For Ten Years He Got Away With It: The Fake Prophet and His Enablers

Summary

BibleThinker Podcast with Mike Winger

Episode: For Ten Years He Got Away With It: The Fake Prophet and His Enablers

Date: May 20, 2026

---

Overview

In this hard-hitting and meticulous exposé, Mike Winger investigates and exposes Gary Morgan, an influential Australian “prophet,” for conducting fraudulent prophetic ministry by mining personal information from social media. The episode peels back layers of cover-up and intimidation by church leaders and enablers—especially Peter McHugh and Alan Jones—who, over a decade, shielded Morgan and silenced whistleblowers. Through a combination of witness interviews, direct evidence, and a tense confrontation call, Mike reveals both the extent of the deception and the systemic failures that allowed it to fester in the wider charismatic movement.

The central theme is both a call to integrity within the church and a comprehensive investigation into how fakes can flourish unchecked when leaders choose silence and personal reputation over truth. Mike positions this not as an attack on charismatic gifts or prophecy, but as a passionate appeal for biblical accountability.

---

Key Themes & Discussion Points

Systemic Problem of Prophetic Fakery

• Gary Morgan is presented as the Australian equivalent of Sean Bowles, using eerily similar “prophetic” tactics—gleaning information from Facebook to fabricate supernatural words of knowledge (00:33, 20:18).
• Top leaders in the charismatic world, including those at Bethel (Bill Johnson), HIM (Ché Ahn), Paul Cain, Graham Cook, and others are implicated in the wider issue—often knowing the fakery but endorsing the perpetrators (03:52, 25:25, 149:25).
• Mike stresses that challenging false prophets is biblical: “Fake prophets should be warned about. That’s kind of like a biblical thing, right? Jeremiah does this. The apostles warn about the fake prophets. Jesus warns about fake prophets.” (08:52)

The Smoking Gun: Exposing Gary Morgan

• Morgan’s “prophecies” all correspond to easily obtained Facebook event lists, public posts, and attendees. In 2015, at a major conference, he called out names, birthdays, and personal details of participants or even of people not in the room, all traceable to their attendance declarations and Facebook data (17:22–28:30).
• Example: A fake Facebook account (“Sarah, June 10”) is created as a test. Morgan perfectly “prophesies” that non-existent Sarah's name and birthday during a livestream. A follow-up fake email, traced back to Morgan’s own recovery email, attempts to establish the fake as real—direct evidence of intentional deception (73:12–107:25).
• Morgan’s methods mirror other exposed prophets: Data-mining, use of generic positive prophecies for the future, and manipulative psychological tactics (31:19, 42:32).

Cover-Up Culture and the Cost to Whistleblowers

• When Nathaniel, Haley, and their friend Chris discover and report the fakery, senior church leaders either dismiss or silence them. Direct confrontation leads to inversion of blame, with accusations that they are “on a witch hunt,” “hurting the Holy Spirit,” and even damaging the church (72:40, 86:36).
• The leadership’s first concern is protocol and reputation, not truth or victimization: “To try and curate the story in order to protect people’s reputations is just more cover up. And so we’re gonna aim to tell this story honestly and straightforward...” (11:40)
• Valuable witness testimonies recount the deep emotional toll, loss of trust, and spiritual confusion experienced by the whistleblowers (79:08–89:41).
• Attempts to trigger an impartial investigation are repeatedly bogged down and manipulated: obstacles such as exorbitant costs, onerous requirements, and control by the same conflicted leaders ensure stasis (127:55–137:43, 297:38).

Leadership Failure and Institutional Complicity

• Leaders in the broader charismatic movement (not just in Australia) know but remain silent or even enable Morgan to continue ministering—they “platform him after the evidence is overwhelmingly clear” (03:52, 25:25, 149:25).
• Examples of enabling behavior: repeated minimization of accusations, private apologies followed by public undermining, contradictory statements to different audiences, and an “innocent until proven guilty” that in practice means “never guilty” (120:01, 137:03, 273:10–274:57).
• Peter McHugh personifies this problem, repeatedly caught in contradictory claims and doublespeak—admitting privately that evidence is “a smoking gun,” then publicly denying any evidence exists (121:54, 125:29, 213:14, 273:10, 312:00).
• Memorable moment: Mike directly confronts Peter with his own contradictory statements and emails (121:54–125:29, 213:14, 273:10).

Broader Spiritual Abuse: The Larry Sebastian Connection

• Mike connects the dots to similar issues at Casey City Church with Pastor Larry Sebastian—where prophecies and cover-up enabled a pattern of abuse and victim silencing (160:07–181:40).
• Numerous victim accounts highlight lack of accountability and further evidence that enabling and systems-protection are neither rare nor limited to Morgan.

Theological Reflection and Call to Action

• Mike insists that none of this should destroy faith in genuine gifts: “I pray that this video doesn’t destroy your belief in miracles or in God working or speaking to people. I hope not, because I still believe those things. But I hope that it causes you [...] to rise up in righteousness and demand integrity and truth and accountability.” (06:06)
• Calls for church-wide commitment to public accountability and transparency: “If something happens in your church publicly, it is…your responsibility to do something about it publicly. People deserve to know, and I believe a lot of people will be healed with just transparency.” (152:42)

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• On the magnitude of the problem:
  “The degree of corruption that is going on in the movement, in the prophetic movement...is astounding.” — Mike Winger (05:06)

• The core evidence explained:
  “He calls out name after name after name of people who are from the event. Their names and information is available on Facebook from the event...They all clicked attending.”
  — Nathaniel (26:03)

• Witness Vindication:
  “Fake Facebook—made Comment. Gary called it out...We saw, we just saw him get caught.” — Haley, after the key revelation (75:37)

• On leadership complicity:
  “Peter, the integrity of, of your honesty in this situation is very much in question…you seem to have different truths for different audiences.” — Mike (136:40, 137:03)

• Summing up the dynamic:
  “You say the same thing to different groups of people...You’re duplicitous.” — Mike to Peter (272:02, 274:10)

• On public versus private statements:
  “She apologized, but later sent an email that was the opposite to Gary’s guys or to Gary, and that was used to discount Nathaniel for, it seems like, years.” (111:31)

• Victims' plea:
  “Evil can prosper but for the silence of a few good men. And for us, it’s like we would have liked other people to say something publicly.” — Nathaniel (143:14)

• Final Call to Action:
  “The church cannot bear up under the weight of fake prophecy. It just can't.” —Mike (344:30)

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:33–06:15: Opening Overview & Framing—naming names, connecting to Sean Bowles, institutional cover up.
• 17:22–28:30: Explanation of the Facebook data-mining scheme; first detailed walk-through of evidence.
• 73:12–107:25: The Whistleblowers’ Test—setting up the fake “Sarah” account, watching Gary fall into the trap, the forged email, and technical forensics.
• 120:01–127:55: Discussion with Peter and Alan, evidence of duplicity and changing stories.
• 149:06–157:24: Impact on the wider charismatic movement, institutional failures, and the broader call to transparency.
• 160:07–181:40: Casey City Church and Larry Sebastian—parallels with Morgan’s case, deep testimonies of abuse, cover up, and (lack of) accountability.
• 184:33–344:44: The “confrontation call” (full transcript) with all main actors—Morgan, McHugh, Alan—where Mike confronts them with stacked evidence, their contradictory statements, and unwillingness to resolve the allegations.
• 344:44–end: Closing remarks and theological rationale.

---

Flow of the Episode

1. Intro and Framing: Mike bluntly reveals the shape and scale of the deception, outlines the nature of the cover-up, and articulates why this is not just about Gary Morgan but about systems and habits in the charismatic movement.
2. Firsthand Testimony (Nathaniel, Haley, Chris): The process of discovering the deception, the emotional and spiritual struggles, and the escalation as leadership fails to act.
3. Smoking Gun Evidence: Mike meticulously builds the case with video evidence, technical analysis, and pattern recognition—showing repeated, deliberate fraud in prophetic ministry.
4. Confrontation and the Cover-Up Mechanisms: The failed investigation, roadblocks, shifting narratives, and persistent duplicity of those meant to bring accountability.
5. Toxic Outcomes: The damage wrought on individual faith, communities, and victims—the cost of silence.
6. Extended Case Study: Larry Sebastian: Parallels in spiritual abuse, prophecy-enabled harm, and further cover-up in an Australian mega-church.
7. Final Confrontation Call: A 2.5 hour accountability call—tense, at times combative—where stonewalling and victim-blaming are laid bare.
8. Public Call for Reform: Mike concludes with a clarion call to biblical standards of leadership, public repentance, and radical transparency for the health of the Church.

---

Tone & Language

• Forthright, unwavering, sometimes blunt—Mike does not shy from direct accusation or emotional intensity (“Gary, you are a blasphemer and a fraud…”).
• Suffused with both theological gravity and pastoral concern: “I pray this doesn’t destroy your belief in miracles or in God working…”
• Deep empathy for whistleblowers and victims, refusing to shame them for manipulation they endured.
• Repeated appeals to scripture and church health—insistence that exposure is biblical and for the good of the Body.

---

Takeaways for Listeners

• Institutional cover-up and reputation management are deeply at odds with biblical truth-telling and patient care for the flock.
• Righteous whistleblowing is costly but vital; integrity sometimes requires public confrontation.
• Visual and digital evidence—when thoroughly and neutrally examined—can be a crucial tool in discernment in the modern church.
• The health and reputation of the Church, ironically, are best protected by radical honesty; silence enables ongoing abuse.
• The situation with Gary Morgan is not unique but emblematic—spiritual health depends on the willingness of leaders and laity to refuse complicity with evil.
• If you encounter similar situations, transparency, documentation, and honest process—not protocol or secrecy—are Christian virtues.

---

Action Steps from the Episode

• Demand accountability and transparency from church leaders regarding prophetic ministry and leadership conduct.
• Share credible evidence when encountering fakery or abuse—protecting the vulnerable over system or personalities.
• Remember that calling out fraud is a Christian, biblical act; integrity must outweigh reputation.
• Do not lose faith in the genuine operation of spiritual gifts because of the counterfeit; discernment and authenticity must go hand in hand.

---

For deeper engagement, consider listening to (or watching) the full episode or reviewing the confrontation call for unedited context and tone.

Transcript

[A]

It's wild, Gary. It's like the Lord wanted you to get caught. We've caught another fake prophet red handed. This video should prove the case to you beyond any reasonable doubt with tons of evidence and exposed lies. Now, earlier this year, in a recorded zoom call, I actually confronted this fake prophet and the guys who've helped cover up for him. A guy named Peter and then more recently a guy named Alan. Peter, you cannot tell the truth.

[B]

Whatever.

[A]

And this goes perfectly with Gary being a fraud. Gary, I am convinced that you are a blasphemer and a fraud who lies in the name of Christ and then demonizes the very Christians who try to hold you accountable. It's disgusting. And Alan, you seem crippled to have the ability to just have the integrity to call out your own people, which is cause this is what happens is what happened to these guys when they stood forward. You've got it. It's nuts. It is nuts. Gary, there's no wonder why you've run with Sean Bowles in the past. You were doing the same thing as him at the same time as him. That call went on for over two and a half hours and that will also be part of this video. This fake prophet, his name is Gary Morgan. He is the Australian. Sean Bowles actually was a friend of Sean Bowles's and he ran with Sean Bowles for a while. When he was first confronted about his fake prophecy, he actually used the excuse, well, you know, Sean Bowles gets confronted like this all the time. You know, these accusations.

[C]

Hi, I'm Sean Bowles and I lead

[B]

Bowles Ministries in Los Angeles, California.

[D]

And I want to recommend to you

[A]

Gary and Sarah Morgan.

[C]

I've known them for over 13 years. I've been so inspired by both of

[A]

them as teachers, healers, prophetic vessels.

[D]

And Gary has been moving in a

[C]

word of knowledge gift and a word

[A]

of wisdom gift as long as I've known him. That has stunned and amazed me.

[C]

Let alone the people we minister to together. Get involved with the prophetic school.

[A]

Get involved with Gary and Sarah.

[D]

They are some of the safest prophetic

[A]

people I know in the entire world. As many of you know, Shambles was the fake prophet who was the rising star in the prophetic movement. Countless leaders knew he was a fraud and they said nothing, even endorsing him after they knew he had victims of disgusting, horrible, inappropriate behaviors including fake prophecy. But not, not only that. And he actually hurt a lot of people. And with fake prophecy, so has Gary Morgan. He has hurt a lot of people and yet he runs A school of the prophets in Australia right now. You can sign up and go to his school. He will teach and train you. You can buy his E courses and you can learn how to prophesy. This guy will teach you how. This is the exporting of corruption into the larger charismatic church, into the larger prophetic movement. It is a big problem. Here's what's crazy. This guy Gary Morgan was caught 10 years ago. He was caught red handed. I mean, smoking guns 10 years ago. And they covered it up. Charismatic leaders covered up for this man. And instead they demonized the two brave Christians, just random people in the church who were willing to say, hey, something's wrong with this guy. We have all this evidence. In fact, they just, oh, my gosh, they have so much evidence, I'm going to show it to you. And instead of holding Gary accountable, they demonized and beat down the two godly Christians who decided to make some noise about this. Nathaniel and Haley, a husband and wife who just wanted integrity and truth and, and wanted to share and trust in their leadership to do something about it. Instead, they were. They were hurt. They were hurt. Gary has left in his wake a metaphorical and even literal trail of blood. One prophecy that he gave is connected to the death of a Christian who believed in the fake prophet Gary Morgan, in particular about his cancer. From 10 years ago till now, Gary Morgan has had the coverup going on where many leaders know about him. Pastor Bill Johnson from Bethel was told about Gary Morgan 10 years ago, and he still continued to minister alongside him after that.

[C]

We knew that Bill Johnson knew about the whole story, Gary Morgan, the whole shebang. And he did a conference with Graham Cook and Gary the very next year. And that was specifically hurtful or disappointing or sad because these are the heroes in the faith.

[B]

And Graham and Bill, Gary just come

[E]

on up and yeah, I just hear the spirit of the Lord say that I'm turning your invitation to innovation, that the Lord's going to begin to cause you a new era and a new time.

[A]

The supposed apostle Chae on was also told about Gary Morgan and he had publicly endorsed him as having a great prophetic gift. But when he heard this stuff, he said nothing. It was crickets. He just let the people who trust him continue to believe in a fraud. And that is a tragedy.

[E]

And so we are receiving this morning from someone who is not just rich in what they know, but they're rich in who they have in their hearts and in their lives. And so I want you to open your hearts with me this morning as we welcome Shayon to come in Jesus name. Amen. Bless you, Shay.

[A]

Thank you so much.

[D]

Thank you so much.

[A]

Thank you.

[F]

It's an honor for me to be here, maybe seated.

[E]

Thank you so much.

[A]

The degree of corruption that is going on in the movement, in the prophetic movement. I'm so sorry to say this, guys. I'm genuinely. I hate this fact. But the degree of corruption that's gone on in the movement is astounding. And I pray that this video doesn't destroy your belief in miracles or in God working or speaking to people. I hope not, because I still believe those things. But I hope that it causes you, the charismatics, those inside the movement, to rise up in righteousness and demand integrity and truth and accountability. Demand accountability and return to authentic ministry. Because the fakers are running the show right now and it's been going on for quite a long time now. Before we launch fully into the rest of this video, I just want you to know I already confronted Gary on this. I've talked to him over a month ago. I sat down with him and Alan Jones and Peter McHugh. These are the guys on his team, so to speak. And on the call were three of the witnesses, the original witnesses that helped understand and find out and prove what Gary had done. And we sat on a two and a half hour call and no, it did not go well for Gary and his guys. In no way would you ever tell people that the accusations were debunked and proven to have no substance. You would never say that to someone, right?

[B]

I've never said that.

[A]

Okay, you wrote that to Victoria in March of 2025. I caught them in multiple lies and deceptions and just all kinds of shenanigans. And you will have the opportunity to see that entire confrontation. That's why this video is so long. But before we get to the confrontation, I want to walk you guys through the story of all that has happened. And this is going to be through an interview that I did with, with Nathaniel and Haley. This is my interview with the brave witnesses who paid the price of having integrity in the prophetic movement. They have evidence of fake prophecies, absolute smoking guns, like evidence that Gary invented a fake person and sent fake emails to try to cover up after he got caught. A faux investigation pushed by Peter McHugh, supposedly to hold Gary accountable and find out the truth. That in my opinion, was a deceitful project where he was trying to make it as hard as possible to have accountability. Asking for the. The witnesses of Gary's sins to Pay thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars for an investigation when all the evidence and proof was already present. We'll get into all of the details there and how Peter lied, even on our conference call, to my face, lied to me and I caught him in those lies. All of that will be there. The sad thing is, is that in Australia, a lot of leaders know about Gary Morgan and they just haven't said anything. And I put out a call months ago saying, please, you guys make some noise about this. And I didn't want to make this video. Literally didn't. I wanted them to just make some noise. I thought if I just post on social media. Many of your leaders in Australia know this guy is fake. I call on your leaders to make noise about it, to warn the church because fake prophets should be warned about. That's kind of like a biblical thing, right? Jeremiah does this. Fake prophets should be warned about. The apostles warn about the fake prophets. Jesus warns about fake prophets. It's something, it's a very Christian thing to warn people about these guys, these scoundrels. And I would say this, he is a scoundrel. Gary Morgan is a scoundrel and a liar. And his team of enablers, in this case, Peter and Alan in particular, are helping him get away with it. So here's the roadmap for this video. The first section of the video, the first big section, because it's in two big sections, is going to be my interview with the witnesses, that is Nathaniel and Haley, who discovered the evidence of Gary's fraudulent ministry and blaspheming against Christ and Satan, sinning against the people of God, his manipulations and his deceit and his callous disregard for people, they found that evidence. And Pastor Chris Turner, who also was there 10 years ago and decided that he was going to be one of the very few who's willing to put their face out there and their name out there and actually address these things. Other people could be on this call right now. Other people could be in this video right now. They've chosen not to. They've not made themselves available to me. You guys know who you are. I, I wish you would just do the right thing and be brave. But these people are. These three are brave. Now, during the interview I have with these three, you're also going to see visual evidence pop up, an email pop up, a video pop up, or even an excerpt from the confrontation call that we did last month in April. You're going to see all this stuff pop up. I kind of recommend you watch this on video. If you're listening on podcast, it's going to make more sense and you won't miss visual evidence if you watch it on video. This is all important to establish the truth of things because even though this is widely known by at least many leaders inside of the movement, this is something that I know I have to laboriously present mountains of evidence in order to get you people to realize. Because you will do what your leaders won't and you will stand up and make noise about a fake prophet, a devious man, a wicked, A wicked person who's being covered up for in the name of Jesus by other leaders. And it's just disgusting. But I believe in you guys. I believe in the Charismatic church. I believe in the charismatic church and I think if you guys just know what's going on in the dark, you will deal with it. So this is me turning the lights on, specifically in Australia. This is the Australian Sean Bowles. This is the Australian cover up of Gary Morgan that happened 10 years ago and persists hopefully until right now when this video drops. And then the second part of the video is just going to be this, the uncut full two plus hour confrontation video. In that video I caught them in several lies. I think it needs to be public record and that was the purpose of the recording. They agreed for it to be recorded. I announced when we recorded it that it was going to be for accountability and that there would be accountability one way or another. Um, and so this is how that works guys. Uh, we're gonna put that whole video up. Nobody can accuse me of using clips out of context. The entire video will be there. I think it needs to be public. It does get a bit intense. I get a bit intense in that video in ways you guys probably haven't really seen me act. And I stand a hundred percent by the I said and the way I said them. So here we go, we're going to get into the interview and the evidence is coming and I pray that this makes a big change. I really do. Australian Charismatics, I believe in you, Nathaniel Haley and Chris. Thank you guys so much for joining. I want to hear the story of what happened. Just uncover the COVID up culture stuff because this ties into everything that I've been working on so far. But it's really specific to your guys situation. 10 years ago you uncovered, I mean you caught red handed in my opinion, Gary Morgan and Peter McHugh exposed himself as a fixer in that situation and there should be some accountability for that. So please share your story.

[F]

Thank you. Mike, I just wanted to say it. I wanted to say at the start of this that Hayley, Chris and I didn't really want to be the people to bring you this story. It's. It'll be hard for us. We haven't talked about a lot of this to many people for a decade, and I think we would not be the ones to bring this story to you if the leaders involved had gone public or on this. In fact, Chris and I have gone to multiple leaders at. Multiple times over even the last few weeks, practically begging them to take this public, and they've refused. So we didn't want to be the people to bring this to you, but it feels like we're the ones willing. Willing to. I guess the last thing that I wanted to say is some of the information we're kind of going to share are about hurtful actions from people that we really love. And that's. That's not easy. We've. We've agonized together over how do we tell this in a way that's honorable. And I've come to the conclusion that to. To try and curate. To curate. To try and curate the. The story in order to, you know, aim to protect people's reputations is just more cover up. And so we're gonna aim to tell this story honestly and straightforward because we believe that's the right thing to do. So I just want to start by

[A]

saying that I'm grateful for that and for people to know that. We together went and confronted gary and Peter McHugh and Alan as well. We had the three of them in a long back and forth discussion, two and a half hour recorded zoom call, also trying to create accountability from within. The purpose of this meeting is because I tweeted out or put on social media in a few different places that we. That Gary, that you were guilty of faking prophecy. And I did this because I had conviction that I'd already seen a significant amount of evidence to demonstrate that this was true. And then I was contacted by Peter, who reached out and wanted to connect and talk about it and actually arrange a meeting so we could discuss it. And since then, basically, we've gone back and forth with Peter Allen and stuff like that, and what I would like us to do, since I know everyone on this meeting has already been down this road before, but I'm the only one who hasn't been on this with you guys. I prefer total transparency and I don't like doing artificial kindness to the point where you can't tell what anybody's saying or what's going on, that kind of stuff. So I just really want to be super transparent is we love the church, we love integrity and truth. There is a major problem of fakery in the Charismatic Church right now. It's an insane problem that's going on for generations and has largely been unaddressed from those in the movement. Only people outside who were dismissed as heretics, heretic hunters and heresy hunters and stuff like that. And Gary, the evidence that was mounted against you looks pretty strong and I'm open to hearing some other side of it, but I have seen a lot of stuff myself already, including other stuff. In fact, I think that I've been misled in my email exchanges even already with some of your. The guys that are, I would say are your team, you know, Alan and Peter. So I'm putting that right out there. You're also welcome to put out there any kind of concerns, allegations against me if you've got him and I'm all ears. No one's above reproach, above the potential of being reproached in that regard. So the purpose of this meeting then is to either establish that I need to go and say guys, I'm super sorry. I just besmirched this guy's character, hurt his ministry and I would make that super public with a groveling apology. And if I was convinced it was true, I'd endorse your character and your ministry. On the other hand, if this has been not only the egregious fakery of the past, but ongoing cover up with allies doing this for you and then causing others to hold you accountable to actually have to apologize, if that's the case, then that escalates things the other direction. And I also have gone public on social media asking for leaders that know in the area to go public and deal with this themselves. I didn't want to make a video about this. I just wanted to instigate people who already know about it to just speak the truth. Protect in a sense, honestly vindicate you guys is one thing I'm hoping comes from this personally and also to stop someone who's manipulating people in the name of the Holy Spirit. That's high blasphemy against God to do such things. So, so yeah, we've done all the other steps first and would have much preferred for those to have worked.

[F]

Thank you, Mike. Yeah, it's, it's been really powerful even just having you hear these events a few months back and, and just saying that, hey, I believe this was so healing to us initially. So we'll. We'll just share the story and Chris and Hayley, feel free to just jump in where it feels right. I guess I'll just start by. Was it October or November?

[G]

November 2015.

[F]

November 2015. And did you wanna.

[G]

That. We were part of Gloria City Church in Brisbane, Australia at that time, and Nath was working for the church, doing

[F]

my, like, the job that I loved and honestly, my two favorite things in the world, especially at the time, evangelism and media and content. So that was my role and was very blessed in my role. And at the time, Gary was speaking at a big prophetic conference our church was putting on.

[A]

And

[F]

I remember I wasn't in his session, but the person who was in his session debriefed with me and they said something I'll never forget. They said, I mean, he's so accurate. They're marveling about how accurate he was with names and dates. And then as. As a joke, they just kind of said, I mean, unless he's getting the information from Facebook and moved on.

[A]

Wow.

[F]

And I never, I never heard of that at the time. I had no grid for that. Data mining wasn't a word in my vocabulary. I didn't think too much of it until it came to reviewing the footage from that session, which was one of the parts of my role. And I remember playing it and it seemed so suspicious as soon as I played it. I remember my heartbeat just picking up. I was in a dark editing studio and I remember just. It sounded. Mike. Like this was information that you would just get off Facebook. Like it was a. To start with a name and then a date and then a picture. And Gary had this book that he was reading out of supposed, you know, words that he said he received from God, was giving these words out. And I just remember the sinking feeling in my stomach because we were taught, and Chris and Hayley can attest to this, but we were really taught that, you know, suspicion is bad. And we're also very much taught, you know, believe the best, do not touch, the Lord's anointed. So I'm like, this is freaky to me. I'm sitting there and I'm going through 1, 2, 3 words. And then he started calling out people who were not in the building. And he turned to the camera to give the words. And I'm just. I felt like I was like sinking into my seat there. This dark editing room. It was enough to really disturb me. So I did. I wanted to debunk it in my own mind. I was Like, I'm just going to debunk this and move on with my life.

[A]

So at the initial time, when you first hear it, you're a. You're scared because you feel like it's wrong to even be asking these questions, but you can't get out of your head. You know, he got. Unless you got it all off Facebook. And you're like, that could. Could be true. I mean, that. That could be a way of doing this. He calls out and it's. To me, it sounds. And I've seen the evidence, and I. I know more than what you've shared so far. You're telling me again, and I want to hear your story again so everybod hear it.

[B]

But.

[A]

But for people to know, this is exactly identical to Sean Bull's. The. The exact same stuff he did. He. He's giving information that's available on Facebook. Facebook, which is now searchable, which has now just recently been made easily accessible for people to find your data online. And all of us jumping on Facebook don't realize yet how much we're telling people about ourselves at this point in. In time with social media. And then he calls out people who aren't even in the room. And this is completely identical to Sean Bowles because he knew they were supposed to be there because of Facebook. But people's lives change. They don't show up. They came to an earlier service or something. So it's looking.

[C]

That's an important point you made as well, because all of the people that were prophesied over, there was many more in that conference, but all of the people had clicked attending on the conference.

[F]

That's what I was about to say. That's right.

[C]

Yes. The people that were in the room and the people that weren't in the room were traced back to having clicked

[F]

attending, which was the thing that freaked me out, because I went to the one place I thought you would go. There was an event with about, I think, 300 people on it for that conference. And so I started following his words through, trying to debunk this in my own mind. I thought, sure, some of the details would be on Facebook. Look, that's statistically likely, but not all of them. And as I went through those words, each and every one of them were on the event. And not only that, some people he called out, then spoke to the cameras, and those people had selected attending on the event, but did not show up to the event. And so this was enough to freak me out. I brought this information to Haley, my. My wife and Chris I don't know if you introduced yourself, but feel free to introduce yourself.

[A]

Tell us who you are. Why not?

[C]

Yeah. Hi, guys. I'm Chris, and I. I worked with Glory City Church. I was a youth pastor there at the time. And, yeah, I'm not sure how much to go into. I mean, I. I first personally, I met Gary at Pastor Catherine's house in 2014. We had like, a little. It was like an Australian Prophetic Council roundtable. And Gary, at the time, to me, he seemed, you know, he seemed like always a likable fella, but a standard kind of general. I'd met many prophetic people, prophets, and had a pretty standard, good prophetic gift, but nothing that remarked at. Until it was one year later. And he came out with, in my opinion, at the time, was the most powerful word of knowledge gift I'd ever seen inside of 12 months.

[A]

This is an exact repeat of Sean Bulls. It's the Australian Sean Bulls is what I'm hearing.

[C]

Yeah, Well, I mean, I was amazed, and I was asking him because I wanted to learn. I said, how did you. How do you. How did this happen for you? You know? And he said, well, I spell faith differently to most people. I spell it R, I, S, K. And I was like, okay, so you just gotta. Okay, you've got to take a risk. Hey, you just gotta. Gotta step out.

[D]

And.

[C]

And. And I really was eager to. To learn and grow and. And was looking up to that gifting, but it was a stark contrast, I remember, from one year to the next, so. But, yeah, I'll let you continue, Nathaniel.

[F]

Yeah, well, I. As I mentioned it, it utterly freaked me out, and I took the information home to Hayley that night, and I

[G]

think it was pretty early on in the process, like, you spoke to me, and I just was like, oh, I don't think. I don't think that would be happening. You know, I've. You know, Gary's prophesied over me in the past, and I think it's a legitimate prophetic gift. And, yeah, I think I've always loved the prophetic personally. And, yeah, I don't think there's anything to worry about. That's what I initially said. But it wasn't until you kind of kept looking into the different people that were on that event and we looked at it together that I became more convinced.

[A]

Right.

[G]

And just.

[A]

You guys did not go into this. Yeah, you didn't go into this looking to find something wrong or to expose somebody. You went into this because of. You had this nagging concern and as you were looking into it, you were trying to debunk it for yourselves as much as for him, trying to move

[F]

on and trying to. To say this couldn't be happening. But, Mike, at. At the point when we all looked at it together, and I'm sure Chris can speak to this as well, but we. We realized that he gave 15 words that. That night, two of them were quite. It was just one thing. It was quite vague. It was like rock or something like that. And I'm not sure if someone stood up for that one, but there were 13 that felt measurable. Out of those 13 words, 12 of

[G]

the 13 had clicked attending on the event. And of those 12, five of them were not in the building. So he delivered prophetic words to the live stream.

[A]

And how many people were in the. The room at that event?

[F]

There's about 500 in the room and maybe under 300 on the Facebook event. That's an estimate.

[A]

So out of about. I mean, how many people, in other words, were physically with. 500, you said so 500, I think.

[D]

Yeah.

[A]

Okay. But it's hundreds. Hundreds of people show up, and everybody. Except for one that he calls out,

[F]

and that one was what Haley was just about to say, because we're like, okay, there's one person, right? Wasn't on the event. One.

[A]

Okay, hold up. I want to hear Haley walk through that, but I want to. For everybody to really understand the weight of this. The guy shows up to the event. He calls out name after name after name of people who are from the event. Their names and information is available on Facebook from the event. And they all. Except for one. They all clicked attending. And you guys had this one person who didn't. They didn't click attending. Maybe that's the one that proves that he has an authentic thing. Still trying to work through it. So tell us about that.

[G]

So this person who hadn't clicked attending, they said that they had met Gary in the hallway before the service, and he asked for her name and.

[F]

Before the service?

[G]

Yeah, before the service. And her details were on Facebook. Every detail.

[A]

Every.

[F]

It was stunning. It was like he would say, I see you playing a guitar, and it was the first picture on their wall. He would say, I see you dancing. And it was like the banner, and it was like, over and over again. Chris, you can speak to this. Because we were so concerned, we brought it to Chris, who was on staff with us. He lived next door to us at the time. And so we brought this to Chris as well.

[C]

I came over. I don't even Know if I came. Yeah, I came over and you guys were like, you know, hey, got something really strange. You want to take a look at it? This could be a thing, you know, Tell me what you think. So, yeah, we look at it, and I think the first one I remember, we look at this girl, and it was like he kept playing on. It was a little twist, I think, on, like, he kept saying tap in the. In the prophecy for this girl, and her surname was Flat Faucet. But, yeah, I was like, yeah. And it was, you know, it was about her. Like, I see you playing guitar. The COVID photo was. Was her playing guitar. And one by one, we went through all the different words. And again, like, I was having the same feelings because I initially was like, no, no. This guy has got an amazing prophetic gift. Now I'm questioning it, because I'm going, what? I don't know what to think. Like this. This is. This is stunning that we can't find one example in the. In the whole night.

