Tom Chantry’s “Crusade For Truth” Hits the Brick Wall of Reality

By | August 27, 2019

“Except with his widow mother, whom he vaguely worshiped, and with Jim Lefferts, Elmer assumed that he was the center of the universe and that the rest of the system was valuable only as it afforded him help and pleasure.”

-Lewis, Sinclair. Elmer Gantry. Penny Books. Kindle Edition.


Tom Kastanza or George Chantry? You decide.


“I must approach this long, legal proceeding as a crusade for truth.”

-Tom Chantry, convicted on two counts of assault of a child and four counts of sexual molestation of a child.


“Above all, don’t lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others. And having no respect he ceases to love.”

― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

In the book, “Let Us Prey: The Plague of Narcissist Pastors and What We Can Do About It,” the authors write:

“Narcissism is typified by an exaggerated sense of self-importance and power, rigidity, the inability to admit error, a sense of personal greatness, the use of power to manipulate and control others, an inability to feel or express remorse, and a lack of empathy for others.”

Having now sat through both of Tom Chantry’s trials, and having read much of his material published on the internet, I believe this description is an accurate portrayal of Tom Chantry. Likely spoiled as a child, he is used to being the center of attention, getting his way, and being accountable to no one. Thus it is no surprise that once the reality of his conviction for sexually molesting a child sets in, the pedophile, as witnessed in his taped phone conversations, cannot accept reality.

According to Chantry, he was “illegally convicted,” all the prosecutors in the back-water state of Arizona should be hung, and the judges sent to prison for life. (In the video below, Chantry apologizes to  Judge Astrowsky for his comment, but not  Prosecutor Eazer – in fact, he continues his verbal assault of Ms. Eazer in his ridiculous rant.) This is typical behavior of a narcissist; Judge Astrowsky can do something for Chantry, and indeed Chantry implores Astrowsky to free him, an innocent man, in his tirade. Prosecutor Eazer is of no value to Chantry, therefore he feels free to attack her. This brash display in the courtroom should give pause to  Al Huber and Karen Chantry, who both testified just prior to Tyrannical Tommy, that son-in-law/husband Tom Chantry was a changed man since he left Arizona.

Al Huber and his daughter, Karen Chantry both testified they had never witnessed any abusive behavior in all the time they knew Tom Chantry! I can only assume they meant they had never witnessed Chantry removing a young boys pants, severely paddle him, and then set the boy on his lap and fondle him.

Al Huber and Karen Chantry surely knew that while Tom was employed at Christian Liberty Academy he pulled a paddle out of his desk and beat a little 5-year-old so severely that the Police were called in to investigate by the boy’s parents. (The parents decided not to file charges, but removed their son from the school.) Left unsaid is the fact that the school’s Headmaster, Philip Bennett, was good friends with Walter Chantry; and Tom’s sister, Becky, married a son of Headmaster (now Superintendent) Philip Bennett, and is employed by Christian Liberty Academy.  I should mention that Chantry stated, according to a document signed by his counselor, Devon Berry two years prior to the above-mentioned incident, that he would never spank another child other than his own. I should also mention that Chantry told the Police he had spanked no more than twelve children since he had been teaching at Christian Liberty Academy!

But Al Huber and Karen Chantry would have us believe Tom was a changed man since he left Arizona!  Who am I to doubt? After all, Huber told the Judge he believes he is a pretty good judge of character – nobody has conned him for more than a year or two!  Let me state the obvious, Mr. Huber; Tom Chantry has conned you for seventeen years.

Tom Chantry is slowly realizing his days of victimizing young boys are over. He likely was convinced in his narcissistic mind that his masterful oratorical skills would convince Judge Astrowsky to “end the tyranny and free an innocent man.”

