A California Church Leader Who Also Taught Jiu-Jitsu Is Accused of Abusing Children Since 2012. Here Is What Comes Next for Families

Reviewed by Abuse Justice Center · Updated 2026-07-22

What Investigators Say Happened

A 51-year-old Hollister, California man was arrested in early July after investigators say they received a report describing child sexual abuse dating back more than a decade. The man led services at a small community gathering space in rural San Benito County and separately taught jiu-jitsu classes at gyms in neighboring Monterey County, giving him regular, trusted access to children across more than one setting.

The Monterey County Sheriff's Office says the investigation moved quickly once the initial report came in, and that detectives identified signs of additional victims within days. Bail was set at $17.5 million, an unusually high figure that reflects both the number of allegations investigators say they have already documented and concern that more victims have not yet been identified.

Why Multiple Venues Make This Case More Complicated, and More Common Than It Seems

Cases involving someone who holds trusted, informal roles across more than one organization, a religious leader who is also a coach or instructor, for example, are more common than many families realize, and they complicate who can ultimately be held responsible. Each venue involved, the community gathering space and the separate gyms where jiu-jitsu classes were taught, may have its own distinct legal exposure depending on what it knew or should have known.

Small, informal, or loosely structured organizations like a rural congregation or an independently run martial arts program often have thinner screening and reporting policies than larger institutions, which can make it harder for any single red flag to be caught, but does not reduce the legal responsibility those organizations may still carry.

What a Civil Claim Can Look Like Here

Because the allegations touch more than one type of organization, families affected by this case may have claims against more than one entity: the community gathering space where services were held, and separately, any gym or martial arts program where the man taught. Each organization's knowledge, hiring practices, and supervision policies would be evaluated independently.

A civil claim in a case like this does not require the criminal case to reach a verdict first, and it does not require your family to be part of whatever group of victims investigators have already identified. Attorneys who handle these cases routinely represent survivors whose experiences come to light well after an initial arrest makes headlines.

What Families Can Do Now

If your child had any connection to a jiu-jitsu class, gym, or small community congregation in the Hollister or Monterey County area, especially over the past decade, a free and confidential case review can help you understand whether a claim may exist, even if you are not certain your child had direct contact with the man involved.

Because investigators say they expect more victims to come forward, getting ahead of the process with an early, no-cost consultation can help preserve evidence and options. Consultations are free and confidential, and attorneys we connect families with typically work on contingency, meaning there is no fee unless money is recovered.

Venue Types Where This Pattern Shows Up

Cases involving trusted adults with access to children across more than one informal setting share some common features. Here is where attorneys say this pattern tends to appear.

1. Small, informal religious gathering spaces: Congregations that meet in community centers or rented spaces rather than large church campuses can have thinner screening and oversight than bigger institutions.
2. Martial arts and youth sports instruction: One-on-one coaching time, close physical contact inherent to the sport, and loosely regulated gym ownership are recurring features in these cases.
3. Massage, wellness, and physical therapy businesses: Any setting involving physical contact and closed-door sessions carries similar risk factors and similar legal questions about organizational responsibility.
4. Small, owner-operated businesses generally: Without a larger corporate structure, screening and reporting policies often depend entirely on one owner's judgment, which can be a significant gap.
5. Any setting with unsupervised one-on-one time with children: Regardless of the type of organization, private, no-camera settings with a single trusted adult are the common thread across most of these cases.

Related