[A]

All right, guys, look, this is editor Mike. Okay? I'm currently editing the video, and I thought this was a great time to cut in and show you seven examples of Gary Morgan's fake prophetic words. I believe them to be from 2016. So we're going to walk through them here. Here's all the video footage that I want to show you about these things, and I'm going to put up on screen, like, social media that's related to this footage. So it should be strong evidence, especially as a cumulative case. When you add these all together, one by itself could be a coincidence. Absolutely. But every single word is like this. And so, yeah, this is a smoking gun already. And there's going to be way more as we keep going. And I'll just throw this out there since I have a chance to interrupt my own video in the editing process. I probably spent 25 hours editing so far. We're going to be talking about a guy named Larry Sebastian later on. Larry Sebastian, another Australian pastor who is deeply problematic. And I hope that including some of that story inside this video will help his victims in that situation.

[E]

Okay, the first thing I saw was I saw a tap. It's like a tap. The Lord was opening, and this tap had been closed for some time. And the Lord was opening this tap. And he's saying, the tap that I'm opening is opening the very things that have been closed to you.

[A]

You'll notice that this is consistent. I'll spoil it for you now. He will say things that are meant. I Believe to prompt the audience to respond with information. So he knows stuff about them. He comes up with a way of hinting at what he knows. They're supposed to figure it out on their own. It's the same playbook that Sean Bowles does. Exact same playbook. And then he acts surprised, like, oh, that's your name. Oh, that's your birthday. Oh, that's. But Gary's not as good at it as Sean was. And you'll see why as we. As we move forward. So he keeps saying the word tap. That's the thing he wants to use. You'll understand why, because it connects to her last name.

[E]

And I saw the 16th of February and the name Esther. Let me describe Esther.

[A]

Okay? Esther Fawcett is her name. Her birthday is on the Feb. On Feb. 16. And faucet and tap. Okay? So for Australians, I'm told this by my Australian friends, they say tap, we say faucet. And they let me know this as I was watching this video. I was like, okay, that makes sense. And Gary will say as much later, too. This is meant to be a play on words. God's opening up a tap. That's what they would understand. American's faucet. And she is supposed to be the one that connects the name tap to her name Fawcett. She doesn't. So he will really kind of push it. And you'll see he spills his cards or he shows his cards a little bit. He does this multiple times in these videos. I know you may not feel convinced yet. I've already seen them all. That's why I can speak with confidence. Let me walk you through the evidence and then maybe you can too.

[E]

I saw a guitar in her hand and songs she was writing.

[A]

So this is easily available info right on her Facebook page. Right at the. Right at the top.

[E]

Yay.

[A]

I want to just say real quick, anybody who is in these videos, God bless you. I'm glad and encouraged. You had a zeal to know God and seek God and be closer to God. You are not at fault here. Gary Morgan abused and manipulated you based upon the evidence I have seen and I want to show you too. And it was broadcast around and it was used to prop him up as a prophet. And your zeal and your desire for the Lord was good, but it's healthy for him to be exposed. And these are the stories we have that can expose that. So don't be too hard on these people. Man, I'd be the same. Well, a younger version of me would have been identical. In that room, getting so excited that he said something about wings. Something about wings. What's your last name? Winger. Oh, God's given you wings. I mean, that would have worked on me too, at a younger age. And then I grew in discernment. And that is what we all need to do, of course. And so no shame in that. Just lessons learned.

[E]

Let me prophesy over you. I saw a tap that God was opening and that he was releasing creativity on you. I saw the 16th of February. What's the 16th of February? That's your birthday. Okay.

[A]

If God did give you her birthday, that would be beautiful. It would be a very special moment for a person. However, if you're lying about it, you're an evil, sycophantic weirdo who is manipulating and abusing people for your own glory. And you don't care about them. You actually despise them based upon your activities, your actions. Notice how he leans on the word tap, tap, tap. It looks like he's trying to get her to say it. She won't. So finally he just asks her, what's your last name?

[E]

Tap. I just saw a tap that was

[D]

opening

[E]

the tap that's opening on your life. Even as I'm praying, I keep seeing the tap. Open up the tap. Lord, you play.

[A]

I was doing a hand motion of a faucet so that she might get it.

[E]

Guitar a little bit. You write songs. Yeah, I see that. Tap of creativity. Your name is gonna be known, love. What's your name? Esther.

[A]

She said her name, and now people are laughing because they're like, oh, yeah, obviously it's the tab that's the connection. These types of cutesy connections are consistent in Sean Bulls as well as Gary Morgan. Find a name connection. Always connect it to their name. The name of their street, the name of something I can find on their Facebook page.

[E]

Okay, Faucet. That's an American tap. Okay, open the tap. Lord. Esther Fawcett.

[A]

He's trying to act surprised. I don't believe he's surprised at all. This was all planned out. Could have gone smoother.

[E]

Come here, buddy. Come. I want an America's. I want the Americans. Come on. Pray for her. Faucet's an American tap. Is that what you call a tap in America? It's a faucet. Esther Faucet.

[G]

Wow.

[A]

Red flag for my charismatic friends. Sound effects in the microphone that are meant to be the power of the holy Spirit. Let's listen one more time.

[E]

Esther Fawcett.

[G]

Wow.

[E]

Thank you, Lord.

[A]

This is. This is psychological instigation. Of. Of response.

[E]

Is there any other taps here? Is there any other taps? Listen, people.

[A]

Now he changes his attention and asks if there's any other taps here. By which he means people related to. To Esther. And he already knows of one, cuz he's probably seen her on Facebook.

[E]

Faucets, I love if you're a faucet, just stand. Who's Heather? Okay, come here.

[A]

Where did you get that? Oh, it's on her Facebook page. Now here's what's going to be interesting. I want you to watch how he treats the mom, Heather, and how he treats the dad. The dad, he does not give his name, he doesn't acknowledge his name, he doesn't seem to know his name. And as far as I can tell, his dad has no Facebook account or at least doesn't have one that was findable.

[E]

So your daughter is literally Esther, is it?

[A]

And of course Heather and Esther have both checked in that they were going to be attending the event.

[E]

The husband can come out as well. I don't want you to feel left out, my friend. As we release Esther into her season, Lord, we thank you for Heather. Heather's a lovely smell, isn't it? Diffuse Heather, Lord, Diffuse Heather.

[A]

Again, it's use the name as having prophetic significance. So Heather has a nice smell. So diffuse Heather, Lord, diffuse. Let people. It's the odor and fragrance of God's work in her life or something like that. It's often these very surface level, like homonyms, you know, having to do with people's names.

[E]

Whoa, what's the 9th of May? That's your birthday.

[A]

Okay, what do you know? It's on her Facebook page.

[E]

Father, right now. In Jesus name, Lord, I release. Lord of Defu.

[A]

More sound effects. Oh my goodness. Please consider sound effects a red flag because here's the thing. The power of the spirit in a genuine sense, like the real work of the Holy Spirit does not require sound effects. It's not like when Jesus breathed on the disciples and they said, receive the spirit. He went, that probably didn't happen, right? The mighty rushing wind of the Holy Spirit in Acts chapter two was not a guy on a microphone going, it's not. If you have the authentic, you don't need to amplify it. You don't need sound effects. All right, we're going to look at the next one now.

[E]

Okay, this is a weird one. There's an advert that I can't get away from. It's. It's Compare the market. Amen. And it's the 5th of January. Compare the market. I know there's. Compare the market on 5 January. Does that mean anything to anyone?

[A]

So God can use authentic prophecy this way, but it's kind of like a Pharaoh's magician thing. This is the kind of thing that if you were going to fake it, this is how you'd fake it, right? Whereas Moses, there's a point at which he's doing things that nobody can fake. And what we see consistently in this whole video is things that can be faked and not difficult to do. So, so Compare the market. 5th of January. What could it be? You can probably guess.

[E]

It's your birthday. 5th of January. Compare the market.

[A]

James David Markert, Market, which you. You hardly hear the R if you have an Australian accent, right? Or a Welsh accent or whatever. Gary's not from Australia, but you don't really hear the R that well. It does sound like market. And 5th of January, that's his birthday.

[E]

His surname is Market. Okay, compare the market.

[A]

Whoa.

[E]

Just stay over there, buddy. So the 5th of January is your birthday. Okay,

[A]

I'll spill the beans on this tooth. The. The. The statements of whoa, while not inherently wrong, are also a tool that can be used, like Pharaoh's magicians, right? Like, can be used to fabricate things saying, like, yes, more, more, more. It sends a signal that something's already happening. And people respond in faith to that, which can be good, but can also be bad. And we should just be aware that it. If. If. If you do a lot of that, maybe it's because you're making up for the lack of something legit. Okay, we're gonna look at the next one. The previous guy, James Marquette Markert, is on the ground shaking, and he goes to prophesy to Alicia Bennett.

[E]

I just heard the word oil of gladness, and I saw. Now, this could be the. I saw one, one, one

[A]

Oil of gladness. Okay, well, she works at Young Living essential oils. And 11-1-111. That's her birthday. Okay, this is right on her Facebook page.

[E]

And I had the name Alicia. Does that mean anything to anyone? Elisha, I saw Oil of Gladness. This has been recorded.

[A]

So if the person's not in the room, as was said in our interview, my interview with Nathaniel and Haley and Chris, if the person's not in the room, he can turn to the camera and prophesy to them. But yet it just so happens that this person we prophesied to checked in that they would be at the event. Their information's right on Facebook, and they just didn't actually show up or they had left early or came late.

[E]

The Lord shows these things. So I'm going to just prophesy. I'll call you out. I feel like your birthday is like the first of November.

[A]

That to me is a red flag. Maybe you're like, what are you talking about, Mike? Earlier he said the lord showed me 1, 1, 1. But now that she's not in the room and she cannot, here's my theory, she cannot come forward and tell him what one one one means because she's not there. He's just going to go ahead and skip to the part where he does the reveal. What he knew all along is that it was her birthday, that 111 was in fact her birthday.

[E]

I feel like your birthday is like the first of November. That camera on. I feel like the Lord has given you healing and the Lord showed me a hands of healing. And I feel like literally God's using you in the area of remedial or using you in the area of. Of literally like what we're diffusing right now here.

[A]

They're diffusing like essential oils on stage. There's a diffuser behind him. You'll see in other clips. And so, yeah, he said oil of gladness. Well, if she was in the room, she could have told him like, oh, I sell essential oils. He just goes ahead and jumps right to the conclusion. He gave the bait. One, one, one and oil of gladness. She was intended, I believe, and I think it's pretty obvious, intended to provide the information of what that meant she wasn't around. Now he gives it, it's your birthday. 11:1, not 1:1:1, right, 11:1 and oil of gladness. But he doesn't want to say oils, essential oils. He goes, what we're diffusing here, it's like he's trying to dance around it. That's how it appears.

[E]

I feel like the Lord's going to use you in this next season and this is a prophetic word to you that you've stepped out in this as a sort of a business and you've abandoned what you were good at and you've literally stepped into what you love. And I feel like the Lord wants, wants you to know that what you've stepped out in is a sure. And what you've stepped out in is something that has been orchestrated by the Father.

[A]

I want to tell you how dangerous this is. This is again where even though it's positive prophecy, even though it's encouraging, he's giving her life and business and financial advice. And the way he's saying it, if you were her and you believed this, if it was me and I believed this, I would not quit that essential oils business. If that's what I'm reading right, and that's what she's doing. I wouldn't quit it. I wouldn't stop it. Nothing would be able to make me stop it. I would sell things. I would suffer. And know this is just the grind before we take off. Because God has, in his own words, Gary Morgan's words, God has assured it. God's called her to this. This is the reckless endangerment that he causes because of his fake prophecies.

[E]

And it's not a season for you to shrink back. But I feel like the Lord is saying that it's a time for you to press forward in him. And I specifically saw, literally, oil of gladness. And there's been a. There's been a grief in your family. And I'm going to say the last

[A]

18 months, which probably means that Gary went on her Facebook page and saw probably a death in the family within the past 18 months. Because nothing's off limits for the fake prophet. In fact, the more important it is, the harder, the closer to home it hits, the more it hurts, the better it makes them look. That's how I see this. And you'll see more of that as we continue.

[E]

And the Lord wants you to know that that gladness has come upon you because that grief tried to take you out. But the Lord wants to declare over you right now that he is releasing the oil of gladness in Jesus name, In Jesus name.

[A]

Money, money.

[C]

So much money.

[A]

Again, I want to present to you guys that this is a cumulative case. Please consider all the factors, all the evidence, because we have evidence that goes far beyond even these videos. I'm going to. I think these videos in themselves are enough. Knowing that it was, knowing all the details that we've shared about it, that this alone is enough. But we have a lot more to present.

[E]

Okay, this is a weird. This is. You're gonna have to. This is weird. I saw a ball. I saw a ball of money.

[A]

He is not good at this. What we're about to show you. He is not good at this. What did he see? Keep in mind, a ball of money. He was very clear. A ball of money. A ball of money. Remember this, because it. He. He shows his cards again.

[E]

I saw a ball of money. And the Lord says, let me describe what I saw.

[A]

Okay, this is going to be connected to a Guy who lives in Ballymoney or Bally. Ballym. Ballymoney. I think it's just whatever they call. You'll hear. But this is a guy named Darrell Crawford Marshall, and that's just where he's from. This is where he's from. Not even where he lives, but where he's from originally in the UK.

[E]

I saw a ball of money and I saw the 28th of January.

[A]

That's his anniversary, local church.

[E]

28th of January. Who's there? Let me. I saw B A L L Y M O N E Y. Ball of money. He.

[A]

Wait, what?

[F]

You.

[A]

Wait, what? He says he saw a ball of money and then when nobody responded, he waited. He even gave the date and there wasn't a reaction yet. And so he just spells it out because guess what? He didn't see a ball of money. He wrote down B A L L Y M O N E Y from Facebook when he stalked this guy, because the guy checked. I'm going to this event. Let's look at this. It's Ballymoney or Ballymoney. Whatever. It's not ball of money. So he said he had a vision of a physical object. What he really had was B A L L Y M O N E Y. And he tried to say it in a way that the guy would notice and then say, yeah, that's me. And it didn't work, so he spilled the beans again. He keeps spilling the beans or showing his cards. I like my analogies. Now let's just keep watching because, my goodness, this is. How did he get away with it for so long. Now this guy's gonna walk up and Gary actually shows him his notepad, which is obviously doesn't say ball of money. It just has written the town the guy's from originally right there in the notepad. And Gary looks like he's play acting as though he's discovering that it's not. Those letters don't spell ball of money at the moment. It's really weird. But here it is.

[E]

Ball of money. Oh, ball. Oh, okay. Ball of money. 28th. That's your anniversary. Okay.

[A]

It's just wild. I mean, how did he not get caught before? I mean, in a sense, what you have is people that are desperate for God to touch them. And they're in an environment, sadly, that has made things like this feel unspiritual. Like testing prophecies, which is what scripture commands us to do. The Bible says testimonies, all things hold fast to that which is good. Let two or three prophets speak. Let the Others judge that we have to actually test this stuff. And this is a completely untested environment which allows frauds like Gary Morgan, the fraud, to be the rising star.

[E]

Him into the glocal right now. In Jesus name. In Jesus name. Ball of money. Yeah. And give him a ball of money, Lord. Give him him a ball of money. Woo.

[A]

This is Monty Python's all new Life of Brian.

[E]

I saw I. The Lord showed me the life of Brian.

[A]

This will be about Brian Modra.

[E]

The Life of Brian. And I saw the 8th of October. Your name's Brian and Brad. Birthday is 8th of October. Okay. Wow. Life of Brian. Father, thank you for the life.

[A]

Life of Brian is a irreverent Monty Python film mocking Jesus. That's what Life of Brian is.

[E]

Life of Brian and his birthday on the 8th of October. Lord. Thank you.

[A]

So on Facebook, there's a picture of him apparently working on a computer. And there seems there may have been other information there about him buying a computer. And he talks about this. Gary Morgan does. I've clipped some pieces out that I think are the most relevant ones.

[E]

Do you do stuff with software? You're a software developer for Linux.

[A]

Okay, right there on the screen in front of you. For those who are listening on podcasts, I do recommend you watch this on video. There it is. Senior software engineer right there.

[E]

Thank you right now for the Life of Brian. And thank you that he's come into the light, Lord.

[A]

Okay. This is obviously very personal to them. Brian has had a real turnaround in his life. As it says on Facebook, this guy's gold. He's turned his life around for God and it's got great things to say about Brian. God bless you, Brian. I pray the Lord blesses you. But sad that Gary Morgan would use you like this. I think that would have to be my ringtone from now on.

[E]

I saw a Mini Cooper. And the Lord says, it's time for New Creation.

[A]

So you have a woman named Ellie Cooper and New Creation Studios is her the name of her thing?

[E]

Who's that?

[A]

This is the banner of her Facebook page.

[E]

I saw a mini cooper. I want you to realize something. The Lord just. I need to come off the mic in two seconds. When this lady comes, I need to come off the mic. Is your surname Cooper?

[A]

Did you catch that, guys? What he did there? He said, I saw a Mini Cooper. Somebody in the audience says, I drive a Mini Cooper. He responds to them by saying, and it's in the larger clip if I didn't include it here. And he responds by saying, is Your surname Cooper, meaning that when he said, I saw a Mini Cooper, he already knew what her surname was, her last name, that it was Cooper. And that's what he was really going for, was Cooper, not someone who drives a Mini Cooper. So he knows this.

[E]

She drives a Mini Cooper. Okay. I feel like the name, there's something about name.

[A]

He also said, I'm gonna have to come off the mic if they come up, which is interesting.

[E]

Cooper, put your hand up, just wave it up. Don't be shy, it's okay. Is your surname Cooper? Come forward.

[A]

Okay? So then he finds the lady and they. He prophesies over them. What I wanted to show there, especially with that one, is again, he knows that Minnie Cooper is a surname because when a woman comes up going, I have a Mini, he's like, no, no, no, it's not you. He knows it's not her. In fact, he knew instantly when he saw her face. It seemed. Now, everything I say here is my speculation based upon observance and rational inference to the best explanation, right? So when he sees her face, it seems he knows she's the wrong one and says, is your surname Cooper? Because he already knows it's not. That's what it looks like. And then she goes, well, I drive a Mini Cooper. Well, yeah, that's not what he was looking for. That's the thing to point out here, is that the details matter. You catch lies when you look at details.

[E]

I got the name Sarah and literally I saw Sarah and I saw it the 2nd of February.

[A]

This is Sarah. Her last name's King. Her birthday is February 2nd. All this is available on her Facebook page. And here, now, this is where some of you may disagree with me, but I'm going to say, I hope you will seriously consider the likelihood, given all the evidence that the tears and the red face that you're about to see from Gary Morgan is depraved manipulation.

[E]

And Daughter of the King. And I saw this, this girl dancing. Dancing, dancing with the Prince of Glory. Dancing with the King of Kings. If that's you, I want you to come.

[A]

Now. This will be interesting. It's actually going to be his wife. Wife. Gary's wife, who finds this girl. That's her running. She grabs.

[E]

Lord, show me Daughter of the King.

[A]

She grabs her.

[B]

She's.

[A]

She's in there with kids or something.

[E]

The surname's King.

[A]

And she's like, yeah, come on, come on, quick.

[E]

Oh, she's a babysitter. Come.

[A]

It's Sarah Morgan in the red. And now he starts sobbing as soon as he sees her, he just starts crying. Can I say this? People who have disabilities don't need you to sob when you see them. People like, it's just pretty much normal life for them. You can just treat them like a normal person and not like a disabled person. Right. But anyways, these tears, I think that this moment was planned out. I think it was plotted out. We saw this with Sean Bowles as well, where he actually cried on stage with people, even though people who know him told me he doesn't really cry. And yet he does on stage. And here Gary Morgan does. And I think that this is deeply manipulative. Imagine hugging and crying with your victim. Why are you crying, weirdo? Why is. Why is he. Let's. What would be the reason? He's so overwhelmed with God's love for her and God care. His care for her and obviously her horrible life situation. Because she wants to dance but she can't because her legs. You can say all of that, but I think that that's not true. I think that this is just a sickness that is residing in the heart of a person who could get up and blaspheme the name of Christ, speak in God's name and make stuff up to prop himself up as if he's a prophet standing up in front of the church, just existing by the grace of God, that he hasn't struck him down yet. So this moment is either a deeply compassionate man or a sick and horribly depraved man. If he's a true prophet, I'm in error here and I should repent publicly. Absolutely. If he's not, which he is, definitely the evidence says he is not, then this is sick. This is disgusting. This is evil. This is wicked.

[E]

It's the 2nd of February. That's your birthday.

[A]

No. Surprise.

[E]

I just saw Dora of the King. So they said your surname's King. I saw you dancing with the King.

[A]

I want you to imagine for a moment what it would be like for him to be cruising through Facebook and he sees a woman who has this set of things on Facebook. Oh, her name's King. That useful? I like when I can use homonyms. Right, okay. So there we go. Oh, she's dancing. I can use the dancing thing. Perhaps knew ahead of time that she was crippled and maybe his wife knew ahead. I don't know how the wife, Sarah, knew where to go get her and knew to run and go find her. And I'm sure there's a good explanation for it now. Now that I were asking the question, but I don't know what the truth of that is, but imagine what it was like for Gary to troll through Facebook and find the right people and think like, oh, here's someone who's handicapped. That's going to be really emotional. Hypothetically, based upon a significant amount of evidence, that's probably what happened.

[E]

Even though the doctor said you couldn't still dance.

[A]

Even though the doctors said you couldn't, you'll dance. Is he prophesying healing?

[E]

Even though the medical profession wrote you off, you still dance. You're a beautiful dancer. You're a beautiful dancer.

[A]

So this is one of those things where it's unclear. The first part of what he said sounds like he's saying that she's going to be able to dance because she'll implied be healed. But then as soon as he says more, you're like, well, maybe that's not what he meant. And this is consistent. The last thing I'll say about this row of prophetic things from Gary Morgan is that the prophecies, the things he knows about them, are highly specific. The birthday, the last name, the situation in their families going on. But the prophecies about the future are generally very generic, right? Just like positivity or the Lord's opening up something new. He's going to use you in whatever way is consistent with what I already know about you. That is the pattern. Super specific word of knowledge, easily accessible on Facebook. Really vague statement about their future that is mostly untestable. Although years have gone by since this. So these people, many of them could actually test those words. But even still, here's how it works. With a fake prophecy, I prophesy to 15 different people that they're going to have an amazing business. 14 of them don't. They lose all their money. They put everything they had into something because I prophesied it, and then they lost it all. One of them succeeded, and I ignore and forget the 14. But the one who succeeded, I can pull that guy out anytime I want as proof of my prophetic truthfulness, right? That God used me. And this guy feels indebted to me because while he did it without my involvement, he feels like I owe this guy. You know, he encouraged me and he told me to do it and I went for it. So, yeah, it's a numbers game. You prophesy, fake to enough people, you ignore the ones you hurt, you remember the ones that you happened to be right about, and you can continue to stockpile amazing stories. I didn't realize I had one more. So this one Listen to what he's. Again, Gary tells on himself. He's really bad at this. Listen to this.

[E]

Senorita or sunita? Senorita or sunita?

[A]

Senorita or senita? Those are two very different words. Right? Senorita. That is a much longer word with extra letters in it versus senita, which is a word most of us have probably never heard of. It's a name, so it could be either one. He doesn't know which one it is. Right. That's why he said senorita or senita. Well, well, let's listen.

[E]

Is that anyone? Your name's Sunita. Evita.

[A]

Did you hear that? Somebody named Evita responded to him and he didn't go, is your name senorita? Is your name Sunita? He seems to think it's a name. Didn't reveal that, but now, now it seems to be out there. But he says, is your name sanita? And keep listening.

[E]

No, it's S A, N I, T A. How.

[A]

Oh, dim witted. Gary Morgan, did you start with I have one of these. I don't know which one. Senorita or senita. And as soon as someone says evita, you go, no, no, it's senita. And here's how it's spelled. S A, N, I, T A. You even have the spelling and you know exactly which one it is because he keeps showing his cards. Gary's not very good at this. You're just not that good at it, which is why you got caught, which is why you didn't actually continue to be. He had to stop doing this. I don't know if you guys know this, but he's. At least to my knowledge, he's either stopped or at least cut way back on the number of times that he does this exact kind of thing because it was too hot, I think, for him. And. But yeah, still, if you'll fake this, you are fake, period. You have to be written off, period.

[E]

There is. Okay, I saw. Let me describe her. She's a woman who's behind a camera.

[A]

Wait, what? So listen, he says, senorita or Sunita? He was hoping Sunita would pop up and be like, it's me, I'm Sunita. That didn't work. Evita shows up. So he goes, no, no, it's senita. It's spelled this way. And then he. He suddenly knows even more. He goes, it's a woman who's behind a camera. So he knows what kind of work she does. He knows the kind of things she does. Either volunteer or some kind of work that she's behind a camera. Photography.

[E]

Okay. She's a photographer. Okay. Let me declare this. I'm going to go down this. So the law says 6th of August,

[A]

and here's her on August 6th on her Facebook page, people saying, you know, saying, thank you for wishing me Happy birthday on August 6th.

[E]

And the Lord's taking you from behind the camera to in front of the camera. And the Lord wants you to know there is a beauty that is upon your life that you see in others. But the Lord is saying he is wanting to bless you, to see in yourself.

[A]

I mean, that's nice, but it's like Pharaoh's magicians. It's like the kind of thing you could just make up. You could just make up anytime. So this was some of the words that you can imagine. Nathanael and Haley and then Chris and other guys getting to see this going, oh, my goodness, like, here's the word. We thought this was amazing. We were there in the room. We thought it was a beautiful moment. But now we're finding all this information online. And I'll tell you, they didn't even notice, necessarily, all the things I'm noticing. But I've looked at enough of these punks to be able to spot what they're doing. And those of you who are like Mike, don't call them punks. Listen, Jesus would have much harsher words for guys like Gary Morgan. Peter would have said something like, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever. That's Peter, right? Jesus talked about the Pharisees because they were hypocrites. They were faking, they were actors, they were pretending and it weren't real. And he talks about them having weeping and gnashing of teeth in relation to them. So Dum dum or numbskull or all those other things are completely appropriate, if not too soft for Gary Morgan. All right, I'm a little worked up and you should be, too. But I'm going to get back to the interview now and you'll hear me a cut in at some points here and there with little voiceovers that I'll do just to help you guys be guided along the path to understand exactly what is up with Gary. The well without water, Morgan.

[C]

It was certainly more than enough to kind of want to look into it for further, you know, or want to bring it to the leaders. And yeah, so like, that's what I, I and Nathaniel and were trying to do. We went to a couple of the senior leaders of the church to Pastor Catherine and Pastor Joel, and it was met with that's not true kind of a feeling, you know, so it was like, I know, I know from Pastor Catherine. She's like, I know Gary. He's relationally, I know him. This is not happening. You know, and we're like, but isn't it? And it was like, just drop it. You know, this is not.

[F]

And also, Chris, I'll add in the, in the middle of that as well, there was like a sense of, I guess this is from Joel, but like, here's a word that he gave at another church. And again, Mike, we like, our sense was like, if we can see, this is legit awesome. Like, that's a good thing. And so he would kind of send words from other churches that Gary had given, saying, hey, how about this? You can't explain that, unfortunately, I want

[A]

to chime in if I can and say, please, yeah, it can take us a while to realize when someone is a fraud. And it can be this thing where we're almost, we're trained to work for them, to like, make even just the tiniest slim of a possibility that they're still legit. We can, we can sort of do their job for them and protect them and then that, you know, propagates what they're doing. But what I've learned in my studies, at least for my part, I'll speak for myself, is that I believe these guys who do this. Facebook was just a new, convenient tool. This is something he probably does. I'm speaking for myself here all the time. He is constantly learning people's names, watching, seeing when they open their wallet, if there's any date, apparently picture there that he can learn something from so you can give him a prophetic word. When guys are data mining on Facebook, it's because they data mine in life. And so when they give you another word, it's, how do you know that an email didn't come? Hey, Gary, my cousin's coming. He's an atheist. He's, he's, he's in university and he just left the faith, but he's going to come. I hope you have a word for him. And then now he has this email nobody knows about, so he can produce this word on the spot easily. Once the guy, you know, the guy's a fraud, you have to start noticing that they're always looking for more information. So that's at least how I would view things. This, to me, is a huge smoking gun. The data that you brought to Catherine, that you brought to your, to your leaders is, is already enough to say this man is. Is data mining stuff and making it up.

[F]

Wow.

[A]

But you actually have a lot more. More.

[F]

Yeah. Well, that was the thing. It started to words from other churches. We. We looked into them and immediately it was more concern. It was. And these were words, Mike, where some of them were, were heavy things, like someone had passed away in a family and people are crying and these are like, these are serious stuff.

[E]

What's the 7th of October? Okay, that's your birthday. Okay, I'm seeing the name Eleanor. Who's El. What's the 14th of July, 7th of July and 14th of July. That's. That's personal to you guys. Lord wants to say, I'm redeeming, I'm redeeming. You know what that is. And so I'm not going to go into that in the spirit, but you

[D]

know what that is.

[F]

The idea that someone could be doing this was deeply troubling to us. Like, really troubling. So, yeah, over to you, Chris.

[C]

But no, it was just a time. It was a continual time where, you know, you know, Joe would come back and go, what about this word? You know, he gave an address. How do you get that? That's not on Facebook? And it was true. And, you know, I was like, kind of rejoicing, you know, oh, great. Thank God everyone's right. He's Gary's, you know, not doing this. Nathaniel goes, hold up a Google search. Second from the top address to this guy, you know, and it was like, oh, my gosh. So it would just throw us and our main leader.

[F]

A main leader at that.

[C]

A core leader in the church. Yeah. And that was another thing. It was like. There was a time. It was like, well, when he ministered at the HIM conference, there was no attending lists. But how did you, you know, how would anyone know who's going to even be there? And then we thought back and we go, well, hang on. All the people that. That were prophesied over were all people from our staff or that church's staff, pretty much. It was like a massive majority, at least. Anyway, we came away specifically saying, wow, God blessed our team so strongly there. Like, God really just picked our team to bless that night with all that. We were getting all the words. And so you're like, well, you could be quite confident there's no attending list. But it didn't, let's say, put that assail that question mark in our heads that we were really hoping to find that in that three months.

[A]

This is common in other fake prophets that I've looked into is they Prophesy to the worship team, to the leadership team. They'll meet with the pastor, what prayer requests, what's going on in your church? They'll gather data. Paul Kane, from many, many years back was reportedly busted for looking up member information in the files of a church and then using that to prophesy. He had a great memory, so he would retain all that info and then he would go public and, and share it. And, and that. That lines up. It's like a symptom to look for is when this guy goes into a room where he doesn't know anybody and he can't actually data mine for some reason, does he pivot to the people that he knows. All of a sudden he's prophesying to his own staff even, or his own kids or something, you know, and it's, It's. That is a red flag that we should consider.

[F]

And I guess for us, that's what it was at that stage. Real, really red flags, serious red flags. And Gary was actually going to be speaking at our church in just a few months at a normal church service in. And so it obviously almost made it like a ticking clock for us that we needed to bring this to the leadership of which Chris and I did. We brought the multiple words, and Chris, you could talk to that, but we brought it to them.

[C]

Yeah, all the new stuff that we'd found, it was like kind of a last ditch, okay, can we just get a hearing? You know, can we get lock in, you know, a face to face and go over everything? And it was like, you know, what if. What would you need to see to. To. To believe that this is happening? You know, if he prophesied a fake Facebook, would that do it? If that person didn't even exist, would that do it? And it was like, that was brought

[F]

up in that meeting by. By someone else. It was actually. Oh, well, I guess if he called out a fake Facebook page, that would obviously be enough. But the meeting quickly shifted to a sense of, I want you to drop it. I want you to leave. It was the. The instruction that, that Chris and I very strongly received in from your pastor. Pastor Catherine?

[D]

Yes.

[F]

Yeah.

[A]

Correct.

