Following the Charity Commission intervention made public on 28 January, there have been further developments:
Stephen Parsons at Surviving Church made comments on that letter and the Christ Church response: The Charity Commissioners intervene in the Christ Church bullying of the Dean.
Gabriella Swerling at the Telegraph disclosed on 29 January further details about the Christ Church response: Christ Church trustees express anger after watchdog questions efforts to oust embattled Dean. This contains numerous details from an email sent to the trustees commenting on the Charity Commission’s action and suggesting ways that individual trustees might respond to enquiries.
A week later on 5 February, the Church Times published a letter to the editor from the complainant, which can be read in full here (scroll down to Complaint against Dean of Christ Church, Oxford) and carried a lengthy news story about this letter and the background to it, see Complainant in Percy case says she acted alone.
This morning, 8 February, Archbishop Cranmer has published an article by Martin Sewell, titled Christ Church Oxford Trustees could be personally liable for £85K each. This article (which includes a link to a Daily Mail report of 22 November) contains a large number of criticisms of the Trustees.
I think many parties are extrapolating from the fact that there have been past failures by the Governing Body, individually and collectively, to conclude that is happening again. That is dangerous. While it is appropriate for the Charity Commission to investigate whether the whole matter could have been dealt with more cheaply and whether conflicts of interest have been declared and handled appropriately, no inference into the underlying merits of the complaint should be drawn from an investigation into potential process errors. Doubtless some members of the Governing Body have seized on the new complaint with unbecoming enthusiasm, and perhaps… Read more »
“…we mustn’t lose sight of the fact that there is a genuine complaint which deserves an open-mind pending investigation” – Kate We also mustn’t lose sight of the fact that the professional “open-mind pending investigation” approach is to neither believe nor disbelieve the lady and her allegation. There is no right or entitlement for her to be believed, but there is a right and entitlement for her to be treated with respect, to take her allegation seriously, to listen with compassion, and to record the facts clearly. I understand the police have already done that and they are no longer… Read more »