JUSTICE FOR BISHOP GEORGE BELL OF CHICHESTER

"BELL REVIEW WELCOMED" - EDITORIAL COMMENT - CHICHESTER OBSERVER - JUNE 29 2016

http://www.chichester.co.uk/news/comment-bell-review-welcomed-1-7454550

Last autumn, the reputation of one of Chichester’s most principled and distinguished Bishops, George Bell, was destroyed...supporters of Bell and the George Bell Group have persistently called for the evidence to be made public as it would have been if Bell was still alive and subject to criminal proceedings...The review is a matter of standard procedure and is not intended to undermine the original decision, but we trust its remit will go beyond mere process without adding further to the distress of the woman involved. Bell was too important a figure to have his reputation trashed without full transparency and disclosure in the public domain. His alleged victim deserves to have her claims clearly and unequivocally vindicated – so that a line can be finally drawn under this matter.

"DIOCESE OF CHICHESTER TO REVIEW PROCESSES USED IN BISHOP GEORGE BELL CASE" - CHICHESTER OBSERVER - JUNE 29 2016

http://www.chichester.co.uk/news/local/diocese-of-chichester-to-review-processes-used-in-bishop-george-bell-case-1-7452592

In a statement, the diocese said: “The House of Bishops practice guidance on all complex cases states that once all matters relating to any serious safeguarding situation have been completed, the Core Group should meet again to review the process and to consider what lessons can be learned for the handling of future serious safeguarding situations...A review has always been carried out in any case involving allegations against a bishop..." It will also consider the processes, including the commissioning of expert independent reports and archival and other investigations, which were used to inform the decision to settle the case...

BBC NEWS - "BISHOP GEORGE BELL: REVIEW TO LOOK AT 'ABUSE' CASE" - JUNE 28 2016

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-36650130

Bishop Bell's supporters have been critical of the church's investigation...The George Bell Group...members claim the Church of England made little effort to corroborate the allegations with any reference to the clergyman's diaries or papers, or those who had worked with him.The Church of England said its national safeguarding team would commission the review to see what lessons could be learnt from how the case was handled...

BBC SOUTH EAST TODAY - COVERAGE OF CHURCH OF ENGLAND'S NEW INQUIRY INTO THE BISHOP BELL CASE - JUNE 28 2016 - 18.30 NEWS ONLY (15 MINUTES IN)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hjd54

COMMENT BY "GRAMMARBOY"

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/14585942.Church_opens_inquiry_into_George_Bell_case/

If the Church of England had commissioned a thorough, independent and professional investigation in the first place, interviewing other relevant people & looking dispassionately into the case rather than spinsterishly throwing up their hands in horror and accepting unquestioningly the accuser's word, the "balance of probabilities" might well have swung decisively in the other direction, & the subsequent destruction of Bishop Bell's reputation never have occurred....I realise that this statement is inevitably going to be received by the "hang the paeds high!" clique as defending the indefensible, but I would merely say to them that were one of their own family to be treated fifty years after their death the way Bishop Bell was treated, they too would see matters very differently.

"CHURCH OPENS INQUIRY INTO GEORGE BELL CASE" - THE ARGUS - JUNE 29 2016

http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/14585942.Church_opens_inquiry_into_George_Bell_case/

THE Church of England is launching an independent review into its handling of a case involving a woman abused by a former bishop...The review will be commissioned by the Church of England’s National Safeguarding Team, on the recommendation of the Bishop of Chichester, to see what lessons can be learnt from how the case was handled. The same process is undergone in all such cases involving bishops..The Church’s opacity on these issues has been specifically criticised by the George Bell Group...

"CHURCH OF ENGLAND ORDERS REVIEW INTO HANDLING OF GEORGE BELL SEX ABUSE CASE" - THE GUARDIAN - JUNE 28 2016

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/28/george-bell-church-of-england-review-handling-sex-abuse?CMP=share_btn_tw

The Church of England has launched an independent review into its processes regarding the settlement of a claim of sexual abuse by one of its leading figures of the 20th century, George Bell...The move is likely to be seized on by Bell’s supporters to bolster their argument that the church acted without sufficient evidence when it effectively branded the former bishop as a child abuser....A group...subsequently challenged the church over its apology, saying Bell’s “condemnation as a paedophile” had irreparably damaged his reputation. The Church had failed to investigate properly, they said.

IPSO RULING - BILLINGHAM v CHICHESTER OBSERVER

https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings-and-resolution-statements/ruling/?id=00385-16

In the specific circumstances of the case, where the Church had provided details of the investigation it had carried out in its press release, as well as the conclusion of independent experts that there was no basis to doubt the veracity of the allegations against Bishop Bell, the Committee was satisfied that publication of those allegations as fact in the headline of the article did not represent a failure to take care over the article such as to breach Clause 1 (i) of the Code. While the Committee expressed some concern that the online article did not make clear the full context in which it had been published, it was not significantly misleading; there was no breach of the Code.