[F]

But someone who didn't receive that, you know, instruction was Hayley.

[G]

I wasn't in that meeting, so I wasn't told to drop it.

[A]

Yeah, well, good for Haley. Haley's. Haley's a hero in this story. I love. I love what. What she did. So let me just recap. So you're in the meeting. You. You present a number of evidences. You're given. What about this word? What about that word? And yet you can still look those up online that you can find all this stuff, even the extra ones they give online. It's just more red flags then you're under. I'm guessing you're understandably like, I'm kind of up against a wall. We've got a ton of evidence, and it doesn't seem to raise any alarms for you guys. What would it take? And they say, well, if there was a fake Facebook page and he called out a person that doesn't even exist, then it would be for sure. That's the implication that I'm getting from your story here. And then. Then Haley takes in, it takes up for the next part of the story.

[F]

Right, because the meeting moved on pretty quickly to say, but I want you to drop it. This is a distraction. I want you guys to leave it.

[C]

And we came away feeling bound to that. You know, we felt like we couldn't, you know, in. I don't know why. When you look back, it's like, we'll just do it, you know, But I've. I personally felt like I've done all I can do. Nathaniel, I think you felt the same. We've done all we can do. We can't go any further with this. We have to just let it go. And, And. And, you know, that. That, that was the impression or the feeling that we had. But. Yeah, go on.

[G]

Yeah. So I, like, obviously still continued to feel concerned about it and quite grieved as I would pray about it and things like that. So I decided to make a fake person on Facebook and I made their first name Sarah. I made their birthday 10 June, and I took a photo of a couple of sheep next door, and I made that the profile picture and sent out some friend requests to try and make it look legit enough. And. And that was it. Like, I'd thought about making a few. Like a few fake pieces, but again, didn't want to spend too much time on it and wanted to just trust God with whatever happened. So, yeah, then it came time for Gary to come speak at our church again. And in the lead up to it, our church put out a Facebook post to say, you know, Gary will be speaking, speaking on Friday night and Sunday morning and Sunday night at our church. So I got my fake person to comment, like, yay, I can't wait on that post.

[A]

And that's because there was all you did. That's literally the only thing that you did with that Facebook page was just one little Comment.

[G]

Yeah.

[F]

And we got a screenshot of that.

[G]

Yeah. So, yeah, I did that and just prayed and, you know, tried to trust God with it and, and yeah, it came to the Friday night that Gary was speaking at the church. Nathaniel was, he was there, he was

[F]

on the cameras again.

[G]

And I was at home with our baby. But I was watching on Livestream, and Gary gave a few prophetic words to, to people who were like, mostly not in the building again. So he gave prophetic words to Livestream and then I'll never forget when, when he said that he had a prophetic word for somebody called Sarah. And he said that he had the date, 10th of June. And I remember I just like inhaled sharply, like,

[E]

seriously, go all night. Even if the next five hit nothing, I'll still go for a why? Because I've seen so many people changed by the goodness of God. Amen. Yeah. The next one I got was I saw the 10th of June and I had my wife's name, Sarah. I had sarah on 10 june. Okay, let me go down the camera

[B]

again

[G]

in that moment. And I just felt like I just went numb, almost like in shock at what had just happened.

[A]

Yeah.

[F]

Wow. And you gave me a call.

[C]

Yeah.

[G]

Rang Nathaniel.

[F]

And I remember your voice just shaking when she called me. I'd finished with the cameras. I picked up the. Maybe I called you, but I remember your voice just.

[G]

Yeah, I felt like I was like trying to get the words out. Like he said, Sarah, 10th of June. That was my fake person. So Nathaniel came straight home.

[F]

Yeah, I did. I don't even think I turned the cameras off. I just said, I'm coming home. And when I got home, we immediately contacted Tom and Catherine, the senior pastors, of course. And I remember just talking to Catherine and explaining what had happened. Tom, her husband, confirmed that this was in, had in fact happened. He went on Facebook, double checked, and basically they said to us, hey, we, we will deal with this. We will go talk to Gary and leave it with us. And so the call ended. And for us, we, we thought that, you know, that was it. I, I, yeah, we thought that was it.

[A]

And when you say you thought that we didn't get it, you mean you thought you wouldn't need to be involved. They're going to take it from here and they're going to hold him accountable. And I can I, before you say what, say what happened next, can I just ask you, like. Yeah, I want people to understand, like, to realize what it's like to have someone who's even given you like you were saying, Haley's giving you a prophetic word, and then you're finding out that this guy's fake. Like, that's got to feel like a violation to you. I mean, it's. It's a violation against the Lord, but it's also a violation against you because now you're like, who am I? Like, your puppet. You're just manipulating me for some weird agenda. What was that like for you? Because I know what it's like to be at a church and be like, this is my place, man. This is where I'm safe and where I'm behind everything. And I support 100% what we're doing. And it's just such a betrayal to me, to use a very simple American term. Gary is a scumbag for doing this. And it's atrocious that. That what happens down the road next, as you keep telling your story, is that you guys are made out to be the bad guys in this scenario, which blows my mind. And this is. This is. Anyway, I'll let you tell more of the story. I don't want to get ahead of you, but would you just tell us, like, what was that like in that experience?

[G]

Yeah. I think we can only speak to what we personally experienced. And for me, I do remember the feeling that it was very unsettling. And I remember actually, like, crying in prayer and just feeling a sense of injustice and a real. Of sense. Sense of grief over what I thought might have been happening.

[F]

It was a sense for Hayley, like, it was deeply upsetting. And that night we had a sense of closure to some extent because we did think Tom and Catherine would deal with it. But we didn't receive a call Saturday at all. And he was due to minister at our church again on the Sunday. And so we didn't receive a call until the Sunday. And it was a call where Catherine told us Gary would like to meet with us in the green room an hour before the service started and wanted to talk to us. So we were a bit confused as to what that would be about. We arrived without. How old was Gabriella at the time?

[G]

Yeah, our young baby. A few months old.

[F]

Yeah. And we walked into the room, and very quickly we found out that Tommy, Catherine had gone to Gary, talked to him this Saturday, and he looked them in the eyes and said, he's innocent. And they believed him. We also found out that at 8:50 that night, Saturday night, an email came through from a supposed Sarah claiming to be the real Sarah to our Glory City info at Glory City. Email and basically said, and we've got screenshots of that, but basically said that it's the.

[G]

Yeah, the emails said like, hi, I'm Sarah and that was my birthday, 10th of June. And I believe the word was for me.

[F]

And apparently Gary also forwarded the email to Catherine because the, the supposed Sarah had emailed him. And so he emailed Catherine Sunday morning and said, looks like this Sarah's real, basically and let's meet with Nathaniel and Haley. So the devil doesn't have a foothold. So we're in this meeting just shaken.

[A]

So I don't mean to laugh at the statement, it's just he's. Gary has a habit of telling on himself, I think from other conversations I've had with a guy. And when he says that he spells faith, R I S K. I'm just like, yep, that is a risk you're taking, looking people's information up online. Then when he says, I wouldn't let, let the devil get a foothold. And I'm just like, he's already got your whole leg, dude.

[C]

But, and if I can just add, I spoke to somebody that was a witness to his sort of countenance at the time after he was confronted with this pre that meeting, who said to me, the guy was worried. I don't know what was going on, but he was worried to the core. And that night, Saturday night, to the effect. So I don't know when. I just know it was somewhere around the time somebody had seen him and said this guy was worried and mentioned something to the effect of the. This thing's going to blow up big. I don't know what he was talking about or why he would be so worried if you were, if you had nothing to worry about. I don't know. You know.

[A]

Yeah, it's, it's interesting to know. And, and this email turns out to be really, really important in the meeting, correct? Yeah, but we'll, we'll just, just point out that you already said this. But the email shows up after he's told that he's under suspicion. He finds out he's under suspicion and then an email comes in, it says, hey, it's me, I'm Sarah. Yeah, correct.

[F]

Yes. From a Sarah Lamberty. The email was from. And so this meeting, this in the green room very quickly became about us. And it was really confusing to us because things were thrown around very quickly. Do you remember some of the.

[G]

Yeah. So Gary was asked, asking us, you know, why did you set a trap? That's what, that's what he said that it was making a fake person on Facebook. And I remember he quoted the scripture verse in Proverbs that says, he who sets a trap will fall in it. And he seemed to imply that there was something. Oh, I can't hear you.

[A]

I want to remember forever that he said that you. He who says. Because Gary has a way of just saying the things that backfire because this is a trap he set. It turns out. We'll find out as you tell the story. And it does. He is the one that falls into it. Actually, he's going to fall into it today as people see this video and find out the true story of what really happened here. But, yeah, they come against you for this. This email, which. Or this Facebook page, which is nuts to me, because every criminal, of course, in court who got caught from an under undercover cop pretending to be a prostitute or something is going to say, well, they trapped. They tricked me, they tricked me. You know, and this is irrelevant. Like, that is just good undercover work. Like every espionage thing that has been successful was based upon the idea of having to do certain things in order to give the opportunity for someone to reveal themselves. And I think that it's fine, you know, God says, why don't you send spies into the land? So they hid their identities. Rahab hides them, you know, as they. As they're checking out the land of Jericho, this sort of thing. Jesus even sometimes would travel in ways where he was incognito or ask people, trick questions and lay traps for the Pharisees and stuff. Anyway, I'm just saying I'm in your corner. You don't even need to defend yourself.

[C]

There's an entire task force here in Australia at the moment, and their whole job is to catch guys going after underage and children. And their whole job is creating fake Facebooks to get these. These guys, you know, Right.

[A]

And they're heroes. What they're doing is awesome. And anybody who says, yeah, but they were. They were deceitful and they laid traps. We're like, what's your Internet search history? Is what I want to know if you're saying that, you know, so, yeah, it's really sketchy.

[F]

I do believe Paley is the hero of this story with her actions. At the time, though, we were in our mid, early mid-20s and very confused. And so we. We were just dumbfounded. And it became even worse when it was said that, you know, the Pharisees asked for a sign and we were testing God. It said that we were. It was said that we were on A witch hunt. And this is where I guess that the details are difficult. It didn't just come from Gary. And as much as it pains me to say this, it came from our leadership as well, from Catherine. And we were absolutely shocked. Like, we could hardly speak.

[C]

It was.

[G]

It was hard having having our pastor say, well, do you think Jesus. Jesus would have set a trap? I don't think Jesus would have done this.

[A]

I think so. I think he would have.

[F]

And by the end of the meeting, we were, you know, just very confused. We left the church that night. I remember the worship was starting, and I just. We didn't want to even talk to anybody. We just wanted to get home and. And process, to try and figure out

[G]

what had just happened. We just felt so confused, so bewildered at what had just happened, even that night. Yeah. Like, we went home, and I remember Nathaniel is almost never like this, but he was pacing back and forth across the room and just, like, saying, like, oh, I don't think there's anything wrong in my heart, but, oh, maybe, you know, God, search my heart. Heart, like, is there anything wrong in my heart? Like, and that kind of thing. It was just extremely unsettling, definitely.

[F]

And the next part of the story, I've agonized over whether or how to tell this, but it feels important to this, to the story, I believe. So the next day, Catherine asked me to come over to her house. And. And I remember just sitting in a chair that I felt like I was sinking into. And the things from the day before were said and echoed. But even worse at this time, it was said that I was like, you know, you've called the works of

[B]

the

[F]

Holy Spirit, the works of Satan, and this is extremely serious. You've really hurt me. And I remember she said to me, I want you to call Gary. I'm gonna put him on speakerphone, and I want you to apologize to him and tell him that you're wrong. And I remember just. I couldn't. I couldn't do that. I just said to. Can I go pray for 10 minutes at least? And. I remember just calling. I didn't think I'd get emotional on this. Sorry.

[A]

It's okay.

[F]

I remember calling Hayley's parents because I didn't. I didn't know what to do. And. And they said to me, hayley's mum said, you're a good man, Nathaniel. And I just started crying. Then Hayley's dad said, you can't apologize without your wife. This is something you guys have to do together. So he gave me that Advice which really helped me because I told Catherine, I'm not willing to do anything without my wife. And I went back home, and at the time, we lived next door to Tom and Catherine, rented from them and were of full time on staff with them. So I came back and Hayley and I just had to figure out what on earth to do.

[G]

We tried to, you know, think of. What could we apologize for? We need to think of something. Because.

[F]

Because I was not willing to. To go against my conviction and say, I believe Gary to be innocent. I'd rather lose my job.

[D]

Right.

[A]

So at this time, still believe. Believe he's guilty. But you're experiencing incredible pressure from your past.

[F]

It's hard for me to deny the. This is my personal opinion, but the evidence that. That stood before us, especially when it was said, this is what would need to be seen, that was put out there. So for me, it was like, we've seen this. I can't test whether this Sarah is real right now, but that looks extremely suspicious. What I can't deny is that a Facebook page has been called that was created to. To trap Gary. That's the truth. It was. And it's a. I believe that's a heroic thing that Hayley did. Any. Anyway, back to that moment.

[G]

So one of the things that Catherine had said at some point in this process is that these things are discerned in the spirit. And you need to believe in the spirit. Spirit.

[F]

No matter what.

[G]

No matter what. And so we, as we tried to figure out what can we apologize for, we came up with, well, we can apologize for not seeking only in the spirit. Like, we went to Facebook as well. So.

[F]

So we went back over. Catherine put. Did you want to say anything?

[G]

No, you go.

[F]

Catherine put Gary on speakerphone. And we apologized for the. That. And it honestly seemed like it was just more. They both just wanted it over. So, yeah, we apologize for that.

[A]

I'm going to share with you what I believe was going on there. Okay. This is based upon a number of situations I've heard about. Is that this accusation, this is. This is hypothetical, or this is my hypothesis. I'll put it that way. The information where people might be whispering, that they caught you looking stuff up online, they caught this. That's the fear. That's the great fear. It's not you. It's. It's. It's things spreading for Gary and the power of him being able to tell people, they apologize to me, that's end of story. It doesn't even matter what he says. You apologized about he has. If he has that in his pocket, he can, he can use that rhetorically. Anytime someone brings something up, he can be like, they apologize to me. And you were offering a careful apology, but it's obviously not going to be used that way. At least that's my opinion. So this, this moment is grievous. And to compare it to the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is. Is wild. It's just wild. And it would be jarring to anybody to have your spiritual leader do that to you.

[F]

Yeah. And the, the conversation itself, I didn't realize would be used the way it has come to be used, the, the apology in, you know, and I guess we can speak to that later. But as the conversation ended, the phone call ended.

[G]

We heard Gary say to Catherine at the end, so can you hide that Facebook post? And Catherine said, yes. I had taken a screenshot of that post, but it was hidden, removed.

[F]

And for us, a few weeks honestly passed and it felt confusing. It kind of in some ways went cold. That was until a minister named Ben Fitzgerald came and spoke at our church. And it was my job to drive him around for hours. While we were driving, he told me that he had just exposed two different people for data mining. Someone was an intern at Bethel and another person in Darwin. And they repented with tears, cried, because he basically brought the information to them. And remember I said I had no idea that this had ever happened to me. It was like. It was just absolutely shocking. I was like, I didn't realize anyone had ever done this in the like. So when he said this, I was. I basically obviously told him about Gary because, yeah, I mean, it's pretty self explanatory. And it turns out he and a number of other pastors were already suspicious of Gary.

[A]

Hey, guys, editor Mike here. And it's important that I point out real quick at this moment in the video that this demonstrates that Bethel leadership in Reading, California, like Bill Johnson, those guys, they were well aware that people were using Facebook to fake prophecy back in 2016. If you listen to this video, that's not what this video is necessarily focused on, but it's definitely an important piece of evidence that comes out of this video. They were not unaware of this or of how to confirm it yet. Gary Morgan and Sean Bowles both continued

[F]

and Ben took it very seriously. So he looked into the different bits of evidence, the screenshot that we had, along with the words, and very quickly came deeply concerned about this. We again were reprimanded for even mentioning it to Ben and were Asked to not say I'm not say anything to anyone. After that, we very strongly told that Hayley would have times when she wanted to tell, you know, even her best friends or close friends and, and she couldn't.

[G]

Yeah, and that was hard not being able to tell anyone, just knowing that we were told not to.

[F]

Even people who had had these words, there were moments where Hayley would burst out crying talking to someone who had a word for from Gary and couldn't even tell the person. So horrible time. But Ben came on board and he, he kind of came to this conclusion that it kind of hangs on the Sarah email. Either a real Sarah comes forward and Gary's vindicated or this person doesn't seem to exist. And it's even worse because it looks like perhaps Gary or someone else could be behind this. So that was his conclusion. Ben got very involved helping and over a process of a few weeks we made some shocking discoveries. Uh, we found out that, well, first of all, Sarah, the supposed Sarah in the email was responding when we asked can you, I believe Ben did, can you come forward? We just need to confirm your, who you are. And the person said, I'm going to Cambodia for six months. I won't be available. So Ben obviously became more suspicious. They sent what's called a banana tracker in the email and ask are you now in Cambodia? And they said, yes, I'm in Cambodia. With. Was it the Red Cross or with the Red Cross?

[A]

Sarah, I know that when she first emailed she expressed interest in going to Gary's school, which is also in Australia. So now he's got to relocate. Well, this is, this is what I'm going to conclude. He's got to relocate her to some far away location because she can't ever talk to anybody. She can't ever meet anybody if she doesn't exist.

[F]

Right. And for, for us, Ben sent what's called a banana tracker in the email with a friend and it showed that the person was still in Australia while claiming to be in Cambodia. We were then able to follow up with the Red Cross and there was no such Sarah Lamberty at the. At with the Red Cross on any missions trip in Cambodia. So obviously became more and more suspicious. And then Hayley and I actually worked with a private investigator locally who came to the conclusion that the surname Lamberty is extremely rare. And there does not seem seemed to be an Australian with the name serial empty in all of Australia at the time was the conclusion that he came to. And so Ben actually confronted Gary with this information and, and Let him know about this, wanting him to repent because the other people he had gone to had in fact repented. Gary refused to repent and I believe Ben told him that he would be looking into the email more. And so that which he planned to. Actually Ben's I guess hypothesis was when you create an email address usually it has a time that it was created. If it was created on the same date that the events happened, it was almost certainly made then or you might even be able to find out who owns the domain, etc. So he told Gary he was planning to do that, hoping Gary would repent, but the he did not. And a Google expert with Ben found out that that exact day the serial empty email was deleted. And not only was it deleted, but when an email is deleted, an email

[A]

account, not just an email. Right, the whole account was wiped.

[F]

Correct, the whole account wiped. And what happens is you see a screenshot with zero days since this was deleted and you can see a recovery email. So Ben, with the help of this Google expert out of interest, put a few recovery few emails in for the recovery email. None of them worked until they put Gary's email in and it confirmed and worked as the recovery email. So obviously at this point Ben was more than convinced that Gary had been doing this, that he had been behind the events the whole time. And so Ben along with us put a document together to clearly make the case here. It was called the sequence of events. According to Gary I believe I didn't know what a dossier was back then, but we put the, the document together, presented it to, to Gary's board, to

[A]

Catherine editor Mike here. I just wanted to point out that we actually asked Gary and his guys about this email and, and in our confrontation they were never able to offer anything remotely resembling a satisfactory answer. This is just the ultimate smoking gun.

[F]

Can I just ask, how do you explain Sarah and 10 June, June being called out, no other email existing to prove that there is a Sarah Lamberty and Gary calling out the exact name date of a Facebook page. It only had about 12 comments on there.

[B]

I just.

[F]

How do you explain that?

[D]

Well I'm in the fortunate position that I don't really need to explain it.

[C]

Nathaniel, you realize the email is deleted. Ben then goes to Gary and says, you know, what's going on here? Somewhere around that time Gary mentions that he's under some sort of attack himself. There was a bunch of, you know, he said he's getting like death threats or he's getting all these like personal threats and Ben said, oh, can you. Can you screenshot those? Can I. Can I read those threats? And then he said, everything's been deleted. My account was hacked.

[A]

His whole account gone. So Gary now is talking about how he is being targeted. His account's hacked, his emails are deleted. He talks about it. We have the. I've seen this. We've seen where he talks about his photos of his kid being taken. His prophetic notes have. Have been deleted as well, which. Which would potentially be evidence that his notes are full of Facebook information. And all that stuff is gone. And so all the sequence of events is so damning that I don't know how any human being on earth can doubt what exactly is going on here. I. I don't. I cannot conceive of how anybody can. You had enough when you had all these words that were all Facebook and they were all people who clicked attending, and one person who said, yeah, he asked my name in the hallway or whatever, then you have the. The other words. You look up and you're like, oh, those are also similarly available. Then you have. Oh, he prophesied to leadership when. When there's nobody available online. And then you've got the fake Facebook page where he calls it out. Then you have the email that goes. Gets deleted. And it also comes in right after he gets confronted. And then the recovery of the email is for his own email account. His own. What was. Well, I'm sorry, I won't mention the name of the email account. I know it, but I won't say it. But it's for his thing that he uses for all kinds of stuff. Then he is now saying, there's a plot. There's a plot against me. That's the pivot that he's got left. Now, Editor Mike here, what you guys are about to hear is Gary Morgan, actually, in our meeting, in our confrontation, punting to conspiracy theory that he was targeted, that some elaborate, weirdly designed plot against him involved making a fake email account that would defend him, only to be discovered months later by Ben Fitzgerald, who just happened to. To dig deep into that email, and, man, the whole thing is just wild. And I think this is basically a backwards admission of guilt. But if you wouldn't mind, share the three reasons that you think it was associated with him.

[F]

Yeah, sure. So reason one, when Ben and Joel, not myself, started to. When Ben was concerned about this, Haley had made the Facebook page. But when Ben was concerned, he said that the email will either show that she's innocent. Sorry, that Gary's innocent, or if a Real Sarah Lamberty comes forward. It was as simple as that with a birth date then real person exists. So that was the main thing he wanted to do with Joel. So the three reasons one Sarah Lampity, the so called Sarah Lampardy consistently lied about their location. They said that they were, you know, on a missions trip in Cambodia with the Red Cross when they were actually in Australia and consistently lied about that. Reason two, Lamberty is an extraordinarily rare surname. We know this because at the time that Ben was concerned we looked into the name Sarah Lamberty and had a private investigator which this has been made known to everyone. This is not new information. So the, the private investigator said very clearly forensic investigator, there does not seem to be a Sarah Lamberty on the record in Australia. So the person, reason two, the person doesn't seem to exist. Not only that, the person is not on the record of going to this missions trip with the Red Cross. That's something you can look at. They said I'm, I've gone to Cambodia. Keep in mind this person supposedly emailed Gary and emailed Glory City Church. So excited about this word. A few weeks later, not willing to talk about it, they said they're going on a missions trip for six months and we looked up with the Red Cross if a serial empty had gone to Cambodia. They did not. So reason two, it doesn't seem that a serial empty exists. And just to make things worse, Ben brought this to my attention. There seems to be that Lamberty was a very rare name and he realized oh interesting, I know someone with the surname Lamberty. I'll ask them if they know Asera this person's name. I believe Ben could tell us who it is. But they had the surname Lambda. He was the only person he knew. He asked if they knew of Acera. They did not. Then Ben found out this person is in Gary's prophetic school. So we believe that's a very odd coincidence since the name Lamberty is 1 in 1 1.9 million chance of having that name is roughly about 20 potentially in Australia with that surname. When Hayley made the Facebook page, when

[G]

I'm, when I created this Sarah on Facebook I made the name the last name Wildman. Just thinking of a last name of people that went to my parents church so their friends, that was how I came up with it.

[F]

So if you're in a rush one could likely conclude that you would use a name you're familiar with. Again not necessarily a smoking gun. But the third reason was that other reason we mentioned that it strongly appeared based on Ben, not myself, and what he did with a Google expert after he put a post out and said, can someone help me with this? The Sarah email got deleted at exactly that same time. It said:0 days ago this email was deleted. The recovery email there you could put multiple emails in of which it rejected. Ben did this, asked me to have a quick look. I did the same thing with the help of this Google expert. The only email that worked was Gary's. The only reason I have said that that is not unequivocal is because to do that would be illegal. I've never said that that in and of itself is a smoking gun, but I sure believe that those three points are enough to cast extraordinary doubt on the existence of a serial ambity. And therefore we're back to a fake Facebook page has been called out the name. And for us, we can't look past that. To us, that may not be able to be explained by you guys, but for us, that is all we decided we would need to see to know that this was happening. Haley put that out as like, as

[G]

a fleece for God and just made it and decided to trust God to reveal whether it was happening.

[F]

And I was happy.

[G]

We are.

[F]

And I was happy to move on when, when we.

[C]

Yes, please go Add just one more oddity about that. That time and this email being deleted at the same time you got hacked, was it Gary, and you lost everything?

[E]

Yeah, and I've got screenshot on the 18th of, at 3, something in the morning, my Gmail was compromised and accessed and I've got screenshot of that. So it was on the 19th, like Nathaniel just said that everything then got deleted. And so yeah, my, my stuff was accessed and hacked. And that's again a reason I said to Pete, we, we need to get these devices forensically looked at because there's nefarious things going on and everything is trying to be set up against me in this. And, and also as well, it's, it's

[D]

no,

[E]

it's no secret that hacking was being used by those involved.

[A]

Wait, wait, wait, let's slow down. Are you suggesting that somebody set you up?

[E]

That's what I was trying to find. It looked like, yeah.

[A]

But what do you, what do you think happened? You think you said nefarious stuff and you think that someone set up the Sarah Lamberty email and connected it to you after hacking your account in order to make it look like you were guilty? Is that a hypothesis?

[E]

Absolutely. Because again, being at dinner when this thing has happened, I have no explanation on how that email could be sent for me if I was at dinner.

[A]

But let me lean on this a little bit, if we can. Your theory is there's a possibility that somebody set up the Sarah Lamberty email as part of an attempt to make it look like you were trying to cover your tracks on something.

[E]

Yeah.

[A]

Okay, so then that would also imply that you think that there is an actual connection, that the Sarah Lambert email is a fake person who's pretending to defend you initially, that that was the initial thing, is Sarah Lambert is defending you, and that then the person who set this up was counting on them doing all this work, talking to an investigator just to find out that the email was somehow connected with you, that this was all part. Because the only people that could be in on this would be the ones on this call. You're saying that they. Right, like, play it out. What does this look like? It sounds like you're saying either I'm guilty or I was set up. And I think that one of those is a much simpler explanation.

[E]

Sorry, you might drop that. I didn't get the last part.

[A]

You said sorry. What if they. If they were. If someone was setting you up at this stage in the game, who's doing it? Nobody's gunning for you yet. They're just, like, hoping it's not true. Gary, come on. Dude, you're such a liar, man. It's so ridiculous. It is. It is atrocious. I don't know how you guys can't. Peter Allen, you should be so embarrassed when you had a chance to out this guy as blaspheming the name of Christ as abusing the people of God.

[F]

Yes. And obviously the information was compelling enough that Catherine, along with several other leaders, did come to the conclusion that Gary is. They believed Gary was guilty of data mining. And I mean, I don't know how to talk about. There was an apology. I don't know if you want to jump in at all there, Chris. I don't really know how to cover that information, but editor Mike here.

[A]

This is a tricky subject, actually. So Catherine had really apologized to them profusely and said she believed them. But unfortunately, it was a little bit later where she actually sent an email over to Gary's guys or to Gary, I don't know. And Alan read that email during our meeting in the confrontation call. You can hear this if you listen in. It was really confusing because in that email, she kind of threw him under the bus and made it look like Nathaniel was wrong and at fault here. And it was really the ammo they needed to discount him. And so if you listen to the confrontation call at the end of this video, the last part of the video there, then you'll hear where this kind of threw them off. They're just. It just took him a while. It was only after the call, I think, that it started to sink in. I think she really did send that when they're saying she did. So that's why some of this is a little bit confusing. And I just wanted to explain it as briefly as I could. She apologized, but later sent an email that was the opposite to Gary's guys or to Gary, and that was used to discount Nathaniel for, it seems like, years.

[F]

There was an apology given to us from Catherine at the time. She believed that. I guess I'll just say she believed that her believing the best in Gary had gotten in the way of her believing the truth. She did apologize saying that we were. That she had said we were wrong when we were right. She believed that she had been wrong and that Ben as well, it was good that he was involved. There were several things there. She didn't want to go public, but she did come to that conclusion. There's been things that have happened since with, with the apology. I guess I could move. If you don't want to say anything there, Chris, I can move on to the next part of the story. But.

[C]

Yeah, no, I mean, we just. During that phone call, we heard an email that was sent that it seemed, it seemed on the face of it to say that or to suggest that Nathaniel, this is two months later, was wrong with everything he did and he was wrong to involve Ben and he was wrong to do this and that, that Nathaniel had not said any of those words which then called into question. Well, what, what. What was. What was apologised for then? If, if you say sorry, it's hard to talk about because we, everyone needs to understand we, we love these people that we're talking about. When I say, when we talk about Pastor Catherine or if we talk about other people involved in Glory City Church, there's insane amounts of. Of good, you know, honorable conduct. I was forever told, stay in the shiny white. You know, don't go into gossip, don't go into these things, like, be pure, lovely, good report, you know, stay in this, in this realm. And it was a great encouragement and we both, everyone, I think, can attest, learn a lot. And we've agonized over how to tell this story because we love these people sincerely and still do. And there's no malice in our heart or anything in telling this, but it's hard to. It's hard to tell these events without telling the scope of the true events of how it happened and how it all played out. So an email was later read that called into question how much that apology meant when on one hand you say you were right to involve Ben, and then privately you're communicating to other people that Nathaniel is wrong to involve Ben. So it's like it was hard for you guys to kind of work out what, what do we do, even recently, you know, take it.

[A]

This is the thing. I've. I've given this advice many times over the, over the phone to people I've interviewed, people who share, sharing their stories with me over the last year, over a year now. And the advice I had to learn because of their stories, because of the same stuff you guys are talking about, where you're like coming to realizations even, even 10 years later, is that you can't trust if you even suspect that something, what I'm calling cover up culture, if you suspect that something like that's going on in your presence. You can't trust private conversations. You can only trust public actions. And when you find that her private conversation with you is one thing and you feel supported and you feel vindicated and you feel loved and you feel believed, and then she was undermining you on those exact issues with an email that was then sprung upon you unexpected in a moment where we were attempting to bring godly confrontation to Gary and his and his guys. That, that's where you go, what on, what on earth is going on there? And you're still trying to figure that out in the context of you still being very, very much loving and caring about, about Catherine and about the people at Glory City. Yeah.

[F]

And that is something that we are still processing through. We are still initiating conversations with all of the people that we're talking through here and have been, you know, in contact with them. But for now, we're just processing through this. It is real. But I say that to say we did receive an apology then, that meant a lot to us and seemed extremely genuine. And the dossier and the events were presented to several people. We found out that there were other pastors in Adelaide that already believed Gary had been data mining and it kind of this document confirmed that. And I guess this is where the story moves to a gentleman named Peter on the board of Gary Morgan.

[A]

And yeah, and I'll say I have personal interaction with Peter from the very beginning when I first I just put a tweet out. When I saw that, how convincing all the evidence was, I was like, you know, basically leaders in the Charismatic Church, especially in Australia, if you know about Gary Morgan, please just speak the truth about this guy. I didn't want to make a video. I didn't want to do anymore, but I. But it was obviously true. And when I did this, I was reached out to by this same Peter. So we've had interaction. We've emailed back and forth. I believe he lied to me multiple times, and I have evidence of it. Hey, guys, Editor Mike here. I've got more evidence for you. This is from a text message I received from Peter McHugh. And you'll see at the top of your screen, he wrote to me that during the many years in which he has known Gary, he says, I'm only aware of one accusation made against Gary for data mining for a word of knowledge. It was 10 years ago. And he talks about Nathaniel and Haley's accusation. He says, the investigation came to a conclusion of the evidence being inconclusive. That was a lie. That was two lies, actually, because there was no investigation and it didn't come to conclusions. I guess there's a third lie and the evidence was not inconclusive. But we'll get into more of that later. The thing I want to highlight here is he claims to me, and they've said this on multiple occasions, that this is the only time anybody accused them of anything. It was when Nathaniel and Haley came forward. That was it. But, in fact, Gary had been accused earlier that same year. He talked about it on a podcast. I'm about to show you where, of all people, his own guy, Alan Jones, is interviewing him. February 15, 2016, was the podcast date. That's before Nathaniel and Haley bring their accusations. Listen to what he says here and then know that we will also show evidence of Victoria and email exchanges where she shows that she brought concerns about the integrity of professional prophetic ministry. This is the really profound. It's Gary in his own words, telling you that he has had multiple accusations from before the time when Nathanael and Haley came forward. I thought this was profound because, well, it's Alan who's actually the guy interviewing him.

