Hillsong founder Brian Houston did not take part in a church-wide cover-up of his paedophile father because Frank Houston’s victim did not want to come forward, a court has been told.
Brian Houston, 69, will later this year learn his fate after facing a hearing in Sydney’s Downing Centre Local Court where he has denied allegations that he covered up his father’s sexual abuse of young boy in the 1970s.
The long-running hearing on Friday came to an end with Magistrate Gareth Christofi to deliver his judgment in August.
Mr Houston has pleaded not guilty to one count of concealing the serious indictable offence of another person.
And Mr Houston’s barrister, Phillip Boulten SC, used his closing address to argue the pentecostal preacher had a “reasonable excuse” not to come forward because of his father’s victim’s wishes.
The Crown prosecution has alleged that from late 1999, when he learnt of his father’s paedophilia, until Frank Houston’s death in 2004, he failed to disclose the information to authorities.
Victim Brett Sengstock was sexually assaulted by Frank Houston at his family’s Coogee home while Frank Houston – then a New Zealand-based preacher – was on a tour of Australia over 50 years ago.
Crown prosecutor Gareth Harrison has argued there was “a culture in the church that when faced with potential scandal, the culture and reaction was to protect the church” and that Mr Sengstock was paid “hush money”.
Mr Boulten, told the court on Friday there was evidence that Mr Sengstock did not consider going to the police or the “secular” authorities, and that claims of a “cover up” were “unfair”.
“Your honour should be safe in the conclusion that Brett Sengstock didn’t want this problem to be publicly exposed,” Mr Boulten argued.
“Either in the church or through a police investigation and criminal prosecution. His reasons are his reasons.
“And they were reasons that he thought about over decades and he never wavered in his determination not to co-operate with the church or with any police investigation.”
During his evidence to the court last year, Mr Sengstock said he did not “recall” ever telling Mr Houston he wanted the matter to remain “private”.
Mr Boulten told the court that Mr Houston was responsible for tearing up his father’s credential as a preacher.
In late 1999, the national executive of the Assemblies of God was called to an urgent meeting at Sydney airport to discuss revelations about Frank Houston.
The AOG board decided Frank Houston would be stood down, enter into its “restoration program”, refrain from preaching for 12 months and be offered counselling and support, the court was told.
According to minutes from that meeting, the AOG board had obtained legal advice indicating that it did not have to disclose the matter to police because by that time, Mr Sengstock was in his 30s and could make his own complaint.
The Crown prosecution has argued that legal advice must have been relayed by Brian Houston as part of a cover-up.
However, Mr Boulten said another member of the AOG board, Wayne Alcorn, had knowledge of Frank Houston’s offending before the meeting and may have been the source of the advice.
Mr Houston said during his evidence, that he did not tell the AOG meeting that he had talked to a lawyer about the church’s reporting obligations.
“There was discussion about legal advice,” Mr Boulten said, adding there was insufficient proof that his client was the conduit for that advice.
“This is not a knockout punch, killer point, we submit. It’s just another conundrum thrown up by the inadequacies of the evidence.”
Mr Sengstock did not disclose the abuse until he told his mother Rose Hardingham when he was 16 years old.
Then in mid-1998, Mr Sengstock’s mother raised it with the church, which led to Brian Houston being told.
The court has been told that when Brian Houston confronted his father, Frank made a confession about his paedophilia.
Mr Houston has stated in interviews, and in his evidence to the court, that he did not go to police because he had been instructed by Mr Sengstock that he did not want authorities involved.
During his evidence, Mr Houston stated that Mr Sengstock told him he did not want to participate in either a police or church investigation.
Mr Sengstock told the court that during a meeting with Frank Houston at a Sydney McDonald’s he was told to sign his name on a napkin and was offered $10,000.
The Crown prosecution has alleged that this amounted to “hush money” while Mr Sengstock told the court: “I was paid for my silence.”
“There’s no evidence of what was on the document, the paper, the napkin that Mr Sengstock signed,” Mr Boulten said.
“Apart from the very brief description of what Mr Sengstock gave and that’s very incomplete.
“It’s certainly an insufficient basis to say the document he signed actually had as a condition that there be confidentiality maintained or not take any further action.
Mr Houston’s defence has argued that before Frank Houston’s death in November 2004, there were tens of thousands of people who learnt of his paedophilia after Brian Houston made several public statements – including at the 2002 Hillsong conference.
In a video played during the trial, Mr Houston addresses the Hillsong Conference at Sydney’s SuperDome in 2002 and talks to the 18,000-strong crowd about his father’s sexual abuse of the boy.
He described confronting his father like “jets flying into the twin towers of my soul.”
“He said that Frank had been accused of sexual abuse over 30 years ago – that’s true,” Mr Boulten said of Brian Houston’s address to the crowd.
Mr Christofi will hand down his judgment on the matter on August 17.