RedHanded - Royal Scandal: The Murder that Shocked Buckingham Palace | #456

Episode Date: June 25, 2026

Tom Cressman’s brutal murder – beaten with a cricket bat by the ex-royal dresser to Sarah Ferguson, the ex-Dutchess of York – was a truly British tragedy.Jane Andrews’s act of violence dominated the headlines in the UK, and for good reason. The obsessive social climber had spent a lifetime getting herself into rooms with some of the richest and most influential people in the country. All she had left to do was marry one of them, and she’d be set for life. But just when she was rubbing shoulders with the family of the soon-to-be-disgraced Prince Andrew, it all came tumbling down. --Patreon - Ad-free & Bonus EpisodesYouTube - Full-length Video EpisodesTikTok / Instagram

Anyone who's ever dipped a toe into the more chaotic corners of the British royal family will be all too familiar with the exploits of the fiery ex-Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, or if you're nasty, Fergie. Oh, I thought she liked it. Does she not call herself Fergie? No, I just meant as in like when it's Janet Jackson, she's like Miss Jackson, he'd be nasty. Oh, okay, got it. All right, sorry. It was a pop culture reference, I'm not.

I'm afraid. Look who you're talking to. While her marriage to the disgraced nonce, formerly known as Prince Andrew, ended over 30 years ago, we Brits know her best, as a professional hanger on who the firm never quite shook off.

And one who absolutely 100 million percent knows where the bodies are buried. And that's why they can't. Hmm, yes. Since the 1980s, the tabloids have slated old Fergs for everything from her fashion sense to her spiraling debts and embarrassingly salacious love life. Who thought she could have been upstaged? And just this year, 26, she found herself in hot water again, all over her alleged links to Megapido himself, Geoffrey Epstein. But we're winding back to a time when Fergie's most quagy's most quixels.

controversial associate was a totally different criminal, her former dresser slash bestie, Jane Andrews. An ordinary northern lass plucked from obscurity into a job at Buckingham Palace in the roaring 80s, this once plain Jane latched onto high society and refused to let go. With big shoulder pads, big hair and an even bigger budget, she wielded her highness's maxed out credit cards on Harrod's shopping sprees and rub shoulders with aristocrats and bankers when she was off the clock. So how did Jane Andrews, this modern-day Cinderella, go from holidaying on yachts to viciously stabbing her wealthy boyfriend to death after he refused to put a ring on it? Dubbed the fatal attraction killer at her old Bailey trial in 2001,

the press painted Jane Andrews as a gold-digging bunny boiler who let Amher. ambition turned deadly. Or, if you believe her supporters, was she a battered woman who finally snapped? Whoever you believe, this is one story the royals probably wished, had stayed in the Duchess's rather cavernous closet. I'm Suruti. I'm Hannah. And this is red-handed.

Sorry, I'm smirking because I was trying to make a joke about my drag name being Duchess Cavernous Closet. I need to workshop it, but there's something in there. bandbending. Born in 1976 in the Lincolnshire town of Cleethorps, Jane Andrews's early years were a world away from the palace she'd one day be sacheting around with her sewing kit. She came from an average working class family.

Her dad David was a joiner by trade whilst her mum June worked as a social worker and later as a primary school assistant. As the youngest of three kids and the only girl, Jane was her family's little princess. A gifted and clever child, she got into grammar school, and she had big dreams to go with it. That is, until financial troubles forced the Andrews clan to move into a smaller house in the nearby seaside town of Grimsby,

with only an outdoor toilet, like your old house. Men are miserable. But dodgy plumbing would be the least of the Andrews family troubles. Jane's mental health took a turbulent turn in her teenage years when she suffered from anxiety, panic attacks, depression and an eating disorder. And age just 15, after her mum learned she'd been repeatedly bunking off from school, Jane attempted suicide for the first time by overdosing on painkillers. Emotionally fragile and desperate for male approval, Jane got pregnant and had an abortion at 17

which her worried family tried their best to sweep under the rug. Because what the Andrews lacked in money and status, they made up to. for in pride. Rather than seeking professional help for their intense daughter, Jane's parents gave her the well-intentioned yet misguided advice, followed by working-class Brits for Time and Memorial, just to keep her chin up and never let others know that she was struggling. Ironically, this stiff upper lip approach wasn't all that different to the unofficial motto of her future bosses. Never complain, never explain. Never explain. Not that Jane knew that, yet, of course.

