RedHanded - Episode 145 - Sex, Lies & “Gender Fraud”: Gayle Newland

Episode Date: April 30, 2020

In 2015, 27 year old Gayle Newland was convicted of sexual assault after using a dildo on a female friend who believed that she was a half-Filipino, half-Latino man named Kye... Merch! Link for store: www.redhandedshop.com  Sources: Real Stories documentary on Gemma Barker: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Wng99iH8aE https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/trans-people-could-face-rape-charges-if-they-don-t-declare-sexual-history-warns-trans-activist-a7076546.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/23/well/mind/is-sex-by-deception-a-form-of-rape.html https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-49127545 http://eprints.keele.ac.uk/3293/3/A%20Sharpe%20-%20Queering%20Judgement.pdf https://webstroke.co.uk/law/cases/r-v-mcnally-2013 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/15/gayle-newland-retrial https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/no-winners-fake-penis-attacker-13260433 https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/43qvz9/consent-dildos-and-deception-reexamining-the-trial-of-gayle-newland https://closeronline.co.uk/real-life/news/woman-stunned-discover-long-term-boyfriend-female-friend-wearing-strap-dildo/ https://thesecretbarrister.com/2015/11/13/gayle-newlands-sentence-was-both-entirely-proper-and-wildly-disproportionate/ https://closeronline.co.uk/real-life/news/gemma-barker-girl-pretended-three-guys/ https://www.stoneking.co.uk/literature/e-bulletins/gender-identity-fraud http://legalvoice.org.uk/oppose-gender-identity-fraud-prosecutions/ https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/15/gayle-newland-retrial See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can listen to Red Handed early and ad-free. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app or on Apple Podcasts. So, get this. The Ontario Liberals elected Bonnie Crombie as their new leader. Bonnie who? I just sent you her profile. Check out her place in the Hamptons. Huh, fancy. She's a big carbon tax supporter, yeah? Oh yeah. Check out her record as mayor. Oh, get out of here.

She even increased taxes in this economy. Yeah, higher taxes, carbon taxes. She sounds expensive. Bonnie Crombie and the Ontario Liberals. They just don't get it. That'll cost you. A message from the Ontario PC Party. Get ready for Las Vegas-style action at BetMGM,

the king of online casinos. Enjoy casino games at your fingertips with the same Vegas strip excitement MGM is famous for. When you play classics like MGM Grand Millions or popular games like Blackjack, Baccarat and Roulette. With our ever growing library of digital slot games, a large selection of online table games and signature BetMGM service. There's no better way to bring the excitement and ambiance of Las Vegas home to you than with BetMGM Casino. Download the BetMGM Casino app today. BetMGM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly.

BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have any questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact ConnexOntario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor, free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. Hello everyone, very quick announcement about the merch before we kick off with today's show. You can head on over to redhandedshop..com now link is in the episode description and get your hands

on some wonderful get in the bin merch don't forget the 10% of all proceeds will be going to solace women's age to help them combat this tragic spike in domestic abuse that we've seen during lockdown so head on over grab yourself some merch take some photos and share them with us on social we can't wait to see it, guys. Thank you, and on with the show. I'm Saruti. I'm Hannah. And welcome to Red Handed. Is everybody ready? I don't know if you guys are ready.

I don't think I'm ready. For this particular episode. I don't think I'm ready for this particular episode I don't think I'm ready though I just ate a fab oh nice I was like once you finish this script you may have a fab smoothie so I did and then I did and it was delightful I decree by the power vested in me by the land that you may have a fab absolutely and I did and we deserve it because uh this is a hell of a case in fact if you've got a fab. Absolutely. And I did. And we deserve it because this is a hell of a case. In fact, if you've got a fab at hand, eat it now, I would suggest. Because you're going to need

all that brain food for the case that we've got for you guys today. Maybe some omega-3 oil. Just rub it on your forehead. Just neck a whole fish. Or down in one. It's like that scene in Midsommar.

I was watching... I was just going to say, I watched watched it I watched it the other day what did you think I I didn't love it as much as hereditary but I was like I appreciated it yeah I think I'm in the same boat like I really want my I want Sarah to watch it because she speaks Swedish and like obviously you're supposed to feel like you don't know what's going on so that's why they don't subtitle all the Swedish, but I really want her to watch it. And then like, tell me how much of it is given away before it happens for us silly English speakers that don't understand. Fair, fair. So Zara is Hannah's lovely Swedish friend. So I would be really interested to know what she thinks of it. But I was watching like um it just came to mind because I was watching like a YouTube video about like food stylists who work in films and things and like how they make different things look like different things and how it's rarely like ice cream it's always mashed potatoes because

ice cream just melts and you've got to take 50 shots of something and apparently like all the food was like something else in midsummer as it really especially because it's all like shot outside in the summertime um so like the eggs are made out of like mango set puree and stuff like this but the fish that uh Florence Pugh's character swallows is real I know I was like but anyway that's kind of how this case might feel for you guys. Let's talk about what we're going to talk about because today we are covering the case of Gail Newland, a woman who was convicted of sexual assault after she used a dildo to have sex with her female friend who believed that Gail was a half Filipino, halfino, half-Latino man named Kai.

So yes, let's all just let that sink in. And of course, to be honest, the headlines around this case and other such cases, because yes, this is not a one-off, are definitely what sucked us in. And it wasn't just the tabloids. The media at large totally went to town on these stories. How could they not? But after a bit of digging, we quickly realised that despite how obviously bizarre it all sounded, it was also so much more complicated in ways that at least I hadn't initially even considered. That was how I felt as well. I didn't know this case specifically, but I knew the Gemma one, which we come on to probably in about 55 minutes. I knew about that

one. But even so, it's so it's so complicated. And obviously, you can't understand how complicated it is because we haven't told you yet. So I'll shut up. But there's some foreshadowing for what's about to come. Okay, so as Hannah said, the Gemma case that she referred to, we will come on to later on in the episode. It was originally meant to be the entire episode on that case. But then I found this case and this was the one I actually had heard about before. And this one just kind of made more sense to go with. And also there isn't a documentary out there on this case where there is a very in-depth documentary out there on the quote unquote Gemma case, which we will point you to later.