[E]

And, you know, I'll be vulnerable, as many times people will say to you, oh, you got that off the Internet, or you got that off Facebook. And I remember being at a church when at the end of the service, this guy comes out of nowhere, and he comes right in my face and said, you got that on Facebook. And the pastor.

[D]

Wait, wait, wait. So the accusation is that before you go to a church service, you're scouring Facebook in the hopes that these people show up and you've gleaned personal information about them to use in the service. In the service. Okay.

[A]

And I would consider him the fixer. That's what I would call him. 100%. This. This guy.

[B]

I'm not convinced of anything in here, Mike. I think I've held that position all while along. I hear two sides of a story, that people are presenting different interpretations of things that I don't understand because I'm not a technologically orientated person. And so, as I've indicated all the way along, I'm very open to the thought that Gary is guilty. I. I've made that clear in all sorts of email communication that I've communicated. I've not been trying to prove that he's innocent. I've been asking the other side to prove that he's guilty.

[A]

So, in. So in no. In no way would you ever tell people that the accusations were debunked and proven to have no substance. You would never say that to someone, right?

[B]

I've never said that.

[A]

Okay. You wrote that to Victoria in March of 2025. You wrote to Victoria in 2016. Gary was very publicly and aggressively accused of using Facebook to give words of knowledge and prophecy. I had the privilege of walking with Gary through this very harrowing time. The accusations were debunked and proven to have no substance. You said that you've never said that to anyone. So it sounds like you tell some people that it's inconclusive and you tell other people that it's been debunked.

[B]

I. Yep. I. I have no. Internally, I have no reason to believe that Gary is either right or wrong until it's proven by the forensic investigation. So, yes, I wrote that. And sure, A perception. We've always acknowledged that. There's a perception that any objective person looking at this is going to come to the conclusions that you've come to. We've not. We've not hidden from that. We've not.

[A]

You've definitely not always acknowledged that. You've not always acknowledged that. I've just read you emails where you don't.

[F]

And yeah, we'll just obviously, obviously, like, share the things that attain to, like, our experiences and what we kind of went through. And I guess for us, we'll do our best to keep it to what we experienced at the time of the events. But, yeah, when. When Peter came on the scene,

[D]

he

[F]

he actually, my first interaction with him was a phone call where he went over the same old thing, saying talking to Ben was gossip that was wrong. Creating a fake Facebook page was not kingdom. And basically said to me at the start of the call, I'll do the talking, you do the listening. Listening. Quite shocked by the tone. It's my first experience with, with Peter. And by the end of the call, having the evidence that we had, I said, can we at least send you the evidence? Could you at least take a look at the facts? And Peter said, twice. I. I won't even look at them. That was the end of our call. Ben and a guy named Daniel Hagan spent some time with Peter convincing him quite, quite robust conversation to look at the evidence. And they convinced him to. So we did get to send the evidence through to him. And allegedly he said to Ben when he first looked at the evidence, this looks like a smoking gun. The reason I know that is because Ben called me to tell me, and I was mid-20s. I didn't know what a smoking gun meant. So I looked it up on Google and I'm like, oh, so that's. That's a good thing.

[A]

Right?

[C]

Right, Bed.

[A]

And.

[F]

And he's like, it's a very good thing, Nathaniel. Get some rest. We've put this document together. It's over. Once again, we thought it was over, Mike, but we found out that Peter went to Gary. Gary looked him in the eyes, told him he was innocent, and Peter believed him. And so within a few days, we were told that the evidence is actually circumstantial, is what we were told. And I believe recently the evidence has been called other things. Other. Even. Even going as far as saying there was no evidence. More recently.

[A]

I'm sorry, Please, Chris, share.

[C]

Yeah, Can I just ask. So you're. You're happy to say now that you have received evidence from us. Yeah. From Nathaniel and Dan. You've received evidence, would you say, Peter?

[B]

I've always been happy to say that. That's in the. All the ML conversations. That's what the conversations were.

[C]

Yeah, exactly. So I'm just curious as to why you told Leon that you never received any evidence.

[B]

So, so can we go back to. Go back to that comment?

[C]

Just curious. Yeah, as to why you told Leo that you never received any evidence, that you got nothing.

[B]

So what I'm interested in is hearing what I actually said, not your recollection of what I said.

[A]

Okay. You were asked, you know, did they have a reason for refusing to submit their electronic devices, which they didn't refuse. If there was a reason, what was it? And you replied, they would not give us any reason. And they've never provided me, as the main investigator here in Australia with any evidence of the claims they could produce. Nothing. Was that a deceptive comment?

[B]

Well, the context for me in making that comment was that there was no evidence through the investigation of the electronic devices, because the evidence, again, we're going to get down to semantics, but from my perspective, my understanding is that I've got circumstantial evidence. It's not evidence that would actually prove, Would hold up in a court of war. And that my whole, my whole premise in the conversations was that Gary was innocent until he was proven guilty. And so I was looking at it through the lens of evidence that could be substantive and actually prove the points that were being made. And so yesterday, they were the words that I used, but the context for me in using them was, was different to the context that you're wanting to portray. And so, yeah, I mean, you can, you can characterize me in whatever way you want to characterize me, Mike. At the end of the day, Peter,

[A]

stop playing the victim. You're deceiving us, right in real time. Okay, I'm not playing the victim. You don't need to play the victim, sir. You said they did not present you, they did not provide you with, quote, any evidence of the claims. Your words. What are the claims? The claims are not about electronic devices. The claims are about Facebook pages and words of information. They did give you the evidence. You lied to those people to defend Gary.

[F]

But back then it was called circumstantial. And there was a lot of pressure from Peter to do a big investigation. Now, might I add at this point, Dan Hagen, Ben Fitzgerald, Catherine Ranalla, us, Chris, others in Adelaide, many people had already come to the conclusion that it looks to us like Gary has been data mining. That was our opinion and firm belief. But there was a real push from Peter McHugh to do a big investigation to get to the bottom of this. And we were encouraged to submit to that investigation by our leadership, of which we did. And emails went back, Mike, for months. You've, you've seen the thread. Chris has seen the thread. And basically there were several things we, we were asked to give our devices up, of which we were willing to.

[A]

Let me if I can. Yes, please, set the stage for this a little bit. So Peter comes in and there's two things he does. The first one, he, he, he hits you guys on the protocol. Objection. You shouldn't have done it this way. You shouldn't have done this thing or that thing. And it's. To me, the protocol objection is very, very powerful because it ignores the real issue in the room and it then comes against whoever's making noise. You shouldn't have talked to Ben. My theory is that the ball only moved in anyway because Ben was involved, because you guys were just two small fish in a pond where, rather where Ben has like a lot more respect and clout and there's a Bethel connection there. And so there's more weight to when he gets involved. That's when Catherine came around and that's when Peter McHugh is like, oh yeah, there's some, some, some merit to these things. Whereas to you, he says he wouldn't even look at it then. Now he's got to deal with the fact that there's people below believing it. Ben's talking about it. There's, there's just accountability expected. So he, he starts to move into obstacle creation mode. And I've seen the threats and you're going to walk through the specific details of all the obstacles he created where he's like, we need a, we need an independent investigation, we need to hire an investigator. And then. But here's how it's going to go and here's all the. Yet the evidence is all. You don't need an investigator for this. Right. Like, if I witness somebody stealing a car, I don't need an investigator to prove to, to me that the guy stole a car. This is an. A, just a series of ridiculous obstacles that he's putting in your path to try to dissuade and slow down any sort of accountability ultimately that Gary may end up getting from this. So if you don't mind. Yeah, walk us through, like, what are those obstacles? How hard did. Did Peter McHugh make it?

[F]

Well, yeah, it went back and forth, forth for months with emails. And again we, we did what we were told by our leadership. It's, it's a good thing to submit to the process with Peter. And we were asked, it was said that we would have to pay. It's at least how it was presented that the accusers would be paying for this investigation at a $650 an hour that we would have to give up our devices, which was confusing to us, but we were willing to do so. Gary would give up his devices, but we were required to pay for replacement devices for him. And there were multiple things like that I wanted, if we were going to get this thing investigated, might I add We've, we've got reason to believe that it looks like Gary chose the investigator that's allegedly as well. So we, we weren't allowed to choose the investigator, but that seemed clear from

[A]

the, that you had no control or really significant influence the investigation. Peter's, Peter's in charge of the investigation ultimately. He's, he took over. So you have someone who ultimately is representing Gary who's going to investigate or control the investigation of Gary. He's going to ask you to pay for it. It's an exorbitant amount of money. He later tells other people that he and another. And who was the other guy that offered? It's a well known name, Graham Cook. Graham Cook, that, that, that Peter McHugh or Gary, between them and Graham Cook offered $20,000 for the investigation and that you guys backed out so that he lied about you guys later on. Editor Mike here, look, I don't really know exactly what Graham Cook's involvement was. Peter McHugh says that Graham Cook offered to pay along with him 20 grand total between them and that he also did this. What you're looking on your screen, this is an excerpt from an email which you can read, you can pause and read if you want. And this is where Graham Cook is basically saying, hey Peter, good job, good job taking care of Gary. You know, and really in the email exchange, Peter uses this concept of innocent until proven guilty way beyond any reasonable way in which normal people mean this. It's like really nutty what, what he means by it. But I think we should document that Graham Cook was in support of the actions of Peter. What he actually knew or what he was being told by Peter that I do not know. And then there is of course the Firelight 2017 conference with Bill Johnson, Graham Cook, Gary Morgan where all of them were on stage doing ministry together. And you can see that on your screen right now. It's pretty trippy because this happened the next year after all of this other stuff blew up with Gary Morgan and there was a mountain of evidence and proof that the man was a fraud. These guys are showing up and doing this and yeah, Bill knew, Bill was told, Ben Fitzgerald told him. But he makes it so difficult. You have to give your devices which is irrelevant to this investigation. There's. You're not, you're not even being accused of anything. You have to pay for it. If you do want to interact with the investigator, you have to travel. You can't talk to the guy.

[D]

Mike.

[F]

That, that, that is, was the thing for me that I Couldn't do. I can give our devices up, we can pay for it. But do you know that ultimately I wasn't allowed. If you, if you look through, please confirm this, look through the email thread

[G]

that Daniel Hager could go there, couldn't brief the investigator because he was part

[F]

of this email process of which Daniel said, Nathaniel's the right person since he has the information. But I was prohibited. Not only that, any information we presented Gary would have to see first. And we said that doesn't make sense to us. But it was clear that no, no, to say anything else is to assume that Gary is guilty and we must assume he's innocent until proven guilty. So we weren't allowed to present any information that Gary wouldn't see first. And ultimately, after months of going back and forth, but Ben and Daniel came to the conclusion they didn't feel that. That this was a fair investigation. And I mean it even said at one point that if Gary is found guilty that we will support a process of restoration that Peter will lead. Lead. And right to me, I expected there like, if we're going to do all of this, surely there would be. Because for us it was like if in the same statement, if Gary is found innocent, Nathaniel and Haley will have to apologize to all parties. We must submit to whatever the investigation shows, not even knowing what it will show. But we had to.

[B]

We.

[F]

There's a big list of. Of apologies we would have to make. I really hoped that if Gary was found guilty, there would be a place of going to the, to the victims and speaking with them if found guilty of this being public. But there was not. It was very clearly, there will be a process of restoration that we will submit to. We didn't know any better at the time. We thought, okay, we'll just go along as best we can with this. But ultimately Ben and Daniel felt that it wasn't going to be fair.

[A]

Bare.

[F]

And so it. They did end up saying, we don't wish to take this any further. And Haley and I were kind of left in a place then with like, okay, I guess.

[G]

I guess it's not happening. There'll be no investigation.

[F]

And that's. We were.

[A]

Yeah, they were really advised. Called off by Peter. The second Ben was uninvolved, Peter's like, okay, it's not. Again, I think that Ben just had more replication reputational strength in that. In that interaction. So he's not involved. And then Peter called it off and he told other people that you were the one that backed out. And so just correct. Just, just Lie after lie. They had said they were. They were willing to give 20,000 in this, this dialogue. We were like, who did you tell this to? Because it's not in the email thread. It's. It's nobody. You say you told Ben. We asked Ben Fitzgerald. He's like, no, I don't remember him

[B]

telling me that we were putting up $20,000 in the process. We weren't asking them to carry the whole financial burden.

[C]

Can I just ask where, like, who you spoke to about you and Graham Cook? Was it we're going to put up 20,000?

[B]

Correct.

[C]

And who did you tell that to be? How did you communicate that to Ben?

[B]

Verbally? Because it was a relational conversation.

[C]

On the phone you said. Yeah, because it doesn't look like that in the email threads. It looked like you would make them pay for the whole thing.

[B]

Oh, well, I'm sorry that. That's the impression that's given, but that was never the conversation.

[C]

Yeah. Did you hear about that, Nathaniel at the time or Dan, that these guys were going to put 20,000 him and Graham Cook?

[F]

That was never mentioned to us. And Dan is, I think, written in the chat.

[C]

No.

[A]

Yeah, he's. Daniel says no. So, Peter, the integrity of, of your honesty in this situation is very much in question.

[B]

Is there a question there, Mark?

[A]

No. I've shared the evidence. There's multiple things that you're sharing that you seem to have different truths for different audiences. But this is you in our meeting, showing me that you're duplicitous in your statements about Gary Morgan, depending on your audience. That's a fact of reality. That's not something you can dispute. I have no question for you. That's. You just. You did this right now we're all here. I'm not going to pretend we didn't see what we saw. So this makes it difficult to think that you should be part of any investigation into Gary. You should be investigated along with Gary.

[B]

You're welcome to do that if you'd like to.

[A]

I'd rather not. I didn't want to have this meeting. You guys asked for it. What I see here, guys, is a ton of evidence and I have not heard a good explanation for it, Gary, from you, except for you telling me that you're a good guy, a ton of evidence, and those who are covering for you, I'll use the term being duplicitous. At least Peter being duplicitous in his engagement and his behavior, being controlling, being difficult in this process to try to make it harder and Harder until people just give up because they have no good faith belief in it. You spoke as though Ben Fitzgerald was on the fence or something else like this. But I talked to him and he very much believes that Gary is guilty. And he just lost faith in you guys as people who would do anything about it. That was the reality. It wasn't an inconclusive investigation. That was never what it was. It was a ton of evidence, no good explanations, alternately. And you writing presumed innocent. Presumed innocent, presumed innocent. Until everybody just says, forget it. And then poor Nathaniel is forced to apologize. Apologize. Gary, please tell me, how am I wrong? Look at this is a very significant amount of evidence,

[B]

Mike.

[E]

I agree to the objective observer, it looks exactly like that. And I haven't denied I called the fake Facebook page, but it's what I saw, it's what I received, it's what I shared. And I can't give any other explanation for that, but I did not data mine and I did not look up Facebook.

[C]

Isn't it weird that you've said this $20,000 to Ben over the phone, yet at the very end of the conversation, you conclude it with, you will bear the full financial cost. Wouldn't you just think to include that in there? If that's your summary of the entire. Your entire position.

[D]

Can I jump in here just for a second with a question?

[C]

Because I've just asked one, so if I can just wait for that, that'd be great.

[D]

Of course, Chris.

[B]

I can only tell you I don't have an objective, an answer that's going to satisfy you on that one. Chris.

[C]

You've wrapped it up and you've said, here's my conclusion of everything. And you've put in there, you guys will bear the full weight. You guys will replace the. The cost of the devices. And just to let you know, it's 600 an hour. That's the investigating team that I'm selecting. Meanwhile, you. You're referring to some conversation who knows when with Ben, the Ben doesn't even remember. Wouldn't you have thought if that was a serious concern? I mean, you put that on your public statement that this was a major piece that you're presenting, like, hey, we've put in 20k. Wouldn't you have concluded that if that was really your heart at the time, to let them know that they're not going to have to bear the full financial cost? If you and Graham Cook were ready

[B]

to do that, that's one way of describing the events that we're talking about. Absolutely.

[C]

How would you Describe it.

[B]

I don't have an explanation for it other than the fact that there was a broader context in which the conversations were taking place and that that information was available elsewhere. That's all I'm saying.

[C]

I can't find that elsewhere, including the source of the information. But. Okay.

[A]

So then Peter, in a show of, you know, integrity, said, I would give 20,000. That was legit. And I said, would you still do it today if I choose an investigation company to look at the evidence? And he said, absolutely, just firmly, with no doubt in his eyes. Would you still be willing to put up $20,000, you and Graham, with an investigator that I choose? Absolutely. Yeah. I hit him up after our talk, and I was like, I found Grace Investigations. I like to get them to do it. We'll submit all the evidence and we'll. We'll stand by whatever results they give. And, yeah, he pulled out. So they're not. They're not surprisingly. He's not interested in doing what he said he would do. Everything is manipulation and control. And the way that investigation was structured, I believe was designed to keep you from getting any forward progress. And if for some crazy reason, you put up 20, 30, $40,000 of your. Of your own money for some. Some investigation where you don't even get to talk to the investigator, you don't get to control the evidence that. Or present the evidence directly to them, it has to go through Gary. That is, the immediate result would have been, okay, he's admitted to this abc, now he's being restored. Now you guys need to be quiet about it. It was. It was the. What do they. What do they call it? The cards are stacked? Is that the phrase? Everything was set up. In other words, I see Peter McHugh as a fixer, as very much a fixer, someone who is knowingly and intentionally manipulating the situation in order to make sure that the elite guy in this position, Gary, does not have to face accountability.

[F]

For us, it's been 10 years, and back then, we. We were advised to leave it with God. You've done everything you can, and to leave this. And honestly, life kind of went back to normal for us. It was distressing, but we didn't have a grid for anything being brought publicly back then. And so we did as we were told. We. Life returned to some form of normality. We. We live in a different state now, but, yeah, it definitely, for a long time, was a hard thing when we thought about Gary, what was happening there. I know for you it's. Yeah. But a whole decade has Gone. Gone by. And we've not spoken about it at all really, until Chris approached us just a few months ago. And yeah, I guess Chris, a lot of what has happened, you've had a really strong conviction. You came to us and yeah, I guess the last few months is. Is kind of history now. I think that's kind of for us where the story. Story lands. I pray and like, we pray and hope that this information is helpful. And that to me feels like the. The right thing to do. Evil can prosper but for the silence of a few good men. And for us, it's like we would have liked other people to say something publicly. In fact, we were very surprised at how easy it seemed, Michael, when. When you put something out. So. But yes, Chris, you. You've really had an amazing conviction. Conviction over the last few months.

[C]

Yeah. And just reading those email threads, just touching back on that as a whole, you know, going through it all and you're like, it. It looked like from one of those, that Gary was going to pick the. The investigator and then everything had to be be run through. I remember one thing you said, you can't, Peter, don't show Gary this because then he'll obviously be able to, you know, alter things or shift things if he sees that, but then we can find the truth if. If he doesn't see that. And Peter was like, no, Gary sees everything. Gary's going to see this. And it was like Gary calling the shots. Initially, Peter was like, okay, maybe if you have to fly down to Melbourne, you could meet the investigator. But then kind of talks to Gary about it and sorry, Gary said, no, Gary's calling the shots on his own investigation about himself with an investigator that he.

[A]

It's transparent corruption. Totally transparent corruption.

[C]

Yeah. So weird. And the hoops, you know, and the, the names, you know, like, intimidating, you know, David Wagner was. Was kept abreast of all this that

[A]

the Lord is bringing to us. Authenticity and integrity again. I believe that there is something that is going to mark this season in prophetic ministry, and it is authenticity and integrity.

[C]

Graham Cook. You know, these are massive names that are quite intimidating to, you know, for you guys to feel like you're up against, you know, the Christendom and it's a few of you guys trying to get truth out. And then, yeah, the stipulations on the apologies yet there's no apology stipulated for Gary if he's found guilty. Not even an ownership or a recognition if he's found guilty was stipulated. Right. He has to go through this investigation this investigator comes to the conclusion maybe that he's guilty, still doesn't need to acknowledge it, still could disagree with the findings and just get restored either way. You know, like it just didn't feel. And then there was this whole device. It was all about the devices. The devices. There were pictures of him at some point after he got hacked at the Apple store, wasn't it? And it looked to be like he was replacing his devices anyway. So we couldn't. There was no assurance through that process that these are just brand new devices and all the. Everything was hacked. It'd been what, seven months. He had to.

[F]

Yeah.

[C]

To, to do. It wasn't like you. It wasn't like, okay, it's that it's week one, let's get these devices off you before you have a chance to alter things. It's like seven months later. So how can you.

[A]

This is a complete distraction. I don't need to see Gary's cell phone to know that, that he looked up words on Facebook. You need, you need the video of him prophesying, you need the corresponding Facebook data available. You need the fake Facebook page that Haley wonderfully made and then him calling it out like we've already got all the evidence. This demand for devices and then demanding your guys devices is to me it comes off like an intimidation tactic. You're going to. We're going to look into what. Maybe you have something to hide. Maybe you've got something, something that you don't want people to know about. It's every single thing about it looks wrong and evil. So cover up culture. And I use the phrase and I want people to understand it because I want them to have a name for something if they've experienced it and go like that's what that was. It wasn't just you had a fake prophet, you had a network of leadership who was unwilling to do the biblical thing which is simply get the evidence that the guy's guilty, call him out publicly, cleanse the church. You can still seek forgiveness for him. You can still seek like for the person's well being. But you've got to get the leaven out from the lump or it will leaven the whole lump. And that's the thing that scares me the most is it's like you wonder how many people and how far does it go. But yeah, you guys are doing the right thing.

[C]

That was the continued hurt as well, I think was seeing leaders that we knew knew and still minister with him.

[A]

Anyway, you mentioned Chae on and Bill Johnson were two people that that we have good reason to believe knew about Gary Morgan and then went on to do stuff alongside of him afterwards.

[C]

Yeah. A year after. So we knew. We knew that Bill Johnson knew about the whole story. Gary Morgan, the whole. The whole shebang. And he did a conference with Graham Cook Gary, the very next year. And that was specifically hurtful for or disappointing or sad, because these are the heroes in the faith that you look up to. And I. I still think he is a hero in so many areas. It's just. I think we're just trying to say, does anybody care about a guy that might be doing something wrong? You know, like, is there. Is there any care for. For the people, you know, that might be suffering, you know, that as a result of these things? Cheyan was abreast of the situation because he was the guy that was over Pastor Catherine. So he was getting the phone calls, like, what do we do here? You know, I'm not 100%, but I believe Peter or Gary, somebody was liaisoning with him on the other side. And the very next year, again, he's ministering with Gary Morgan. Gary introducing him as we welcome Shayan

[E]

to come in Jesus name. Amen. Bless you, Shea.

[A]

Thank you so much.

[D]

Thank you so much.

[A]

Thank you.

[C]

You know, and it's like, God, is there somebody. Is there somebody that at least says, I'm not going to. I mean, at the very least, Pastor Catherine never had him back, never published another prophetic word. You know, never had any public affiliation at the very least. But there were still many people, you know, I'd spoken to so many leaders in the recent months that said, oh, yes, yes, I believe that he was guilty. Oh, by the way, please don't use my name. I do not want to be involved. And it's like, yeah, it's just frustrating because you're like, what it means is, for me, it feels like it's reputation over character. If this is going to drag me into some sort of thing and I get, like, this, like, exposure guy name or, you know, because us as charismatics, like, we. We just cop it. The second you. You say you give a prophetic word, it's like, oh, you're clearly false, because there's no such thing as prophecy. So there's a thousand channels, there's a thousand videos, but we're just. We're all we're arguing for is the truth. People should have be able to see all this. And if you still want to go to visit Gary Morgan and listen to him speak after knowing these things, that's your call, you know, but nobody. There was just nobody willing to do it, Mike, and we didn't want to do it either. And then, you know, we're grateful that you are somebody that was. Yeah, happy to help.

[A]

Nathaniel and Haley. Is there anything that you want to share? Kind of. You kind of come to the end of your story on this stuff. Is there anything you want to share as far as, like, where do you hope go happens from here? Or what would maybe your message be to just churches in general about how they can handle this kind of stuff in the future after having seen it so up and close like you have?

[F]

And obviously, we're still processing through this, so we're. We've aimed to just share our experience, but I guess if there's anything I could say, it's that if something happens in your church publicly, it is. I believe it's my personal opinion that it's your responsibility to do something about it publicly. People deserve to know, and I believe a lot of people will be healed with just transparency. And so I guess I want to keep it simple. We don't have all the answers right now. We've just tried to tell our story. But I sure know this would be a lot easier if people knew about this 10 years ago. And so I think my hope is just for transparency. And if it's done publicly from a place where perhaps someone's been platformed, then I. I do believe it's a public responsibility. Chris, you might want to talk to that. But that's like, that's. Yeah, that's. That's my opinion.

[C]

Yeah, agreed. I feel. I feel the same thing when it comes to going, okay, it's not. It's not an attack to destroy the church or, you know, to burn everything down. We're not of that heart. Our actual heart is for the church. My heart is for the people and the leaders. You know, I firmly believe that Pastor Catherine's heart is in the right place when it comes to wanting to win the lost, you know, wanting to see souls and lives change. And I recommended somebody go to Glory City the other day. You know, I was like, oh, this would be a good church for you if we. What you're telling me you're searching for, this would be a great church. My heart is not to destroy the building, but I see a gaping hole in the church, and I want that part just rebuilt. You know, I want us to go healthy process. There's clear scriptural direction for us to go. Okay, this is healthy. This is unhealthy, and we can Talk about that, you know, and it's not, it's not a bad thing. You shouldn't, you shouldn't have a bad name if you, if you say that I think this guy is, is unhealthy. This guy might be doing this or might be doing that. You don't even need to firmly state. You can state the truth as you see it, as we've done today. We're just saying people can make up their own minds, but they should have all the information before they. They go ahead and, and do that. And not in the dark or I'll just tell this person over here. But, but those people over that church, they can be in the dark and they don't need to know the truth or, you know, so, yeah, that my heart is still for the church and for these leaders. And I don't think it's that hard to. It is hard. No, I won't, I won't say that. It is hard to, to take that step, to say we don't believe, we have confidence or good faith in person X or person Y anymore based on these reasons. That's a difficult thing, but it's a necessary thing. And I think it's what God is doing in the wider community. When I felt I saw your video mike on Sean Bowles, the Six Hour One persevered and. But it burnt in my heart from then that I felt like this isn't necessary thing and this is what God's doing. And, and I asked God one night, I was praying, I said, look, is this anything you do you want me to have anything to do with this God? And very clearly that night he gave me a dream. I literally prayed before I went to bed. And boom, he spoke, you know, that this was something that he wanted to do for his church. And I think that's the only reason that I've continued down this, this path saying, let's bring some transparency. Let's just bring the facts as we know them. People can make up their own minds again. But I felt like this is something that God was on and pushing me and encouraging me and Nathaniel and Hayley. I know you feel God. And so our heart is honestly for the church and for the leaders. And these guys are not. I'm not calling people that don't expose or the people that I spoke to that already knew or had a belief regarding Gary Morgan that asked me not to talk about their, their name or their involvement. Many people don't want to have that. I'm just saying that if you took that extra step it would make a well rounded, healthy church.

[A]

That's the agenda is bringing health and well being into the body of Christ and following what scripture says and un doing that sort of unintentionally. We've absorbed this idea that you don't follow what scripture says. When it comes to accountability with leaders, you do it with people usually in churches. Often someone who's just a random member of a church might have accountability, but. But the leadership often is. It's like a protected class and that's unfortunate. And they should be treated with great respect and love and care. And they get false, false accusations. I do. Every leader does. But. But if we don't have a way to deal with those who are manipulating or abusing or taking advantage of the body of Christ, then we're leaving the sheep unguarded. So I'm, I'm super grateful, Nathaniel and Haley, you guys are about to check out for this part of the video. And I'm super grateful for you guys telling your story. Thank you so much for being willing to do that because your story is actually mirrored in a lot of other stories. People listening right now will be listening to this video going, that was us. We had a mirror experience. We tried to do something in integrity. It was turned against us. We were attacked. We didn't have the sort of authority in that area to do much more. And then we were left confused. But hopefully this is your vindication, I hope.

[F]

Thanks so much, Mike. And yeah, we do really pray that this will help people.

[A]

Editor Mike here. I am going to give you guys the confrontation call in full. That's why this video is very, very long. Half of the reason anyways. But before I do that, there's a situation that has just been getting more and more heavy as far as my awareness of it. And it's about a guy named Larry Sebastian. According to a ton of witnesses, he's a very abusive pastor. Now that phrase I just said is kind of important. According to a ton of witnesses, he's a very abusive pastor. And it relates to this stuff with Gary Morgan and Peter McHugh. Because Gary Morgan, he prophesied in a way that further enabled Larry to harm people. That is, I believe, a fake prophecy that was leveraged to enable an abuser. And Peter McHugh, he was personally involved in dealing with the fallout of Larry's sins in a way that raises serious red flags. You're about to hear about it. This part of the video is for that community, for those who have been hurt by Larry Sebastian. I hope that this Brings more light to your situation and brings help to you guys. And now I'm going to pass the video off to Chris and to Karen, who are able to share with us some of the stuff related to Larry Sebastian.

[C]

Hey, Mike, you asked me to look into the Larry Sebastian Casey City Church thing. So here's what I've come up with. It's a minefield. Let me try to break it down from just the facts. 2009, Gary prophesies three days out from Larry buying a building. So Larry's going to buy this building. People are excited. He meets Gary Morgan. Gary says, you're going to be signing something. So let's listen to that now.

[E]

Met Gary Morgan for the first time,

[A]

and he said he had a word for us.

[E]

So the word, you know, it was a fairly lengthy word, but just the part where he.

[A]

Where he mentioned, he said that I see you sitting in front and about

[E]

to sign three different documents because there's. There's a.

[A]

There's a huge offer that is coming your way.

[F]

And he said, and, dude, it's large, right?

[C]

That building was a huge step of faith for all these guys. Like, they didn't feel like they could achieve that in the natural. It was like this, the way they tell it, a big step of faith. So, okay, we're going in. And now they've got this prophetic credibility, this backup that this is God's thing. Great. Then the pressure builds from a number of different reasons. There's a leadership spill. There's a call from the elders at the time for Larry's resignation. Larry, you need to step down. Larry refuses, then puts it to a vote. Me or them? That's the situation. This is in 2013. Now, we know that Peter McHugh, we know that Gary Morgan and Larry, that all met together at that time. As far beyond that, I don't know. Now, flash forward 10 years in 2023, I want to introduce a man named Kevin Manning. So Kevin Manning is now one of the most senior elders. I think he was the associate pastor, but he was on the eldership team. All of these stories, all of these claims of abuse come out of the woodwork to Kevin, and he has to confront Larry Sebastian. He goes to Larry and he says, larry, I need you to step down. Asks for his resignation. Basically, Larry says, no, I'm not going to do that. Now this puts Kevin in a quandary. Larry in a quandary. What are we going to do? So Larry doesn't attend the next few services. Kevin calls mfi, introducing mfi. Ministers Fellowship International. Okay? This is a organization that I think their slogan is something like healthy pastors, healthy churches. Kevin calls the state leader. The state leader says, what should we do? Kevin says, I think we need an investigation. We need people to come in that don't know me and don't know Larry. Now, Larry, I guess, thought that idea was. Had some merit because they got an interim eldership committee to come in. Larry was involved in picking all of the people that came in to investigate if Larry is or not abusive. Larry helped pick all those people. He at least knew four out of the five. Now, Kevin was not. Kevin didn't even know that that meeting was happening and was not involved in who to select. I want to introduce to you Johnny Scroggins. Johnny Scroggins is the Australasian head of mfi. When he heard about it, he got in a plane and flew straight down to Larry's church. I just want to play a clip from Kevin talking about what happened at

[A]

that time between that Saturday two and

[D]

a half hours with Johnny and that

[A]

Monday in the eldership meeting.