For Jane, Grimsby had lived up to its name, and she was desperate to escape. After scraping together three O-levels, Jane did a foundation-level fashion course at Grimsby College of Art, hoping it would be her ticket out of there. But what she got was decidedly less glamorous. Depending on who you ask, Jane either worked as a sales assistant at Marks and Spencers, or for their head office as a lowly children. Orden'swear designer. Either way, it wasn't exactly the high-powered fashion career that Jane had dreamed of. Grimsby in the 80s, and now, probably, to be honest, was better known for dockyards than runways. And if you want to make it in fashion, the real opportunities were down in London. So, in 1988, 21-year-old Jane responded to a mysterious ad in The Lady, which is a magazine apparently at the time. And, oh my God, do you not know about the lady? I've never heard of the lady. Ah, okay, so the lady was where you would advertise

if you were a housekeeper or a nanny, like anything like that. So if you wanted a domestic help of any description, you would post an ad in The Lady. And I'm sure it was still going till the 90s or something like that. I remember my mum talking about The Lady, yeah. Okay, interesting. All right, so yeah, she responds to a job that was advertised in the Lady magazine for a personal dresser job in the Capitol.

Six months later, an envelope from Buckingham Palace landed on the doormat of Jane's House. It was an invitation to an interview with Sarah, the Duchess of York. Well, I've just fact-checked myself. The lady has never ended. It has been a continuous publication since 1885. It's actually England's longest-running magazine for women. Oh, well, there you go. Fun fact.

There you have it. Fun fact. Jane rocked up in London with just a tenor in her pocket and a dream. She took a taxi to the palace, aced her interview and was offered the job on the spot. And just like that, the very first dye was rolled in the reinvention of Jane Andrews. She swiftly shook off her old troubled teen self and rebranded herself in the image of the Duchess, dressing just like her, and even dyeing her mousy hair red. Jane's friend, Baysia Briggs, said that the...

They looked like Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Calling Jane's devotion to Fergie, downright loopy, while palace biographer Ingrid Seward recalls Jane hero-worshipping her new boss. I mean, it makes sense, doesn't it? It's not hard to understand why. No. Of course, it's like for Jane coming from this,

what would have felt to her like a dire situation that she wasn't able to get out of, suddenly you get called up by fucking Sarah Ferguson. Think what you want of her, and I certainly do. She was the fucking Duchess of York and she's pulled you out of nowhere and she's given you this golden ticket to like what you think is going to be this unbelievable new life. Of course you would worship her. It would be bizarre if she did anything else. It's like she has risen you up to this new status. But I am surprised and maybe we'll come on to it,

that this is how Sarah Ferguson hired her personal dresser, like through the lady magazine. I think it was quite common. I think if you're, If you're running a stately home or whatever, you'd be looking in the lady, I would say. Yeah, I guess it's like such a personal job attached to her. You would think she would only do it through, like, I don't know, royal recommendations or, like, you know, severe nepotism of, like, you would only hire the daughter of, like, some, like, whatever random aristocrat or something. Like, it is interesting that they're like, yeah, sure, Jane, you waste it. We'll hire you. Like, great, I guess.

Yeah, Fergie's not known for doing. doing what she's told, though, is she? And also at this stage in history, nobody's admitted that Andrew's anonce yet. So this is all glamour. This is all straight to the top. And Jane wasn't content with just being the Duchess's latest servant.

Jane wanted to become part of her world. The only trouble was the moment Jane opened her mouth. It became embarrassingly obvious that she was an outsider. The other royal staff mocked her for her common humberside accent, taking the piss out of the way she said words like bath and grass, bath, grass, glass, glass, path, etc. Never won to give up without a fight.

Jane made extreme efforts to fit in. She elongated her vows and put on effectively posh manners to the point where the Duchess herself affectionately nicknamed her Lady Jane. It was, quite frankly, a masterclass in overcompensating. But what else are you supposed to do? Like, they can smell it on you a mile off anyway. Like, there's no, there is no...

Do you remember when they try telling us, though, that Kate was a commoner? That was ridiculous, yes. Oh, he's married a commoner. He's married a commoner. I was like... Well, that's what they said about Diana, too. She's a Spencer. Anyway, no matter how much Jane played the part.

She was still, however, just the help. Her official job title was Sarah Ferguson's personal dresser. a role which, quite aptly, required her to wear an impressive number of different hats. Her duties included maintaining the Duchess's wardrobe, curating her distinctive and flamboyant style, ironing, sewing, fetching accessories, and so on and so on. But the best bit is that she used to go on shopping sprees with Fergie's infamous credit card.