So, we are going to be exploring the case of Gail Newland. And we're going to do it with an open mind, and then we're going to discuss our thoughts later. I'm not totally sure if things will be much clearer by the end of it, but let's give it a try. Here we go. Get your brain hats on. In September 2015, Gle Newland stood trial at Chester Crown Court in Manchester here in the UK. The 27-year-old was accused of five counts of sexual assault against her female friend whilst disguised as a man. The complainant, who we will refer to as Chloe, was Gayle's best friend. And Chloe was alleging that Gail had groomed her via social media,

pretending to be a man named Kai Fortune, before seducing her into a sexual, in real life, relationship. And the whole thing had lasted for two whole years. To say that it was a bizarre and controversial trial would be quite a large understatement. It was fraught with complicated ideas, lurid details and giant sex toys. But fundamentally, it all really hinged on her word against hers. Pretty much everything was contradictory in terms of Gail's testimony and Chloe's, even down to how they met. Gail claimed that in 2012, she was a student at Chester University

and it was there that she 2012 she was a student at Chester University and it was there that she started going to a student club night and it was at one of these nights that Gail claims she first met Chloe. And according to her, the two quickly became close friends. So close in fact that Gail says she told Chloe her deepest, darkest secret. That since she was a teenager, she had been using social media platforms like Blogspot, Facebook, MSN and YouTube to chat to girls under the guise of a man named Kai Fortune. Gail claims to have told Chloe that she got pictures for her Kai character by stealing hundreds of photos from the MySpace page of an American man. And she said that she was doing it because she was attracted to girls, but that she wasn't comfortable with her

sexuality. So Kai allowed her to talk to girls in the way she really wanted to, but in a way that she felt was safe. I mean, safe for her. Like this is pretty, pretty serious catfishing going on. A hundred percent. According to Gail, what happened next surprised her. Chloe added Kai, so that's her alter ego, on Facebook and began communicating with him in a flirty way. So Gail went along with it. And according to her, they fell in love. And things quickly entered the real world. The pair started meeting up and engaging in consensual sexual activity. That's, of course, according to Gail.

So at this stage, Gail is saying that Chloe knew 100% what was going on. She'd already disclosed this Kai character. Chloe goes and finds Kai of her own accord and engages with her off her own bat. Engages with him off her own bat, sorry. Exactly. And what Gail is sort of saying here is that her and Chloe have their friendship where they hang out when she is Gail. And then they have their sexual encounters when Gail is there as Kai. And Chloe, importantly, knows that they are the same person. Gail also claimed that Chloe was too uncomfortable with her sexuality,

so she wanted Gail to continue to play the role of a man so that their relationship could be acceptably heterosexual. So, crucially, Gail says Chloe knew all along that she was in fact Kai. But Chloe gives a very different account. Chloe claimed that she met Kai on Facebook before she ever met Gail in real life. Kai had sent her a friend request that she'd accepted and they started chatting. They fell in love online and actually got engaged before they even met face to face. And according to Chloe, Kai was the one who introduced her to Gail. Kai told Chloe

online that Gail was his best friend. God, that's complicated. And like anyone in a new relationship, Chloe wanted to make a good impression. So when Gail suggested meeting up, she agreed. And remember, at this point, according to Chloe's side of the story, she hadn't even met Kai in person yet. So after meeting up, Chloe said that she and Gail became best friends. They had so much in common. They liked the same music. They liked the same films. They both liked playing netball. What a big coincidence. Gail also became Chloe's shoulder to cry on because Kai was weird about meeting up and he often stood Chloe up in that first year and Gail would therefore be there to pick up the pieces. So if you're wondering how he managed to get away with and explain away the fact that he

put off meeting up for so long, well Kai told Chloe that he had been in a terrible car accident that had left him disfigured. And he also said that when he was been in a terrible car accident that had left him disfigured. And he also said that when he was being treated for this car accident, doctors had discovered a brain tumour. And he also said that he was severely ill with cancer, and he also had a heart condition. I don't watch Catfish anymore because, what's-his-name said some really nasty things on Twitter, But I have in my time watched quite a fair bit of it. And that is so common.

You see it in like every single episode. Like I can't meet up because my arms are falling off, etc. It really is. This whole case, so many of these cases are just like a play by play of a catfish episode. And yeah, you're right. When we're like sort of, oh my God, how could this possibly happen? If we're believing that the catfish show was real then this happens all the time and people believe it because if you say you're super sick it's one of the few things that people can't sort of

keep going at you for not wanting to meet up so obviously with a heart condition with cancer recovering from a terrible car accident and also now with a brain tumour, Kai said that he was always just too sick to meet up. And for over a year, he refused. But then, finally, Kai agreed to meet. But he had conditions. Chloe was to have her hands tied behind her back at all times. And she was to wear a blindfold for the entire time they were together, even when they were intimate.

Kai said that Chloe couldn't touch him because of his injuries. He had tubes coming out of him and it was all just too risky. And he also told Chloe that he had to wear a tight compression garment to help with all his healing. Despite all the weird conditions,

Chloe agreed. So the pair met up at a hotel in Chester and had sex. And after they were done, Kai said he had to go to the hospital for treatment and left. Despite how seemingly sick Kai was, their sexual encounters became regular and they started meeting up every Sunday and even sometimes during the week as well.

This went on for another year. When Chloe tearfully told this story at trial, she called herself, quote, a pathetic, naive idiot who had the worst judgment in everything. But the story was, of course, torn apart by Gail's defence team, and they asked Chloe what most people are probably thinking. Why? Why would she allow herself to be tied up and blindfolded

with this man she's never even seen? And Chloe says that it was because she loved Kai and that he was constantly telling her how much her understanding, support and love was helping him through his recovery. He told her that they would get married one day, move in together and have kids. And she said that she thought, all right, this isn't ideal, but he'll learn to trust me and his anxieties about his appearance will ease

and things will be fine in the future. But according to Chloe, on their last sexual meet-up, something felt off. And again, remember, this is Chloe's version of events that she is telling at trial not to just keep interrupting everything she says interrupting myself the last time after like a year of being intimate with somebody according to her story with your eyes tied up and your hands bandaged behind your back that's when you feel like something is off for the first time I don't know it's just it's weird there are so many weird mental hoops to jump through like I can kind of identify with her to a certain extent not to the same extreme but it's you do it with all new guys don't you like oh well he's this, but this is a really good thing about him. Like, it's a really extreme version of that.

Exactly. And I just remember reading something. It wasn't my sort of saying, I can't remember who to credit it to because I can't remember where I read it, but somebody said, don't sort of fall for a person on the hopes of who they will become,

but fall for somebody on who they are now. And I just think here, that's exactly what she's doing. It's that but taken to the extreme. You're like, you know, one day he'll stop sort of choosing his friends over me constantly. This is just the intensely like extreme version of that. Yeah. So on this last sort of sexual encounter where Chloe finally started to feel like something was off apparently that night kai had asked her to quote lick it but when she lent in to oblige she said that it didn't feel right she said that the testicles didn't feel right and she said that something in her head was screaming at her to pull her blindfold off.

So she did. And to her horror, she said that she saw Gail on the bed wearing a strap-on dildo. And Chloe told the court that she couldn't believe it. And that Gail's first response was, it's not what you think. I don't really see how it could be anything else. No. And I also think, you know, it's quite hard to relax sometimes in certain situations. If this is all true and Gail was doing this, maybe she's getting off on the thrill of it, the danger of it.

