Victim of CofE clergy abuse claims Sarah Mullaly ‘misled public’

The incoming Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally, has been accused of misleading the public over the status of a clergy abuse case. A complainant, known as Survivor N, has said the denominational leader’s claim that the case had been “fully dealt with” is contradicted by ongoing proceedings.

The Bishop of Fulham has now decided to proceed with a formal investigation into the priest at the center of a clergy abuse complaint, contradicting earlier claims by Mullally that the case had been fully resolved, The Telegraph reported.

The complaint was originally filed in 2020 under the Church of England’s (CofE)Clergy Discipline Measure.

Documents show that the CofE’s tribunal president directed diocesan lawyer Stuart Jones to handle the case earlier this month. The decision to move forward was made by Bishop Jonathan Baker after N went public, prompting a review.

In a letter to N, Jones confirmed that he had been instructed by the president of tribunals to revisit the 2020 complaint. N alleged that Mullally’s claim that the matter had been resolved was demonstrably false, citing the ongoing status of the case.

Mullally had previously stated that N’s original allegations of sexual misconduct by a priest had been fully investigated and resolved. N said the investigation had never concluded and accused church authorities of attempting to “spin” the reopening as new rather than acknowledging the original case had been buried.

The priest allegedly groped N, asked him to perform a sex act, and spoke of a sexual attraction while partially undressed in his flat. After filing his complaint, N said he learned that Mullally, then Bishop of London, had forwarded his confidential email directly to the priest, violating protocol.

N later filed a separate CDM complaint against Mullally, which was never formally addressed by the CofE. The Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell, concluded that Mullally had committed no misconduct and said no further action would be taken, as reported by Christian Today.

In her public statement last month, Mullally acknowledged that N had been failed by the CofE’s processes. She maintained that the original allegations were handled by the Diocese of London, but admitted the complaint against her had not been properly managed.

N responded that the denomination’s handling amounted to a “stitch-up.” He said it was inappropriate for Bishop Baker, a suffragan bishop under Mullally’s oversight, to now oversee the case, and criticized the reappointment of the same diocesan lawyer involved in the original investigation.

He said it felt like a “sick joke” to see Jones once again managing his case after failing to act in 2020. N referred to the situation as “Mullallygate” and questioned whether Mullally’s upcoming confirmation as archbishop should proceed.

Andrew Graystone, a campaigner for abuse survivors, said the CofE must restore public trust. He questioned why a case described as resolved was being reinvestigated and criticized the denomination’s internal procedures.

The Diocese of London said the priest was originally investigated in 2014 and 2015, and no safeguarding concerns were found. A restraining order was issued against N in 2017 related to his contact with the priest and remains in place.

A spokesperson confirmed that N submitted a CDM complaint in April 2020. It became the subject of legal proceedings before the president of Tribunals. After N’s public comments in December 2025, the president issued new directions for the case’s handling.

The investigation now proceeds under Bishop Baker despite Jones’s earlier recommendation to dismiss it.