Now there's a juicy titbit of controversy here that's worth mentioning. Royal sources describe the period of John's employment as, quote-unquote, the dark days, the mad days, where the Duchess's overdraft was in the millions. And there was, quote, no accounting. Not just financial lack of accounting. A lack of accounting for behaviours of princes, I seem to remember. So young Jane allegedly had carte Blanche to spend that money as she pleased. And if you believe Palace rumours, she took full advance.

of the situation, like helping herself to design a gear on workshopping trips for the royal wardrobe, with a one for her, two for me, attitude that Fergie allegedly turned a blind eye to. And then there's a mystery of how on a relatively modest salary of £18,000 a year, the equivalent to about £51,000 in today's money, Jane somehow managed to buy a brand new flat in Battersea Park, and reportedly keep £50,000 in her bank account at the same time. Nothing was ever officially proven,

but eyebrows were certainly raised. Still, even if she wasn't dipping into the Royal Cookie Jar, Jane's job gave her access to something even more valuable, the sort of social capital that she'd never had before. As the newest member of London's hoity-toity Sloan Ranger scene, Jane hobnobbed with old money toffs like she'd been born with a silver spoon in her mouth just like the rest of them. Off duty, she could be found partying in Chelsea bars and champagne tents at the races with a string of wealthy eligible bachelors. And soon enough, one of them made an honest-ish woman out of her.

Christopher Dunn Butler was an IBM banking exec, 20 years Jane's senior. The sort of settled older man Jane hoped could look after. her and provide the stability that she so desperately craved. But after their whirlwind romance and wedding in 1990, Jane realized Christopher was more of a pipe and slippers kind of guy, and Jane needed passion. Their relationship fizzled out, with Jane indulging in multiple flings with other men. Around this time, Jane's boss found her own love life very publicly hitting the rocks. After Fergie split from former Prince Andrew in March 1992, she was papped five months later in the infamous toe-sucking scandal

on holiday with her so-called financial advisor. Viewer discretion is advised if you do decide to Google this particularly notorious picture. It's not that bad. It's just a bit of toe action. No. Is it Sarah Ferguson sucking someone's toes? because that is absolutely not something I ever need to see. I just mean in the context of the things we usually give warnings for of what you should Google,

I think it's really low down on the scale. So having well and truly put her foot in it with this later controversy, the Duchess became an even bigger laughing stock than ever before in the eyes of the public. Bearing in mind, this is a woman about whom the tabloid once genuinely ran a poll-asked, would you rather shag Fergie or a goat? I'm not Fergie's biggest fan, but that's so fucking horrible. Fucker, man. Naturally, during this tough period,

the Duchess leaned on her closest employee for more than just sartorial advice. She and Jane bonded over their mutual love woes, with Fergie even dedicating one of her travel books to her faithful assistant, saying, quote, whose loyalty and kindness. Ness knows no bounds.

Jane was buzzing to have become the Duchess's bosom buddy at long last, but like all good things, it wouldn't last forever. The first professional hiccup came in 1995, when Jane accidentally allowed baggage containing a diamond necklace and bracelet, wedding gifts from Fergie's mum-in-law, the actual queen, to be checked in with all the other regular Jo's luggage on a flight. Unsurprisingly, the jewels. were nicked.

While Fergie reportedly stuck up for Jane amid calls for her to be sacked, their professional relationship never quite recovered. The cock-up coincided with Jane's marriage crumbling. Her long-suffering hubby Christopher filed for divorce that year, fed up with her cheating and social climbing. Still, Jane swiftly set her sights on even bigger and better things. And even richer men. She briefly dated a guy called Dimitri Horn, the stepson of a Greek shipping magnate,

but he called things off when it became clear that Jane was much more invested than he was. Jane was not having any of that. After the breakup, Jane dug her heels in and started stalking Dimitri, hounding him with threatening phone calls and leaving notes on his car. Oh, oh. She even broke into his Knightsbridge flat and trashed the place in a fit of rage. Dimitri alleged that she scratched his car, stole his Bulgari watch and fraudulently cashed a check for £8,000 from his brother's account.