But like, how relaxed could you be knowing that you're just one sort of blindfold tug away from being discovered? It seems completely outlandish and almost a little bit unbelievable, to be honest. But we believe victims on this show. We will continue to discuss this as we go. So Nigel Power QC, Gail's defence lawyer. Great name. I only hope that he names his son Max. But anyway.

I had a doctor the other day called Jo Power. She was amazing. I love it. I want to be you, Jo Power. I love it. So Nigel in the courtroom has the dildo that was apparently strapped to Gail's waist, brought out into the courtroom. And he had it placed on the table for all to see. And this dildo, it was giant, it was bright pink, rubbery, and described as thick. One of the reporters who reported on this case, he was at the trial, said that you could almost smell how rubbery it was. No, thank you. God, can you imagine getting called up for jewellery service and you're like, oh, it's probably just a robbery or something. And you're like, oh no, I'm just dildos, wall-to-wall dildos. Great. So glad I don't have to go to work. Honestly,

I would have fucking loved to have been on this jewellery. It's absolutely wild. What's happening with jewellery now? We can't be having jewellery right now. I'm going to have to put a quid in the jar,? We can't be having juries right now. I'm going to have to put a quid in the jar, but we can't be having juries now. We're not having socially distanced juries, are we? Are all courts just on hold? Yeah, no, no, no. That was the whole thing that, God, people are really pissed.

Some activists and campaigners are really pissed because they've been carrying on with court cases without juries. And then there was all this hullabaloo where people were saying that the government or the judicial system are trying to get rid of juries. And when we come back from coronavirus, they're going to just be like, well, we didn't need juries. And that would be a travesty, blah, blah, blah. So currently, there are no juries serving. But the last time I checked, court cases were going ahead. That's basically all I know on that. Good knowledge.

Thank you. So Mr. Power, when he had this big pink dildo brought out, he pointed out to the jury and the rest of the courtroom that the decorative testicles, if we will, didn't budge. They didn't even move when you like moved the whole thing. So not too sort of anatomically accurate. No, it's got, that particular dildo has got other aesthetics in mind. I don't think total realism is the top of its list. It's a surrealist dildo. Why am I talking about it like it's a sentient being? So Mr. Park, when he sort of pointed this fact out, he asked Chloe,

who had been in previous relationships with men before, how she could have mistaken it for the real thing. He also raised the point of how, during such intimate activities, for over a year, she couldn't tell that it was in fact her best friend Gail, someone with whom she spent a lot of time. He asked her, couldn't she just sense it through smell and her voice? Throughout the trial, Chloe swung between intense crying and being deeply combative. And when Mr. Power questioned her about the dildo, she screamed at him, telling him that

he just thought her life was a big joke. When Gail took the stand, she told a very different story. She claimed that the entire two-year relationship was consensual and that it had been in fact Chloe who had asked her to buy the dildo. Apparently, Chloe told Gail that she'd told people she was in a relationship with a man, so if Gail got a dildo, it would make it somehow more real. Gail said that she was a virgin and she wasn't as confident as Chloe, so she just went along with it. As far as she was concerned, it was just role play, a fun, exciting way of exploring their sexualities together. And when accused by the prosecution of being manipulative and

controlling for forcing Chloe to wear a blindfold, Gail calmly replied, quote, I don't believe anyone would wear a blindfold for the period that she's saying in the scenario she's saying. I don't believe anybody would not be able to tell the difference between a male and a female. And I don't feel anybody would not be able to tell that it was their best friend. And I think this is a fair point by Gail. Think of how vulnerable you already feel, or at least kind of how I feel sometimes when I go to meet a new guy who I've met like off a dating app for the first time, let alone if it's intimate. I can't conceive of agreeing to enter that situation right from the start before any kind of in real life trust has been established or anything totally and literally blind it's it's hard isn't it because everyone's different and everyone has different levels of the way that they feel about things but it really does seem a lot and like even obviously no one's spending any significant amount of time around their friends right now but I just think you know like I've got mates that I've known for nearly 20 years and I know it's them when they open the door and they walk in.

I don't have to look. I know it's them. Or like, I know it's my sister or I know it's my mum. Like people you've spent a lot of time with, you just get used to their feeling without looking at them, I think. Definitely. And this was questioned at trial as well because Chloe was asked you know about the tone of voice how did she not recognize it and Chloe says that she did in fact once question Kai on the fact that him and Gail sounded very similar and Kai just told her apparently that they had grown up in the same town they'd grown up together and so they probably spoke the same way with the same sort of verbiage and inflections and like that.

But come on, like voice? I don't know. There's so much of this that feels so implausible. But we're going to carry on and we're going to keep, we'll keep digging into it. So Gail was also asked at trial that if she was telling the truth and it had all been consensual, why then would Chloe suddenly make all of this up and drag it all out in front of a court of law? What would be Chloe's motivation for lying about this? Well, Gail said that Chloe had changed her mind about all of it, their relationship, everything, when Gail had told her that she was going to come out to her family and tell them all about their relationship. And apparently this had been too much for Chloe. She didn't want anyone to know that she was a lesbian, or at least that she was

sexually attracted to women, or that she had been sexually involved with Gail. But then you could ask, like, why would Chloe care if Gail told her parents? I was kind of like, does that feel like a strong enough motivation? I think it can be because I think I kind of understand it because like if you're not ready to come out, you're not ready to come out and someone forcing it on you probably feels quite suffocating. And even if, you know, it's not like she's going to her parents' house, but it might have felt like just a step too far and her just feeling like, I'm just not ready. Can you just leave it? No, I totally agree with that. And that and I think you know no one should ever be forced into coming out when they are not ready I can't even imagine how sort of panic stricken one would feel if they weren't

ready to do that and somebody was forcing it upon them it was more of the why would that then lead to her in Gail's eyes completely fabricating this story. Yeah true. Because even if she had come out to her parents Chloe she could have just denied it. It didn't even mean everyone was going to find out. She could have just called Gail totally fucking crazy and been like it's all a lie. But then when you dig more closely into it apparently Chloe had a very close relationship with Gail's family she apparently often even went with Gail to visit them and I even read about one particular incident in which Gail's dad had even called Chloe's landlord when he'd been like giving her shit and pretended to be

her dad for her and apparently Chloe even told Gail like that she had had that kind of typical happy middle-class upbringing that she had always longed for maybe she saw Gail's parents as like surrogate parents for her yeah maybe it was just all too much but again it's kind of like why then go to the level of like going to the police and going into court I don't know yeah because it's a lot it's a lot to go down to a police station and it's even more to get it to trial. Like that's a lot of work, if nothing else. Definitely. And also, if she didn't want her private life to be scrutinized, she could have just, like I said, kind of denied it privately, dragging out into the public.

