Categories
News

Brian Houston’s First Day in Court Goes Poorly as Sex Abuse Victim Denies Pastor’s Testimony

Hillsong’s former Global Senior Leader Brian Houston had his first day in court today, responding to charges that he concealed the sexual abuse of a 7-year-old boy by his deceased father more than 30 years ago- a case which investigators took two years to build.

He has pled ‘not guilty’ and if convicted, faces 5 years in prison.

In 2014, a Royal Commission confirmed that Brian Houston’s father, Pastor Frank Houston, was a pedophile who confessed to abusing a young boy, now revealed as Brett Sengstock, in 1969 and 1970. Brian Houston was made aware of the allegations in 1999, five years before his father passed, but did not go to the police and turn his father in.

Brian previously claimed that Sengstock told him he didn’t want anyone knowing, a claim the victim vehemently rejected in court. According to News 9:

On Monday, (Sengstock) described a phone call he made to Brian Houston after not receiving $10,000 from Frank Houston, which he felt pressured to accept and considered payment for his silence.

“(Brian) turned around and said to me ‘you know this is all your fault’. I didn’t say anything, and he said ‘you tempted my father’,” he told the court.

(Houston’s Lawyer) asked on Tuesday whether he recalled another phone conversation, where Houston had told him he was believed, Frank Houston had confessed, and his wishes for privacy and no further investigation from the police or the church would be honored.

“That’s not any conversation I recall with him at all,”(Sengstock) said.

Houston’s defence is relying on whether he had a reasonable excuse to not report his father’s abuse to police in the five years between him confessing it to his son and his death in 2004.

Houston’s lawyer has argued Houston was respecting the survivor’s wishes not to involve police.

Crown prosecutor Gareth Harrison on Monday told the court the witness had never told Houston he did not want the police involved.

Categories
abortion Church

Judge Permanently Bans Undercover Abortion Videos From Being Released

Pro-life activist David Daleiden, made famous for his staggered releases of videos showing that Planned Parenthood was selling body parts, has been issued a summary judgment by a federal judge prohibiting him from releasing hundreds of hours of undercover video he took while filming an abortion conference.

Concluding that the recordings were done illegally by breaching the National Abortion’s Federation’s Exhibitors Agreement and Confidentially Agreement, U. S. District Court Judge William Orrick gave NAF a permanent injunction against the release of any Center for Medical Progress videos, ensuring they will never see the light of day. He explained:

The scope of the requested permanent injunction is broader than the Preliminary Injunction.

It effects a permanent dispossession of the recordings and NAF Materials from defendants and adds a provision barring defendants and their agents from entering or attempting to enter NAF offices or events by misrepresenting their identity or with the intent to take video or audio recordings.

Not only may they not release the videos, but the judge ordered him to hand over all copies of the film to the courts, preventing it from being seen by the public. Judge Orrick, who has repeatedly ruled against the CMP in the past, says that the footage reveals nothing insidious or illegal, but Daleiden disagrees, taking to Twitter to voice his frustration and insisting that they show conversations discussing infanticide.

Categories
Church Coronavirus Featured News Righteous Defiance

John MacArthur to Battle in Court Tomorrow: This is What’s Going Down

John MacArthur, the Senior Pastor at Grace Community Church (GCC) in Sun Valley, California, is scheduled to be in court tomorrow to discuss his upcoming contempt charges and trial stemming from the church’s decision to defy a court order insisting they shut down indoor services in order to comply with Governor Gavin Newsom’s COVID-19 lockdown restriction.

Instead of submitting to the government’s will, the church deliberately continued to have church services, despite being ordered not to and disregarding a September 10 injunction. The County wants them to be found in contempt for flouting the injunction. The church argues that the injunction was granted on the faulty premise of an unconstitutional order, and should have rightly been ignored.

On September 24th, Judge Mitchell L. Beckloff ruled against LA county for the fifth time. Rather than adjudicate the contempt charges, GCC lawyers argued that MacArthur and GCC were first entitled to a full-blown trial on the merits of their lawsuit challenging Gavin Newsom’s shutdown orders, proposing that “a final determination on the constitutionality of the orders must occur before the County could seek contempt against MacArthur for merely holding church.”

The judge was persuaded and agreed. Special Counsel Jenna Ellis explains in a statement from the Thomas More Society:

This is significant because no person can or should be held in contempt of a constitutionally invalid order. Los Angeles County continues to presume that its order is valid, with utter disregard for First Amendment protections. It’s tyranny to even suggest that a government action cannot be challenged and must be obeyed without question. This case goes to the heart of what our founders designed for the purpose of legitimate government—not to be above the rule of law. Pastor MacArthur is simply holding church, which is clearly his constitutionally protected right in this country.

It was a brilliant tactic. With LA’s Superior Court suspending civil trials the rest of the year, this decision effectively let GCC continue holding services for months without being bothered- at least until January 2021 at the earliest. Though it cost the church substantially in legal fees, it guaranteed them the freedom to have their services unimpeded.

The court date tomorrow then is to discuss the extent, scope, and merits of the trial. When it is scheduled to start. How long it will last. What it will cover, and who will be deposed.

One specific matter of contention is the deposition list. Lawyers for GCC are seeking the depositions of LA County Health Officer Dr. Muntu Davis and one of their supervisors, Sheila Kuehl. County lawyers argue that such information is not needed, preferring to only have the case assessed on the merits of the contempt of the injunction.

In their court papers, GCC lawyers want to ask Davis to “explain in detail why you have not sought a temporary restraining order against any political protesters or protest organizers,” and have him elaborate on why the church was seemingly singled out, and why Davis specifically sought an injunction rather than fines or citations. They state:

Plaintiffs have refused to produce Dr. Muntu Davis for a deposition, despite him being a named plaintiff and the signatory to a key declaration. By so doing, plaintiffs attempt to render themselves the finder of fact on the issue of contempt and to strip defendants of any ability to effectively defend themselves.

The same thing goes for Kuehl. The church’s attorneys want to ask about “any and all actions taken by the County of Los Angeles against Grace Community Church of the Valley, including evidence regarding the basis, motivation, and reasons for such actions.” The County lawyers, however, are supremely opposed to this, arguing:

Defendants’ attempt to kick the can down the road until after a trial on the merits should be rejected. The contempt proceeding should proceed now and should be limited to defendants’ challenges … as to whether this court exceeded its jurisdiction in issuing the preliminary injunction order, i.e., whether the order is void on its face.

As things happen behind the scenes, there has been no further comment from MacArthur about the trial since the 81-year-old pastor took a break from preaching duties on October 5th, following his long-standing habit of taking about a month off each year.