[D]

Both Johnny and Clara there. At no point did they or Larry or Krista ask about anyone who had

[A]

been affected by Larry. And we're not talking one or two or three.

[D]

We're talking a large cohort of people. I was sitting

[A]

in a pub with Joni and where we were meeting. And after listening to him talk about

[D]

how Larry and Krista are going to

[A]

be back in church on Sunday, Larry and Krist are going to be back at work, regardless of my reasons that

[D]

I gave him, I'll go through those in a second.

[A]

As well as to why that was not a good thing.

[D]

In spite of all of that, he was insistent upon it. I finally got to the point where I just had to ask him, now, what do you say, Pastor Scroggins, to those who have been. Who've been harmed in all of this?

[A]

What do you have to say to them?

[D]

And he could only go to Mark, chapter 11, verse 26. And he did it this way. We're sitting at a table opposite one another. He grabs his Bible, he pulls it out.

[A]

He opens it up to a page

[D]

that he had marked there in Mark, chapter 11. He flips over to it. He says, if you don't forgive, forgive those who sin against you, then neither

[A]

will God forgive you. And then he closed the Bible and

[D]

he put it back.

[A]

And that was it.

[D]

That was the sum of what he had to say to those who were hurt.

[C]

Joni then preaches the next day after Speaking with Kevin. And I want to play a clip from his sermon because I find it interesting. I also want to note that when Johnny came in to be a part of this investigation committee or came in for that weekend, he was staying with Larry Sebastian while he was taking up the role of the intram elder investigating everything. Now let's have a listen to that.

[A]

Out of 12, one was a Judas.

[D]

Can I hear that?

[E]

True or not?

[D]

Am I lying or not?

[E]

Let me just make it simple right now, all right?

[D]

Out of 12, there was one, right?

[E]

They just make it easier, make it simple.

[D]

Let's say one out of 10.

[F]

So if you got 20 people inside

[E]

the church, how many Judases do you have? 2.

[D]

If you got 30 people inside the

[E]

church, how many Judas do you have? I'll just make it simple, all right?

[D]

If you have a hundred people inside

[E]

the church, how many Judas do you have?

[D]

You got a thousand people inside the church.

[E]

How many people, Judas do you have?

[C]

Hundreds.

[D]

Oh

[E]

God have mercy. The good southern boy said this way,

[A]

excuse my southern English right now, right?

[D]

He said, the bigger the dog, the more the fleas. That's what he said.

[C]

All right, okay, so we've got this Johnny Scroggins. He's in, he's just reseated Larry. He said, larry, you don't need to step aside while they, while we're investigating you. You can be here running things. You're the pastor. So Larry's back in town. The very next guest visiting speaker was Gary Morgan. Gary prophesies over Larry Sebastian and I just want to play a clip from his prophetic word.

[E]

And the Lord is upgrading your season right now. He's upgrading where you're at, but also as well where you're to going, going. And I felt like the Lord is adding to and he's not taking away. The Lord is multiplying and he's not dividing. And I just see like these mathematical things over your life. And I felt like the Lord is saying subtraction and division are being taken away from you right now. But multiplication and addition are being yours in this season.

[C]

So Gary continues and he prophesies, going to be three open doors for you, Larry, and look towards the future, this kind of thing. So you've got Johnny Scroggins comes in, puts Larry back into the church. And the week later Gary Morgan gives this prophetic word over Larry and and his future. Now this is where the interim eldership comes. You've got Peter McHugh. You've got another guy by the name of Alan Meyer. So there's a lot of names. They come on and they're entrusted to hear out the victim stories and find the credibility, you know, the, the claims of abuse. We're going to look into that. We're going to try to find the truth. Larry says that he will abide by the ruling of this intra meldership. What, what they conclude, I'm happy to do it. They come on. Their process is not to talk to the victims necessarily one by one, hear their stories or you know, basically their process is let's get them to write it down. Kevin, can you pass us the statements effectively from anyone that's making a claim against Larry? Kevin said that this process was difficult for some, Some people didn't actually want to write their statement based on the. Their sort of trauma. But nevertheless they gather 30 plus statements. Many of them were anonymous. They were then encouraged to put their name on it. Those that did put their name on it, there was an encouragement to confront Larry. I think they were operating under a principle of like natural law where the accused person has a right to confront the accuser. Basically from June until November they present their findings. Okay, so Alan Meyer, Peter McHugh and some others present the findings. And it was for Larry to resign. Let me show you a small clip from that.

[A]

The unfortunate but in, but consistent theme

[E]

has been the treatment of people at

[D]

the hands of Pastor Larry and to

[A]

a lesser extent Krista. In the light of those 31 qualifications,

[E]

we found that in at least 12

[C]

of them Larry is a deficient and

[D]

disqualified leader.

[C]

So that was a short clip from Alan. Based on the findings, the interim elders, they recommended that, that Larry step down. Larry did not listen to the advice from the interim elders, so he must have changed his mind there and he stayed on. They provided that recording to people. Somebody has put it on. Tovchurch.org T O V church.org if anyone wants to see the findings there, Mike, that's the best I can do in terms of just finding the facts. I'm sure there's much more that I'm missing out. It's a very big story and I'm sure both sides would, would want to put more into it from different points of view. But that's just kind of what I could, what I could see. Let's just pass it on to Karen Allsop. Karen was someone who was with the church for 20 years, a board member, one of the first board members and also a whistleblower in a state inquiry into cults and coercive control. So thanks Mike.

[A]

Thank You, Chris.

[G]

And thank you, Mike, for standing up for the broken and bleeding sheep. Since 2023, we've had over 100 victims come to us confidentially sharing their stories. These are just a few of them.

[C]

There's so much pain you're not getting

[G]

to hear

[A]

because each one of us

[F]

has been berated in private behind closed doors.

[C]

And there are so many people that

[E]

are still scared of him.

[A]

I'm still scared of him. I've gone head to head with you.

[C]

So for each of us here, there's

[F]

a story of pain.

[C]

And for each of us here, there's

[F]

probably 10 others that are too scared to speak up.

[A]

I was the one.

[G]

Larry was at my door.

[F]

I was a single mum around 15 years ago.

[A]

night, at any hour, he decided that

[G]

he wanted to yell at me. I used to work for Larry.

[A]

At any hour, he decided that he wanted to yell at me and berate me. He would come to my door and

[G]

stand there and my kids and I would hide upstairs from him.

[F]

I don't know what's going on here,

[A]

but I will tell you this. This man abused me. I watched him abuse many people.

[G]

I wasn't there in a place that was protecting me. I know that what he would have

[A]

done to me if we were in

[G]

a private vicinity he wanted.

[A]

He couldn't hold his hate for me back. My relationship with God was affected greatly

[G]

because it was yet again, someone that abused me in the skies of God. In God's name. I have never, ever known such hate

[A]

in a human being. And even if I did do wrongly

[G]

by him, which I did not, he

[F]

should have been able to approach me

[G]

in love because that's God. That is not God.

[A]

But I do remember that he was talking to me about that I needed

[F]

to go home and give my husband

[A]

what he asks for because, you know, men have needs.

[G]

And that's a message that was reiterated

[A]

by Krista on many, many occasions. And I do remember he was yelling at me in the office and he

[G]

would take a step towards me like

[A]

very, very close personal space. And I would take a step back and he would take another step and I would take another step back and I was pinned up against a filing cabinet. At one stage, he really was only about

[G]

5cm from my nose yelling at me. One of the most devastating stories was a female in her twenties now that came forward who had been raped at

[A]

the age of 12 at a youth

[G]

event by an older boy who was related to the then leadership team.

[A]

She had gone to Larry privately.

[G]

She shared of the rape was Asked specific details and was told that it

[A]

would be dealt with.

[C]

So he went in there afterwards to

[A]

do something after church.

[C]

And I went in, I followed him in,

[G]

asked if I could talk to him.

[F]

He said yep, and said to shut the door.

[A]

So I shut the door.

[G]

I sat down, but he didn't sit down.

[A]

Why didn't he sit down? He was looking at me, like standing over me. I think I had my back to

[G]

the door because I felt trapped.

[A]

I had my back to the door.

[F]

Here he was facing me, standing up,

[A]

not doing anything, not.

[G]

Not moving around. I related to him.

[F]

I guess this is the next logical step.

[G]

You tell your pastor, that's what you do, you see?

[A]

He said, don't tell your mum, don't tell anyone.

[C]

I'll deal with it. And then he just walked out.

[G]

It wasn't until just a few years ago in counselling that this girl was able to share with the counsellor what had happened to her. And it wasn't until November 2023 that

[A]

the interim elders delivered their findings to two places.

[G]

Firstly, to the inside of the church, to the building where people were still supporting Larry, and then to a room full of 60 victims, 60 former members,

[A]

30 online, 25 more that requested the video.

[G]

The findings stamped the truth, but they were not shared by the interim elders publicly.

[A]

There's been a lot of work done with Larry and Krista, particularly by Peter,

[E]

in a very personally spending many, many

[A]

hours in very, very penetrating conversations with

[F]

them as a couple.

[A]

Not a stone or a rock has been left unturned. And as a result of that, both Larry and Krista are acknowledging things openly, which at least is heartening.

[G]

I want to finish with an audio recording from September 2023, a forced grace and reconciliation meeting.

[B]

The second thing is that we're all having to struggle to bring our hearts and our minds to surrender to God's word. There are lots of opinions in the world. There are lots of experiences, experiences in the room. There is pain in the zoom, people who are connecting with us to the zoo. We are not ignorant of that and

[A]

we're not going to avoid that.

[E]

But the risk of seemingly diminishing the

[B]

pain of those that are experiencing it. If you want to experience some real pain, then just become a pastor or church.

[G]

This meeting was chaired by Peter McHugh.

[A]

No, no,

[C]

we need to stop that because that's inappropriate what you're saying.

[A]

When is someone going to take accountability for the pain that has been caused?

[D]

Excuse me, Can I ask you if you remember?

[F]

I am.

[A]

Thanks. End. Can you see that? We're not interested about that.

[F]

Cuz if a pastor is pastoring a church properly, those things aren't going to happen. When you start devouring and hurting your

[A]

sheep and bleeding, the sheep are there bleeding and in pain.

[G]

When does that stop?

[F]

When does somebody take accountability?

[C]

Because you have to stand in front

[A]

of Jesus and give account for that

[F]

while this dear girl has years of

[A]

healing to take place because somebody is narcissistic and abusive.

[D]

When does it stop?

[F]

God's children need to be protected

[C]

enough.

[F]

And it's about truth. I haven't heard anyone speak truth tonight.

[A]

Where's the truth?

[F]

Where is the love of Jesus? Because if people love Jesus, they're not

[C]

going to be hurting and abusing people.

[B]

So point of view.

[C]

You have a point of view.

[F]

But let me tell you, there are people bleeding here. You need to be sensitive to them

[A]

and you are not being sensitive to them.

[B]

I apologize if you don't feel I've been sensitive or something to say.

[C]

I've learned to apologize.

[B]

I'm sorry that you feel bad.

[E]

I'm incessant.

[B]

It was not my intent, it wasn't my motive. And if that's the way it's been

[D]

received,

[B]

what we're asking is that there

[A]

will be a sense in which the stories are brought to Larry in the

[B]

way that he can respond.

[C]

He knows what he's done.

[B]

At this point in time, he doesn't

[A]

because he's not been.

[C]

He knows exactly what he said.

[D]

No, Larry knows who I am and

[A]

he knows what he's done to me.

[F]

He knows what he did to me.

[G]

It was heightened, it was distressing and it broke me. Following the findings in November 2023 when Larry was found as disqualified as a

[D]

pastor, it is our recommendation that Larry

[C]

and Krista resign from leadership and take

[A]

time to address a range of emotional and relational issues personally. There was a counselling trust that was

[G]

set up by the interim elders. Part of the requirements to access the trust were that people could no longer be members of Caysa City Church. So while we stayed members to continue to seek accountability, we were forced to resign our membership so that we could

[A]

access the counselling trust for our family.

[G]

I really want to thank you, Mike, for shining a light and bringing accountability in the body of Christ. I know what it's like to be a whistleblower and a victim advocate and the toll that it takes. It's not easy, but it's a calling that God's called us to. And I just, I'm. I know I speak on behalf of many. I'M incredibly grateful.

[A]

Editor Mike back here again. It seems to me that Gary and Peter were connected to this in unhealthy ways, very unhealthy ways. And hopefully this video sheds more light onto that and helps that community. God bless you guys. All right, this is the confrontation call, and I have to say some legal stuff real quick before we get into it. And first off, it's this. They agreed. Everybody on the call agreed for it to be recorded. Everybody knew it was going to be recorded on the recording. I'm acknowledging it's being recorded. They all consented to it. Even more than that, it was actually Gary's side that demanded that this call be recorded. And I thought to myself, are they crazy? They want to record this call, okay? Because I don't illegally record stuff. And I thought, well, if that's what they want, we'll record it. But I made it clear, and then this is in the recording, that this recording is for accountability, public accountability, for either myself or for Gary. One way or the other, it's coming. That is, there is no real cause for suggesting that this recording was somehow meant to be private or that there wasn't consent or that there wasn't acknowledgement that it was meant to be for public accountability. I also want to add that we mentioned a transcript. This transcript that we refer to was from a meeting that Peter McHugh had with the board of a church called GCC. Now, this is a little bit of a confused moment, and we clarified it after the call between me and the guys. But the GCC thing, it was, to my knowledge, it was not a transcript at all. It was notes that were written down, quotes that were written down during a meeting, but not a transcript of a recorded meeting. So I'm saying this for legal reasons, okay? Because somebody might want to try to make a stink legally, and we have to try to cover our bases. Now, that's not me who would do that, but I don't know, somebody else might. So this is the confrontation call, and we're submitting it to the public record for full accountability. I wish some leaders had just stuck their necks out and done the right thing, because none of this would have been necessary. This is not the best way to do things. It's just where we're at now. You should have heard it say that it's recording in progress. And so I. I'll just say thank you, Daniel. I see you're here. If you just wanted to be here to. To witness, you're welcome to do that if you want to Share. You're welcome to do that. Okay, so it's up to you.

[B]

You just.

[A]

Everybody can control them their own selves and I respect that.

[B]

So

[A]

the purpose of this meeting is because I tweeted out or put on social media in a few different places that we. That, Gary, that you were guilty of faking prophecy. And I did this because I had conviction that I'd already seen a significant amount of evidence to demonstrate that this was true. And then I was contacted by Peter, who reached out and wanted to connect and talk about it and actually arrange a meeting so we could discuss it. And since then, basically we've gone back and forth with Peter Allen and stuff like that. And what I would like us to do, since I know everyone on this meeting has already been down this road before, I'm the only one who hasn't been down this with you guys. I prefer total transparency and I don't like doing artificial kindness to the point where you can't tell what anybody's saying or what's going on. That kind of stuff. So I just really want to be super transparent, is we love the church. We love integrity and truth. There is a major problem of fakery in the Charismatic Church right now. It's an insane problem that's going on for generations and has largely been unaddressed from those in the movement. Only people outside who were dismissed as heretics, heretic hunters and heresy hunters and stuff like that. And Gary, the evidence that was mounted against you looks pretty strong and I'm open to hearing some other side of it, but I have seen a lot of stuff myself already, including other stuff. In fact, I think that I've been misled in my email exchanges even already with some of the guys that are, I would say, are your team, you know, Alan and Peter. So I'm putting that right out there. You're also welcome to put out there any kind of concerns, allegations against me if you've got him, and I'm all ears. No one's above reproach, above the potential of being reproached in that regard. So the purpose of this meeting then is to either establish that I need to go and say, guys, I'm super sorry. I just besmirched this guy's character, hurt his ministry, and I would make that super public with a groveling apology. And if I was convinced it was true, I'd endorse your character and your ministry. On the other hand, if this has been not only the egregious fakery of the past, but ongoing cover up with allies doing this for you and then causing others to hold you accountable, to actually have to apologize. If that's the case, then that escalates things the other direction. So that's the, that's the stakes. That's. So I'm just putting it straight out there with you guys. We'll just talk like adults. And I want to, I want to pass the ball first if I can to Gary and say, Gary, what is your position on all of this stuff? What do you, you know, did this stuff happen in the past? Did you do it? Did you cover it up? Have you been slandered, misrepresented? Maybe you can just share and we'll just let you talk for a minute.

[E]

Yeah, thanks, Mike. Yeah, I, I think, yeah, there's a level of slander and accusation that's not true. And this is hard for me because again, this is something I've had to carry 10 years and it's. When this came out, you know, 10 years ago, I was open and willing to, to meet with Nathaniel and Haley and, and those that brought accusation and you know, I, I didn't data mine. I haven't data mined and I don't need to data mine in that sort of sense.

[C]

And

[E]

my heart has always been for the church. It's been for the church, it's been for the body of Christ, has been for the integrity, the prophetic and yeah, that's where I've always landed and always been in that place, Mike. And so,

[A]

Okay. And so, so you've never, you, you never looked up people's information to, in some people would say enhance prophetic word or some people call it cheating. I would, I would consider those kind of actions blasphemy against the name of God to fake a prophetic anything.

[E]

Absolutely agree with you there. And you know, for me, prophetic ministry has been something I've been in 20 plus years and haven't have needed to enhance, haven't felt under pressure and haven't needed to do things that have, you know, would be blasphemous against the Lord. I feel a lot too much and love the church too much to do that.

[A]

So if we, if we can, I'd like to revisit some of the past then those, those particular allegations and stuff like that. And so I don't know if Nathaniel or, or Chris would like to share first.

[F]

Yeah, up to you, Mike. Would, would you like us to.

[A]

What would you prefer? That'd be wonderful. I, I think if you could share some of the particular evidences again that were looked at to me that seem from at this moment and I'm open to hear other, other things here, but it, it looks like an incredibly strong and convincing case that, that the data mining is exactly what happened.

[F]

Yeah, yeah, we could definitely share that. And Chris, you can jump in.

[C]

Yeah, jump in.

[F]

Yeah. And for us, we'll do our best to walk through this. It's not something we have spoken much of for the last decade, but we'll just try to keep it to the facts as best we can. So in 2015, November 2015, my role at the time was on media and live stream at Glory City Church. At the time they held a conference, a prophetic conference of which Gary was a speaker. I was not at the session that he was speaking at. It was another member in my team and I just remember when debriefing with this member, they, they said something that just stood out to me. They said, marveled at Gary's gift and accuracy, mentioned that he had called out names and, and dates and for myself, we've always loved the prophetic and being at Catherine's church on staff are no strangers to what's possible in the prophetic. But the next thing they said was as a joke pretty much. Oh, I mean he was so accurate. I mean unless he was looking up on Facebook and kind of laughed and then moved on in his conversation. For me it was, it was just enough to remember, but I didn't think much of it. Later when I was reviewing the session, part of my role, I did notice a pattern with Gary's words that seemed very specific on names, dates and certain visuals. And being on the media team, like obviously integrity is really important to me to, you know, there's a miracle testimony, it comes through just to double check the facts. It's part of the role and

[D]

it

[F]

bothered me, even the thought of it as much as it's bothered everyone else. And honestly the thing I did next was to quickly debunk it for myself, believing it not to be possible. I didn't know what data mining even meant back then. I was in my early 20s and I simply, while reviewing the session did what I thought someone may do if they were to be data mining, jumped on Facebook and looked at an event we had at the time. Gloria City Church had an event and people would usually select on Facebook attending and there are about 300 people I believe.

[A]

Right. I can't remember.

[F]

I think it was a lot though. And I just simply went along as Gary's giving the words out again, wanting to pretty much disprove it to myself, thinking maybe there'd be a bit of overlap. You kind of expect that there might be a few names or dates that. That overlap. That's fine, honestly. My expectation was a couple of words into to move on and be like, hey, this is all good. But it did become concerning fairly quick when I. When I would go through and there'd be a name mentioned or a date mentioned and then a word, and one by one, it correlated with people who had clicked attending on the event. And I felt quite sick to the stomach at even the thought of it. And then it started to be people who were not in the room but had selected the event. And again, it would be like a date, a name, and then a certain picture that usually was right up on the. On the wall of their Facebook page. And it started to become more concerning as I went through it. Finally, by the time I got to the end, 12 out of 15 words were people on the event. There were 500 people in the building, I believe, and 300 people on the event. I kind of expected that there might be a few not on the event. There was only three left out of the full 15 words, and two of those were simply just the name or a date. There wasn't enough to know for sure, but there was one, a Sarah King, who was a friend of ours, and she had spina bifida, and she was not on the event. And for me, that was like, okay, at least there's one. Don't overreact here. I shared it with my wife Hayley that night. A little bit concerned, but also not really wanting to believe something like that at that point. But I was at least concerned.

[G]

I shared it with you, and we. Sarah, as my good friend, when I asked her, you know, about the conference, she said that she was actually babysitting Gary's child, and she'd met him in the hallway earlier. That's what she said.

[A]

And.

[F]

And also your reaction when I first told you about my concerns.

[G]

Yeah, I didn't believe it at first. I didn't. Didn't think it was very likely. I believed it to be genuine, prophetic words.

[A]

But

[G]

I started looking into the specific words, just like Nathaniel did. And the more names that we went through, the more alarmed I started to feel and the more concerned I started to feel

[C]

when. If I can just add that when he met Sarah that time in the hallway, he specifically asked for her name as a thinking. That's how she tells it. Yeah.

[G]

Yeah.

[F]

Yes. So, yeah, honestly, Haley's usually the grounded one. I was Kind of hoping to hear like you probably overreacted, don't worry about it, to be honest. But with that being Sarah had already had her name asked of her before the session started and was babysitting the kid. It suddenly became that every single person on the list that we saw was either attending the event or like Sarah. And we again, at this stage, I didn't have a grid for this. Chris lived at Catherine Renal's house at the time. I lived next door to them. We were all very close. So we, I think Chris was over our house. I think we started to just quickly share the concern with Chris, hoping that we'd be able to bring it to Catherine. Over to you, Chris.

[C]

Yeah, so, so I came over to their, their place and they're like, you know, this couldn't be right, is it? And, and we just went through them one by one and I said, well let's, let's have a look. And it was, it was interesting that, you know, if there was something brought up about one of the girls playing guitar, well, her cover photo was a guitar or another word about a girl dancing. And her literal cover photo, like you really didn't have to go very far. All the information was there and it was enough to I guess say it's concerning. Of course there's always that element of, well, you know, holy spirit could tell you things are on Facebook, there's a lot on Facebook. And you know, we spoke to Catherine, she didn't want to believe it. She had relationship with Gary and, and said no, I know Gary, you know, this, this can't be right, this can't be true. We also were speaking leader there at the time, Joel Shaw. He didn't believe it. You know, he's like, no, no, no, couldn't be, couldn't be. So Catherine didn't really express any interest to want to discuss it or go further with it or have any involvement with it. Felt like it was a waste of our time or a distraction, a lot of these things. What was good was that Joel believed it and was in, in Gary's camp and we weren't sure. Obviously we wanted to believe Gary. He's a lovely, likable personality and we were enjoying his company when he would come and minister. So we didn't want to believe it, but we wanted to find a disproof and Joel's strong position that this isn't right. Presented a three month back and forth that took place where it would be like, okay, what about this meeting over here, this him conference? There was no There was no attending list. There was nowhere to click attend. So how does he know who's going to be there? And then we're like, oh, that's a good one. And then we'd go back through and we'd realized every person that was prophesied over were people in our team or that church's team. And it was all people that you could. You could quite confidently guarantee that he knew would be there. We. We literally came away saying, wow, wasn't our team blessed? Like, God really blessed our. Our staff at this other church meeting that we were at. So it was like, suspicious. Again, it wasn't like a, oh, okay, cool. He's just got a bunch of random people with no way to know who was there. It was very honed in on people that you could confidently assume would be there. Another example was a word that Joel found that he said. Okay, he literally gave details for an address here. He said, you go, I'm seeing this road and you're going down this house. And Joel was just looking for one mind you in his mind, one way that you couldn't access it online would debunk everything, which I'm not so sure that is applied sound logic. But. But that's what he was looking for. And he found one. And. And Nathaniel was looking and there was no way to find that on Facebook. After a bit, Nathaniel managed to find that. Those details in a Google search. It was like, second result, I believe you could find this guy's information. So this is three months of back and forth with, in my opinion, only strengthening the plausibility of. Of this scenario. So. Yeah, and then leading us to, you know, leading the creation of this fake Facebook account as a bit of a. As a bit of a fleece to God and. And a bit of a confirmation. I'm not sure I'd be very interested to hear from Peter or Alan as to what it is that they would need if. If a scenario like this was to happen, what it is that they. They feel like they would need to see. Because for us, that was kind of what we would need to see. And then that happened. Yeah, I'm not sure.

[D]

Sorry, Nathaniel.

[F]

That's okay.

[E]

I could.

[G]

Sorry.

[F]

Did you want to go for it?

[D]

Yeah. Just seeking clarity on Chris's question. What was your question, Chris?

[C]

My question was, what is it that you would need to see? If somebody came to you and said, we're very confident that this situation is happening, someone's data mining on Facebook, what would do it for you?

[D]

Yeah, it's a great Question, Chris. It mirrors a question I was just thinking of. Of what would it take, Mike. So my question is to. Mike. Mike, one of the things I've been thinking as we plan on meeting is what would it take you, Mike, to think that or to believe that Gary isn't guilty of these things?

[A]

Just the falsification of the evidence that's been presented, the falsehood. If you get the victim's finger or the perpetrator's supposed accused, if you get their fingerprints on the murder weapon, what would you need to undo that? Well, you would need to show how they got on the weapon that was unrelated to the murder. You got to falsify the evidence somehow. And what we have is a number of examples of information that appear to have come from Facebook, confirming not only the data is consistent with stuff on Facebook, Right. Which is already very anomalous, but the people having checked in or been associated with the event or the person's name being known. Then we have someone could call it entrapment. I think it was a godly righteous thing to do to create that Facebook page and say, hey, this could exonerate the guy. This could go either way. And then all of a sudden, he gives a word that looks like it comes right from the page. Then there's an email that shows up that. Then that Google account gets deleted when people start asking questions about it being associated with Gary. And then all of a sudden he's like, I got hacked. And all this stuff. And everything about that, it seems like the most plain on your face thing is that Gary is absolutely guilty and you guys are empowering him to do it and oppressing the people who want to hold him accountable. That's what this looks like.

[D]

And what was the last word? Pressing people?

[A]

Oppressing.

[D]

Oppressing.

[A]

Yeah. Gary. You guys, I have sat across from person after person in this process. I sat across from Chris Reed, who tried to schmooze me, and he lied through his teeth. And the only reason I knew he was lying through his teeth is because I knew more than he knew I knew. I held information back because I wanted to find out if truth would be shared. And it's become easier for me to go, yeah, it is possible for people to do this kind of grift where they feel empowered and they think, maybe they think, but there's so much good being done, it's okay. Or I'm just trying to sort of kickstart the work of the Holy Spirit or whatever they think they tell themselves. I don't know. But I do know that this is overwhelming evidence. That in the eyes of just about any reasonable person, it would be like, Gary, you have to have an incredibly good explanation for this. It's not a vacuum. It's not just an accusation. There's. There's a flood of evidence.

[E]

I'm not trying to smooth you, Mike. And again, not trying to deceive or just, you know, be deceptive. I. My process has always been my process in words of knowledge and in prophetic ministry and, and in 20 years, you know, of prophetic ministry, like there's no pressure for me having to. To come up with stuff. And there's words I've had that, that absolutely have no connection to information and stuff like that. And so, yeah, I'm not, I'm not here to do that.

[A]

So, Gary, maybe you could answer this. Like, why did that email trace back to your account?

[E]

It didn't.

[A]

Can you explain that? It didn't. Can you explain that to me?

[E]

Well, the, the email that, again, I was, I've been accused of sending. That email was sent while, while I was having dinner with Catherine and Tom. And so that email was sent at 8:50 while I'm in the middle of a dinner. And so I don't know how I could send an email and have dinner at the same time.

[A]

Okay, I'm not. You. Really? You're. You're a tech guy and you don't know how to send an email at a different time than you typed the email.

[D]

That feature didn't exist until 2019. Gmail didn't introduce that feature until three years later.

[A]

Really? So you guys have looked into this. What else have you not shared with me? Then just tell me the stuff, because here's a claim from you, right? I was eating dinner at that time. Okay, I don't know if that's true or not. I also know that there's other. There's ways to delay an email. Now you're. Now I'd have to go and validate whether there was a way to do it back in 2016 or not, which I assume there was. But then I wouldn't know how to validate whether you were having dinner at that time or if you didn't stop and go to the bathroom for five minutes or anything else. So this does not constitute evidence or an explanation that I can validate.

[D]

And I think what you're pointing to, Mike, is. And maybe Pete wants to jump in because I'm new to this. I wasn't there at the time, but I think everything that we're pointing to is the need for the forensic examination. Because you're right, Mike, any reasonable, objective observer would come to a similar conclusion as the one you're coming to. Like, hey, this looks ridiculous. And you can say things like, well, it appeared that Welsh Eagle was the recovery email for Sarah's email, but you can. And Gary, God bless them, thank you for screenshotting this. Put in multiple emails and you get the same response from Google saying, oh, a security code has been sent. Sent to this email. And Nathaniel as well in his note to the forensic examiner was like, actually, the link between Welsh Eagle as a backup email address is not actually that valid.

[A]

That valid. What does that mean? Could I.

[D]

Could I talk to that guy Nathaniel?

[A]

Yeah, it was Nathaniel that said it wasn't valid.

[F]

Yeah, no, that was not my words. You've got the document there. It's the same document that's been available for the last 10 years. We haven't put anything else down, but I guess we are talking about quite a few things that do pertain to us. Mike, would you like us to share just what happened?

[A]

That'd be great.

[F]

Next step, because for us, where we're at with the story so far, we were all deeply concerned, but as Catherine rightfully mentioned in a meeting we had.

[D]

Before you go down that line, could I interject, just. Nathaniel, when you said those were not my words. Yes, I had an email from you on 22nd of July, 2016. Would I. Would it be appropriate for me to read that email in reference to the verifiability?

[F]

Of course. I'll just say I've always been transparent with this. And so my words on that, from what I remember, and I imagine you'll read this out, was that it couldn't be absolutely identified. And I've held that to this day. But the things I'm about to share, and I have always held to those, I believe it's consistent with the document are three reasons. Three, that we believe the email is highly likely to be connected to Gary, I've never stated on the record that it unequivocally is, but what is clear is what I could talk about in a few minutes, if that's okay. You're more than welcome to read that.

[D]

Just hearing you say, hey, no, no, I. I did say it wasn't 100% verifiable. That's what I pointed to, my cast. Hey, can I speak to the guy? And that was you.

[A]

And I had Alan. The phrase that jumped out to me was that it was not that accurate. Which is a way of saying Something's inaccurate. So that the identification of the email with him is inaccurate. And that would be news to me and not consistent with what I've heard so far.

[D]

Let me just read this paragraph then, so we're all on the same page. And I'm not paraphrasing. Nathaniel.

[A]

Great.

[D]

In our previous document, sequence of events, it is stated in section 18 that there's a possible link between the Saralam email address and Welsh EagleMail. Please notify the investigator that the Saralam email address may or may not be linked with. With Welsh Eagle. As Ben's friend was not able to verify a definitive link. Sorry, definite link between them. This information, the word I was looking for.