I don't see that it makes much sense if her motivation all along was secrecy. I don't know. I kind of feel like cutting ties and running would have been an outcome I could have believed if this was the motivation. Possibly, but just, I hate saying to play double-decker, just to fuck things up. What if, right, Chloe thinks, in Chloe's mind,

if we're buying into Chloe's story, she thinks that she hasn't done anything wrong. So running would make it seem like she was accepting some kind of responsibility. So maybe, but I completely get what you're saying. Like if it is true and they were in a relationship together and you don't want that sort of spread everywhere, it seems like the absolute opposite of what you would do to take it to court. So maybe that makes me think that maybe there's more truth to Chloe's story than than not but it's so hard I mean I don't know her it's hard I know it's completely hard because

in this sort of model in this discussion we're having we're completely removing their personalities prior to this case happening we don't know them so it's very hard to judge but if we believe Gail's story that they were together I don't understand I don't feel like there's sufficient motivation for Chloe for why she's doing what she's doing unless it's just really to punish Gail and she's like whatever and she's like hoping that there'd be a conviction here but I don't know it the whole thing doesn't really make any sense but we've got loads more so don't get too caught up on this just yet. Whichever one of the stories is true be it Gail's or Chloe's there was CCTV footage presented at trial showing

Gail and Chloe in the street having an argument on the day that their relationship fell apart. Either they're arguing because Gail had told Chloe she was coming out to her family or they're arguing because Chloe had realised Kai was in fact Gail. The footage doesn't really prove much. They're arguing, but you can't hear it. And as far as we can tell, either scenario could fit. Personally, and this is just our opinion, but if Chloe is telling the truth, would she have really chased after Gail when she realized she was Kai to fight out in the street or would she have been so shocked that she wouldn't have been able to even speak about it until after she'd been able to process it all again difficult because we don't we don't know her and again you know that's just sort of us you know looking at it through the

lens of how we might react but the story is when they show the argument Chloe says it's outside the hotel so it's after it's happened she sort of chased her out they're having this argument but I'm like that's a lot to take in and to immediately react but then you don't know how somebody reacts to these situations and like that's why we say it could be either scenario. In any case there was more. The prosecution entered as evidence a text sent by Chloe to Gail the same day and it read, Are you for real? You should be locked up for what you've done to me. You've raped my life, my heart and soul. No amount of counselling will make up for this. You are pure evil, Gail. You're sick. I only have one question. Why me? If I had not ripped off the mask, I wouldn't have known the evil truth.

That's pretty compelling. That's pretty damning. Yeah. And I'm going to say, like, I can't conceivably believe that Chloe would have just immediately been like, on it enough to be like, right, I'm going to send her this text so that one day when we're in trial, they'll read this out. And it'll be proof that my story is real. Like, I mean, it's a lot to come up with on the spot, isn't it? Exactly. And also a very significant understanding of the legal system and how this kind of conviction is going to work for her to have done that.

Right. So yes, definitely a very damning piece of evidence. And to this, Gail replied to Chloe by email that day with a response sent not long after and it read I had to make up lies to cover up the initial lie it turned from a seed into a tree I felt guilty every day but I knew you needed me okay so that also sounds pretty damning but is Gail really referring to the lie of her pretending to be Kai or is she referring to the lie of like staying in the closet to her family and lying about who Chloe was to everybody and she felt guilty about that but she knew she couldn't out her yet because Chloe needed her I don't know it's out of context

it's kind of hard to tell what she's really talking about yeah that one's a bit more ambiguous but whatever had actually happened that day between her and Chloe, soon after sending those messages, Gail tried to kill herself. She threw herself off a bridge. She survived, but she ended up breaking her leg. When she was being treated by first responders, she told them, quote, I have done something I shouldn't, and now my friend can't forgive me. Interesting that she says friend.

When Gail was asked at trial what she'd meant by this, and surely we would assume that it was because she was pretending to be Kai, but Gail said that it was because she had called Chloe crazy and tapped when she freaked out about Gail wanting to come out. She said that she knew Chloe had struggled with her mental health in the past and that this was the worst thing she could say to her. And it was this, alongside her heartbreak at the fact that Chloe wouldn't allow their relationship to come out, that had led her to try and take her own life. Another interesting point worth mentioning about the suicide attempt

was that when paramedics were stripping Gail out of her wet clothes, they noticed that she was wearing a swimming costume underneath. Remember, Kai had apparently told Chloe that he had to wear a compression suit for his injuries. Obviously, this isn't the case for Gail, so why was she wearing it? You could argue that if Gail is lying, and she really was pretending to be a man, a tight swimsuit could be used to try and compress her breasts. And the day she tried to kill herself was the last time she and Chloe had been intimate. Why else would she be casually running around in a swimsuit? Interesting question. Was the bridge over water? That's a good question. I don't think

so. Okay. I think it was okay because I thought I'd crack this wide open they call it like an overpass bridge so I think it's just on to another road but also she's like wearing a fucking woolly hat and stuff and I'm like my only sort of idea about it was like well maybe if this suicide attempt is actually a cry for help of like look how much I care about you I'm willing to do this and I'm going into the water and I don't actually intend to die. Maybe a swimming costume under my clothes would help me out. I mean, it's tangled thinking, but you can kind of figure it out. That's a really good point.

And I did also consider that. I couldn't definitively be sure, but I don't think 90 percent. I don't think it was over water. And also it's made quite a big deal about in places that are like, why is she doing it? The compression suit. So, yeah. But I do think your point about the fact that she says to those paramedics that friend, that she had done something to her friend, is a very interesting point I hadn't considered. Why not girlfriend?

It's just the whole thing is lots of tangled thinking. He was hip hop's biggest mogul, the man who redefined fame, fortune, and the music industry. The first male rapper to be honored on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, Sean Diddy Cone. Diddy built an empire and lived a life most people only dream about. Everybody know ain't no party like a Diddy party, so. Yeah, that's what's up.

But just as quickly as his empire rose, it came crashing down. Today I'm announcing the unsealing of a three-count indictment charging Sean Combs with racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, interstate transportation for prostitution. I was f***ed up. I hit rock bottom. But I made no excuses. I'm disgusted. I was f***ed up. I hit rock bottom, but I made no excuses. I'm disgusted. I'm so sorry. Until you're wearing an orange jumpsuit, it's not real. Now it's real. From his meteoric rise to his shocking fall from grace, from law and crime, this is the rise and

fall of Diddy. Listen to the rise and fall of Diddy exclusively with Wondery Plus. You don't believe in ghosts? I get it. Lots of people don't. I didn't either until I came face to face with them. Ever since that moment, hauntings, spirits, and the unexplained have consumed my entire life. I'm Nadine Bailey. I've been a ghost tour guide for the past 20 years. I've taken people along with me into the shadows, uncovering the macabre tales that linger in the darkness, and inside some of the most haunted houses, hospitals, prisons, and more. Join me every week on my podcast, Haunted Canada,

as we journey through terrifying and bone-chilling stories of the unexplained. Search for Haunted Canada on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you find your favorite podcasts. Hi, I'm Lindsey Graham, the host of Wondery Show American Scandal. We bring to light some of the biggest controversies in U.S. history. Presidential lies, environmental disasters, corporate fraud. In our latest series, NASA embarks on an ambitious program to reinvent space exploration with the launch of its first reusable vehicle, the Space Shuttle.