Sorry, Tom. after conning good and decent people in your little cultic Baptistic world for 49 years, the game is up.  Unfortunately for you, the bumpkins of backwater Arizona know an Elmer Gantry when they see one. A jury of twelve of my fellow citizens has convicted you, and a member of the Judicial branch of the Arizona Government has sentenced you to twenty-four years in prison. I’m sure I speak for all my fellow citizens of Arizona when I say that I am happy to see my tax dollars spent on your two court cases. I am happy to help provide for your food, housing and medical needs for the next 23 years, secure in the knowledge that you will not be sexually molesting any more young boys.

In way of explanation, while listening to the sentencing testimony you will occasionally come across some choppy sounding audio. This was caused by me clipping out references to the victims or their families. I chose not to include the statements made to Judge Astrowsky by any of the family members of the victims. I also chose not to include the statement of Bob Selph – where have you been all these years Bob? I pray you now work to right the wrongful neglect you have foisted upon the good people of Miller Valley Baptist Church, although many of them no longer attend that church, and some no longer attend any church. I also chose not to include the statement of Mr. Stevens, Defense Attorney for Tom Chantry. Mr. Stevens was placed in the unenviable position of attempting to justify the bizarre “allocution” of Tom Chantry.

Finally, below the video, you will find several documents that I utilized for my screenshots. These are provided for reference and admittedly are easier to read in this format than they are on the video.



Don Lindblad Report for Ear… by Todd Wilhelm on Scribd


Letter From Blackburn to In… by Todd Wilhelm on Scribd


Letter From Jensen to Black… by Todd Wilhelm on Scribd


Letter From Tripp to Blackb… by Todd Wilhelm on Scribd


Devon Berry Letter Concerni… by Todd Wilhelm on Scribd


2004 Police Report of Thoma… by Todd Wilhelm on Scribd

Submit Comment

newest oldest
Notify of

[…] Tom Chantry’s “Crusade For Truth” Hits the Brick Wall of Reality […]

Former CRBC Member - WI

Well, I finally summoned the mental stamina to listen more intently to Chantry’s lies (and avoided retching again – somehow) his obfuscations, blame shifting, proclamations of victim-hood, his extensive lawyer-like knowledge of the (corrupt) American judiciary system, and his attempts to curry favor with the judge during his sentencing rant. As a judge I would have been appalled and angered by the malignant narcissism he exhibited. Judge Astrowsky was subtly excoriated and extensively lectured to by a convicted pedophile.

I counted at least 23 separate incidences of Chantry blaming his dilemma on others, specifically including the “broken” legal and legislative system in AZ and the US, the United States in general, the people of AZ, the jurors, judges, prosecuting attorneys, the true victims of his crimes and their parents, Yavapai County, the city of Prescott, AZ, the police, Bob Selph, the IC members and finally social workers. He claimed that he was THEE victim on, at least, eight separate occasions. Oh boy – very scary stuff as he proved that he is completely untethered from reality and psychotic.

He would have made a very good politician or a used car salesman instead of a pastor supposedly dedicated to the love and care of souls.

A very courageous and competent Susan Eazer said it best when the judge allowed her to refute Chantry’s ad hominem attacks on her – that Chantry’s deranged thinking and verbiage just proved that he was a narcissistic that were consistent with the findings of the IC as documented in their 2002 report (specifically Ted Tripp).

Thanks, Todd edited the sentencing video to remove victims’ names. There are always glitches when editing videos, so he probably listened to Chantry’s bizarre rant at least 10 times.

I listened to the edited versions several times to make sure there were no mistakes.

That wasn’t a pleasant experience.😉

Kudos to everyone who gets through Chantry’s whiny, ridiculous “sermon” even once.

It starts out bad and just keeps getting unbelievably worse and worse.

Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)


Yes, judges LOVE it when a defendant lectures them about what their responsibilities are! NOT!

I think the judge let Chantry carry on and on and on because if he hadn’t, Chantry could have complained in his appeal that he was not permitted to have his say prior to sentencing. Judge Astrowsky does seem to be a very even tempered man, however. Nothing he hasn’t heard before I’m sure, albeit perhaps not quite as eloquently and arrogantly delivered by other defendants as by Tom Chantry.

