This violation suggests the shadow Session rehearsed its actions in advance…
When a person is indicted by the Session, the BCO requires that, at the first meeting after someone has brought charges, the Session appoint a prosecutor and order an indictment drawn.
In the case of RE Dudt, members of the Midway Session crafted and signed the indictment before the Session actually met and ordered them to do so. This is a violation of the PCA Constitution.
SPECIFICATION 15 OUT OF 40
As a reminder, RE Dudt stated the following specification of error against the Midway Session in his appeal:
15. The Session of Midway Presbyterian Church of the Presbyterian Church in America erred in procedure when the clerk and members of the court drew up the indictment prior to being ordered to do so by the Session at the called meeting of October 7, 2020. The indictment was circulated to some members of the court, including the clerk, before the meeting, but was not provided to the remaining Session members at any point during the meeting nor was the wording of the indictment voted on by the Session. However, the signed indictment was provided to the accused at the end of the October 7, 2020 meeting, proving that it was both written, signed, and sealed prior to the October 7 meeting. This irregularity violated BCO 32-3 and is a manifestation of prejudice.
THE SJC PANEL’S RESPONSE
The SJC panel concurred with RE Dudt. It wrote:
This specification of error is sustained.
A Minute Explanatory. The minutes of the Special Session Meeting of October 7, 2020, and the dating of the indictment clearly show that the Session conflated the provisions of BCO 32-3 [ROC 87-89, 90]. However, Appellant did not raise a point of order, as was his right, at that meeting, nor at the Stated Session Meeting of October 19, 2020 [ROC 195] when he was called upon to plead with respect to the indictment; and the error did not cause material harm to Appellant’s cause.
IMPLICATIONS OF THIS VIOLATION
How could the court hand RE Dudt a signed indictment in a sealed envelope in the same meeting in which the Session issues an order to draw one up?
They can’t, unless the Session majority coordinated its actions in advance and planned to vote to indict him.
We know from other evidence that Senior Pastor David Hall has a history of hosting planning meetings with his chief lieutenants and reliable supporters on the Session. We also know from recent evidence that David Hall and his Session probably planned RE Dudt’s indictment and conviction in advance, reducing the all-night secret trial to a mere formality.
RE Dudt’s appeal stated that this violation was evidence of prejudice, meaning that the trial was pre-judged, its actions pre-planned, and its conclusions foregone.
The judges did not keep an open mind. They had no need of evidence (and there was none).
They judged their brother in their hearts without evidence or witnesses, against a man-made law, in violation of the commandments of God and the Constitution of the PCA, and with a complete lack of Christian charity.
Is this what you expect from shepherds claiming to represent Jesus?