with his friends who really don’t have any interest or knowledge about it as the church we attend now is not part of that group. At Bible study his friends wondered if maybe he was becoming bitter and brooding on this stuff. Ouch.

So I have been thinking about that all day and then I come to this in my Bible reading. I guess I’m struggling with the need to know what is really going on in our old church association and the pastors our pastor keeps company with so I can better understand what happened to us. But I’m also struggling with when the news becomes a point of what shall I say, glee when I see them getting caught in lies of their own making. I’m wondering if this is sinful when maybe my attitude should be more one of sorrow and wishing for them to come clean and repent of their ways and fear for their souls?

That is just the struggle I’m having right now. I want justice done for the children. I want these men to be held accountable, but I’m having a hard time with my own attitude of rubbing my hands together in glee to see them beginning to shake in their boots and I’m not sure if this is the attitude I should have.

Mr. Jesperson

The defense sounds pretty slim to me. A self-proclaimed expert that is available for anyone to hire for $3,000, one and only one character witness and Tom himself testifying. Surely a good pastor would be able to find more than just one character witness. The lack of others speaks volumes. And putting Tom up on the stand is a big risk. The prosecutor will cross-examine him and that will likely be the highest drama coming right at the end of the trial. That is likely happening even now while I am still writing this out.


Now that I think of it, maybe folks who are members of ARBCA churches should be asking their leaders if any money from the local churches is being sent (or has been sent) to help with Chantry’s defense.

Headless Unicorn Guy

Eazer got Lindblad to admit that he strongly supported Tom bringing his church into the ARBCA

Think of All Tho$e Tithe$…

Headless Unicorn Guy

John Sears led Pastor Lindblad through a sanitized, obviously well-rehearsed recitation of his involvement with Tom Chantry

Pastor unto Pastor o’er the world is Brother…

Like “Code of Blue” where Cop will always side with Cop against Not-Cop.

Headless Unicorn Guy

She is of the opinion that children generally are unable to remember anything prior to age 3 or 4. She further stated that as adults we generally are unable to remember anything before the age of 10.

At 62, I can attest that I CAN remember things down to age 3 or 4, but it’s fragmented. Single-scene memory “sanpshots”, not a continuous memory trace. (And some I’m not sure WHY I remember that. Like what had to be a dream from age 5; all I remember is Boris Badenov’s voice saying the phrase “Feet for Food”.)

Law Prof

I’ve been teaching for 15 years and have some familiarity with Rate My Professors. She rates very low, and also the comments get kind of pointed, as in what you see among professors who either are not particularly competent or who tend to be particularly full of themselves. Just a horseback opinion, but probably 19 out of 20 profs would rate higher than her on average.

Also, in my opinion, something is fishy about her recent ratings. A run of four recent ones given on the same exact day, 3/26/2018, and a fifth, given weeks later, which totally break with the pattern of low ratings established over the last several years. Suddenly, after 14 years of ratings, the vast majority of which are either “awful” or “poor”, just like that she “gets it” and runs off five straight “awesomes”. Folks, she got a total of five 5.0 reviews in 14 years, then now, in the last several months, has gotten five straight, four of them on the same day! Really? I don’t believe these are legitimate. Do. Not. I think some or all of those are fraudulent reviews, almost as if someone was trying to gussy things up a little. Not saying it was her, but am saying it looks fishy and illegitimate to me. That is my opinion, nothing more, nothing less. If I knew a little more about statistics and had a little more time, I could run a statistical analysis of the odds of this happening. I’ll bet you’d have chances in the fractions of a single percent. Bet you.


Todd, was Eazer able to bring either of the reports from 2000 into evidence as the result of Don Lindblad’s testimony?

Ted Kijeski

Oh, how I yearn to see those transcripts.


It’s one thing spending your life as a scribe, a Pharisee or a teacher of the law.
It’s another spending your life doing it as an incompetent.

Take these men out of their own self-protective, self-serving bubbles recycling other men’s words and they are truly nothing.
No character, no morals, no honesty.
Just the code of silence of a criminal gang.

And these are men who have presumed to sit in judgment on others…

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.”

Beware of the next generation.


Wow! That “expert” witness sounds like a joke. When my husband worked for the federal government , they had a saying that an “expert” was anyone more than 20 miles from home with a briefcase. Sounds about right! I think her student’s assessment of her is also telling – when he describes her demeanor as “pompous.” Seems like she would fit right in with this bunch. And her assertion that “as adults we generally are unable to remember anything before the age of 10” is completely asinine. Typical talking head that knows nothing about real life. Has she even studied the effect of trauma on young brains?!! Wow – just no words. She seems to know little to nothing about the subject – I hope she’s not doing counseling, cause she sounds woefully ignorant about trauma based therapy. Unbelievable.

On the subject of her fees, do we know who’s writing the checks for Chantry’s defense generally? Would be interesting to know – especially if it’s anyone from ARBCA (who knows – may be someone on his defense witness list!). Small circle of mendacious liars.