Thanks, Rae. I agree that cutting Tom Chantry off probably would have contributed to his entitlement/persecution complex.

Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

Perhaps I’m missing something regarding Tom Chantry’s eloquence. Both the content and delivery of this speech seemed very poor and amateurish to me.

It was like watching an arrogant 8th-grader try to debate his way out of a paper bag.

Some of the gaffes and logical fallacies would be understandable if the speech had been given extemporaneously. However, Tom Chantry indicated that he’d spent a lot of time composing his eloquent arguments.

I’m surprised that so many people laud him as a great orator and teacher.

Maybe the talent pool in ARBCA is tiny.

Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

Paul Schmidt

Interesting how Chantry persists in shifting the blame to others: classic narcissism.

When Pastor Tom Lyon of Providence Reformed Baptist Church was talking with me an hour after his Sept. 9, 2018, statement from the pulpit in which he condemned “muckraking blogs” for damaging the “reputations of good men,'” he too blamed Arizona’s judicial system and statutes for Chantry’s predicament.

That’s the moment I knew in my head that my wife and I were forever done with PRBC. It took my heart a few hours to catch up. Bit of a phase shift, as it’s deemed in electronics. But we had strong emotional ties there.

Chantry’s supporters in ARBCA are intelligent men, but so woefully ignorant of the prevailing sins in the world around them. I suppose that comed from holing up in a study all week preparing a sermon, rather than investing some time in the lives of congregation members, many of whom have broken backgrounds and/or present painful situations.

On a side note, PRBC never had much more than 30 or so families in attendance, maybe 120 souls on a Sunday. But during our first association with it in the early 1990s through the mid 2000s, there were five divorces; in most cases it was the wife who strayed. All too often I heard of wives who were (and some who purportedly are) spiritually dying there. And yet two of the three PRBC elders made strenuous effort to protect and aid a child molester, a man whose sins were known to them at the time, but not to the congregation.

The misplaced priorities are breathtaking. …

Thanks for your comment, Paul. I theorize that ARBCA was condemining the Arizona legal system so that ARBCA pastors could justicy ignoring guilty verdicts, in Tom Chantry’s case. I’ve been doing informal, yet intense, advocacy work against the enabling of child sexual abuse in churches for about eight years. Pastors and church members who support credibly accused people accused of child molestation often say that folks are innocent until proven guilty, and it’s slanderous to post any evidence to the contrary.

Then when someone like Tom Chantry is found guilty in a secular court of law, these same “innocent until proven guilty” individuals come up with rationales for saying that the verdicts are unfair.

I suspect that ARBCA would have claimed that Tom Chantry was wrongfully accused/convicted if the muckracking blogs hadn’t been putting up so much pesky evidence that he really is a violent pedophile, and ARBCA leaders illegally covered up that inconvenient truth for many years.

Of course, why would the muckracking blogs have gotten so much atttention regarding Chantry if ARBCA members weren’t already distrustful of their pastors and leaders? Surely, there must be a way to blame the state of Arizona for everything, right?

Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

Sowre-sweet Dayes

Just finished listening to the audio. Just wow. There is not a even tiny drop of remorse. Attacks the prosecutor and the victim, and preaches at the judge telling him what he should think, judge, and act. All is done in a clam preacher’s voice. Horror! Dangerous person.

They create their brand of right and wrong

I wonder how many other preachers would sound the same in a court of law?


Reminds me of Oral Roberts Junior, and all of Schuller’s kids. All grew up self important, entitled, and morally bankrupt. Of course, so were their fathers, so, no big surprise..

Former CRBC Member - WI

I will not comment on the audio portion in this post since I can no longer mentally, spiritually, and emotionally deal with this tragic fiasco that could have been prevented by godly people with courage but one that has devastated so many people – most including the MVBC child and parent victims – and all of the collateral damage to churches and church members over the past 20 years.

