The Innocence of JD Hall

You read that right. Consider this article and related publishing from Protestia a public and sincere apology to JD Hall and his family for what they have endured under the auspices of church discipline. I hope public vindication can help them reach some measure of peace and closure from this saga, indeed, for any role Protestia or I played in it. To be clear, I have always maintained that I didn’t believe the embezzlement charges, so I suppose being able to finalize and publish the evidence is a vindication of sorts for me as well.

Our Investigation

Through a series of incidents occurring between May and July of 2022, JD Hall, the founder and publisher of Protestia.com and its predecessor Pulpit & Pen, was found to have become addicted to prescription Xanax and subsequently resigned from his role as pastor at Fellowship Baptist Church in Sidney, Montana. Between the church initially rejecting Hall’s resignation after his DUI arrest on May 11^th, 2022, accepting it on June 5^th after discovering that his Xanax addiction was behind his behavior, and later accusing Hall of domestic violence and embezzlement of church funds (the latter resulted in criminal charges), the speculative rumor mill spun out of control as Hall’s enemies rejoiced and his friends ran for cover.

Protestia followed the church’s lead in keeping with our stated purpose of helping churches and removed JD from his role with us in keeping with his resignation from the church. Yet even as accusations and questions swirled, we never stopped being JD’s friends and his brothers in Christ, in keeping with our desire for his repentance and restoration. We are investigators, desirous of knowing the truth, and bear a responsibility to godly obedience over our feelings or reputations. Despite our following the church’s lead on disciplinary action (which included re-forming Protestia as a parachurch entity in Colorado), we continued to minister to JD the best way we knew how (mainly by being available to chat about anything but polemics) and keep digging for the particulars, set on determining the truth about what happened.

What we found has been enough to challenge not only our original decision to unquestioningly follow Fellowship Baptist Church’s lead on our decision to remove JD from his role at Protestia (he no doubt would have stepped down with or without our decision) but also shake the foundations of how we see church discipline. I do not doubt that there are readers who will be unmoved by the information presented by this investigation, believing (however illogically) that we are siding with our friend over his former church. Yet remaining open to finding out all that actually happened has resulted in heat from both our enemies and our friends.

On one side, JD Hall and Protestia haters were all too happy to paint us with the accusatory brush of being hypocritical fundamentalists. On the other, we received well-intentioned advice from brothers to close the supposedly now-tainted Protestia brand and start over. Yet we remained unwilling to abandon two guiding principles:

First, Protestia didn’t do anything wrong, and allowing cancel culture to win the day for the sake of reputation was to abandon a foundational principle of true biblical polemics – the crucifixion of reputation for the sake of truth. Second, we didn’t know enough not to keep investigating, particularly with embezzlement charges being adjudicated in the courts. Investigation is a big part of what we do, after all.

So, we investigated and asked questions about the factual particulars of the events that resulted in JD’s departure and the biblical presuppositions that should inform our Christian response. Following are the conclusions of our two-year investigation, which was rigorously compiled and is supported by reams of objective and (as much as possible) cited evidence. God willing, many – like me – will read this information and reassess their accusations, gossip, and “at least I’m not that bad” assumptions.

On a personal note: Enemies of this ministry (often identified by their constant pejorative use of “blog” when discussing us) have routinely accused me of being JD Hall’s “lapdog,” “sidekick,” or some variant thereof, taking marching orders from him to this day. They say this primarily because they hate what I have to say and because I wasn’t openly doing this work before joining the Protestia guys, so my co-hosting of Polemics Report was the first time they saw any of my work. But as someone slightly older than JD, who has a wife and kids of my own, and with my share of hard-earned scars from decades of ministry, military service, and (most recently) culture warring, I don’t take orders from anyone but Christ and the jurisdictions He has ordained in my life.

Read my work over the last three years and tell me I’m wrong. When JD was wrong, I told him (he would return the favor). When he’s been right, I’ve said so. And when we’ve disagreed on debatable stuff, we’ve debated openly for the sake of each other and the larger Body. I’ve come to accept that God designed me to fight – argue, write, preach, and, by His strength, stand and sing his praises in the midst of whatever comes.

The Legal Truth

Several outlets of various quality and/or reputation have reported on JD Hall being “found guilty” of felony embezzlement (see here, here, or here). In reality, he entered a Nolo Contendere (no contest) plea in Richland County District Court on May 28^th, 2024, as part of a plea bargain legally securing his innocence. My favorite context-deficient headline has to be “Protestia Founder J.D. Hall Found Guilty of Embezzlement, Ordered to Pay Church $15K” from my favorite patriarchy-allergic scandal blogger, Julie Roys. Julie changed the headline (although not the permalink) from “found guilty” to “convicted” after figuring out Hall pleaded no contest rather than guilty, but ironically this is still in error.

On the surface (particularly to reporters not willing to actually investigate), it looks like there was an investigation by law enforcement, an indictment, and charges based on this investigation, a trial, and a judgment. It looks like a court determined that JD Hall had stolen from the church he had pastored for years. Yet a little digging (or perhaps reaching out to those in the know) would reveal that the government prosecutors had simply taken the information given to them by the church at face value – information that turned out to be nearly 100% false.

Upon Hall’s departure, church leadership filed a complaint with the Sidney police that Hall had “embezzled over $90,000 in the last year…” according to newly appointed church treasurer Deedra Erickson, who curiously admitted to the police that she had no direct knowledge of the embezzlement. Instead, Erickson had merely reviewed the church’s bank statements between 2018 and 2022 and highlighted expenses she determined not to be “church approved or authorized.” The Sidney Police Department turned the information over to a certified forensic accountant to generate a report for the investigation and any upcoming trial. The report was an Excel spreadsheet confirming the addition of the charges the church described as “unapproved,” and based on the total and the church’s identification of the charges being “unapproved,” Hall was charged with violating Montana Code 45-6-301 Theft by Embezzlement – Exceeding $10,000, a felony offense in the state.

