Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

| November 20, 2018

Scroll to top


No Comments

Prince Charles Requested to Give Statement on Former Sussex Paedophile Bishop

Prince Charles Requested to Give Statement on Former Sussex Paedophile Bishop
Jack Mitchell-Charman

The Prince of Wales had extensive contact with the formerly Sussex based Bishop.

Prince Charles has been asked to partake in a public inquiry involving Peter Ball, a formerly Sussex based paedophile Bishop.

It has been requested that he give a witness statement.

Ball was Bishop of Lewes between 1977–1992, with the majority of his acts occurring in this period.

Ball had a prolific list of offences, abusing 18 teenagers and men.

In October 2015 he received a 32 month sentence, but was released after serving just 16.

Peter Ball was a Bishop in Lewes for 15 years

Prince Charles had previously risked becoming embroiled in Ball’s case.

However, during the judicial process, Clarence House stated that: “The Prince of Wales made no intervention in the judicial process on behalf of Peter Ball”.

Charles is known to have had contact with the Bishop, with the two exchanging a series of letters.

Ball moved to the Diocese of Gloucester in 1992, home to Charles’ Highgrove Home residency.

Clarence House have released statements which show a willingness to co-operate with the investigation.

The request was made by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse at a hearing on Wednesday.

Lawyer Richard Scorer represents complainants at the IICSA, and stated that: “It is imperative that the inquiry leaves no stone unturned in its efforts to establish how Peter Ball was able to evade justice for two decades. If this means calling Prince Charles and other prominent establishment figures as witnesses then the inquiry should do so without fear or favour”.

Clarence House have said that Charles “is more than willing to provide context on his contact with Mr Ball, as his former local Bishop, if that would help the inquiry”.

They also clarified that Charles “was unaware of the extent of Mr Ball’s behaviour”.

Submit a Comment