After listening to Chantry’s audio defense – I will say that Chantry is the best narcissist I have ever heard and had the misfortune to encounter. I have learned some valuable lessons.

I will say that the 30 second Seinfeld video about “Tom Constanza” was absolutely brilliant. The 30 second video captured the spirit of post-Christian America as embodied by Chantry. “Tom Constanza” oddly enough preached and wrote about and against the post-Christian lunacy that now characterizes him. WOW!

It is a SAD commentary on our nation that many citizens believe and accept the ludicrous notion that “it’s not a lie if you believe it.” This is the relativism and subjectivism on multi-layered stacks of STEROIDS that now characterize our nation. Add TOLERANCE of everything and anyone and you see the mess we now face. This, in a nutshell, is why the churches are so weak and most men are so feckless and cowardly – just the opposite of the men and Christian ministers who founded a fledgling nation built upon Biblical and Christian principles and values. We need more men and women with integrity who will step up and speak out whenever something is amiss or not right.

I commend all of the godly ministers who are standing firm and continue to be Men of Integrity, Courage, and Honor in this “soup of lunacy.” I also commend church members who are awake and alert to the present evils among us (Bereans) and ones who have the courage to honor Jesus Christ by the gentle but firm and direct confrontation of pastors or elders whenever they are in error or violate God’s commands in Scripture.

Sue Cutler

I am amazed at the restraint shown by the judge during Tom’s self-serving and arrogant civic’s lesson.

Yes, Tom Chantry probably can’t pass a middle school civics class.

The Governor of Arizona heads Arizona’s executive branch. The prosecutor Chantry hates is part of the judicial branch, of course.

Ordinary citizens elect members of Arizona’s legislature. Legislators cannot behave like tyrants for that reason.

In Colorado, a judge instructed the jury I sat on not to think about sentencing or any punishment the accused might receive.

The judge said several times that the sentencing part of the legal process was her job.

The jury’s task was only to render a verdict of guilty or not guilty on each charge.

So Tom Chantry’s contention that Arizona is the only state that disallows telling jurors that they shouldn’t be thinking about how a guilty verdict will affect the accused is not true.

I won’t even dignify Chantry’s ridiculous statements about how the Constitutional concept of the balance of powers works, with an answer.

Chantry has lots of time to read the Constitution now.

Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

Headless Unicorn Guy

Maybe the judge was letting him go on and on to show just how stupid and arrogant he was being?

That’s an interesting idea. I’m certainly not a judge, yet I can understand letting people just have their say, at a sentencing hearing regarding major felonies, however ill-advised what they’re communicating might be.

I also agree with the judge’s perception that Chantry made a few valid points. That might be a bit like thinking that even a broken clock is right twice per day, yet it is probably still a good reason to let someone ramble on for more than 30 minutes.

I’m sure that the judge would have asked Chantry to wrap things up at some point. Chantry doesn’t have the Constitutional right to take up the court’s time for as long as he wants, during a sentencing hearing.

I’m not privvy to any private conversations between Chantry and his lawyer of course. However, his experienced lawyer looked uncomfortable to me. Perhaps that’s because Chantry shared his diatribe with his lawyer before delivering it publicly. Chantry’s lawyer may believe that arguing for leniency during a sentencing hearing, based solely on the grounds that you think you’re innocent, is unwise.

My understanding is that in all states, not just Arizona, a judge must presume guilt during a sentencing hearing. A judge cannot just arbitrarily throw out a jury’s guilty verdict(s) at that time, based on someone’s broad and bizarre interpretation of the Constitutional separation of powers.

A convicted pedophile can argue for leniency regarding the sentence he or she will receive based on what he or she perceives to be mitigating circumstances regarding the crime.

However, to my knowledge, the judge cannot take that person’s perception that he or she is innocent into consideration when rendering a sentence.

Therefore, spending more than 30 minutes trying to convince the judge that he is innocent was likely an arrogant and ill-advised thing for Chantry to do.