And in 1985, they announced they're sending teacher Krista McAuliffe into space aboard the Space Shuttle Challenger, along with six other astronauts. But less than two minutes after liftoff, the Challenger explodes. And in the tragedy's aftermath, investigators uncover a series of preventable failures by NASA and its contractors that led to the disaster. Follow American Scandal on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts. Experience all episodes ad-free and be the first to binge the newest season only on Wondery Plus. You can join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. Start your free trial today. There were also other messages which were shown in court that seemed to back up Chloe's story.

One which Kai had sent to Chloe saying, quote, you're not my girlfriend, just leave me the fuck alone, I'm having a breakdown. To which Chloe had replied, quote, if I found out the truth, I'd probably hate you. I'm 100% real but who are you again out of context okay but still I don't know it's like who are you I guess you could say if you just think that person's lying to you obviously they are but maybe she doesn't know what she's lying about I don't know I think yeah like the other like that that text and the one that we just discussed before are more ambiguous.

But it's the one where she talks about the mask that really is difficult to refute. Definitely. So as we said, this text, if we look at it with sort of hindsight, does seem to back up Chloe's version of the story. And if nothing else, though, because given it is out of context it does make it sound like that Chloe at least had doubts about who Kai was or at least that he might have been lying to her and in court Chloe admitted to some frankly weird things like the fact that she had seen pictures of Gail's dog on Kai's Facebook where where he had captioned it as his dog. It was the same breed, and the dog also had the same name.

The dog was called Gypsy. When she questioned Kai on this, he said that he and Gail had just got the same dog, and they'd just named their dogs the same thing. I mean... I don't know why. Also, why is Kai putting the pictures of fucking dog on his Facebook like and also you would think that because Facebook are obviously just watching us all the time surely they would be able to prove who sent the first friend request

that I just thought that was odd to not have been surely that is on record somewhere and you'd be able to say who made the first move. Yeah, no, that's a good point. I don't know why. Can't they tell if it's Kai who sent the request or if it's Chloe? They must be able to. They don't ever sort of bring that up. No one ever sort of seems to dig into it to sort of validate it one way or another. But that's a really good point. Get Zuckerberg on the phone now. So aside from the whole dog thing, there was more. Because Chloe even admitted in court that she had, in fact, grown suspicious of Kai during their relationship. And that once she had even called him from a different number.

And she'd asked for Gail. And guess what? It was Gail speaking. Why is Chloe calling Kai's number and asking for Gail? Surely she must have been suspicious that they were the same person, at some point at least. I don't know. Maybe that's why there isn't a documentary on this case. Yeah. Again, where's the phone record? Seems mad. All this kind of makes it seem like Chloe should have been able to quite easily rumble Gail long before she did. Why didn't she connect the dots? Did she choose not to? Or were there no dots to connect because she already knew that it was Gail? At trial, so much is read into these texts and these disjointed words and statements because it's really the only substantial evidence that there was. But to me, it all just feels so ambiguous and so

open to interpretation. I definitely don't think it's solid. No. Solid is not the word to describe literally anything in this case, except that giant pink dildo. That's some pretty solid evidence. Some pretty stiff evidence there. Even down to the decorative parts. But in this case, for the prosecution, it feels like the biggest hurdle they needed to overcome was getting the jury to see why Chloe might have been more willing than others to look past red flags and do things like allow her hands to always be tied behind her back and to be blindfolded. Before Gail or Kai, Chloe had been in an abusive relationship with a man

and this could well have skewed her framework of what a healthy relationship should look like. It's like what we were saying at the top of the show, like, oh, it's not as bad as the old one, so I'll make allowances to the extreme. Exactly. Sure this guy Kai sort of keeps making up reasons for why he can't meet me and then when he does he wants me to have my eyes blindfolded and my hands tied behind my back but isn't outright abusive to me in the way that I've experienced in my last relationship. That is absolutely a possibility here with Chloe for sure. So did Chloe perhaps just think that she needed to go along

with all of the weird shit to please Kai? Kai being Gail and Gail being Chloe's best friend would have known full well about Chloe's past and therefore they would have known that she was vulnerable. All the promises Kai made of a future together, if Chloe really didn't know that it was Gail, are incredibly manipulative. And if Kai really was insisting that Chloe tie her hands up and blindfold herself without her

real desire to always do this then isn't that akin to coercive control and manipulation? Especially if Chloe is telling the truth that she didn't know it was Gail and Gail is using information about Chloe's previous relationships in order to do this. Oh, it's completely manipulative. It's probably like the most extreme example of manipulation I've seen. Yeah, because on one hand masquerading as her best friend to extract information and then giving it to your other persona in order to use it to manipulate her if Chloe is telling the truth and Chloe is right about what happened.

Because like, as we said, all this only holds if Gail is lying. And what I'm not doing is I'm not undermining Chloe's vulnerabilities. Her previous abusive relationship would most certainly have had an impact on her going into this situation, whether she knew it was Kai or not. But if Chloe did know, so if she did know that Gail and Kai were the same person, then there are no grounds for a charge or a conviction, surely. So whether or not Chloe knew is the real issue at the heart of this entire case.

And when it comes to this question, there are all sorts of inconsistencies in the story. Firstly, Chloe gets dates and situations totally wrong. Again, quite a bit is made of this by the defence team. But I don't know, from the cases that we've covered in the past, I don't think that's that major. People forget things all the time. We've seen that time and time again. Don't really think it proves much. But what I did think was quite odd

was that Chloe didn't reveal until quite late into the trial that her hands were always tied behind her back. Before, she had indicated that it had just been most of the time so when the defense questioned Chloe if she had consented to tying her hands up and being blindfolded she cried and said yes she had because she thought there was no other way to be with Kai I mean again I don't know how big a deal it is but obviously then it does plant this idea in the jury's mind that at some times she may not have had her hands tied behind her back. Therefore, could she not tell that it was a woman and that it was her best friend? Yeah.

