CHARLES ‘MISGUIDED’ OVER ABUSIVE BISHOP
Inquiry slams prince for friendship with paedo
PRINCE Charles’s long-standing friendship with a paedophile clergyman was “misguided”, an inquiry into child sex abuse has found.
After then-bishop Peter Ball received a police caution for gross indecency in 1992, Charles stayed in contact with him for more than 20 years.
Ball used his friendship with the Prince of Wales “to further his campaign to return to unrestricted ministry” after his caution, a report by the Independent Inquiry Into Child Sexual Abuse found.
In 2015, Ball, now 87, got 32 months’ jail for sexual offences against 17 teens and young men, one of whom took his own life.
The report said Charles was “misguided” for speaking to the then Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, about Ball in 1992, and buying a property to rent to Ball and his brother.
It said: “His actions, and those of his staff, could have been interpreted as expressions of support for Peter Ball and, given the Prince of Wales’s future role within the Church of England, had the potential to influence the actions of the Church.” The report found that Carey suppressed the truth about Ball’s abuse.
The prince told the inquiry that he was “deceived” by Ball, the former bishop of both Lewes and Gloucester.
One of Ball’s victims, Neil Todd, killed himself aged 38. The inquiry said he was “seriously failed” by the church, which “discounted Ball’s conduct as trivial and insignificant” while displaying “callous indifference” to Mr Todd’s complaints.
The report accused Ball’s former Diocese of Chichester of “serious failings” in handling sexual abuse allegations. It said Ball is an example of how a senior member of the Anglican church “was able to sexually abuse vulnerable teenagers and young men for decades”, backed by senior colleagues.
Clarence House said: “It remains a matter of deep regret to the Prince that he was deceived by Ball over so many years. At no time did he bring influence to bear on the actions of the Church.”
Charles’s actions could have been interpreted as support for Peter Ball INDEPENDENT INQUIRY INTO CHILD SEX ABUSE