Hall initially pleaded not guilty, hired a lawyer at significant expense, and hired a forensic financial auditor to examine church bank statements, the church’s general ledger, additional financial documents and correspondence (including Hall’s PayPal account), email and text between Hall and FBC leaders, and the church’s constitution and bylaws. The report (here, sensitive information redacted) concluded that, rather than Hall “embezzling over $90K,” $15,454.44 in potentially unauthorized expenses were identified. The information relied upon by the police to charge Hall turned out to be the investigators taking the church’s claims at face value rather than conducting an actual investigation – they simply accepted as true the claims made by church leadership about how money was spent/approved. Yet even a rudimentary examination revealed that church leaders made claims that often contradicted each other and were nearly universally contradicted by the church’s operating documents.

Here are a few glaring examples:

• Church leadership identified fuel usage by Hall as theft. Yet the church budgeted for fuel use, a specifically enumerated benefit for the Pastor.
• Travel expenses by Hall were labeled theft by the church, yet the church budgeted for ministerial travel (including public appearances, both political and religious), and business meeting minutes indicate the church was fully aware and supportive of these activities.
• Dozens of transactions recorded as usual, ordinary, and authorized (benevolence, food pantry, hospitality) were identified as theft by the church to the police.
• Hall’s cell phone plan (including family phones) was part of his compensation, paid by the church since 2008. Hall voluntarily reduced this benefit in 2018 when the cost for the plan price increased, sending the difference back to the church, yet the church identified this as theft.

Interestingly, much of the $15,454.44 considered potentially questionable was money used to compensate Pulpit and Pen/Protestia writers, yet the income from web operations went back to the church, putting the church in a net positive position – yet church leadership told the police that the income from Hall’s online ministries was money he stole rather than money he earned.

The primary “personal” expense identified by the government and the defense’s audit was a gun safe purchased with a short-term retail loan paid from the church account. Hall’s defense team described the loan being paid from the church account rather than Hall’s personal account as an error, and notably, the church staff responsible for accounting and bookkeeping did not notice or ask about the $135.52 monthly charge from the church account, an account Hall was not responsible to monitor. Hall offered to reimburse the church for the total plus interest.

One of the primary accusers, deacon Sam Shell (who harassed Hall’s daughter and called his wife “the most unattractive wench” after she made it clear she was sticking by her husband) claimed that a hunting trip he went on with Hall was paid for with church money, apparently not realizing the cost was covered by the hunt organizer rather than the church.

In total, the forensic accounting investigation found less than 5% of the expenses reported as theft by the church were “personal in nature,” and presuming the gun safe payments were included in that number, this would have left roughly $60/month of potentially personal expenses charged to the church. Without full discovery and testimony being brought to bear at trial, the allowability of these potentially personal expenses remains undetermined.

Still, by the clear and available evidence, it is safe to conclude that not only did JD Hall not steal over $90K as initially claimed by the church, nor over $10K as required to be a felony, but it is abundantly clear that he stole nothing at all.

Yet according to the court judgment, Hall and the church agreed that he would pay the church the $15,454.54 in restitution (total sum of potentially problematic charges), issue a public apology letter to the church, pay various court costs and fees, and be subject to probation-type restrictions for three years.

Why, if he is innocent, would he not go to trial to clear his name? Aside from the facially bizarre claims made by the church to the police, the answer (much to the chagrin of lazy midwit journalists) lies in the court decision itself.

The Decision

JD Hall was not determined to be guilty based on a trial. He was not determined to be guilty based on available evidence. Rather, his “guilty” status is part of a plea bargain process and a legal compromise known as an Order Deferring Imposition of Sentence. The purpose of this legal compromise is found in Montana Code Annotated (MCA) 46-18-201, which allows a defendant to plead guilty or no contest, the judge to technically find a defendant guilty, yet defer imposition of the sentence (maximum of three years for a felony charge). In doing so, the judge initiates a process (see MCA 46-18-204) that requires the court to strike (remove) the defendant’s plea, dismiss the charges entirely, and remove all information related to the charge from the public record. In other words, the case is entirely dismissed.

Additionally, a defendant complying with the requirements of this process is entitled to file a motion to terminate the remaining portion of the deferment upon half of the time being served in compliance (See MCA 46-18-208) – meaning someone in Hall’s situation can move to have his plea stricken and charges dismissed in 18 months.

In other words, JD Hall has not pleaded guilty or apologized for stealing anything, and in a year and a half, he will have full legal exoneration to match what the available evidence clearly demonstrates.

The Legal Reasoning

There are many reasons a judge might allow a deferred imposition of sentence, but one of the major reasons is to allow the parties in a case to avoid a lengthy and expensive trial neither wants. Defenses often agree to a deferred imposition of sentence because the terms are less costly than going to trial. No matter the outcome, a weeks-long jury trial could cost a defendant $30-40K minimum. Conversely, the prosecution often agrees to such a compromise not for financial reasons (they are the government, after all), but because they foresee losing at trial. Plea bargaining with a deferred imposition of sentence is a good way to save face when an indictment has been issued on really bad information.

If JD Hall was able to clear his name for $15K (less than one year of his family’s tithe to FBC Sidney), apologize for the pain his addiction caused without admitting to what he clearly did not do, and close a painful chapter in his life for himself and his family rather than put church members on the witness stand to explain why they called him a thief for using the church’s fuel budget to drive around Montana doing the gospel ministry they called him to do, shouldn’t he have done it?

About Author