Difficult. But it wasn't just Chloe who slipped up about the blindfold. Gail did too. Before the trial, Gail had said that sometimes the blindfold would slip and that Chloe would be able to see. So her point was obviously Chloe knew that it was her and that the blindfold was just part of the role play. But at trial, Gail said there was no blindfold and there never had been. When she was asked about why she'd previously said there was and that the blindfold had sometimes

slipped, Gail claims that she had said that at first because she loved Chloe and that she wanted to give her an out. But when she had watched Chloe stand in trial according to her and lie to everybody, she decided not to cover up for her anymore. Then there were other women. Three women came forward at trial to say that they had been in intense online relationships with Kai, and he had used the same excuses of car accidents, heart problems and cancer to avoid meeting up. To me, this kind of only proves what Gayle had openly admitted to, that she'd already used social media to speak to women since she'd been at uni. Of course, it doesn't paint Gail in glory because she's tricking strangers into very serious relationships. These women thought of Kai

as a boyfriend and they were in love with him. But Gail's already admitted to this and having relationships online is one thing, but what happened here with Chloe is quite another. Being a bad person isn't illegal, though it does show her to be pretty ruthless, manipulative and remorseless in how willingly she treats others totally terribly. For a trial so twisty and turny and jam-packed, it was relatively short and lasted just over a week. And in the end, the jury found Gayle Newland guilty by a majority of 11 to 1 of three counts of sexual assault by penetration. And she was sentenced to eight years for each count to be served concurrently. But it didn't end there.

Gayle's defence team appealed and in October 2016, the conviction was overturned. This decision was due mainly because of Judge Roger Dutton's closing remarks to the jury at the original trial. He had said in these closing remarks, quote, The victim was successfully deceived into believing this was full sexual intercourse with a man and nothing less. That comment, the fact that he is saying the victim was successfully deceived, is clearly very biased towards Chloe, because coming back to our point that the whole thing hinges on the fact that the jury need to decide whether they believe if Chloe knew that Kai was really Gayle or not.

If the judge is telling them that the victim was clearly deceived, then what else is there for the jury to decide? Like, that's what they should be discussing during deliberation. He would have said that after though, surely? No, it was prior to the jury going out for deliberation. Oh, right. And so, yeah, you can see how problematic it is because if the jury decided that Chloe knew, then Gail couldn't have been convicted. So for the judge to tell the jury prior to deliberation that Chloe had been manipulated and deceived

makes the whole thing pretty unsafe. And that's why the conviction was overturned. And also, people didn't really like the language that the judge used at all and I agree that to say nothing less makes it sound like lesbian sex is in some way less than heterosexual sex. So with the conviction overturned Gail stood trial again and this time was again found guilty on three counts of sexual assault and also one count of fraud. The fraud charge was added because while she was out on bail between trials,

Gayle had gone back to work and had defrauded her employers to the tune of £9,000. She did it by saying that she was paying for blog posts, but she had made up these contributors, written the blogs herself and paid herself the money. And she was sentenced to six years and six months in jail. As the sentence was read, Gayle cried hysterically in the dock, screaming, I can't go back to prison. I can't. But she was going back and she was also put on the sex offenders register for life. It stated that the reduced sentence of six and a half years at retrialrial as opposed to

the original eight years was because of Gail's Asperger's syndrome and her psychological issues that weren't taken into account at her first trial. So let's discuss. As far as like we could tell during the research, it feels like there are two issues here. Firstly, do we think that Chloe knew? If she did know that Gail was Kai and that Kai was Gail, then there's really no case. But if she didn't, and she really was duped by Gail, why and how is all of this illegal? So to address the first point, I mean, I don't think we will ever know if chloe really knew or not it's impossible to tell i mean is it plausible i mean i don't know i guess like strange things happen all the time maybe we don't know chloe kind of how vulnerable she was all of that it

does seem like very very bizarre to me but i don't know and I think this very fact is what makes the whole conviction very shaky for me because in my opinion there is no way that the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Chloe did not know Kai was really Gail I just I mean there's so much reasonable doubt surely yeah I think like for me the only thing that sticks is that text that she sent on the day that's the only thing that I can't square away with context or without context or in any way at all but can you convict someone on a single text when everything else seems so outlandish I don't know but it's difficult because we have no idea what Chloe's like as a person. But two years of not knowing seems difficult to get your head around. It's

impossible. That's the part that feels very strange, especially the fact that she seems to have had doubts at certain points. But you know, maybe she wasn't wanting to find out. And you know, the whole mask ripping off thing, when she does say it, like, how could you do this to me? You're evil. If I hadn't ripped the mask off, I never would have known. Was it that Gail was doing something that Chloe hadn't consented to, but not necessarily the fact that she was a totally different person that she had seen when she ripped the mask off? I don't know. I mean, possibly, but she does use the word rape as well. Yes, she does. So yeah, I don't know. I think it's hard to know. And I think if I was in that jury, would I have felt like it was proven to me beyond reasonable doubt? I don't know. I don't know. But let's park that for a moment because I feel like, like I said, we can't ever know. We will never know the answer to that. So let's focus instead on the second point and discuss why this went to trial.

Gail was convicted of sexual assault, but the grounds for the assault charges were based on what the CPS refer to as gender fraud. And like we said at the start, this is not a one-off case. There have been several here in the UK in the 2000s. There's the case of Gemma Barker, which is the one that might ring the most bells for people. It's the one we were talking about at the top of the show. Gemma was a 20-year-old woman who was sentenced to 30 months for pretending to be three different boys when she was just 17 in order to sleep with two of her female friends who were only 15 at the time.

And then we've got the case of Justine McNally, who was sentenced to three years for six counts of sexual assault by penetration after using a sex toy on a woman while pretending to be a man named Scott. There's also the case of Christine Wilson, who was found guilty of having sex with two underage girls who both thought that she was a boy. She was given 240 hours of community service. Another woman, Jennifer Staines, posed as a man named Jason and slept with three 13 to 17-year-old girls. She was jailed for 39 months. And then there's the story of 25-year-old trans man Kieran Lee, who in 2016 was given a two year suspended sentence for obtaining sex by deception. At the time,

he identified as a man. He was in a relationship with a woman who knew him as a man. During their relationship, they hadn't had penetrative sex as Kieran was awaiting his gender confirmation surgery. But his girlfriend didn't know that that was the reason. She didn't know that Kieran was transgender. After his girlfriend made it clear that the relationship was doomed if he did not perform penetrative sex, Kieran used a fake penis to have sex with her. She was not aware that it was a sex toy and not in fact his penis. As you can see, while there is a common thread that connects these cases, they are definitely varied in their circumstances and sentences. So there are campaigners out there who are angry about such

cases of gender identity fraud. In the articles I read by some campaigners they say that these cases and trials are witch hunts against the LGBTQ community. But the issue that I found is when you dig a little bit deeper into each story, it becomes quite confusing because I don't think, at least from what I've read, that these cases can all be categorized as one type of case or even one type of crime. In some cases, I don't understand why they ever even really went to trial or what the CPS was hoping to achieve by pushing for a prosecution or really what the grounds were. Let's consider, for example, the case of Gail Newland. Like I said, I don't think that the prosecution proved it or beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't know if I would have been moved to convict if I was in the jury.