[F]

Sorry, I'm not real good with spelling. I would have been trying to say

[D]

definitively, okay, this information is not 100% verified, as it would be illegal to do so. If this link was 100% verified by the investigator, it would settle the case. But if no link is found between Sarah Lamb and Welsh Ego, we believe it does not prove anything, as there are many ways to create an email. Therefore, it may not be worth having the investigator spend any great deal of time looking into this. So I just wanted to make sure that we weren't leaning into this as, like, this is our silver bullet.

[C]

Well, if I. If I can even just take it back. Alan.

[A]

Sorry, real quick. I wanted to make this clear, Alan and Peter. You guys are convinced that that email was not made by Gary, not sent by Gary, or an association with Gary, by him or someone helping him out?

[B]

I'm not convinced of anything in here, Mike. I think I've held that position all while I hear two sides of a story, that people are presenting different interpretations of things that I don't understand because I'm not a technologically orientated person. And so, as I've indicated all the way along, I'm very open to the thought that Gary is guilty. I. I've made that clear in all sorts of email communication that I've communicated. I've not been trying to prove that he's innocent. I've been asking the other side to prove that he's guilty. And the only way that I could get to that point was to have electronic devices investigated because there were so many different points of view, as we're seeing right now in this conversation, that people are saying, yes, but there's this. Yes, but there's that. Yes, but there's this.

[A]

Okay, and so, Peter, quick question on that.

[B]

No, no, let me finish. Let me finish. I'm sitting here listening to exactly the same thing that happened 10 years ago. And so I've got different points of view which are expressing concern that somebody's right and somebody's wrong. The only way that I could resolve that was to have an Australian Federal Police qualified forensic investigator of electronic devices be paid to go through and actually review. Did Gary search Facebook as he is being accused of, who set up the email address? All the things that we're trying to resolve here through different points of view cannot be resolved unless. Unless you choose to believe a particular narrative about the facts that we've got in front of us. The only way that we can establish the facts is to have the facts investigated by somebody who knows what actually happened on those electronic devices.

[A]

So in no. In no way would you ever tell people that the accusations were debunked and proven to have no substance. You would never say that to someone, right?

[B]

I've never said that.

[A]

Okay. You wrote that to Victoria in March of 2025 in an email that I have.

[B]

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[A]

You wrote to Victoria in 2016, Gary was very publicly and aggressively accused. Hold on, I'm going to read your words.

[B]

Who's Victoria?

[A]

She emailed you guys asking about these issues. You had an extensive back and forth with her, you guys. And Gary. Gary emailed her, too.

[B]

Victoria, who I. I just don't know what we're talking about.

[A]

On her email, she put her last name as writes W R I T E S. I think because she likes to write

[E]

lady from New Zealand.

[A]

But you wrote to Victoria in 2016, Gary was very publicly and aggressively accused of using Facebook to give words of knowledge and prophecy. I had the privilege of walking with Gary through this very harrowing time. The accusations were debunked and proven to have no substance. You said that you've never said that to anyone. So it sounds like you tell some people that it's inconclusive and you tell other people that it's been debunked.

[B]

I. Yep. I. I have no. Internally, I have no reason to believe that Gary is either right or wrong until it's proven by the forensic investigation. So, yes, I wrote that.

[D]

And

[B]

sure.

[A]

Another concern about misleading information was the idea that in some places it's been said that Nathaniel and others were not willing to contribute to the investigation or to surrender their electronic devices. Whereas I have the email threads back and forth between you guys. And they said that they were willing to do both of those things.

[B]

Yes, I drew your attention to that in the email that I sent you. Earlier about the facts, that I knew them. So I've acknowledged that to you already. All I'm saying is that when push came to shove and we had to do it, Ben Fitzgerald representing Nathaniel and Hayley and Daniel indicated that they were no longer prepared to do that. So the end result was that they were no longer prepared to do that. But, yes, they did acknowledge that they were prepared to do that in the early stages.

[A]

So I saw the way that you shared it. It was misleading. It was very, very misleading to suggest that the reason things didn't go forward is because they were not willing to submit their devices, which they were, or that they were not willing to put more forward money for the investigation, which they were.

[B]

Now, where did I share that?

[A]

I'll let the guys chime in here if you guys can share that.

[F]

Yeah, as in, sorry, the. Where was that shared?

[A]

Yeah, I'll have to dig it up.

[F]

Sure, I can do that.

[B]

Maybe we're talking about children and things. I acknowledge, as I did too already, that Nathaniel was prepared to put a financial commitment to it. But what I'm pointing to is at the end of the day, that commitment was withdrawn by Ben on behalf of those that he was representing in the conversation. That's what. That's all I'm saying. I acknowledge that they were prepared to do it, but at the end of

[A]

the day, the implication that you give to Peter is that the investigation in some cases was inconclusive and that everybody decided to pull out. Now, when I look at the emails and the discussions, it looks to me as though the investigation was made as cumbersome and difficult as possible and that the people who were involved decided that this was not a good faith investigation. And that's when they said, forget it. Not some kind of inconclusive thing, but that you orchestrated an investigation that would be cumbersome, financially, costly, and just without good faith. You know, like, did the people who are going to have to pay for this thing, did they get to pick the investigators?

[B]

Yes.

[A]

Did they have to commit to following your instructions no matter how the investigation went forward? Was there a commitment on their part where they had to follow no matter what?

[B]

In the email that I sent you, Mike, I indicated that Nathaniel was welcome to become a part of the conversation with the investigators.

[A]

Under what conditions? That he flies all the way to where you guys are.

[B]

Flies Always a couple of hours. That's where the investigator. That's where the investigator was going to be.

[A]

Yeah, he can just have a zoom call. The guy can just get on the phone. I'VE been part of investigations. Usually you just get on the phone with people. You don't need to be in their presence and submitting their own electric stuff. Like, that's weird and unnecessary. And reportedly, Gary had already replaced his electronic devices by then. So then it becomes this odd thing where we're like, we're examining devices that we think aren't going to have anything. We're giving up devices of ourselves which would only be used to incriminate us for reasons that are unrelated to anything about the situation. We're being asked to pay for it. They're being told, let's see, they're being asked if Gary's to be found guilty, all parties who have accused him will support a process of redemption that I will lead. What? So to get investigated, they have to agree to be under your control after the investigation is over, even if he's guilty?

[B]

That's not what I meant. By the words that you're reading out.

[A]

They're supposed to pay $600 an hour for the investigator. $600 an hour, and you're adding extra stuff he has to investigate, which adds many more hours to the investigation and much more of a financial burden on them.

[B]

We were putting up $20,000 in the process. We weren't asking them to carry the whole financial burden.

[C]

Can I just ask where, like, who you spoke to about you and Graham Cook? Was it going to put up 20,000?

[B]

Correct.

[C]

And who did you tell that to?

[B]

Ben.

[C]

How did you communicate that to Ben?

[B]

Verbally? Because it was a relational conversation.

[C]

On the phone you said. Yeah, because it doesn't look like that in the email threads. It looked like you make them pay for the whole thing.

[B]

Oh, well, I'm sorry that. That's the impression that's given, but that was never the conversation.

[C]

Yeah. Did you. Did you hear about that, Nathaniel, at the time, or. Or Dan, that these guys were going to put 20,000 him and Graham Cook?

[F]

That was never mentioned to us. And Dan is, I think, written in the chat.

[B]

No.

[A]

Yeah, he's. Daniel says no. So, Peter, the integrity of your honesty in this situation is very much in question.

[B]

Is there a question there, Mark?

[A]

No. We've shared the evidence. There's multiple things that you're sharing that you. You seem to have different truths for different audiences.

[B]

If that's how you see it, then that's how you see it. I can only talk to you about my experience in the process and what I know my heart was and the conversations I had with multiple people.

[A]

Peter, we can do more than that. Though, because I explicitly asked you. I even read you from your email. I said, have you. You would never say the following, right? The accusations were debunked and proven to have no substance. And you said, no, I would never say that. I've never believed that. And then afterwards you said, okay, I guess I said that. And there's. You don't even have an explanation for this when you say the accusations were debunked. Right? You were saying something about Nathaniel and Haley and Chris. You're saying something about Ben and something about Daniel. You're saying something about all of these people. And you're saying this to someone who privately reached out to you guys, saying, I believe in Gary. I just. I'm nervous because all the exposures that are happening, just. Just tell me that this guy's legit. I just. She wanted to just trust you guys.

[E]

That's it.

[A]

And then she gets this and her radar goes up higher and higher because you guys were very evasive and weird in the email. It was very strange. The whole thread is weird. But this is you in our meeting showing me that you're duplicitous in your statements about Gary Morgan, depending on your audience. That's a fact of reality. That's not something you can dispute. I have no question for you. You just. You did this right? Now we're all here. I'm not going to pretend we didn't see what we saw. So this makes it difficult to think that you should be part of any investigation into Gary. You should be investigated along with Gary.

[B]

You're welcome to do that if you'd like to.

[A]

I'd rather not. I didn't want to have this meeting. You guys asked for it. What I see here, guys, is a ton of evidence. And I have not heard a good explanation for it, Gary, from you, except for you telling me that you're a good guy, a ton of evidence, and those who are covering for you, I'll use the term being duplicitous. At least Peter being duplicitous in his engagement and his behavior, being controlling, being difficult in this process to try to make it harder and harder until people just give up because they have no good faith. Belief in it. You spoke as though Ben Fitzgerald was on the fence or something else like this, but I talked to him, and he very much believes that Gary is guilty and he just lost faith in you guys as people who would do anything about it. That was the reality. It wasn't an inconclusive investigation. That was never what it was. It Was a ton of evidence, no good explanations, alternately. And you writing presumed innocent. Presumed innocent. Presumed innocent. Until everybody just says, forget it. And then poor Nathaniel is forced to apologize. Apologize. Gary, please tell me, how am I wrong? Look at. This is a very significant amount of evidence,

[E]

Mike. I agree to the objective observer, it looks exactly like that. And I haven't denied I called that the fake Facebook page. But it's what I saw, it's what I received, it's what I shared. And I can't give any other explanation for that, But I did not data mine, and I did not look up Facebook. I've never done that.

[A]

You've never done it. And at the same time, the email. Haley makes this Facebook page. It's wild, Gary. It's like the Lord wanted you to get caught. She makes this Facebook page, does a little comment on a Facebook post. You call out the name and the birth date. Then an email shows up and it's Lamberty. A name that is very rare, but is. But is inside your circle, your area. There's someone with that last name. And then the person is pressed, like, hey, you know, they want to find out more about this person who emailed. And their email gets deleted. The Google account's gone.

[E]

I was at dinner when that email was sent. I was sat there with Katherine Tall and with.

[A]

That's absolutely fine, Gary. All that is fine. I'm asking you to respond to the evidence I just shared, but to set

[E]

up an email and to send an email while you're at dinner, I just don't. And that's one of the things I said to Pete. I said, there's nefarious things going on here that need to be investigated.

[A]

Sure, I can look into this. It won't be hard to find out. In 2016, was it possible to send an email without sitting at your computer? Sure, I can look that up.

[E]

I was there at 8 for dinner. Catherine and Tom were there. Trevor and Meredy were there.

[A]

And this email appeared, and you maintain it was not. It was not possible to do that in 2016.

[E]

I must say something. I did not send that. I was at dinner that night.

[C]

Was Sarah at that dinner as well

[G]

as in me?

[C]

Yeah.

[G]

No, I was at home, pregnant, on good rest.

[C]

Okay.

[A]

Okay. So the defense is not that strong. If it was. No, I'm sorry, Gary. Go ahead, please.

[E]

I was just, you know, again, there was being accusations that, you know, I was. There was someone else helping me and stuff like that. And that's one of the reasons in chatting with Pete is. Is that we have to get these devices. Not just myself, I, I was open, I said pete, there's my device. And I just want to clarify, I hadn't changed devices, there was no devices that had been changed and so I'd offered my devices, I offered Sarah's devices. And every time there's been questions, every time there's been things talked about either by Ben or Dan or others, I haven't shied away, I haven't deflected, I haven't tried to defend my position. I've shown up to everything that I've been asked to show up to and including when Pete came to me and said Gary, you need to submit your devices. I said I'm happy to submit my devices. There's nothing that I have to defend you. And so but at 8:50 when that email was sent I was having dinner at Trevor and Meredith and also as well Catherine and Tom were there.

[A]

Do you guys think that the. Well first let me ask Nathaniel. He's suggesting that he did not. Was that something I misunderstood? Did he have a new device or not?

[G]

There was a social media photo from Gary like a few weeks after like the original thing happened where he was at the Apple Store buying new devices. That was what we saw.

[F]

Yeah, I, I think that's probably Ben would have, would be the person I imagined to talk to about that. I guess if I could just add one thing, the main thing for us here and we, I guess we're going to share how it happened but this is like we're happy to just move with whatever way the meeting needs to go Mike but for us there was a fake Facebook page made that was called out and Chris was referring back to a meeting we had some time ago and for us that was clear that that would be what we would need to see to know that something like this was happening. I guess that that's the history doesn't make things go away and I guess for us that still especially with the email, whether we've got three reasons we do believe the email almost certainly is my wording is connected to Gary but irrespective of that an email was made, a fake email by my wife. I'm not sure if he wants to share anything more about that. We don't need to but if you'd like us to. Totally your call. But that to me is. I don't know how to explain that.

[A]

Yeah, I don't think that. I think you're right in that Identifying whether this email is associated with Gary is more evident. It's not it's not, it's not the linchpin. But what if you wouldn't mind share the three reasons that you think it was associated with him.

[F]

Yeah, sure. So reason one, when Ben and Joel, not myself, started to. When Ben was concerned about this, Haley had made Facebook page. But when Ben was concerned he said that the email will either show that she's innocent, sorry, that Gary's innocent or if a real Sarah Lamberty comes forward. It was as simple as that with a birth date then real person exists. So that was the main thing he wanted to do with Joel. So the three reasons one Sarah Lamperty, the so called Sarah Lampy consistently lied about their location. They said that they were, you know, on a missions trip in Cambodia with the Red Cross when they were actually in Australia and consistently lied about that. Reason two, Lamberty is an extraordinarily rare surname. We know this because at the time that Ben was concerned we looked into the name Sarah Lamberty and had a private investigator which this has been made known to everyone. This is not new information. So the, the private investigator said very clearly, forensic investigator, there does not seem to be a Sarah Lamberty on the record in Australia. So the person. Reason two, the person doesn't seem to exist. Not only that, the person is not on the record of going to this missions trip with the Red Cross. That's something you can look at. They said I'm, I've gone to Cambodia. Keep in mind this person supposedly emailed Gary and emailed Glory City Church. So excited about this word. A few weeks later, not willing to talk about it, they said they're going on a missions trip for six months and we looked up with the Red Cross if a Sera Lamberti had gone to Cambodia, they did not. So reason two, it doesn't seem that a Sarah Lampy exists. And just to make things worse, Ben brought this to my attention. There seemed to be that Lamberty was a very rare name and he realized, oh, interesting, I know someone with the surname Lamberty. I'll ask them if they know a Sarah, this person's name. I believe Ben could tell us who it is. But they had the surname Lambda. He was the only person he knew. He asked if they knew of a Sarah. They did not. Then Ben found out this person is in Gary's prophetic school. So we believe that's a very odd coincidence since the name Lamberty is 1 in 1.1.9 million chance of having that name is roughly about 20 potentially in Australia with that surname. When Hayley made the Facebook page When I'm.

[G]

When I created this Sarah on Facebook, I made the name, the last name Wildman. Just thinking of a last name of people that went to my parents, church, their friends. That was how I came up with it.

[F]

So if you're in a rush, one could likely conclude that you would use a name you're familiar with. Again, not necessarily a smoking gun. But the third reason was that other reason we mentioned that it strongly appeared based on Ben, not myself and what he did with a Google expert after he put a post out and said can someone help me with this? The Sarah email got deleted at exactly that same time. It said 0 days ago this email was deleted, the recovery email there you could put multiple emails in of which it rejected. Ben did this, asked me to have a quick look. I did the same thing with the help of this Google expert. The only email that worked was Gary's. The only reason I have said that that is not unequivocal is because to do that would be illegal. I've never said that that in and of itself is a smoking gun, but I sure believe that those three points are enough to cast extraordinary doubt on the existence of a serial entity. And therefore we're back to a fake Facebook page has been called out the name. And for us, we can't look past that. To us that may not be able to be explained by you guys, but for us that is all we decided we would need to see to know that this was happening. Haley put that out as like, as

[G]

a fleece for God and just made it and decided to trust God to reveal whether it was happening.

[F]

And I was happy.

[G]

We are.

[F]

And I was happy to move on when, when we were.

[C]

Yes, please go add just one more oddity about that. That time and this email being deleted at the same time you got hacked. Was it Gary and you lost everything?

[E]

Yeah. Screenshot on the 18th of at 3, something in the morning, my Gmail was compromised and accessed. And I've got screenshot shots of that. So it was on the 19th, like Nathaniel just said that everything then got deleted. And so yeah, my, my stuff was accessed and hacked. And that's again a reason I said to Pete, we, we need to get these devices forensically looked at because there's nefarious things going on and everything is trying to be set up against me in this. And, and also as well, it's, it's no, it's no secret that hacking was being used by those involved.

[A]

Wait, wait, wait, let's slow down. Are you suggesting that somebody set you Up.

[E]

That's what I was trying to find. It looked like.

[A]

Yeah, but what do you. What do you think happened? You think you said nefarious stuff, and you think that someone set up the Sarah Lamberty email and connected it to you after hacking your account in order to make it look like you were guilty? Is that a hypothesis?

[E]

Absolutely. Because, again, being at dinner when this thing has happened, I have no explanation on how that email could be sent for me if I was at dinner.

[A]

But let me lean on this a little bit, if we can. Your theory is there's a possibility that somebody set up the Sarah Lamberty email as part of an attempt to make it look like you were trying to cover your tracks on something.

[E]

Yeah.

[A]

Okay, so then that would also imply that you think that there. There is an actual connection, that the Sarah Lambert email is a fake person who's pretending to defend you initially, that that was the initial thing, is Sarah Lambert is defending you, and that then the person who set this up was counting on them doing all this work, talking to an investigator just to find out that the email was somehow connected with you, that this was all part. Because the only people that could be in on this would be the ones on this call. You're saying that they. Right. Like, play it out. What does this look like? It sounds like you're saying either I'm guilty or I was set up. And I think that one of those is a much simpler explanation.

[E]

Sorry, you might drop that. Me. The last part you said.

[A]

Sorry. If they. If they were. If someone was setting you up at this stage in the game, who's doing it? Nobody's gunning for you yet. They're just, like, hoping it's not true. Gary, come on. Dude. You're such a liar, man. It's so ridiculous. It is. It is atrocious. I don't know how you guys can't. Peter Allen, you should be so embarrassed. When you had a chance to out this guy as blaspheming the name of Christ, as abusing the people of God, you instead caused serious harm to the light. Nathaniel, please, would you mind sharing just briefly how this impacted you when you guys tried to have real accountability, how it hurt you guys?

[F]

Yeah, sure.

[B]

Yeah.

[F]

Well, we were very shocked, obviously. Hayley, do you want to share just quickly what your reaction was when this happened and then we can mention it?

[G]

When he first called it out, when it first happened, I just felt really in shock. Like, I just was numb and just shocked and more. The aftermath where our pastors initially, like, didn't believe like they believed that Gary was legitimately hearing from God and that we'd done the wrong thing and that we were wrong to set a trap, so to speak, which came from.

[F]

From Gary. Our pastors did believe us logically. Tom looked at the details originally like anyone would when they looked and said and saw like we called Catherine and Tom that night as it happened. There's nothing in it for us here. I'm a. I'm a media guy. But we were shocked and pulled by this. We called Catherine. They were shocked and appalled by this and thanked Haley for creating this page. But Mike to I I guess I'll come to what you're asking about because it's the next thing that happened. They believed us on this and thanked us for making this because Tom looked, saw the fake Facebook page, drew the conclusion anyone reasonably would that the Gary had called out a fake Facebook page made to catch him, the only one created. And we thought that was it. We thought it was over. Tommy, Catherine were meeting with Gary and as he's mentioned, he. We didn't know about this but he claimed complete innocence. We didn't hear anything for the whole Saturday. When Sunday came along, we were asked to be in a meeting with Gary before he was going to preach on Sunday. We couldn't understand how he would still be preaching but we thought maybe they'd be repenting from the stage. We didn't know. So we came along to this meeting with our six month old child and it became very clear that this meeting was about us. And Gary mentioned some things and you

[G]

might remember and I remember Gary quoting the scripture from Proverbs, he who sets a trap will fall in it. And in that he seemed to imply that there was something wrong in our hearts that was the reason that we had made a fake Facebook person. And I knew that that wasn't true. I knew that my motivation in making it was a love for the prophetic and a love for the people in our church. And that was why I made the Facebook person to get to the bottom of it. But we were very much attacked in that meeting and in the weeks following and the motives of our hearts were like scrutinized on and it was very confusing and we were accused of being on a witch hunt and a lot of absurd things and it was very, very difficult, very, very traumatizing for young people. We were in our mid-20s and we just found it very, very difficult to be so persecuted for what we thought was doing the right thing.

[F]

Yeah. And even as, as things progress, Tom And Catherine have since apologized to us profusely and do believe that Gary is guilty based on the evidence alone and have apologized for the way we were treated. But even my very first phone call with Peter McHugh, I was told at the very start of the call, are you on speakerphone or are you recording? I mentioned I wasn't recording. It was on the 12th of May, 2016. I believe Peter would be calling me to get to the bottom of the facts. That's what I was told. I was hopeful. And at the beginning of the call, it was said very clearly, am I on speakerphone or am I being recorded? And I said, no, you're not being recorded, but you're on speakerphone because my wife is here. I was told immediately to take the call off speakerphone, which meant Hayley, the person who originally made the Facebook page, wasn't even able to be privileged to the call. And I'm glad she wasn't, because Peter went on to accuse me very clearly of being a gossip, creating a fake Facebook page. I remember his words saying, I'll do the talking, you do the listening. I'd never been spoken to by a leader like this before. I remember just trembling as someone in their 20s, like, quite, quite shocked by it. And I remember just blurting out as the call felt like it was going to end, surely you would want the facts. Can I just send you the facts? To which Peter said, I wouldn't even look at them. And I just might have, like, managed to. To say, can I. Can I please email you the facts so you can see the facts? And again, he repeated, I would not even look at them. It was a short call, but I remember it. And that was just a few of the things that happened. Yes. A few days later, Ben and Dan were able to talk Peter into looking at the evidence. And the very document that you all have was created pretty much for Peter and Catherine so others could see just the clear facts of what had happened.

[A]

Peter, do you acknowledge or deny that you said that over the phone to Nathaniel?

[B]

It was 10 years ago, so I have no recollection of the call. What I can appeal to is that that's not who I am and that's not how I conduct myself. And so I'm probably as shocked as Nathaniel's describing that that I would be accused of saying something like that. But there's no way that either of us can prove that. So I'm not denying it. I'm just saying it's not in keeping with who I know myself to be. So, yeah, beyond that, I'm not quite sure what you want me to say.

[A]

Peter, you were part of a zoom call that happened in February of 2026. On February 11, in the Zoom call, do you remember. Do you remember what you said about the investigation?

[B]

Again, I have no idea what you're talking about.

[A]

Zoom call with Leon Nakotra. Nakotra. Leo Nakotra, John Manducas, J. Lee, Josiah Nicotra, and Cliff Cherry.

[B]

I remember the zoom call.

[E]

Yep.

[A]

Yeah. You told them you were asked, did they have a reason for refusing to submit their electronic devices. If there was a reason. Actually, let me read to you from the beginning. You said, Graham and I were prepared to put up $20,000 to do that when I made the offer, talking about the investigation of the electronic devices. And at that point, you know, the other side withdrew. The other side said they didn't want to participate in that. From our viewpoint, from our perspective, it left Gary hanging out to dry because they continue to make accusations, but they haven't been willing to do the hard work of actually proving what they're saying is true. And so, from our point of view, we think this is a closed case. So you suggest that you guys were putting up a bunch of money, which everybody says they did not hear from you. And Ben says he did not hear 20k from you. And you also said they refused after you offering all this money, they refused to offer their devices, which is not true. That's a lie. Then Leon followed up by asking you, did they have a reason for refusing to submit their electronic devices? If there was a reason, what was it? You, Peter, replied, they would not give us any reason. And they've never provided me, as the main investigator here in Australia, with any evidence of the claims they could produce. Nothing. You went on to talk about Ben, Ben Fitzgerald, and you said Ben inserted himself in the process. In my bad days, I want to break Ben's kneecaps. You call it an unwarranted rumor that has not been proven. Peter, you're what we call the fixer, right? Gary's the fraud. You're the fixer. That's what this looks like. That's what any reasonable person would see if they weren't caught up in some sort of spiritual deception. Anybody led by the Spirit would have been on Nathaniel and Chris and the other guy's side, rooting them on and saying, yeah, guys, speak truth. This is what we do as Christians. And you've come in and you've offered different stories to different folks and put yourself in the middle of it as, like, the Fixer. On February 11, you said things that you said you would never say. And if I didn't have. It's just like when I talked to Chris Ree. If I didn't have the evidence that you didn't know I had, you could have just lied to me this whole meeting.

[B]

So there's lots of suggestions that you're making here, and I'm not getting an opportunity to actually respond to each one as you put them on the table. So can you just go back through the dialogue of the meeting, the zoom call, which, just for the record, we had no idea was being recorded, and we weren't informed that that was the case, so. But you have the transcript, so there it is. So just go back through it again and just let me. As you're shooting lots of bullets at me, I want to get a chance to actually sort of respond to it. Any of those. That. The previous sort of set of conversations, you shot a bunch of bullets, and then we jumped away somewhere else. And so. So let's just go through it one by one and give me an opportunity to explain myself, if we can do that, please.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, you're absolutely. And Gary, as well. You guys, please, if you have any explanations, I would. I would. If. And if you have great explanations, I will not only apologize for what I've shared, I will publicly declare your innocence and your integrity. And I would have no qualms about doing that, because what this meeting does is it brings us to the point where accountability is coming one way or another to somebody, it might be me. Fine. So be it. I'm fine with that. But, Peter, please do. Please share anything you can that would help exonerate what you've done.

[B]

I asked if you could go through the transcript again, so. And would you stop so I can comment on each of the things that you're assuming create me to be the fixer. So I'd like to be able to comment about each of those things that you read out. So if you can just read through it again and just. I'll just stop you when I want to comment.

[D]

Sure.

[A]

The first. I'll read the first paragraph, which was you said, Graham and I were prepared to put $20,000. Put up $20,000 to do that when I made the offer, talking about the investigation here. And at that point, you know, the other side withdrew. The other side said they didn't want to participate.

[B]

Let's just stop there. So I. Again, I mean, I just. It's just. It's really going to come down, Mike, to who you choose to believe at this point as to whether Graham and I did put up $20,000 and that we did say that to Ben and that we did make that clear to Ben and that Ben was the one who withdrew. That's my recollection of the reality and of the facts, and I'm not. So at the minute you're choosing to believe Ben's recollection of those points of view over my recollection of them, that's your prerogative to choose to do that. But what I'm saying is that there's no evidence here other than my word and his word. And if you're going to. Sorry, there's evidence more than just $20,000 being offered.

[A]

Yeah, it's. It's. It's the email exchanges you have with Nathaniel where you. You make no such offer throughout the entire discussion, all the way to the point where it's the whole thing's ending. You make no such offer and you imply that they have to pay for the whole thing.

[B]

Again, I offer the thought that you're relying on email conversations that don't reflect the full breadth of the conversations that were being taken. And if that's what you want to rely on, then that's entirely your prerogative to come to a conclusion. That there was evidence, and I've acknowledged in my email to you that there was evidence that Nathaniel offered to contribute towards the financial costs. I'm offering to you that there were verbal conversations between Ben and myself because part of this was a relational thing where he asked me to be an intermediary between Gary and himself. And so I'm offering to you that my point of view, my perspective, my memory is very clear, as I have stated to many people, that the $20,000 was offered. So I'm happy for you to rely, if you want to rely on the email conversation that Nathaniel was prepared to put up money, I acknowledge that he was prepared to do that. I'm offering to you that the conversation continued verbally and ended up in another place. And so it's entirely up to you, Mike, as to where you're going to land on, what you choose to base your opinion or your perspective on. I can't refute that.

[A]

Right. Well, would you agree with the following? At least when Nathaniel pulled out, he was not aware of an offer for you guys to pay $20,000.

[B]

That's what he's suggesting. Correct.

[A]

Okay. And you have reason to doubt anything Nathaniel said.

[B]

I'm answering a question at a time So I don't know where that question's coming from. I'm not. I'm not doubting that Nathaniel offered that. I'm just saying that in the email that I sent you. Ben. There's an email that I wrote saying that Ben withdrew the offer for forensic investigation of electronic devices.

[A]

Would you still be willing to put up $20,000, you and Graham, with an investigator that I choose? Absolutely. Yeah.

[B]

Yeah.

[A]

Really? Because it's not gonna be about researching Gary's devices. I'm not sure how that helps. You have a guy who is good at tech, and, I mean, how would you find out looking at someone's devices anyways? You said your prophetic notes and stuff were all deleted, so I don't see how that's gonna help anything. But. But what we do have is we have a Facebook page that was made.

[E]

Sorry, Mike.

[A]

Sorry, Gary. Go ahead, please.

[E]

I never used the device simply for me. My process was in worship, which, again, standing next to Nathaniel, I think at some point I was standing next to Chris in worship, and I would write down what I received, like I've done many times.

[A]

But you wrote it down in your device, like your prophetic notes you write in your device?

[E]

No, no, in. In a physical notebook. So any. Any words that I receive in this. In the medium in worship. And again, it's. You know, there's. There's many instances, Mike, where, you know, this is. This has happened. And. And again, in. In. In these last 10 years, this is. This is the only place. This is the only instance literally where this accusation has come. And, you know, the fruit. The fruit speaks for itself. And, you know, again, I. I see this. I acknowledge this to an objective observer. As I said to Pete right at the beginning, the. The way this. This is being painted, absolutely. To any objective observer, there's. There's guilt, but I know what I know. And. And again, I object to your characterization of me being a liar. I am not a liar.

[A]

So really, Gary, really quick on this. You say you did not keep prophetic notes in any way associated with your electronic devices so that nobody could delete your notes because they hacked you. That's not a thing.

[E]

So my emails were deleted from that, from my Gmail. And also as well, I created a folder for me to create a photo book for Tobias from his birth because Emma was about to be born. And I created a folder and I put all them photos in there to create a photo book, and that had been deleted.

[A]

So you sent an email or a text message to somebody that said,

[B]

just

[A]

about to go into a meeting. I only got the last one on Wednesday and then found my whole account had been accessed and changed. All my personal emails, prophetic notes, Tobias, memories, everything, all deleted. I've tried to restore from my Mac, but they got a lot.

[E]

My journal. My prophetic notes would be my journal, but not my. Not my prophetic ministry that I did on in meetings. I didn't use electronic devices. I'd use my notebook.

[A]

You're the one that used the term prophetic notes. I asked you about prophetic notes. You answered about prophetic notes, your term. Gary, it sounds like you're not telling the truth right now. Does anybody care to disagree with me on this?

[E]

I think you're learning my words there. Again, prophetic notes are my journals.

[A]

I asked you about prophetic notes. You answered about prophetic notes so they would not have been on your electronic devices. And I use that term because that's the term that was in the message. Now you're saying that's not how you use the term. But that's. That's how you used it just now. I didn't explain prophetic notes. I just asked you about them. You assumed that's what it meant.

[E]

I was talking about how I give prophetic words in a meeting. And so then you jump to the email being deleted.

[C]

Yeah, he may have used paper from the pulpit. If that's the topic in question, I have to go back and have a look, but I feel like I have a memory of paper. Journals from the pulpit, if that's the

[E]

topic, always use journals.