In my opinion, Chantry’s rant, that consisted almost entirely of false statements and hominem attacks, ironically disproved the points he was trying to make as a perceived (by him) victim of the secular legal system/society in general.

Tom Chantry doesn’t care about the whole concept of the rule of law. He just thinks he’s above it.

I wonder if his father, Walt Chantry, bears some responsibility for instilling that value and belief in his son. Based on what I’ve read in primary source documents that address Walt Chantry’s attempts to manipulate people who were looking into allegations regarding Tom Chantry’s abuse of children, I’d say that Walt Chantry has an entitlement mentality as well.

Others have the right to different opinions about everything I’ve said above of course.

Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

Former CRBC Member - WI

One thing I learned from the “Chantry fiasco” was that I personally hate being manipulated by others. I recently jettisoned two long time friends due to their subtle manipulation of me and their selfishness over the years. I sensed it was going on but mistakenly tolerated it and wrote it off as simple character flaws. Once I put a stop to it the relationships changed and that was unacceptable to both “friends.” They had to go.

Some very good points were made in this post by JC. It kind of reminded me of Chantry when being investigated by the Informal Council and he began to twist everything and then claim that he was not allowed to completely express his views – yet he signed the document. This was the same motus operandi Chantry used in his court rant. Once people are on to narcissists then their talk is simple blather designed to blame others or circumstances so as to avoid accountability. As in court and as apparently the case in 2001, then the three Informal Council members (experienced men) were expecting to encounter a man who knew that he committed sin, was sorrowful, contrite and repentant, one who grossly overstepped his authority as an elder and pastor, and one who understood that he was criminally liable.

Instead, after awhile – they were all probably shocked and sickened by his arrogance, manipulative techniques, lack of remorse and repentance, and then outright nauseous at his claim he was the “victim” since he received little support from the elders at MVBC as if that lack of guidance somehow gave him permission to physically and sexually abuse children. Maybe the MVBC elders did not like him since they too sensed his arrogance and wished to avoid being manipulated by him. Besides, he could gotten any needed help from his father, an experienced pastor, or from his backers in ARBCA if he wished. If they were godly men they would have counseled him to “fess up” and accept the consequences of his illegal and immoral behaviors.

Samuel Conner

Re: “and he began to twist everything and then claim that he was not allowed to completely express his views – yet he signed the document.”

My understanding is that it’s worse than that. It appears that earlier in the process, he and DL thought that the “IC” was going to come down hard on him, and so this was a defensive strategy to deflect attention from his misdeeds. But when they (TC and DL) were surprised to discover that the “IC” wanted to show him mercy, the need to object vanished. That’s why he dropped the insistence on being heard. He was offered opportunity to voice his concerns.

But then he later complained about not being heard (after having declined the opportunity offered by the “IC”), evidently as a way of attempting to discredit what findings the “IC” did make. And this provided grist for EB’s charges that the “IC” sinned against TC.

Justice has been done. It is a shame, though, that the sentences are to be served concurrently. But there is a third trial in the works, I think.

Former CRBC Member - WI

Samuel, you are probably correct – thank you. You were following things closer than I was since I often almost vomited at Chantry’s unthinkable manipulations and games to avoid accountability. Maybe you have experience in law enforcement since they encounter individuals like Chantry on a daily basis. Those ARBCA guys are “good” at strategies employing lying and manipulation and Chantry has a superior IQ as do most narcissists since that enables them to twist and spin things in their favor and avoid accountability for their actions.

Man, I was just seeking a solid church in which to learn more about God’s Word in the Bible so that I could become a better Christian by loving God and others more. I came in “hungry” for the Word and received it from Chantry so I unwittingly thought that he must be a godly pastor as did many others. Boy, that (reality) still hurts but is nothing compared to what the true child and parent victims suffered at MVBC. My heart and prayers go out to them as I pray that they do not equate a very sinful man who was supposed to represent Jesus Christ – with a loving God. That is my prayer for us all.