But then let's consider the case of Kieran Lee. I personally find it troubling that the law could prosecute transgender people for choosing not to disclose their past to a sexual partner. I mean, I guess we have to ask ourselves, like, why should it be a legal stipulation on the part of transgender individuals? In this country, it isn't illegal to lie to somebody about how rich you are, about what your name is, even who you are, or if you have any sexually transmitted diseases in order to get them into bed. So why should gender be different? Why should transgender people have to quote unquote, warn partners as if they are a threat or in some way dangerous. Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult. Like, obviously, you should be open and honest with your sexual partners

about a whole host of things, but making it law is tricky. This is the thing. There's conversations about what do you feel like you need to disclose to your sexual partner and when. There was some interesting articles I read about if you were transgender, at what point should you disclose that? Right at the start, halfway through, when you're in bed? What about the associated risk with violence that some transgender people may face if they make a disclosure like that? I don't know. It's super hard, isn't it? Because we don't legislate and criminalize certain sort of non-disclosures.

Yeah, but equally penetrating someone with a dildo when they don't know about and criminalise certain sort of non-disclosures. Yeah, but equally penetrating someone with a dildo when they don't know about it. Not cool. Definitely. I think the argument then becomes, is it the consent has gone because that's not really what the person consented to? And just to be clear, there are laws about lying to people, catfishing people or committing fraud when it's linked to financial gain, but not with sex. And of course, it's also important to mention that the laws concerning what you must disclose in a sexual situation vary from nation to nation. For example, in the UK, you're not legally obliged to disclose being HIV positive to a sexual partner. But in the US, that is a criminal offence not to disclose.

So let's consider the case of Gemma Barker. Gemma identifies as a lesbian woman. She tricked two 15-year-old girls into believing that she was a boy. She started relationships with them and engaged in sexual activity involving sex toys without the knowledge of her partners. One of the victims, Jess, said that she had been reluctant to start a sexual relationship because she felt that she was too young and on every occasion she had said no.

According to Jess, one night her boyfriend slash Gemma didn't stop when she asked her to. Jess then went to the police to report this sexual assault before she or anyone even knew that Gemma was the culprit. Jess had thought that she was reporting her ex-boyfriend for rape until the police arrested the ex-boyfriend during an arranged meet-up between him and Jess and they realised that it was in fact Gemma, a woman. And there is, as we said at the start,

a very in-depth documentary about the whole Gemma Barker case. It is, I mean, it's like one of those real stories ones it was made by channel four but like you can watch it on youtube we'll leave a link below so you guys can check it out it's such a crazy story and jess one of her victims i fucking love that girl she is hysterical she is so funny she she should like be given her own TV show. It's honestly, she's hilarious. Please go watch the documentary just for Jess. As you can see, there are nuances to these cases. And that's why I personally don't feel like it's the right thing to lump them all together. I'm not saying that all activists who are challenging this kind of conviction are doing that. I'm just saying in a lot of articles I read, they put all of these five convictions together and treat them

as if they're one. But clearly you can see in the Gemma Barker case, Jess went to report rape thinking that the rapist had been her ex-boyfriend. She wasn't doing it because she suddenly realised she had been sleeping with a woman and that's why she went to report it. So it feels completely different to the Gail Newland case or to the Kieran Lee case. So I don't know. I think we need to look at them as individuals. It is important, so important that we continue to have conversations about consent and what it means.

Here in the UK, it is an offense if a defendant intentionally penetrates the vagina or anus of a person where the other person does not consent and where the defendant does not reasonably believe the other person consents. And the definition of consent here in the UK is a person consents for the purposes of this act if he agrees by choice and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice. Interestingly, I discovered during the research for this, that in the United States there is no universal definition of what consent is. It varies state by state. And there is an activist who I came across named Joyce Short who runs a website called ConsentAwareness.net. And she is campaigning to have the laws around consent changed in the US. She believes that sex, by deception, should be treated as a Class D or Class E felony. And Joyce Short does a TED Talk, which we will also link below.

It's called When Yes Means No. And she says there is a clear distinction between consent and assent. Quote, consent means freely given knowledgeable and informed agreement. Assent means agreement on the face of it. This was all summed up really well in an interview Joyce gave with the New York Times. She says, basically, if someone lies to you and you agree to do whatever on the face of it, but you're not knowledgeable or informed, you can assent and agree. But that doesn't mean that you're consenting. I mean, that's the crux of it, isn't it? Because if we believe Chloe, she consented to having sex with Kai and she actually ended up having sex with Gail. And I think you can argue that she did not consent in her version of events.

She did not consent to sex with Gail. And that's the issue. Yeah. The New York Times article that covers Joyce Short's ideas, it particularly refers to the case of a university student called Abigail Finney, who went to her boyfriend's dark dorm room, got into bed and had sex with the person in there. She got up and she realised to

her horror that it wasn't her boyfriend, but another man. He was originally charged with two counts of rape after he admitted that he knew he was tricking Abigail. But in February 2018, he was acquitted and all of the charges were expunged from his record. Joyce, Short and others campaigning for changes to the law and clarification say that they recognise that the topic of gender is a grey area and we are seeing such prosecutions because non-disclosure of gender history

can be tried and has been tried as deception if it breaches the freedom and capacity of a partner to consent in sexual activity. Again, I really don't think we can lump all of these cases in together. They need to be looked at individually, and we must strive for more clarity in legislation. Any ambiguity in the legal system leaves it open to abuse and personal prejudices being exercised.

So we don't have all of the answers to this case or these types of cases. The point is that we can't oversimplify. It doesn't boil down to just one thing. As we've discussed in the stories we've talked about today, there are many, many factors. And I feel like the questions left remaining are, does deception negate consent, therefore making sex by deception rape?

And if so, what types of deception? And what is deception? And what is non-disclosure? And what do you have to be lying about for the consent your sexual partner gave to then become void? I'm not sure. But what I do know is that if such cases are going to be criminalized when relevant our current legal framework is wholly ill-prepared. But consider how often is the law changed or updated? It happens so rarely and so slowly and this isn't me saying at all oh well it will just happen when it happens i very much believe that we must be discussing these issues i'm just saying that our legal system is currently and constantly playing catch up with issues like this just because something falls into the social

consciousness it doesn't automatically end up in the legal setup things are nowhere near perfect when it comes to anything anywhere anywhere, be it LGBTQ rights, racial equality or women's rights, for example. But things are improving. The issue is that the wheels of our legal systems and structures are very slow and very rusty. That is the case of Gail Newland and various other cases. I hope you guys are okay. Maybe have another fab if you need it. God, it's difficult, isn't it? I think the Kieran Lee case aside, because that is a, well, it involves a trans person. The other ones we've discussed, the people don't identify as being trans. And I think that separates them. Again, you know, these aren't all the same thing. Obviously,

who are we to say like, oh, you are definitely a trans person just pretending that you're not like when how would we ever say that about anybody but if that person is identifying openly as in Gail Newland's case as a woman and actively pretending to be a man for deceptive purposes it's difficult what they said what campaigners said is that that Gayle Newland got a very long sentence. Her first sentence was eight years and then she was sentenced to six and a half years at the retrial. Basically, people were like, this outrageously long sentence that Gayle Newland has been given sets a precedent and it puts at risk all members of the LGBTQ community because now they can come for anybody who doesn't disclose or who maybe,

you know, doesn't confine to heteronormative things. But my question about that would be back to the legal system and the issues within our legal system, because the judge got a lot of flack for giving such a big sentence. People in newspapers were saying that he was like some sort of pedo sympathizer because he had previously handed down lesser sentences for convicted sex offenders, like child sex offenders. But the problem is like,

that's a decision to be made within the framework of what the CPS was pushing for and what the legal framework would allow. It's not really something that he could have just arbitrarily changed. You know, judges do work within the parameters that they're given. So I think that is quite tricky. The whole thing is very difficult. I would just leave it on the point of the legal system needs to change with the times. It needs to change and it needs to structure itself to protect LGBTQ people specifically against this kind of thing rather than making them more vulnerable to it.