SIR CLIFF SPEAKS OUT

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/cliff-richard-sex-abuse-good-morning-britain-interview_uk_576a3099e4b0b1f1704f99eb?ncid=webmail19

[Sir Cliff Richard] said there should be anonymity for those accused of sexual abuse until they are charged and said he felt like he had been ‘collateral damage’. Speaking about how he felt when he was told the Crown Prosecution Service [CPS] had insufficient evidence to charge him, he said: “It’s very difficult for me to explain to people what it’s been feeling like, what it felt like for me, to be an innocent, but having these vile accusations thrown at me. The CPS, I mean, it’s just what they do...there are certain terminologies that they have to use, and in this case they never say there is no evidence, they just say insufficient evidence, nothing on which we can prosecute. And so in a way I still feel tarnished because insufficient suggests that maybe there’s something there and I know there wasn’t”

THE BELL CASE AND THE WIDER CULTURE OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND

Revd Professor Martyn Percy

http://www.georgebellgroup.org/bell-case-wider-culture-church-england/

There clearly are serious cases....the Church of England’s National Safeguarding Team needs to pursue. But equally, there are already too many instances of alleged abusers...assumed to be guilty until proved innocent – only for us to discover later that no charges are to be brought. The shadows that hang over these other victims, and the stigmatisation they endure, should not be overlooked...The root of all evil is the abuse of power. Those who have used their power to abuse children, and those who have covered up such sins, cannot be allowed to hide...But equally, those with the powers to investigate such abuses must also become fairer and more transparent in their dealings with alleged and actual instances of abuse. There are now too many examples of...those who turn out to be falsely accused, being sacrificed...

IS THERE A LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DIOCESE OF CHICHESTER WITHHOLDING THE DETAILS OF THE CLAIM MADE BY BISHOP BELL’S ALLEGED VICTIM ?

Alan Pardoe QC and Desmond Browne QC - 10.6.16

http://www.georgebellgroup.org/a-review-of-the-law/

In our view not one of these...[legal] provisions justifies the course taken by the Diocese, which has resulted in seriously handicapping the efforts of those wishing to see Bishop Bell’s name cleared and his reputation restored...The Diocese’s statement of 22 October 2015 referred to the settlement with 'Carol' having been reached after “a thorough pre-litigation process”. It is now clear that there were never any proceedings between Carol and the Diocese and the action was settled without any litigation being initiated...His reputation has been damned by the Diocese’s public statement of 22 October 2015, yet by reason of misconceived legal arguments the public has been prevented from judging for itself the material on which the Diocese acted.

"GOT IT WRONG" BY RICHARD W. SYMONDS

The BBC got it wrong about Bishop Bell
But admit they got it wrong.
The Newspapers got it wrong about Bishop Bell
But do not admit they got it wrong.
The Church got it wrong about Bishop Bell
But do not admit they got it wrong.
We got it wrong about Bishop Bell
So we've got to right the wrong.

http://www.georgebellgroup.org/a-review-of-the-law/

IS THERE A LEGAL JUSTIFICATION FOR THE DIOCESE OF CHICHESTER WITHHOLDING THE DETAILS OF THE CLAIM MADE BY BISHOP BELL’S ALLEGED VICTIM ?

10th June 2016

A review of the law by His Honour Alan Pardoe QC and Desmond Browne QC

It is obviously critical to any assessment of whether on the balance of probabilities the late Bishop George Bell sexually assaulted the woman now known as “Carol” to be able to consider the full details of her account (or accounts) of what occurred....The Diocese has, however, refused to disclose any of this material – even in redacted form. The Diocesan Secretary...has cited a number of legal provisions to justify this stance...
In our view not one of these...provisions justifies the course taken by the Diocese, which has resulted in seriously handicapping the efforts of those wishing to see Bishop Bell’s name cleared and his reputation restored.

"I DON'T DOUBT SHE WAS ABUSED, BUT THE QUESTION IS : WAS IT BISHOP BELL?" - TONY DIGNUM - LEADER OF CHICHESTER COUNCIL

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-36294052

Chichester Council said it [Bishop Bell's portrait] had been replaced as there was reasonable doubt about the woman's ['Carol's'] claims.
Tony Dignum, leader of the council, said: "We haven't seen sufficient evidence against Bishop Bell to justify removing his name entirely from our memory. I don't doubt that she was abused but the question is: was it Bishop Bell?"
The Rt Rev George Bell was Bishop of Chichester from 1929 until his death in 1958
But, a group set up to defend Bishop Bell said the church's investigation was inadequate and the woman's claims uncorroborated.
Journalist Peter Hitchens has claimed the council's move as "a small victory" for his defenders, but ultimately they want the church to re-examine the evidence against him.

CPS - WE GOT IT WRONG ABOUT SIR CLIFF RICHARD TOO - BUT WON'T ADMIT IT

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-36547213

I chose to remain silent. This was despite the widely-shared sense of injustice...Other than in exceptional cases, people who are facing allegations should never be named publicly until charged....they forever tarnish the reputations of innocent people...I feel very strongly that no innocent person should be treated in this way....in some peoples' eyes the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) announcement today doesn't go far enough because it doesn't expressly state that I am innocent...There lies the problem.
My reputation will not be fully vindicated because the CPS's policy is to only say something general about there being 'insufficient' evidence.
How can there be evidence for something that never took place?

~ Sir Cliff Richard

BBC ADMITS - 'WE GOT IT WRONG ABOUT BISHOP BELL'

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2016/03/the-bbc-admits-to-its-great-credit-we-got-it-wrong-about-bishop-bell.html

The summary of the conclusions of the Editorial Complaints Unit (ECU) has just gone up on the BBC website, and can be seen at http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/comp-reports/ecu/southeasttoday051115. There’s also a report on the Corrections & Clarifications page at http://www.bbc.co.uk/helpandfeedback/corrections_clarifications.

The ECU concluded that the Church’s original October 22nd statement (in my view the unjustified basis of much misleading reporting on the matter, as it made no assertion of guilt) ‘did not warrant reporting as a matter of fact that the allegations had been proven’