[A]

I. I'm not denying any of that. I'm suggesting that at some point he told Ben prophetic notes had been deleted, meaning that such things no longer existed to be examined. That's what you suggested to Ben. That's the part I'm getting at. And you're saying, well, they were never on my phone in the first place. And I'm like, well, how interesting that you told them they were deleted. That's a very interesting disappearance of evidence. Oh, I conveniently relocate them from paper onto my electronic device, which, oh, it was hacked. You see how this evidence continues to stack against you.

[E]

I never suggested that, Mike. That's your suggestion.

[A]

I have no idea how that's a response to what I just said.

[B]

Mike, can you just help me clarify Ben's observation that the notes were deleted from an electronic device? Where's that information coming from?

[A]

Are you doubting that it was real? That what I read was real? Gary, can you attest that what I read was Real?

[E]

No, it's a text message I sent to Ben when the. Two days after my device was compromised, my Gmail was compromised, which I've got screenshots for.

[B]

So can you just read the text again? I'm getting lost in the backwards and forwards.

[A]

The part that I was highlighting is that he. He mentions to Ben that he had prophetic notes on his devices that were deleted that he no longer has.

[B]

Is that what the text. Can you read the text to us?

[A]

Sure. He says, just about to go into meeting. I only got the last one on Wednesday and then found my whole account had been accessed and changed. All my personal emails, prophetic notes, Tobias's memories, everything, all deleted.

[E]

That's on my device. That's. That's literally my Gmail account.

[B]

I think what Mike's asking though, is what did you mean by prophetic notes in that text, Karen?

[A]

Well, now he says he means journal. So which is. Which is.

[B]

No, no, no, no, no, no. Wait a minute, Mike, don't answer the question for him.

[A]

No, he already answered it, Peter. You just lost track of the conversation. He did answer this. Gary, please share it. Share with them again.

[E]

Would be my journals would be things that I've written down that I maybe throughout the week that I, I felt the Lord was sharing with me and stuff like that. Then I put that in my notes and so that would be in my Welsh Eagle connected there. And so. But it's also as well, I've. I use my Apple notes as well, which again, it's. They're there to see and I'm happy to. For people to see them, but they want what I write down as I go on the journey. And so yeah, I. There's no denial there, Mike, that I. That's. That's what happened.

[A]

The only, the only other thing I want to bring up is this idea that there's been no other accusations in 10 years. I've heard this line several times. It's in the public statement and all this other thing that in the past, you know, 10 years, there's never been another accusation or concern. Concern. I think, I think the phrase was not. No one has even raised a concern in 10 years. And that's not true. And the emails back and forth with Victoria last year are evidence of that because she not only raised concerns like a question. Hey. But as she got more and more worried, she started finding stuff and she started bringing it to you guys. And so there's concerns there and there's obviously people that have come up because Gary, in his message back and forth with Victoria, says that he's been asked about this kind of stuff, and then people try to use his answers against him, which means people obviously have ongoing concerns. And so this seems to be. You guys are misleading people about the fact that, yes, there have been concerns, there's new concerns, there's re. Brought up old concerns. There's people like the pastor, Nathan Drez, old pastor, who says, I believe you guys. I'm sorry, I apologize. Obviously, that's a serious issue. But you guys presented to the world like this thing was just sort of inconclusive or. Or even worse. These guys were just bringing a bunch of false accusations.

[E]

I've never presented it like that. And every time there's been a question, and again, every time someone's asked me questions, it's always related back to Glory City. It's never been to other ministry. And. And again, I've been. I've been. Been honorable in not mentioning names, never mentioned Nathaniel's name. Haley's. Chris was never in the picture. So again, I've never mentioned Chris, but Daniel or Ben, I've never mentioned their name. And I've been very transparent and open about the process and in that sort of respect, interestingly, with Victoria, it was a random email, and again, we were having random emails from random people asking questions. And so simply the response was, hey, could you let us know who you are? And. And, you know, what church you're part of? Because again, one of the things that I'm finding difficult, Mike, is, is people are approaching in unbiblical ways, trying to get biblical outcomes. And. And again, there seems to be this. This sort of smaller mirrors that approach where they're looking for full transparency and vulnerability, but are not offering that, you know, in the first place.

[A]

I don't understand how that answers my question. Here's the. Here's the thing. There have obviously been ongoing concerns. You guys have presented things in public in a way that is different than what they are in reality. The evidence seems mounted. If you guys are up for it, I'd be happy to contact an organization, and I'm not. I don't care about examining. I don't see how examining devices helps this situation in the first place. Anybody's devices, for that matter. I think what we have to look at is the words and the Facebook posts, which are already documented in the dossier that was created, and we can share what's there. And the thing is, it seems as plain as the nose on your face what's happened here. And there are others who have Concerns whether you feel they've brought them to you or not. I don't know how you guys react to people when they bring up concerns. If you create a real open door for that or not. There's one of the comments on the. I'll read it to you guys. This is sad. When this stuff started going public, there was a person who went out and said, hey, I want to say this is what happened. Gary Morgan, prophecy that hurt my family. And then someone else, you know, chimes in and responds underneath. And they said the following. I'll read it to you. And I have no reason to. To not take this at face value. They weren't trying to draw attention to themselves. She just says the following. I know this prophet, too, and I'll never forget how he prophesied over our darling Nitin, their kid, when he was fearful that the cancer had returned. He told our boy that he was cured and the cancer would not be returning. So Nitin did not seek treatment. Delaying treatment was a fatal mistake. I cannot forget that, and I can't forgive. I just can't find a way to trust in church leaders anymore. And I've walked away. I'm so saddened for you and Stu sending so much love to you that she's talking about the other person who suffered reportedly because of your prophetic ministry not being genuine. Wasn't there. Kib. So, Nathaniel, do you want to share more on that? Nathan,

[G]

This person said that it wasn't their child. It was a person from their church. The person who wrote the comment, I think was on staff at the church,

[F]

and they called him our boy because he was on the worship team they were with. This person was on staff and yeah, reached out several times to beg him to seek medical treatment because they had been in palliative care and understood the signs.

[A]

Do you remember prophesying about Nitin?

[E]

Gary, what's the name?

[A]

N I T I N

[E]

I don't. Where was this? What church?

[A]

I don't know if you guys have more details.

[F]

Yeah, I believe Larry Sebastian's church. We only know what you know from the comments publicly and then have followed up. Just to understand more.

[A]

Peter, how do you handle it when you hear an accusation like that? What do you. What's your process?

[B]

I would want to talk to the person that was directly involved in it if that person was prepared to have the conversation. It's a heartbreaking and incredibly significant accusation that would need to have some level of at least human empathy, if not deep concern about what's actually happened there in the ministry time.

[E]

Can you repeat what happened, Mike? Because I. I have no recollection of that. I don't know what the accusation is.

[A]

The accusation is that you prophesied over this. This nitin. That the cancer would not return, and so they did not seek treatment when it did, and delaying treatment ended up being a fatal mistake, and so they died.

[E]

Honestly, hand on heart, I have no recollection. And on heart, that. That goes outside of protocols that we teach in our school. And. And I live by myself. That's.

[A]

So if I found, like, two or three witnesses that. That validated this.

[E]

In fact, I record every prophetic word I give. I. I either record myself or ask the person to record it. Is this something that was recorded?

[A]

I don't have more information than what I share with you.

[E]

I'm. I'm. I'm devastated, Mark. That's. I'd never. No one's ever approached me and said that happened. Not even the pastor said something like that happened.

[A]

And do you check on people when you prophesy about them? Do you follow up, see how they're doing? I mean, you guys, it's a culture. It's a culture where nobody feels like they could come to you, and then when they do, you know, Nathaniel here and his wife are treated like pariahs, and they're completely justified. They're completely justified. How did you not champion them, Peter, were you involved 10 years ago? Alan, are you more recent?

[D]

Right, yeah, I'm more recent.

[A]

I mean, Alan, what do you honestly think about all this? It's an overwhelming amount of evidence. I've caught specific deceptions even in our call just here today. Anybody else seeing this would know what this is. And you're in an awkward position because you're like, okay, you know, do I just continue towing the party line, or do I just call it what it is?

[D]

I think the. The difficulty we've got here, Mike, is you're clearly stating facts, and you. We are. We're all acknowledging the facts. Gary called out a word that was also the same as a fake Facebook account. You know, emails were sent that. We are very doubtful that person exists, etc. Etc. But then there's the narrative that goes over those facts, and one side is choosing to interpret those facts a certain way. So, for example, you know, you've been caught out. What was the word that you just used that you said about Pete's behavior

[A]

as a fixer?

[D]

No, no, just. Just right before you threw to me, hey, guys, you know, we're having this conversation, and. And yeah, you've all. You know, it's clear that Pete's been deceptive. It's like. Well, I'm not sure. It's clear that Pete is deceptive because that would attribute motive to his heart. It is clear that things have been said and that Pete doesn't have a recollection that's been said. So as I sit here listening to this, one of the advantages I have is that I've known Gary 20 plus years. I've watched him minister pre social media. I've watched him be in random restaurants and know the names of people and, you know, go up and, and do things. So again, we didn't hop on the call to defend Gary. We hopped on the call to bear witness to truth. And it's clear that the facts are true. How we're, how they're being interpreted. Interpreted. Have a little bit of concern with Alan.

[A]

Allow me to push back a little on what you just shared. First off, it's okay to attribute motive. That's reasonable to do. If a guy's sneaking around my house in the middle of the night, I attribute motive. He is up to no good. And I'm very smart to do that. It's very wise to do that. There's times to attribute motive. There's times not to. There's times where it's unclear. There's times where it seems obvious. As far as what Peter did, he didn't just fail to remember a conversation. I asked him very clearly, would you ever say the following? And he said, no, I've never had that position. It's something he's never believed. It's something he's never thought. And then I have two instances of him doing it. That's deceptive.

[B]

Sorry, which of the two instances I read? Yeah. One was the email from Victoria. There's a lot of information that's gone under the bridge, Mike. I'm just asking you to clarify not to.

[A]

So the email to Victoria, it was the zoom call?

[B]

Well, we didn't even get to finish that conversation because the conversation dived off in other directions. We only talked about one, the first opening paragraph. So I'm happy to go back over that conversation if you want to,

[A]

if that's what you want to do. I, I mean, are you. Do you think that would be fruitful to, to share what you. I could try to bring it back up.

[E]

I'm.

[B]

I'm not sure what's going to be fruitful, Mike. I'm just suggesting that we only talked about to say that there were two examples and one of them was the. The zoom call. We only explored one part of that as an example.

[A]

Well, I don't need.

[B]

I don't need to. Mike. At the end of the day, you'll believe what you want to believe about the facts that are on the table. Yes, I did write to Victoria. I clearly regret writing what I wrote. Then if you want to take it and make it something more than that, that I'm deceptive, then that. Again, as I said before, that's entirely up to you to create the narrative, as Alan said, that you want to create around the facts.

[A]

Well, like you. I'm sorry. Please, Chris, share.

[E]

Yeah.

[C]

Can I just ask. So you're. You're happy to say now that you have received evidence from us. Yeah. From Nathaniel and. And Dan. You've received evidence, would you say, Peter?

[B]

I've always been happy to say that. That's in the. All the email conversations. That's what the conversations were about.

[C]

Yeah, exactly. So I'm just curious as to why you told Leon that you never received any evidence.

[B]

So can we go back to. Go back to that comment in the transcript?

[C]

Just curious as to why you told Leo that you never received any evidence, that you got nothing.

[B]

So what I'm interested in. In is hearing what I actually said, not your recollection of what I said.

[E]

Okay.

[C]

Nathaniel, do you have that transcript?

[F]

Yeah, I believe it's the, the one you have there, Mike. Yeah, there's.

[A]

Sorry, go ahead. Would you like to read it to us, Nathaniel? That'd be wonderful. That little section, it's underlined.

[F]

Yeah, I believe you've got it. If I take 20 seconds to find it, I can.

[A]

Oh, okay. I can do it here. So it's. You were asked, you know, did they have a reason for refusing to submit their electronic devices, which they didn't refuse. If there was a reason, what was it? And you replied, they would not give us any reason. And they've never provided me, as the main investigator here in Australia, with any evidence of the claims they could produce nothing. Was that a deceptive comment?

[B]

Well, the context for me in making that comment was that there was no evidence through the investigation of the electronic devices, because the evidence. Again, we're going to get down to semantics, but from my perspective, my understanding is that I've got circumstantial evidence. It's not evidence that would actually prove, Would hold up in a court. And that my whole. My whole premise in the conversations was that Gary was innocent until he was proven guilty. And so I was looking at it through the lens of evidence that could be substantive and actually prove the points that were being made. And so, yes, they were the words that I used, but the context for me in using them was different to the context that you're wanting to portray. And so, yeah, I mean, you can. You can characterize me in whatever way you want to characterize me. Mike, at the end of the day,

[A]

Peter, stop playing the victim. You're deceiving us. Right? In real time. Okay, I'm not playing the victim. You don't need to play the victim. Sir, you said they did not present you, they did not provide you with, quote, any evidence of the claims. Your words. What are the claims? The claims are not about electronic devices. The claims are about Facebook pages and words of information. They did give you the evidence. You lied to those people to defend Gary. You told me there's other stuff. In our very first. Your very first message to me, you told me that the investigation was inconclusive. And ironically enough, you said the investigation came to a conclusion of the evidence being inconclusive as to whether Gary had data mined.

[B]

It's inconclusive because it hasn't been proven.

[A]

Proven to you. Ben's convinced.

[B]

Proven in a court of law is.

[A]

There's no courts of law here. These are people. These are just people. This is the church.

[B]

Yeah, but somebody still surely is entitled to a position, have been innocent until proven guilty. There's a perception, we've always acknowledged that. There's a perception that any objective person looking at this is going to come to the conclusions that you've come to. We've not hidden from that. We've not.

[A]

You've definitely not always acknowledged that. You have not always acknowledged that. I've just read you emails where you don't. You cannot tell the truth.

[B]

Whatever.

[A]

And this goes perfectly with Gary being a fraud. Gary, I am convinced that you are a blasphemer and a fraud who lies in the name of Christ and then demonizes the very Christians who try to hold you accountable. It's disgusting. And Alan, you seem crippled to have the ability to just have the integrity to call out your own people, which is because this is what happens is what happened to these guys when they stood forward. You've got it. It's. It's nuts. It is nuts, Gary. It. There's no wonder why you. Where you run with. You've run with Sean Bowles in the past. You were doing the same thing as him at the same time as him.

[D]

Mike, would you be open to some questions right now?

[A]

Any Questions you want?

[D]

Thanks. You mentioned. And I was very moved by Nathaniel and Haley's retelling of what they experienced. You know, so you guys move thinking that you're following the Holy spirit. You meet with Gary. Just. I'm. I'm replaying back what I heard, so please correct me if I'm wrong. You have a meeting with Gary on the Sunday morning. You don't feel like that goes well. And then you said, you know, it was horrible. We were told we were on a witch hunt. I'm curious who was telling you that you were on a witch hunt? And give me the time period of that happened. And then you said that Catherine and I think Tom is that their name came back and apologized to you. Can you help me with the time frame of that?

[F]

Yes, I believe so. Is your question a time frame of what in particular?

[D]

My question is I heard that it was a really traumatic experience for you to be in a meeting. And. And it sounded like that the. That you're on a witch hunt. The accusations followed longer. And I'm wondering, did I hear that correctly, or did I make an assumption it followed longer than just that one meeting with Gary?

[F]

Yes.

[D]

And who was it that was stating that you were on a witch hunt?

[F]

Again, I guess in the midst of it, it was real difficult for everyone. Tom and Catherine have profusely apologized.

[D]

They were people who were. Were. Were telling you.

[F]

Yeah, for a period of time. And again, Catherine has apologized with tears and said that she believed the best in Gary and she believed that she had let her love and belief in Gary get in the way of seeing the true details. And once she saw the same dossier that has been unchanged and made available to everyone, she came to the conclusion that Gary was, in fact, guilty and apologized for the way we were treated. But she was not isolated. There were other leaders that will remain unnamed that are close to us who refused to reach out. And may I add that not one person in the last 10 years from any of this has come to us to ask for any clarification in any way, shape, or form. Things have been said about us, but very little has been asked from us. And so that really understates some of what we experienced. But there's no need to dwell on that.

[D]

Do you remember when Catherine came and apologized to you?

[G]

It was two months after. So it was in May of 2016.

[D]

May of 2016. And I bet that probably brought a lot of salve and peace to your heart.

[F]

Of course. Yeah, definitely.

[D]

Can I read you an email from Catherine that was Sent in August, so I'm bad at math. Somebody else can do it. Several months after that, she had apologized in May. This is from Catherine. She said, hi, Peter. My apologies for not getting back to you sooner. Well, this part doesn't matter. I'll jump to the paragraph that does. Sorry. As I've not taken the role of accuser or prosecutor from the beginning, I think it's not necessary for me to say too much. This is an email from Catherine to Peter. I have spoken with Nathaniel, and he has come to the conclusion that he was wrong in the way he's handled this. He acknowledges that Hayley should never have set a trap and that he should not have spoken to Ben about the matter. He's also apologized to me and will apologize to all involved. I'm glad he recognizes this, and I'm pleased he's come to this conclusion on his own. And I'm so curious about that fitting into the timeline. And I would just love to hear your reflections on. On that email.

[F]

Yeah, I. I don't think that misinterprets the way. In fact, it's very clearly in the email thread, the last thing I said is, I believe you have this, Mic Winger. I felt a lot of pressure to admit to wrongdoing at any cost. And so I did at one point say, I am sorry that my wife created an email. It was quite absurd, really, but I guess I was young and I did feel I had to apologize for something because of the extremity. So, yes. And also there in the email thread, I said, I'm sorry for going to Ben without asking permission. I actually felt at the time that I probably needed to ask permission and had been asked to be silent on all fronts. We had friends and multiple people. We told no one because of the pressure put on us. So I will say, for the record, I disagree with that now. But I will also say with. For the record, this is important. None of those things that I apologized for change the results.

[D]

Can you just help me understand that last phrasing?

[F]

Yes, I. I can be sorry the same way I worded in the email. Again, I don't believe this anymore. I believe that it was immense pressure put on me.

[D]

Right.

[F]

That caused me to see the world in that way and believe I had to apologize. But putting that aside, my apology for involving Ben on the email thread, I have said I do not regret bringing him on board, though that's the next thing I said, and I still stand by that to this day. And can you read the first part again? Because I'VE never heard this email.

[D]

Yeah, I've spoken with Nathaniel. He's come to the conclusion that he was wrong in the way that he handled this. Presumably, you don't feel that way now.

[F]

Of course not.

[B]

Okay.

[D]

He acknowledges that Haley should never have set a trap and that he should not have spoken to Ben about the matter.

[F]

So are you asking, do you still feel that way?

[D]

I was just curious about, like, because the. I had never met you, and I'm trying to bring myself up to speed on this, and I'm reading this email, and I'm thinking, I wonder what changed? Because here we are ten years later, talking about the same thing that you had retracted.

[F]

Are you asking whether I should be sorry that my wife created a fake Facebook page? Because if that is the question, it's unusual that I would be sorry for something I didn't do. I did feel pressured to be apologetic back then for about everything. We had been very speculated upon. Every little that we had made, we. So, yes, at the time, I apologized. Honestly, when I look back at that, I see it as absurd as the victims, really, in a situation like this, being pressured to apologize for something. My wife's actions, which we are one. But she made a decision there, and I championed her in that decision, and I still champion her in that decision. In fact, I think my wife is really the hero of this story, and I'm not shied away from that. I believe that she loves problems, prophecy, loves God, and these decisions were made because of that. And yes, I do disagree now with apologizing for that. But again, those apologies. I never apologized for it happening, and I never changed my stance on the record.

[D]

Yeah, that's super helpful, Nathaniel. I'm just trying to work out what. What had changed.

[A]

The.

[D]

The other thing that I've. I've never understood, and I. I don't think it's been brought up. Correct me if I'm wrong. Is as I understand it. Yeah, I can see in the email threads you guys were willing to submit your devices, and then at some point, you guys were not. And I'm curious, what was the decision to not submit your devices?

[F]

We never chose to not submit our devices. We have, on the record, been willing to submit our devices until the end.

[A]

But, Alan, you were under the impression, for some reason that they were unwilling to. That there was an unwillingness on their part, in particular about the devices.

[D]

Yeah, yeah, I was. You know, I've read about, you know, 100 emails in the last week, trying to bring myself up to brief on this. And so One of my curiosities was, you know, another email from Pete to Dan. Dan, you're on the. You can hear what I'm saying is. Hi, Daniel. Below is an email I received overnight last night. I chatted to Ben and he indicated too, he's walking away from pursuing this matter further. Or Mike, I've heard you say, hey, the reason they walked away was because, you know, Pete made it too onerous. I'm just curious. Unfortunately, Ben's on the call, so I can't ask him why, Nathaniel, did you decide to walk away?

[F]

We did not. Oh.

[D]

So the, the email here that, that I was reading, which was assumed that you are. You don't want to pursue it any further.

[A]

I think what really happened, Alan, is Nathaniel didn't. You know, Nathaniel and Haley didn't carry the social currency to make something happen. And Ben did. And when Ben stepped out, there was no longer kind of like a heavyweight in the room.

[F]

Could I say one thing, please? In the email thread, Peter made it very clear that since Ben had stepped down his position. You might have this. Mike, I haven't got it in front of me, but it was made very clear that my position in this. I have to find the exact wording. But can you say that anyway?

[G]

Haley, do you mean his role has

[D]

come to a conclusion?

[F]

Ben advised him that he no longer wished to continue with the investigation of the electronic devices. Now that Ben no longer wishes to the process to continue. I believe my previous role has come to a conclusion that definitively meant for us that Peter had dropped the investigation. And he went on to say, I now advise you as a father and give you advice. And we basically said, we. We don't agree with the, with the advice. The advice was we cannot agree to. We must not. I'm not quoting here, so you can take a look for yourself. So I'm just saying what I remember. We felt that we did not have an option to agree to disagree, nor were we able to have an honorable draw. And I didn't know what that meant since his role had concluded before we had a chance to have any say in the matter. And we simply, at that point, being on staff and very intimidated from the whole thing, submitted to Tom and Catherine and said, we, we will. You can see the wording there. It's in the email.

[E]

Yeah.

[D]

Yeah. And then, Dan, I know you're. I don't know where you are in the world, so I hope it's not too late for you, but I'm reading the last email. I have that kind of just Draws this to conclusion. Is Dan emailing Peter saying, I will leave it to God to sort out from here. I will continue to try my best to stay in love and unity with all that have been involved in this. I will not be continuing any more communication on this matter. So again, as an outsider coming to this, reading the emails, it looked clear to me. Nathaniel, I'm hearing you now 10 years later say, hey, I changed my mind. I regret that. But I think the difficulty is I'm hearing Mike, you say, hey, you browbeat these, I'm putting words in your mouth. Mike, forgive me, I'm using hyperbole here, but as Mike reviews, this is like, hey, you know, Pete heavy handedly managed this and beat these guys in a submission and so they bowed out. And then we don't know why Ben bowed out because he's not on the call. And then Dan, what's the point of Dan Sting? And Dan, you can speak up, whereas I'm over here going, hey, I'm reading the same emails as you, Mike, and I'm coming to a very different conclusion. It looks like Nathaniel is like, hey guys, I dropped the ball, I made a mistake, I'm deep, sorry. Next domino is Ben saying, hey, I'm, I'm bowing out. And then Dan bowing out. So as I look at this, I come to a different conclusion than you, Mike, when you asked me, hey, what's your, what, you know, what are your eyeballs telling you on this? I have the advantage, which is why I love these calls of listening to Nathaniel give context that isn't in there. But as I'm looking at it, I don't think that Pete is being heavy handed in this. Having read these emails, he's trying to follow an impartial investigation. The people who are bringing the investigation are now saying we don't want to go through with it. And so it comes to its natural conclusion. I don't know if that helps answer your question that you asked me, Mike.

[A]

Alan, you've got the emails there. Could you maybe read the part from Nathaniel that you thought had him pulling out and showing that he just doesn't want to continue with the investigation? So I can understand that better.

[D]

Yeah. To clarify, it isn't an email from Nathaniel, it's an email from Catherine speaking on behalf of Nathaniel. Let me just pull up.

[A]

Sorry, but it's the one you already read.

[D]

Yeah, yeah.

[A]

Where does it have Nathaniel? Because you did maintain there at the end, I understand you right, that Nathaniel pulled out that from the reading of the email it was like he's gonna pull out because he's sorry, and he's stopping. Was the. Was the message right?

[D]

Yeah. Let me read it to you again. So this is an email from Catherine in. In August. That's why I was interested in the timeline, you know, because I could understand if this email had come while there's this pressure, like, you guys are the worst. You're on a witch hunt. So it was interesting for me to hear, actually, no, peace had come. Your leaders had apologized to you. There was lots of months for that to settle. And then here in August. And again, I understand. Nathaniel, these are not your words. This is Catherine communicating on behalf of you. She says, I have spoken with Nathaniel, and he has come to the conclusion that he was wrong in the way that he has handled this. He acknowledges that Haley should never have set a trap and that he should not have spoken to Ben about the matter. He has apologized to me and will apologize to all involved. I'm glad he recognized this, and I'm pleased he's come to this conclusion on his own.

[F]

Thank you for that. Alan, can I ask one question?

[D]

Yeah, of course.

[F]

What's the date on that email?

[D]

That is the 2nd of August, 2016.

[F]

Okay, thank you for that.

[D]

And, Nathaniel, would you say that that represented your heart at the time? Is Catherine misrepresenting you in. In that email?

[F]

I think I felt very pressured to admit some wrongdoing and also was very speculative about my own heart at the time. So I do think at the time, I felt like I needed to say nothing to anybody at all. That's what I was very clearly told to do. And so even the thought of talking to Ben, who was a close friend of mine who came and ministered at Glory City Church, and I drove in the car for many hours. He happened to mention what happened with an intern, and it came up in conversation. He can attest to this. What happened with Gary, as a friend to a friend. And if I have to be the one to apologize for talking to one person in the midst of all of this, I think back then I felt like, that's fine if I've got to apologize for that. And really what I had to do was to talk to nobody. I no longer believe that then I did. So, yes, I apologize for that. And secondly, I think it was a place of, okay, creating a fake Facebook page. It really became. I'm sure others can talk to this, but there was a sense of, like, even the idea of creating a fake Facebook page is wrong. It's just very clearly wrong. And no one should ever do that. So I think as well, I felt pressured to say, hey, yeah, we're sorry we ever did that. But I stand by the very last thing I said in the email thread that I do not regret bringing Ben into this and my conviction on the matter has never changed. I believe that although time has passed, the evidence will not disappear and speaks for itself.

[A]

Daniel's commented in the side there. I'm going to read what he said. He says I couldn't be confident in any forensic investigation on devices. How do we know what device was being audited? Factory reset devices, prophetic notes deleted, and the expectation that I would pay tens of thousands of dollars on an investigation that I would believe would likely be inconclusive close to six months after the event. I agree with 100% of that. I think the evidence is already there. The advantage of bringing in somebody is to have someone that all parties agree can speak to the issue. But Alan, I get it, you're trying to construct a story through all of these emails and stuff like that, but I think that you're constructing, even with the emails, you do have a very selective story. There's the continual obstacles placed by Peter, there's the dismissive treatment of the evidence, and then there is just the fact that $600 an hour, you guys have to pay for this. You know, Peter tells us that There was this $20,000 on offer, but he didn't tell Nathaniel that. Apparently, at least in the record, in the recorded back and forth where they're negotiating the terms of the investigation, there's no mention of that. The implication is that.

[B]

Can I just show this again? Mike, I feel like you're shooting a whole lot of bullets at me and I don't have an opportunity to reply.

[A]

You talk about time in. Anytime, Peter. I'm listening.

[E]

An open forum. Yeah,

[B]

sorry, Chris.

[C]

An open forum. You just jump in and say, can I. Can I reply to them?

[B]

Can I reply to them? So the obstacles, again, I. My motive was not to create obstacles. My motive was to establish an impartial approach to two different sides of the story that I was trying to find conclusive answers to. And so again, I can only appeal to the fact that, Mike, you were describing it as obstacles, but my intent and my motive was not to create obstacles. My intended motive was working from the presumption that someone's innocent until proven guilty and that I was not convinced that the evidence that was being presented was enough to prove that he was guilty. And I was trying to reach for an objective, outside perspective. That didn't involve anybody to establish that. So I just. To say that they are obstacles is so far from my reality and from my understanding of what was going on that I just have to say that that's. That's not the case.

[A]

Would you suppose if, if you. Let me reply to that, please. If you went to the police and you reported because you, you like the application of like court of law, right? And you reported my neighbor has been defrauding people and they said to you, we are going to investigate this, but because your neighbor's innocent till proven guilty, Peter, you have to personally pay for the investigation.

[B]

Would that be okay? So let me jump in there. So personally pay for the investigation. Again, creating the broader context that I can see Alan reaching for is that I've got Nathaniel's pastor saying to me that Nathaniel has acknowledged wrongdoing and that happened in August. And I remember that this is now trans. We're now about six months into this thing. So I've got Nathaniel's pastor saying to me that there's the stuff going on here that he needed to apologise for. So I'm going, okay, well, then that's worthy of investigation. In pursuing that, we've put the $20,000 up. Now you can continue to appeal to the fact that what's in writing. And I acknowledge that and I can't refute that. All I'm trying to point to is that there were conversations that Nathaniel wasn't aware of and others weren't aware of that were taking place because Ben had positioned himself in the conversation as the go to person in having these conversations. And so we weren't asking Nathaniel to pay for it all. That is not the case.

[A]

Let me read from the email and ask you if you can explain it better, Peter. This is from your email to Nathanael and you give him several conditions. You say Daniel's inclusion in the in the investigation is conditional upon and gives six conditions. And one of them is number four. As Gary has freely and willingly presented himself to this investigation as a self proclaimed innocent party and yet to be found guilty, it is only fair that those who are accusing Gary bear the financial responsibility for the investigation. Gary believes that he will need to surrender his iPhone, iPad, MacBook to the investigation and anticipates that part of the cost of the investigation will include the replacement of these devices at the point at which they are surrendered. At this point, it should be noted that the Investigating company charges $600 an hour. Does that or does that not read like they will bear the entire financial burden at $600 an hour, as well as having to purchase new electronic devices for Gary and themselves when they turn theirs in and have to buy their own stuff as well. How is that not wildly unfair?

[B]

It's not wildly unfair because I knew that I had presented that there were $20,000 that we were prepared to put up, which is not included in the context.

[A]

It's not in the emails. And everybody who is on that email chain says that you never said that to them.

[B]

Yeah, that's right.

[C]

Isn't it weird that you've said this $20,000 to Ben over the phone, yet at the very end of the conversation, you conclude it with you will bear the full financial cost. Wouldn't you just think to include that in there? If that's your summary of your entire

[D]

position, Can I jump in here just for a second with a question?

[C]

Because I've just asked one, so if I can just wait for that, that'd be great.

[D]

Of course, Chris.

[B]

I can only tell you I, I don't have an objective, an answer that's going to satisfy you on that one. Chris

[C]

wrapped it up. You've wrapped it up and you've said, here's my conclusion of everything. And you've put in there, you guys will bear the full weight. You guys will replace the cost of the devices. And just to let you know, it's 600 an hour. That's the investigating team that I'm selecting. Meanwhile, you're referring to some conversation who knows when with Ben that Ben doesn't even remember. Wouldn't you have thought if that was a serious concern? I mean, you put that on your public statement that this was a major piece that you were presenting, like, hey, we've put in 20k. Wouldn't you have concluded that if that was really your heart at the time, to let them know that they're not going to have to bear the full financial cost if you and Graham Cook were ready to do that?

[B]

That's one way of describing the events that we're talking about. Absolutely.

[C]

How would you describe it?

[B]

I don't have an explanation for it other than the fact that there was a broader context in which the conversations were taking place place and that that information was available elsewhere. That's all I'm saying.

[C]

I can't find that elsewhere, including the source of the information.

