WINGS Note: John has a cousin with the same name. Please don’t confuse the two different people.
In April 2023, Rob Newman, Overseer of CA/AZ/NV/HI, advised that John was asked to step aside from the ministry as workers had received several credible allegations of unacceptable sexual behavior, including a complaint of inappropriate touching of a minor, which has been reported to the authorities. See https://wingsfortruth.info/2023/04/25/letter-by-rob-newman-overseer-of-california-re-removal-of-john-vandenberg-from-the-work-april-2023/
Further information was posted at https://wingsfortruth.info/2023/05/18/john-vandenberg-clarification/
A note recently issued to California staff (March 8, 2024) says:
Rob requested to notify you that we received the sad, shocking news that our friend and brother John VanDenBerg died today in a construction accident by Puget Sound in Washington state.
He and Kent Kingman had been working in a house that Kingman’s purchased, and 2.00PM PST today part of the roof collapsed. One of their sons who was there (fortunately not underneath when it came down) lifted the beam off his Dad, but John was gone.
Life-Flight transported Kent to a Seattle hospital. His wife Donna said that Kent was really banged up and that he was going to be okay.
No funeral details at this time.
Since August 2023, there have been rumors that that John Vandenberg was “cleared by the FBI” prior to his passing or that others have been “cleared by the FBI” after a visit with the FBI. This is not correct as the FBI does not “Clear” anyone. Their job is to determine if there is sufficient information to prosecute. If there is, that is passed on to relevant legal authorities to try the case in court. The court system determines guilt or innocence. Even lack of a guilty verdict does not mean the person didn’t do the deed, it may mean there simply wasn’t sufficient evidence presented to meet the legal bar for the guilty verdict.
The rumor may have started because John (and two other alleged perpetrators) was subject to a short evaluation by an unknown professional, and deemed “low-risk”, according to church leadership in California – Rob Newman, Richard DenHerder, and Harold Hilton.
This situation is explained clearly in a recent letter to CA/AZ/NV/HI workers:
Dear CA/AZ/NV/HI workers,
I am writing with a concern regarding some misinformation that is making the rounds, for at least a second time. I am writing to help you all to understand the full impact of these statements, so that you may be better informed if you choose to reshare incorrect information. This is in regards to John VanDenBerg being declared innocent, by various professionals per the various rumors. I understand you’ve now been made aware that this declaration of innocence simply isn’t correct; there’s no possible way for this to be done outside of our justice system (and certainly not by the executive branch of our government, such as the FBI). The original rumor I heard was several months ago and apparently originated from John’s engagement in a recidivism risk assessment process with a forensic psychiatrist. This relates to the controversial practice Rob has sometimes used, hiring a forensic psychiatrist to evaluate the risk of future harm by putting someone with accusations or convictions back into meetings. Forensic psychiatrists are normally used after the court proceedings have concluded guilt, and the forensic psychiatrist’s evaluation is used as a sentencing duration recommendation. If John went through this evaluation and was deemed ‘low risk’ (something he had shared with others some months back), the evaluation itself first presumed his guilt on the accusations used in the risk evaluation. So I’m still at a loss as to how any declaration of innocence has this source, but this seems to be the origin of John’s exoneration claims both recently and in the past.
I wonder if you’ve considered what John being innocent would mean, the ‘good news’ as it was referenced. If John is innocent, it means all his accusers are guilty of malicious slander. While John’s accusers may be currently faceless to you, they are not faceless to Rob. Some of the accusers are also not faceless to me. As a result, I know they include people currently in fellowship and in homes you’ve stayed in, perhaps even recently. They include elders’ wives you’ve been in fellowship with. If John is truly innocent, these same people are all vicious liars. Would this be a better conclusion on the matter? Would it be better that one former worker’s innocence comes at the cost of many of the friends’ guilt? I find the idea that so many of the friends would be malicious liars also chilling – there is no ‘good news’ scenario here.
The people I know brought their accusations to Rob out of concern for the children in the fellowship, and because Rob solicited this information. They do not want to be known publicly out of shame for what happened to them (even though they bear no fault), and out of fear of being vilified by those who cannot fathom believing John was capable of harming children. And this would happen regardless, as there are people today who still can’t believe Ruben Mata’s guilt. By propagating a declaration of John’s innocence, the trust these survivors put in Rob (and by implication the ministry as a whole) has been betrayed. Their words have now been tried and found false per this rumor, the horror of their childhood experience declared a fantasy. This misinformation can have serious consequences for these survivors, including triggering migraines, vomiting, depression, and even suicidal ideation. These words can have severe consequences for all survivors who hear them, not just those alleged to be victims of John.
The sad reality is that there will be no definitive arbitration of truth on these matters. Most accusations will never see their day in our imperfect court system. Therefore, our community will live in perpetuity with one of two terrible truths being reality; that these accusations mean either we live amongst malicious liars or among predators of children — or both. In most (probably all) cases, we will never know the full truth. So we have no choice but to move forward without truly knowing guilt or innocence. The best we can do is to operate in a way that gives full consideration and care to the possibility of truth existing on both sides of these accusations.
Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, and for your help in preventing further propagation of harmful messages to the many survivors among us.
With appreciation,
Steve Paddon
WINGS for Truth 