Dentistry cover and dental Information about Dentist around the world Related Articles
A multi-millionaire dentist who tried to take care of a 13-year-old girl has been banned from practicing for life – after disgusting new details of his activities emerged.
Richard Prais, 58, had spent the past two years and tens of thousands in legal fees fighting the ban from the General Dental Council – but has now lost and will be banned.
Prais – who is married to a glamorous and successful banker – this week failed to convince a committee of the General Dental Council that his offending was a “one-off” but instead he has been struck off the Dental Register – which means he never has to work as a dentist again.
Prais, who lives in an £8 million house in a fashionable north London suburb, pleaded guilty in court to the offense of “adult attempting to engage in sexual intercourse with a child”.
But the offense went unreported in the media for nearly two years until MailOnline learned of the case and finally brought it into the public domain last month.
Richard Prais, 58, had spent the past two years and tens of thousands in legal fees fighting against the suspension by the General Dental Council – but has now lost and will be banned
It comes after the multi-millionaire dentist was caught trying to groom a 13-year-old girl (Prais is pictured)
Now disturbing details of his activities have come to light as a result of his failed battle to be allowed to continue treating patients.
Grotesque details of his arrangement were revealed at a public hearing of the General Dental Council’s Professional Conduct Committee.
The committee heard how Prais had groomed the girl online and ‘asked the child to send him a message with an image of her’, to which he replied: ‘you really are young’ and ‘send me nasty pictures’ .
Prais also said in the messages “that he did not want to be a pedophile.”
The committee heard that at a later point in the exchange, after identifying himself as a dentist, Prais asked: “Are you really 13?” The girl replied: ‘Yes why’. And Prais’ response to this exchange was ‘letsgetnaughty’ and ‘we should send each other naughty pictures’.
The care lasted over eight days. Prais continued to send explicit messages along with photos of a sexual nature, one of which showed her naked with her hand covering her genitals.
Prais directed her to touch her private parts, said he wanted to see her naked and asked: ‘Would you like to see my c***?’
Other dirty comments included: “I’d like to see your panties too”, “Show me your body”, “You want to play with me”, “We need to send nasty pictures are you ready for this”.
During a dawn raid on his luxury home by officers from the Metropolitan Police’s Child Abuse and Online Sexual Exploitation Team, Prais and his wife Frania had initially refused to open the door for officers, the Committee heard.
Officers arrived at Prais’ home at 5:55 a.m. and attempted to enter, but were refused entry by Prais and his wife on February 2, 2021.
At 6.02am, police forensic evidence showed how Prais deleted the Kik app from his phone, which he had used to communicate with a 13-year-old boy, in an apparent attempt to hinder the police investigation .
Prais, who lives in an £8m house in north London, has spent thousands on legal fees in his bid to win the right to continue treating children despite his conviction.
The Kik app has been called the ‘playground of pedophiles’ by appearing in ‘more than a thousand’ child abuse investigations and subsequent convictions.
The committee heard that police evidence showed that at the time of his arrest, Prais had been using the app to communicate with various people for seven years.
A security guard at the property finally persuaded the couple to open the door for officers and the embarrassed dentist was still holding his mobile phone when he was arrested.
Mr Callum Munday, adviser to the General Dental Council, submitted: ‘Communicating with a child (in this way) is a form of child grooming and child abuse.’
He added that Prais had been convicted of ‘a serious sexual offense involving a person dealing with a 13-year-old girl whom you tried to give away for sexual gratification. You have sent sexually explicit messages and photos of yourself.’
Mr Munday submitted that there was a risk that Prais would repeat his conduct ‘given your lack of knowledge and that a finding of harm is required on the basis of public protection.’
Munday said Prais had ‘deep-seated attitude issues’ explaining: ‘You still deny that there was any sexual pleasure on your part.’
During his evidence, Prais admitted he had spoken to ‘many women’ using the controversial app, some of whom he believed had ‘lied about their age’ – and he insisted his online chats were just a ‘ fantasy’.
It later emerged that Prais had been texting him from both his home and his practice in Hampstead, north London.
He told the Committee that he has been ‘playing tennis with another dentist’ and ‘learning the scriptures’ to help himself avoid a recurrence.
He claimed he poses no danger to anyone as he has ‘learned how to control his rational mind’. And he tried to play down his offense by referring to his behavior as simply “weird” and “boring”.
In his defence, Prais, through his barrister Fiona Horlick KC, submitted that the period in which he sent the messages was short. And that despite talking to the girl knowing she was 13, there was no suggestion of meeting in real life
She pointed out that Pras then stopped communicating and stopped responding to her. She submitted that this was all online and no actual harm was done.
Ms Horlick also submitted that there was “no evidence to suggest a widespread sexual interest in children” and “there is no risk of recurrence and no finding of harm is required to protect the public”.
The GDC Committee’s written decision found that Prais in evidence had ‘repeatedly apologized for communicating with a child but failed to acknowledge the sexual nature of that communication.’
And although his reflections focused on the challenges facing him, his family and the family dental clinic, they ‘make very little mention of the potential impact of your offending behavior on children’.
Prais is married to the glamorous banker Frania
The committee found that Prais had repeatedly stated that he did not believe the person he was communicating with was 13, but said: “The committee noted that this was inconsistent with your guilty plea in court.”
The GDC committee found ‘evidence of deep-rooted harmful problems and the attitude that you persistently denied to your probation officer and the GDC that the explicit sexual messages you sent to a 13-year-old girl were for sexual gratification.’
They said: ‘You directed your inappropriate and sexually motivated behavior towards a vulnerable 13-year-old girl…. Your sexually motivated behavior was completely unacceptable and seriously damaged the reputation of the profession and public confidence in the dental profession.’
Prais was told: “You have sexually abused a child and you still refuse to admit what you have done. The committee was of the view that your failure to recognize the sexual aspect of your behavior was profound and persistent, prevailing from the evidence report in 2021 until today. The Committee considers that this is difficult to correct. Given the lack of meaningful insight, the Committee cannot be satisfied that the risk of recurrence is low. Furthermore, without full knowledge, the Committee is not satisfied that you can be genuinely remorseful.’
The GDC committee concluded that ‘Prais’ conduct was fundamentally inconsistent with you remaining on the register, to allow you to remain on the register indefinitely during the appeal period would be inconsistent with the totality of its findings, particularly with the lack of widespread meaningful knowledge in this case’.
Prais has twenty-eight days to appeal this decision.
Prais pleaded guilty at Willesden Magistrates’ Court to an “adult attempt to engage in sexual intercourse with a child” between 25 November 2020 and 27 January 2021, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 .