[A]

But okay, there's, and there's, there's more. You, you required, you required that they give you the information that they wanted to find.

[B]

Mike Allen was going to.

[A]

Okay, I apologize, Alan. Please.

[D]

Yeah. Chris, I love, I love your, your question and I appreciate Pete's honesty in saying, hey, I can't give you an objective answer and I would like to offer subjective observations, not an answer because again, I wasn't there. But as somebody who's immersed himself in this reading, it would. In fact. Mike, did you read that email? The bit about, hey, we'd expect to bear the cost? Can you tell me the date of that? Just so I know where it fits in the timeline? And, and the reason I'm asking for that, Chris, is simply that this process by its very nature

[E]

grew.

[D]

You know, it had a life to it. There was emails back and forth, things were refined and I just want to know where, where did that land in the timeline right at the end? Do you have a date on that email?

[C]

I didn't have a doubt

[D]

while you were having a conversation. At some point I was trying to find, I'm almost positive, but I couldn't find it. The email where Graham says, I would like to put up money. They were discussing who's going to bear the cost. And I was like, well, we have something in writing. And I realized it probably wouldn't help because, yeah, I searched and searched for

[C]

that and I could not find any record of it.

[E]

So.

[D]

Yeah, yeah, and I couldn't in this, in this call, but for some odd reason I think I can remember it. Do you have that date, Chris, or, or Mike?

[C]

No, I don't have it with me. I just remember it was, it was as everyone was wrapping up and Ben's out and there's a conclusion there. Dan had capped the position as well, I believe, articulated Peter's position at the end.

[D]

The reason I'm questioning whether that if you, if you give me a phrase for it, I can put it into my database and probably find the email pretty quick.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. The phrase. How about put. Once the final report is delivered. That's a phrase right there. The one I'm reading from was from Daniel to Peter in reply to his email. And so that date of that email is August 31st. But I'm looking for the original Peter email, not just the reply, which would have that timestamp as well.

[B]

Yeah.

[D]

Oh, I'm looking at. That brings up an email from Dan to Peter. Sorry, guys. Where I was going with this is I'd be so curious to know where that landed in the chain of events because it could very well have been like, hey guys, this is going to be the cost. And as Pete and Graham are talking about, they're like, well, hey, let's cover it. That's all I was looking for.

[F]

I was just trying to offer the 1st of August.

[D]

1st of August.

[A]

Thank you.

[D]

I don't have that email, but if it's, if it's. What I was looking for is what was the context in which that was communicated? That's all. So sorry, it didn't add much to the conversation.

[C]

It just concluded like a bit of a summary of. Okay, guys, well, here's sort of a context.

[E]

Yeah,

[D]

yeah. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll, I'll find it.

[C]

Yeah. I had a question, Alan, that I asked just at the start.

[B]

Yeah.

[C]

If someone came to you and said, hey, we, we suspect this is happening.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

There's a guy that, you know, let's, you know, just hypothetical third party, what would you need to see? See,

[D]

I, I think the, the evidence that, that Mike pointed to in the case of Sha, you know, was, Was fascinating. I'm thinking particularly of the word of knowledge that he called out.

[C]

Mike, you'll remember, I just froze. I'm so sorry, everyone. And I caught nothing of your, Your response.

[D]

It was profound and everybody's at peace now.

[A]

Everything got solved.

[E]

Yeah,

[D]

I think the easiest way for me to answer that would be. I've listened to a lot of conversations go back and forth, and I can't help but wonder if we miss each other because we're saying different words and assuming we mean the same thing. So, for example, one of the phrases that have been brought up over and over again, you know, Mike, you, You impassionately said to us, guys, like, you know, evidence. You know, you said facts were brought to you. And I would say facts were not brought to you. To us. Claims were brought to us. And we need to work out what do those claims point to. So, for example, I, I've. Did someone say something?

[C]

Oh, yeah, sorry. I was just saying that that's still going back to the situation. I'm just asking you for a hypothetical.

[D]

Yeah. I'm getting their story.

[G]

Okay.

[C]

Sorry.

[D]

You insert a coin in this jukebox place is like. So the narrative that we've come to is, hey, when we looked at all these Facebook words, what do you know? They're everything that Gary called out. Ergo, he must have used Facebook to call these out. But if you could consider for a moment if a true prophet of the Lord was calling out accurate information, why would we be surprised that Facebook confirmed terms if it's accurate words?

[C]

Yeah.

[A]

So I think you're missing the details

[C]

to, to, to believe that this person, if Someone in, in your church community came to you and said, I believe person X is, is getting words off Facebook.

[D]

Yeah.

[C]

You would, you would say, well, hang on, let's not jump to conclusions here. What is it that you would need to see to say, aha, you're right.

[D]

I would need to go to the scriptural definition of a false prophet. Do these people lead other people away from Jesus? Are these people a fraud? Do they live one way but live a different way? And do they make stuff up? Those would be my three tests that I would look for if I'm going to call somebody a false prophet.

[A]

What if you just need to say that they were guilty of faking prophecy?

[D]

The trouble is with everybody living well, see the things I, I don't have a good litmus test for you because obviously the evidence or the claims of evidence that you're putting forth, I've come to a very different conclusion than, than you have. Part of that is because I've witnessed Gary demonstrate astonishing accurate words of knowledge without any access to, you know, either predates social media or it was events where there's no way that he could have known he was going to meet that person. You know, to look up. To look up.

[C]

That there's nothing really that a person could, could give you specifically, you don't know.

[D]

Well, I like the example that, that Mike used with Sean Bowles, that Sean had called out a person and an address. What was it? He called out one thing and got it. It's like, oh, this is good. And then said another statement and they didn't respond to that and then moved on. And when you looked at Facebook, you saw, okay, this is clear evidence that he was looking at something that wasn't the same thing.

[C]

A different person.

[A]

Yeah, it was. So for anybody who doesn't know, the context was bulls called out a woman. And then he said, I'm getting Psalm 105. I feel like 105. Does 105 slaughterhouse mean anything to you? And she says, no. And he goes, well, pray about it, pray about it. And he had called out a few pieces of information that were accurate about her that were on her Facebook. But if you googled her name in the same area where this event was happening, there was a woman with her name who lived at 105 Slaughterhouse. It was just a different lady, right? It was. Or the mother's name, but it was a different person. So he had a real address for a person of the same name who lived in the region, but it wasn't the woman he was talking about implying that he googled it. Right. It was very strong evidence in my opinion. And I think that what trumps that is the fake Facebook page with the name and birthday and a comment and then Gary calls it out like, this is. This is the smoking gun of smoking guns. This is how they caught, I mean, this is how they caught Shum, sorry, Chris Reed in the first place. It was because they made changes to Facebook pages and then Chris Reed went and dug them up and looked them up and it was. And then was. Was caught out and it was still didn't get exposed and didn't get stopped or anything like that because of the culture that's there. But, but this is it, man. You call out information that any reasonable person would conclude you dug up on Facebook. That's all you need. That's all the evidence you need. And it's not just like your life's on Facebook. No, no, no. It's like I say you're a dancer, your Facebook photo is you dancing. I say you play guitar. Your Facebook photo is you playing guitar. It's surface level, everything corresponds perfectly with the public available information. This is a no brainer. I think if you guys can't see it, you're the wrong people to investigate it. And that guys like Gary tend to surround themselves with just the right people who will never really hold him accountable. It's like a survival mechanism. You can't have people around you who will truly hold you accountable because you'll never survive. So you have to surround yourself with the right people.

[B]

Mike, I have to appeal to the fact that we've always said that if somebody looking at it objectively is going to come to the same conclusions that you come to, we've never resolved from that. We've never said anything different to that. Gary has always owned that. I have owned that in the process. We agree with you objectively, the conclusions that you've come to. What, what any person would come to.

[A]

Okay. I appreciate that you're sharing that and I think that's a great deal of transparency that you're sharing that and it's wonderful. It is not what you've always said to people as I've. As I've quoted you multiple times to different people telling them very different things. Shall I read the quote to Victoria about the evidence, how it all being. All being false and proven wrong?

[B]

No, no, you've already read that. I hear what you're saying. Yeah.

[A]

So. So again, you're telling me things that aren't true. You Said we've always acknowledged that any objective person would see the evidence and come to the same conclusion you just came to. Mike Allen says there is no evidence. There's just claims. You guys are not on the same page. I don't know where you guys are at.

[B]

Yeah, again, it feels like a semantic conversation. And so that's, that's all fine. That's all good.

[A]

It's not semantic. These are. And these aren't just claims, Alan. This is evidence. You, you, there's a Facebook page that's called evidence. There's a word that he shared that's called evidence. There's witness testimony. Those, those are, that's, that's called evidence in court testimony. Which is, which is. Claims is submitted as evidence. That's the nature of things. The only person I've had in a very long and annoying debate tell me claims aren't evidence is Matt Dillahunty, the atheist. Because he was trying to debunk the idea that Christ rose from the dead and he didn't like the witness testimony. But witness testimony is actually how a lot of things are decided in court because claims are evidence. This person says this happened. That's evidence of something we have to now assess. Is there another witness? Is there ulterior motive? You know, how much does it stack up? And you guys are saying right here, at least Peter just did that. An objective person looks at this evidence and goes, yeah, it looks like he did this. That's all you need.

[C]

And Peter's now acknowledging obviously, which is good, that it is evidence. You know, when before you said that you, you never received any evidence and now you say, well, if anyone looked at this evidence, yeah, sure, they're going to believe that. When you have a private meeting when with, you know, Glorious Gospel Church, you're saying to them like, yeah, we were never presented any, any evidence. So, you know, it's interesting, Alan, you're saying that what you would need to see would be a Facebook call out of the wrong same name person. So you're still.

[D]

I'm holding to like the three biblical strands for the test of a false prophet. It. Because.

[C]

So you're changing your, your thoughts on. Because before a moment ago maybe I misheard you, it sounded like you said, look, if something like the Sha B situation came up where it was a completely wrong person, that would kind of be what I would need to see

[D]

is that that would meet one of the three criteria. So one of the three criterias is they make stuff up which, you know, I would be happy to put Data mining as a make stuff up. But as I've already pointed out, the difficulty with appealing to Facebook for, oh my gosh, there's no way anybody could be this accurate. Look at this information. It's easily found on Facebook, but I would also say if it's true, of course it would be listed on Facebook.

[F]

Can I just ask, how do you explain Sarah and 10 June, June being called out, no other email existing to prove that there is a Sarah Lamberty and Gary calling out the exact name, date of a Facebook page? It only had about 12 comments on there.

[B]

I, I just.

[F]

How, how do you explain that?

[D]

Well, I'm in the fortunate position that I don't really need to explain it, Nathaniel, but I will tell you a story of something I saw that was astonishing and that Gary was ministering at a church I was pastoring at.

[A]

Alan, I want to stop you there because this is actually the whole point. You know, earlier you were asked by Chris, what evidence would you need? And you said, that's a great question, hey Mike, what evidence would you need? And you deferred back to me. And then now you're asked again, what evidence would you need to confirm that Gary's guilty of the things he's accused of? And you're pivoting to what would I need to officially label him as a false prophet, given three tests that I feel I've directed, derived from the text of scripture. And we're like, we're just saying guilty, not guilty. What would you need to show that he did this? And you're making it a much bigger claim so that it's harder to prove. And then now he says, what would you do with this evidence? And you go, let me tell you a story of something that happened that you guys weren't around to see that involved Gary. And this is how we silence our own minds from approaching and dealing with the facts that are before us. And the facts before us are pretty clear. Like it's pretty clear Gary's guilty. It's a reasonable conclusion that he's guilty and that you guys have been doing cover up culture for him for a long, long time. And these people who are on the call, and even the ones not on the call but who are wanting to be aware of the call right now, like Ben, who's probably sleeping right now, it's whatever, oh, dark 30, they're for no benefit of their own, are seeking to try to hold, for the sake of the integrity of the church, hold Gary accountable. And if, and it's Alan and Peter, that will not let that happen. And Gary sits here silent and makes you guys do it all for him. And it's, it's, it's, it's, it's an atrocity. It's an absolute atrocity.

[E]

I've answered when you've asked me questions,

[A]

you've answered with I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know. That's your, that's your answer to everything. And then maybe it's a conspiracy. Maybe it's a massive, like long conspiracy where someone created an email account, they hacked me. They made it look like it was part connected with me. Then they, then they made this, this Sarah Lamberty email and they sent it out. That would have initially to most people would have just defended you, but because people decided to follow it up, then it made you look bad. And that was part of like a big scheme. And of course you got hacked. So you know that can't be traced. Come on.

[E]

But I can because I've got the screenshots that I was hacked, Mike. And, and again I go back to how can I send up an email and send it when I'm at dinner with people at 8:50? And then another email was sent from Glory City that changed the timestamp on it.

[A]

Is your wife capable of sending an email?

[G]

I am very capable of sending and

[A]

you weren't there, so that, that's not an alibi.

[G]

I was very sick. I was pregnant with Emma.

[E]

And so again we peel back. That's why, that's why Peter in his position wanted the forensic evidence. Because again it's, it's this place. And I will, I will hold to. I did not data mine and I did not look up events, things and stuff with. I did, I don't need to do that. And again I appeal to the place where you labeling me the same as Sean Boltz. Yes, we were friends for a season, but when, when questionable practices of his prophetic ministry, particularly with the marriage stuff, which again is out of prophetic protocol, we, we took him aside and said, sean, you can't do that. And then he contacted us and wanted us to do a whole session on words of knowledge. And I said, sean, I can't do that. I'm happy to do a session on boundaries and protocol, but we're not doing words of knowledge. And from that point he cut us out, cut us out of it.

[C]

Can I ask a couple of questions

[E]

and again try to appeal to him?

[C]

So I've got a bit of lag Here. Can I ask you some questions, Gary?

[E]

Absolutely.

[C]

So at one point you mentioned that you never tried to paint anyone as, like, being false accusers. Is that. Did I hear that right? Or are you saying that you never went out to try to paint Nathaniel and Haley as being false?

[E]

I never mentioned names.

[C]

You never mentioned names. But you, you would say. Are you saying that you, you mentioned earlier, but I'm not sure if I heard you, that you said something about. I never painted anyone as a false. Any of this as a false allegation. I've only tried to be open and willing submit devices. I'm never saying anyone's making false claims or did I mishear that or

[E]

I didn't say that.

[C]

The other question people ask me about

[E]

this, I never, I never, I never mentioned names.

[A]

Well, you know what, Chris, can we come back to your question in a second?

[D]

Yeah.

[A]

Pretend the people just knew who you were talking about. What did you imply about Nathan or Nathaniel.

[B]

Sorry.

[A]

And others, Haley or others, Ben, Even though you didn't use their names. You keep saying I didn't mention names. But if I was to get a hold of a pastor who you've talked to privately about all this stuff and say, what did he tell you about these, these individuals who he didn't name, what would that be?

[E]

Well, it's clear as when, when Catherine came to me with the, the accusation, I said, who, who, who brought the accusation? And initially she, she wouldn't say. I said, I'm happy to meet these people. I'm. I'm open to meet them and would love to meet them. And I did meet them. And, and again, I didn't see in that meeting attack or hostility or stuff like that because I didn't posture myself as hostile. I postured myself in a way of, just to discover why they did what they did. And, and Mike, you can paint it as righteous and stuff like that, but it's, it's, it's unrighteous behavior. And I asked the question, I wanted to discover that. And what was unrighteous in the dialogue?

[A]

Who asked the question, Sorry, what was unrighteous behavior?

[E]

Setting up a fake Facebook page?

[A]

Is it unrighteous when, when police do a sting or they, they catch a drug dealer because they set up a fake drug purchase?

[E]

We. We're back. And for you, on, on, on biblical versus, you know, mammon. And so we're, you know, again, we, we have to be clear, are we talking biblical here or, or we talking secular?

[A]

Because again, the only morality I'm ever talking about is real Morality, which is biblical morality? Was it. Was it un. Was it unbiblical when Hagar sent the spies out?

[E]

Biblical morality or secular morality?

[A]

There's only one morality. I don't know what you're talking about. So I just asked you, is it immoral when police set up a sting operation?

[E]

So we're outside the church or inside the church? That's why I'm trying to differentiate what we're talking, because there's two different realities.

[A]

Just be clear with your. Maybe your answer is if you're not. If you're not in the church, you can do that, but if you're in the church, you can't. Maybe that's your answer. I just wanted to know what your thought is here so you understand the accusation.

[E]

I follow, you follow. We follow, you know, biblical precedents and these biblical truths we hold to when

[A]

the church in China meets inside, like a cornfield so that they won't be attacked. They're in the church and they're deceiving people about whether they are meeting and what they're meeting for. Is that biblical or unbiblical?

[E]

Why are they deceiving people?

[A]

So they won't be persecuted.

[E]

It's a way of looking at that.

[A]

Yeah. No, she was right. Haley's a hero.

[C]

Okay, I had another question.

[A]

You don't like it because you got caught? Gary, it's obvious, man. Come on. Sorry, Chris, Back to you.

[C]

No, you're right. We'll leave the. The false painting people as false. That's okay. So Nathaniel and Haley apologized to you probably days later, I would say maybe three, four days later, on the phone. And immediately after that, you were on the phone to Pastor Catherine and you had one request, which was that they delete the Glory City Church comment of you appearing at Glory City Church that had that fake Facebook person saying, I can't wait to be there. That was your only request. Make sure you get rid of that. I'm just wondering if you have nothing to hide and you got this genuinely from the Holy Spirit, why would that be your. Your request? Why would you care whether or not Glory City or some page said, hey, I'm excited to come. Why did you make that request?

[E]

I don't remember making that request, Chris. You don't said, no. It was 10 years, years ago. I don't remember that. I don't even remember that conversation.

[C]

Yeah, there were three people within earshot of that, and subsequently that was deleted. So I just found that a. A very interesting request, but, yeah, you. You have no recollection If I, if

[E]

I was to surmise, and it would, would be probably to cover Nathaniel and, and Haley, because they. Yeah, because that was my heart. And again, whether they agree or disagree, my posture in that meeting wasn't one of accusation, but was one of care. And that's why I didn't deflect, I didn't defend. I just wanted to discover what was going on for them. At one point in that meeting, when I asked Nathaniel a question about it, about whether it was the only one, he turned around and said to Catherine, you told us to do this. And at that point, Catherine shot back and attacked Nathaniel. And in that, in that place. And so, because she denied, she, she said she didn't do that. And so again, if there was hostility in that meeting, the only hostility came from Catherine when Nathaniel said that she, that she told them to do it.

[C]

This happened about four days after that meeting on a phone call. It was an apology from, from Nathaniel, but. Yeah, you don't remember. Okay.

[F]

And I'll just, I'll just say as well that I imagine both Catherine and I would disagree with that, that, that,

[A]

that played out like that.

[C]

Yeah.

[D]

Guys, my. I suggest that we land this plane because right now it feels like circling to land.

[A]

Right, Listen, sorry, go ahead. If anybody has any final things, they'll share and then I'll. And then I'll wrap it up and we'll take a few minutes and let everybody, if they have anything they want to say still.

[C]

Yeah, I did. So you put in your public statement on your blog that you, you didn't have any sexual relations with this, this person publicly. You admitted what was and wasn't to take place. So that's still your position, is it, that you, you, you didn't have a, like, let's say an all out sexual event?

[E]

What. Sorry, Chris, what are we talking about?

[C]

Just on your, your blog post, it was interesting, to be honest with you, because it was exactly the same as your Facebook post in relation to the GGC allegations. The start read the same. So the first few times I went to read it, I felt like I'd already read this. I didn't need to continue. But at the end, you acknowledged that there was some sexual impropriety, although there wasn't a physical sexual line that was crossed. Is that still your.

[E]

Yeah, we never had sex.

[C]

Yep. Okay. And then Peter, when Dan called you and just asked you if you were aware of the allegations, your first response to him was no. Is that correct?

[B]

My first response to him was I was driving my car. I was in traffic. I was trying to understand what it was that he was talking to. And as we went along in the conversation, I realized what he was talking about.

[C]

So it was all. So your first response was not. Not, no, I hadn't heard of that, or I wasn't aware of that.

[B]

My first response was that I wasn't aware of Gary being accused of having a sexual relationship with someone.

[C]

You weren't aware of Gary being accused of having a sexual relationship?

[B]

Not quite sure where we. Not quite sure what you're reaching for here, Chris. What? What? Tell me what the child is.

[C]

Well, to me, there was a call that was made, and I'm just trying to get clarity from you without hearsay. I guess that was asking you if you were aware of that situation. And your first response being, no, I wasn't aware.

[B]

Well, I think we need to go have Daniel either communicate on the text or actually join the conversation. I'd need to revisit exactly what the question was. But I. I do recall that after pulling into my garage and realizing, oh, that's what he's talking about. And so my. What I heard Daniel saying to me was, are you aware that Gary has had a sexual relationship with someone? And I said, no, I'm not. But then when I called into the garage, I. I went, oh, he's probably referring to the sexually inappropriate relationship that has. That Gary's talked to me about. So. So that's. That's the best answer I can give to you, Chris. I'm not.

[C]

Okay, yeah, because there were screenshots that were taken by the. The person that I guess was the husband at the time, and all their family can testify. I think there was about eight of them that have a text message that said, or they read from Gary, basically. And sorry to be graphic, but I can't wait to sleep with you again with the text. I mean, this divorce happened over this situation. And so I'm just feeling like maybe the public statement wasn't the whole story. If there was something like that. Can you speak to that Gary about sending that specific text message?

[E]

Yeah, I. I never slept with Dennis. And. And hand on heart, I can say that we never had sex. And without being graphic, there wasn't. When we were together, there wasn't an arousal on my part. And so, yeah, I never, never slept

[C]

with him from the husband. So they said that they saw the message from you about sleeping together again and about being in the shower. There was a bunch of them that seemed to connote the opposite story.

[E]

Had a shower, never had a Shower. The only, the only times that we connected was probably three times when I was in Wales. But that never, never had sex.

[C]

Okay, I think that's all my questions for now. Thanks guys.

[A]

Anybody else? Daniel has a question. Sorry, Daniel has a question he's asking there. He says why was Gary allowed to continue to minister?

[E]

I think we shared that in 2008 when I admitted, when I admitted what I'd done to Sarah and then subsequently called our oversight at that time when we were in America, they gave us the worst advice possible was don't talk about it. Forgive and move on. You know, it's between you and your wife. There's forgiveness and move on. And we subsequently after six months realized that was not the best advice and so we went to RTF Women sort ministry and also as well jumped into to counseling together in counseling. Oh no way.

[G]

That was afterwards. Sorry.

[E]

Yeah, sorry. Yeah, we.

[G]

We did try to get help as best as we have but we were very young.

[E]

Yeah. And 22.

[G]

Didn't have any tools unfortunately. And it was unfortunately a cover up. If you want to say there was a cover up.

[E]

That was a cover up.

[G]

I, I felt like I was silenced

[A]

at the time as well.

[G]

But after was it 2018 when you were connected over messenger there in different countries. It was only three weeks of messaging. Highly inappropriate. And it broke my heart, I'm going to be honest. But it actually gave us. It was. I'm just speaking from a wife's perspective. It was actually the best thing that ever happened to us because we actually got the help that we needed and we spent or Gary spent nearly four years once we actually looked back at in the counseling and just. And I, I'm not whitewashing and he doesn't whitewash what he did.

[E]

I share about it now in kind of weekends. I shared, shared it in Doha when I was there with the church and

[G]

at the time we can see to all external ministry and we were already halfway through SOP at the time. And the wisdom at the time was only finish this out which I took on the lead role in that position. And I guess for whatever reason we can always split hairs of process and you can always look back and go yes, we did it right, yes we did it wrong. There's always objective responses in hindsight's always 20 20. But Gary was very much involved in that process and there was, there was moments of pride. I'm not going to lie. But at the end of the day that pride was just there to cover the shameless what he done. And he Absolutely. Was repentant and kept to the process. Exactly. Anything that I asked of him. Anything Pete asked of him. Allan and AJ were very much involved in that process at the time. And then I also had external help myself outside of that time. So the reason why was the decision at that moment because he was responsive to the process, and it was very much a joint request.

[A]

Okay, Daniel, if you wanted to follow up with something, you're welcome to do. So I just want to open up again if there's anybody else who has something they want to share. Before I kind of close us up, I have a couple things I want to say. Peter, Allen, Gary.

[B]

I'm all good. Thank you.

[E]

Yeah.

[D]

I just appreciate everybody making time for this. It wasn't easy to coordinate everybody's schedule. I can totally understand where you're coming from. I'm deeply sorry. Nathaniel and Haley, that you. You experienced flack for what you thought you were doing was the right thing. That's not a pleasant experience for anybody. So thank you for creating space to hear us out. We did request the meeting that there was no need for you to do that, but I'm grateful that you did, and I hope you got what you needed, Mike.

[E]

Yeah, and. And I. I would say that to Nathaniel and Haley, I wasn't aware of what you guys were walking through, and I'm always coming against you in that sort of space. And so I'm. I'm sorry that happened that. Yeah, I'm sorry.

[A]

I'm going to add just Daniel. You guys can see in the chat, he. He said, if they knew. Above question, if they knew of his inappropriate contact, why was he allowed to continue to minister? I'm not sure of other context that Daniel has around that. I'm just reading what he wrote. Is there anything anybody wants to add to that?

[D]

I think just what we put in the public statement that all his external ministry stopped and only taught within the local church, the local school that they had. And then Pete, at some point, you, after a certain time of his counseling, let him start traveling again. Is that. Is that my correct understanding?

[B]

Yeah.

[F]

Yep.

[C]

What was the time period of that, if I can, where he wasn't allowed to externally Minister?

[B]

I can't comment without any accuracy given when it was in the past. So, Gary and Sarah, can you comment?

[D]

We may have mentioned that in the public statement, Chris. No, no, no. You got to remember. Oh, hang on again. I'm useless with time because there was the initial thing that happened. When was that? 2008.

[E]

Eight. Yeah.

[D]

Yeah, we. I mean, we knew none of that until the 2018. I think we make a comment about that on the public statement about the 2018 thing.

[A]

Chris, I'm trying to scan it and it looks like you said in 2018 and it doesn't give specific times. He then began weekly counseling with a licensed psychologist. During this time, Gary ceased all international travel and reduced his ministry involvement to helping teach at their school school, while Sarah oversaw. In 2019, with Peter's supervision, Gary returned to limited national international ministry. So it would be some point in 2019, is the statement,

[C]

as when he wouldn't have been. As when the sort of restrictions on external ministry would have been 2019.

[A]

It would have been lifted at some point in 2019 and imposed at some point in 2018. They don't give months or anything here.

[C]

And then these prophetic meetings, these internal house prophetic meetings you're allowed to continue at, were they filmed or were they just totally in house? Not, not, not a live stream thing.

[E]

It wasn't a live stream. We didn't do.

[G]

We did.

[E]

Oh, the recording, yeah, they filmed recording, yeah.

[C]

Because I believe you were ministering at a Church in December 2018. So that's where I was confused. If there was some sort of external ministry cap as to why you would be taking.

[E]

That would have been taking students for presbytery to that.

[C]

No, this was like a public church meeting where you were prophesying over somebody. I believe I can try and track that down and I can shoot it to you in a, in an email, try and follow up with that. But it seemed to be right smack bang in the middle if it was at some point 2018 that this restriction came on.

[D]

I think we talked about that because when we were writing this, you know, Gary was going through his Instagram to go, hey, I'm trying to work out, you know, the timing of all this because again, long time ago and you did flag one thing and then I think it was a hub. I don't know if you're familiar with their school of profits. I've heard it characterizes an at home meeting, but they had a school school and there's hubs that their school operates in. And I think in the context of that meeting. And again, you'll work out, Chris, when you look at the timing, because I think we talked about that, that, oh wait, there was this trip. Why was I on that trip? I think that was related to the school of profit, so it would fall under that remit of reducing his travel to just teach at their school.

[A]

All right, well, I'm I'm grateful for everybody making the time to come out. This was hard for all of us with, across all these countries to try to get schedules going. And I'm grateful that everybody sat through, even when I, I choose to be intense for a good reason. I think as it stands, my own assessment of it is unchanged. And I imagine a lot of people at this meeting, your own assessment of the situation is unchanged. What I did try to do is create a public, or I should say a permanent record of some specifics and some details. And it's deeply disturbing that Peter is in any way involved with holding Gary accountable and he should not be. And you've, you've misrepresented things many times repeatedly in this meeting and to others and even recently about these issues and whether you want to say that, that, you know, if you want to say, well, Mike, you can't go to his motives, then fine, how about this? Whatever the reason is, you're not the guy. If there's someone to hold this guy accountable, it's not you. Alan, I'm not sure if, if you're the guy, if you have an actual true third party independent investigation who can report without accountability to you guys, then you can try to move forward with that. But in my own assessment of things, and I think this is shared by a lot of people outside of the circle of you guys right here, I think this has been view. My understanding is that it's Daniel's view that everybody on this call is that the evidence is already overwhelming. There's already overwhelming, convincing evidence. And if this was to go really wide public, showing all the evidence, you yourselves have acknowledged that objectively people are going to be like, yeah, he's guilty, look at him. And it's just astonishing. I think that what we're seeing is the same thing all over again, where you're just dug in too much and you just can't quit. And so we tell ourselves convenient truths, convenient lies sometimes to try to keep on going and pushing on. But anyways, I appreciate, especially Nathaniel Haley, Chris, Daniel, I appreciate you guys and Ben too, sticking his neck out and getting swatted for it. I appreciate that. But this is absolutely not resolved in any way because the buck stops with Peter McHugh and with Allan. And it's the people who are supposed to hold Gary accountable. And you guys tell yourselves cute stories about these things instead of dealing with the truth. That's my honest opinion. And I think that if you were to even attempt to seriously investigate Gary, you would never have written, we have not received additional concerns about the integrity of gary's ministry in 10 years. That's not, it's not factually true. How do I even know about concerns you've received? I'm not even there. I haven't even asked people for information. Just comes, you know, and it wasn't just one or two. There's that the whole, It's a whole nother thing to get into the whole church where you prophesied about it and ends up being this really abusive scenario. And they used your prophecy to help prop up this leader. Anyway, so you guys, I'm going to. I'll end our meeting. I'm grateful for everybody who being part of it and at the same time, I'm going to pray about what, what to do next. I was just going to do a post on social media and leave it alone and hope that the ball would roll because there was overwhelming evidence and just the leaders just need to be public and speak about it. But since then, I don't know if anybody's publicly spoken about it. It seems like nobody has. As far as leaders, like leaders go. Has anybody

[C]

GGC put out a statement basically saying we don't know. This sort of stuff has come to us and this sort of stuff has come to us and we don't have any formal conclusion, but you know what we know sort of thing. That's the only. Any movement.

[A]

Well, the, the accountability should come from, with, from within. You guys, you're, as leaders, you're the guys he's looking to, to help him out and hold him accountable. It should come from there. And if it won't come from there, then I say it should come from anywhere as Christians, because the church cannot, cannot bear up under the weight of fake prophecy. It just can't. So I guess that'll end our meeting then. So thank you guys.

[C]

Thanks, guys.

[D]

Thank you.

[B]

Thank you.

[F]

Thanks everyone.

[A]

Thanks. Editor Mike here for my very last time and just want to say this video would not have been needed if leaders had just done the right thing. And that is the point of this video. It's piecemeal work. If I target one guy after another after another and just kind of try to take down one. No, what I need to do, hopefully God willing, is help be part of a larger move movement where tons and tons and tons of Christians are saying we want biblical accountability. We want, when those elders are persisting in sin, to rebuke them in the presence of all and to have no fear to do this because it will cause the rest of the church to be purified in the process. We will have no fear of man. We will have fear of God. And that fear of God will purify the church. This is not enjoyable work. This is not fun stuff. This is not entertainment. This is about stoking an actual revival in the charismatic church, one that brings us back to what scripture says about honesty and integrity and purity and holiness and accountability. If we do it, it's going to bring, I believe, beautiful, beautiful fruit. And all it takes is the people who know stuff to say stuff.