Headless Unicorn Guy

Tom Chantry doesn’t care about the whole concept of the rule of law. He just thinks he’s above it.

i.e. GAWD’s Anointed.

“Laws of MEN or WORD! OF!! GAWD!!!”

Sue Cutler

If that was the plan, it was a success.


Janna L. Chan (blog team member)


I think that the Reformed Baptists of the ARBCA think that is the authoritative right of pastors to spank children. ARBCA people choose to be counter-cultural– not only to the secular culture, but more specifically against the evangelical culture. Tom Chantry’s supporters choose to believe that he is being punished for being counter cultural not criminal.

You have a point about spanking but even ARBCA has never officially condoned child sexual abuse.

I think that’s why Tom Chantry has few vocal supporters now.

Thanks. Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

They create their brand of right and wrong

Yes, this is spot on. Church split early 80’s: We had to be counter to the evangelical culture. We were led to think we were on some sort of cutting edge. It played out in all interesting sorts of ways in our community. I was devastated at the age of 18, having to leave behind all my friend, ties, boyfriend, everyone I knew from the previous church and almost everyone else I knew period, because NOW we had a new priority, and it was ARBCA. We sat in our newly formed little group of those who had the truth in a concrete room with no windows (in our high school building) praying that one day we could possibly meet others with the truth–others who probably lived across the country somewhere–yet unknown to us budding adults. WE especially had to be separate from evangelical Christians, so even attending my Christian college down the road, where peers I had known from childhood also attended was fraught with discernment challenges never ending. The college had
a list of approved churches we were required to attend, and ARBCA was NOT on the list. NOW, all of these people are friends. Now, those who formed the ARBCA church intermarry with those (even cousins) on the other side of the church split. IOW, the split didn’t work very well. It is obvious that the split only served nepotism’s hurdles of finding jobs for sons while I went around the country looking for theological perfection and am now meeting others via the internet with the truth of the abuses that we all endured. Can you imagine your local high school junior miss pageant being won by an ARBCA daughter and in tradition of Junior Miss all the contestants attend the winner’s church the next day only to be berated by the preacher/pulpit about the theology in their home churches?

Sue Cutler

Interesting that Huber says that whatever he’s done in the past he’s not the same man. What did he mean by that???

Former CRBC Member - WI

In examining most of the documents and timelines on this blog, Dale Smith had to have specifically known that Chantry was not above reproach before he married Karen yet said nothing to his supposed “brother” in Christ – Al Huber. Is this the sign of a Christian man? This fact has to smell to high heaven at GRBC in Rockford as I cannot but assume that their church is living the lie of still believing in the narcissist’s innocence. I suppose all the remaining members of GRBC are wearing their “invisible clothes pins” on their nostrils as they worship and fellowship especially when “pastor” Dale walks by. The Lord God has been wearing a HAZMAT suit with full facial gas mask for 20 years during this sordid affair. I do have some sympathy for Al and Karen and the boys since they too are victims in this cover-up.

Interesting points. I have great sympathy for Tom Chantry’s children. Their father is a violent pedophile and their mother seems irresponsible and neglectful, at best.

I think that both Karen Chantry and Al Huber are knowingly enabling a pedophile who also violently abuses children, at this point.

I don’t believe that anyone of average or above average intelligence could genuinely think that Tom Chantry is completely innocent of illegally abusing children, given all the evidence presented in two criminal trials.

That’s just my opinion of course. Thanks.

Janna L. Chan (blog team member)

I Was There Also

Thank you Todd and Janna for your all the hard work you both have put into this coverup! Interesting that Devon Berry is still a faculty member for the School of Nursing at Oregon Health and Science University. I wonder how the school would feel knowing that someone in such an esteemed position for a nationally recognized medical school counseled a known and convicted child molester. I understand he may have been swindled in some way by Don Linblad, Mark McCormick and Tom, Lyon, but it doesn’t excuse that he helped cover up for a known child molester and abuser, especially now that it’s been made public after Tom’s sentencing.