CHARLES DAMNED OVER THE PERVERT BISHOP
‘Misguided’ prince blasted for backing sadist paedophile ++ He’s the first ever royal to be criticised by public inquiry
PRINCE Charles was condemned as ‘misguided’ by a public inquiry yesterday over his support for a paedophile bishop.
Peter Ball, who is believed to have molested more than a hundred schoolboys and young men, was cautioned by police in 1993 over a sexual assault on a teenage monk.
He resigned in disgrace as Bishop of Gloucester yet was allowed by the Church of England to return to the ministry following Charles’s interventions. Ball had calculated that the prince’s support for him would ‘ease’ his path, a scathing report by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse found.
It is believed to be the first time a public inquiry has criticised a senior royal. Released yesterday, the 252-page official report:
Questions Charles’s evidence
that his letters to Ball were merely ‘polite’ replies, saying they were more cordial than that;
Says the prince, as future head of the Church, ‘ should have recognised the potential effect’ of getting involving in the bishop’s case;
Concludes Charles ‘did not try to find out’ details of the police investigation;
Damns the CofE for refusing to believe victims and giving Ball and other child abusers free rein;
Brands former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey ‘ weak’ and said his compassion for Ball ‘did not extend to his victims’;
Blames the Crown Prosecution Service for missing an opportunity to charge the predatory paedophile with a range of offences in 1992.
The report castigated Lord Carey, who was responsible for letting Ball return to his duties, including visiting schools. It condemned the CofE for ignoring the suffering of child abuse victims in order to preserve its own reputation.
Last night Clarence House said: ‘It remains a matter of deep regret to the prince that he, along with many others, was deceived by Peter Ball over so many years. As he made clear in his voluntary witness statement to the inquiry, at no time did he bring any influence to bear on the actions of the Church or any other relevant authority.
‘His thoughts remain with victims of the abuse suffered over many years.’
Ball, who made his young victims roll in the snow naked before beating them until they bled, regarded Charles as a loyal friend. The pair prayed together at the prince’s Gloucestershire home, Highgrove, and exchanged more than 50 letters.
Extraordinary extracts from them were last year read to the inquiry, which is investigating claims of an alleged Establishment cover-up of child abuse.
‘Failed victims and survivors’
In one letter, Charles reassured the bishop he was the victim of ‘monstrous wrongs’ and said he was desperate to help him, adding: ‘I wish I could do more.’ He also promised to ‘see off’ an unnamed person connected to the case.
Yesterday the inquiry concluded: ‘The actions of His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales were misguided.’
Last night Richard Scorer, a specialist abuse lawyer at Slater and Gordon, representing several of Ball’s victims, said: ‘We may never know the true harm caused by Charles’s intervention and support for Ball, but welcome the fact that the inquiry did not shy away from highlighting his role in this scandal.’
Phil Johnson, 53, of Eastbourne, East Sussex, who was inappropriately touched by Ball when a 13-year- old choirboy, said: ‘Peter Ball was a charismatic figure and it is possible he deceived Prince Charles, but if that is the case, he is very gullible and naive and it casts serious doubt on his judgement.’
Another victim, who wished to remain anonymous, said: ‘To say that he was simply misguided in continuing that friendship, even after he was made aware of Ball’s police caution, seems to be letting him off rather lightly. He must have been fully aware of the power and influence that his support would bring.’
Charles gave written submissions to the inquiry last year, following weeks of legal wrangling in which Clarence House claimed the prince could not be compelled to give evidence and that his human rights could be breached.
The prince told the panel he had not understood that the 1993 caution carried an admission of guilt, and that he only appreciated the horrific nature and scale of the offending in 2015, when Ball was finally convicted of abusing 18 boys and young men.
Inquiry chairman Professor Alexis Jay said the Church of England had ‘failed victims and survivors of child sexual abuse by prioritising its own reputation above their welfare’.
Bishop Peter Hancock, the Church’s safeguarding lead, promised lessons would be learnt from the ‘shocking and uncomfortable’ evidence. A royal source said: ‘At no point did the prince ask to get Bishop Ball his job back.’