Yeah, exactly. I think the legal system absolutely needs to change with the times. And as Hannah said, it needs to make a shift to protecting members of the LGBTQ community and also continuing to protect victims who come forward and say that they have been assaulted or raped or whatever the case may be. And it's difficult. No legal system is perfect. But yeah, attempts should be made. So get on it. Simple pimple. Exactly. Hurry up. What are you fucking waiting for? See you when the world is fixed. I just think with this case, it totally snowballed into something I wasn't expecting. And in fact, I recorded a little voice note summarising this entire thing and my questions around it and sent it to a bunch of my friends via WhatsApp.

And each of them replied and they were like, thanks very much. There's a massive argument going on in my house now about this because I went into the kitchen and I played your voice note out loud. was like spreading the joy that's what you get for being friends with us so I don't know if you've got housemates you've got a significant other you're living with some parents maybe some grandparents I don't know maybe play this episode and then have a big argument about it all don't have it with us though please and and then also guys today as we said at the top of the show merch get in the bin merch is now out head on over to redhandedshop.com and get yourself some fun merch because why not they make great pajamas if nothing else lounging around in quarantine hell i just feel like i'm permanently

fucking wearing red-handed merch like every time I FaceTime one of my friends they're like you are so ridiculous please stop wearing your own merch I'm like I can't I can't because I have no clean clothes I weed on all I like that you just don't we on the red-handed merch I like it give it the sanctity it deserves so buy yourself some merch please listeners and don't we on it either but if you are really desperate i'll allow it as long as it's not on my face but with that thank you guys so much we are going to be bringing you loads more content as ever to get us through this lockdown whatever and if you want to get your hands on even more extra content you can do that by being a

lovely person who signs up to our patreon and here are some wonderful people who have done that so right the first name immediately i'm scared what's happening uh zio mara guadio i i don't know i don't know know what sound X makes. It's like x-ray. Is it just X-amora? No idea. Leela Laney, Delani Butel, Shari Kay, Nicolette Balestieri, Grace Glemboski, Rachel Smith, Katie Warren. Did you see that? I don't remember if it was on Twitter or Facebook, but somebody posted like a video of like substitute teachers be like, and it's a guy just reading out everybody's name wrong in the classroom.

And it was like, it was so funny. We're trying guys. So Rachel Smith, Katie Warren, Claire Brown, Rachel coppock paula renger to september love i'm not going to read out your no beep uh somebody you've just put down your email address uh i don't know september love thank you kaylin jennifer edwards kaylee kassoon katherine little Hayley Kassoon, Catherine Little, Taylor Balding, Jenna Walsh, Miffy, Moosey Maddy, Shauna DeSalvo, Francis Smith, Matthew Rojas, Hannah Naylor, SleepByTheRiver! Katie Dumont, Cherie, Andrea Weston,

Rebecca, Laura, Alyssa, Rachel J, Ashley W, Nyla Dubovsky, Lauren Boyette, Alexandra Sotelo, Venus Gnauwa, Emma Goddard, Nicola, Natasha E, McPeak, Tag, I'll tag, I'll tag. Rhian Arch, good. Rhian Archer. Rhian Archer, LT, Nicole Lieberman, Jesus San tag, I'll tag. Rhian Arch. Good. Rhian Archer. Rhian Archer.

LT Nicole Lieberman. Jesus Sanchez. Probably Jesus, sorry. Jesus Sanchez. Fabiola J. Vasquez. Again. Mate, Fabiola. Cassie Gross.

Lieutenant Shanks. Mika Knight. Gemma Fry. Nicola Fowley. Becky Mowbray, Robert William, Emma Butcher, Mac, Jake Tilbury, Sam Perez, Stephanie Blake, Maribeth Bukowski, oh dear, Dr. Pierce, Alyssa Johnson, Jessica Estrada. And also I've got a very special one for my friend Katie. Brovin is her married name.

Brennan is her maiden name. That's important in a minute. And she's just become a, I haven't seen her for years and she just sent me a message being like, our red-handed is getting me through. She's a teacher, so she's like a proper front-liner.

And she is now a patron, so I said I'd bump her up the list because I'm nice like that. And you should go and check out her blog, which is called Bloody Hell Brennan and it's very funny. So if you need a laugh, go and have a look.

So yeah. Thank you guys for listening. And we will see you immediately after this in Under the Duvet. Goodbye. Yeah, bye. I'm Jake Warren, and in our first season of Finding, I set out on a very personal quest to find the woman who saved my mum's life. You can listen to Finding Natasha right now exclusively on Wondery+. In season two, I found myself caught up in a new journey

to help someone I've never even met. But a couple of years ago, I came across a social media post by a person named Loti. It read in part, Three years ago today that I attempted to jump off this bridge, but this wasn't my time to go. A gentleman named Andy saved my life. I still haven't found him. This is a story that I came across purely by chance but it instantly moved me and it's taken me to a place where I've had to consider some

deeper issues around mental health. This is season two of Finding and this time if all goes to plan we'll be finding Andy. You can listen to finding andy and finding natasha exclusively and ad free on wondery plus join wondery plus in the wondery app apple podcast or spotify they say hollywood is where dreams are made a seductive city where many flock to get rich be adored and capture america heart. But when the spotlight turns off, fame, fortune, and lives can disappear in an instant. When TV producer Roy Radin was found dead in a canyon near L.A. in 1983, there were many questions surrounding his death. The last person seen with him was Lainey Jacobs, a seductive cocaine dealer

who desperately wanted to be part of the Hollywood elite. Together, they were trying to break into the movie industry. But things took a dark turn when a million dollars worth of cocaine and cash went missing. From Wondery comes a new season of the hit show Hollywood and Crime, The Cotton Club Murder. Follow Hollywood and Crime, The Cotton Club Murder on Follow Hollywood and Crime, The Cotton Club Murder on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts. You can binge all episodes of The Cotton Club Murder early and ad-free right now by joining Wondery Plus.