To cut to the chase, little Jane Andrews had gone a bit bunny boiler. By the time she finally accepted that it was really over, Jane fell into a depressive episode, making another suicide attempt that she survived without treatment. Still, Jane was determined to find her fairy tale prince. and staggered back onto that horse. Yet, no matter how many frogs, Jane kissed, nothing stuck. She had several short-lived flings,

with various royal journalists and hangers-on over the next few years. But all of her boyfriends ended up finding her clingy and possessive. Jane would go into scorned lover mode, refusing to accept that it was over and displaying vindictive and volatile behaviour. One man claimed that she screamed and hurled all. ornaments at him, while several reported her lying about being pregnant and having miscarriages or abortions. It was all part of a pattern that Jane would resort to repeatedly whenever she

felt rejected. Wild mood swings, intense ups and downs, threats of self-harm. The works. The one constant thread in Jane's unstable life was her relationship with her boss, but by the late 90s even that was starting to fray. Fergie's latest love interest was a Tuscan aristocrat. Count Goddo della fucking what? Gerdariska. Count Gado Della Gerdariska.

Nailed her. Did she? I don't know. But thank you for your unwavering support. But according to Palace gossip, Count Gado also had a soft spot for Jane, an awkward detail that allegedly drove a wedge between the once close women. Jane was hurt when a freshly divorced Fergie.

snubbed her 30th birthday party instead sending a gift of a small crucifix necklace that certified poshopal Basia Briggs described as a goo googor, a little nothing the sort of thing you find in a cracker. Oh dear, not for the big three-o. What are in their crackers? Because I've always got like little screwdriver,

maybe a kazoo. I got a pen last year, it was great. A pen? I'll take Gigar when it's at her. I think it just like boreble, I think, but let me double. I did look it up, but let me check. A showy, small trinket or decorative item that typically has no real value or practical purpose. Got it.

Whether or not the rumours were true, a tear was clearly forming between Jane and the now ex-Duchess of York. She just couldn't sew back together. In November 1997, Jane's world fell apart when she was unlawful. unexpectedly made redundant, losing her job as Fergie's dresser after almost a decade. Now, while the official line from Buckingham Palace was that it was all about cost-cutting, some reckon it had more to do with the alleged behind-the-scenes drama. The news came as a huge blow to Jane, who sank into her deepest funk yet. She received an official diagnosis of depression, for which she started taking medication.

Jane also shed a lot of weight and started losing her. hair and she was diagnosed with PCOS, which is now known as PMOS, basically means that lots of hormonal issues which just add to this already incredibly shit sandwich she's munching down. The most laughable thing about, so it's polycystic ovarian syndrome as what PCOS stands for, do you know what it's absolutely nothing to do with? Sists. Not nothing. So that's how little we know. Makes sense. Now, a journalist that Jane dated briefly around this time said that it was, quote, hard to exaggerate the devastating effect that the redundancy had on Jane,

who became a fragile mess of anxieties and insecurities and struggled to adjust to life outside the firm. Not only did Jane feel personally betrayed, claiming Fergie had promised her just weeks ago that she would, quote, be with her for life. but it rocked her entire sense of identity. She'd reinvented herself, purely based on her proximity to high society. So without the job that had put her there, who was Jane Andrews? Unable to face returning to Grimsby with her tail between her legs,

Jane needed a way to anchor herself into the world she desperately latched onto. And in 1998, she found one. Mutual friends introduced her to Thomas Tommy Cressman, the rich boy of her dream. A former stockbroker who ran a successful car accessories business, Tommy came from an upper class family who ran the largest chain of Ford car dealerships in Europe. A privately educated trust fund kid, he liked to work hard and play hard. Tommy's friends described him as a confirmed bachelor who loved fast cars and boats,

and while he was charming and warm, no woman had ever been able to tie him down. At least, not yet. because after a failed two-month stint as a PR consultant at the swanky Clareges Hotel and a dull sales job at the Knightbridge Jewel Shop Annabelle Jones, Jane now seemed to have set her sights on her next fall-time position, the future Mrs Cressman. Jane moved into Tommy's Fulham Bachelor Pad after just a few months of dating, with pals suspecting that she used a wrist injury as an excuse to get her feet under the

table. Now in public, the pair seemed very happy. They were high-flying, they would host dinner parties, but if you looked just a bit more closely, the cracks were there from the start. Jane apparently made no secret of her wish for Tommy to commit to her, and several friends felt that their relationship wouldn't last, since Jane was just too intense for Tommy. As time went on, those cracks, widened into ruptures that threatened to explode. Just six months in, Tommy confided in his mum about Jane's obsessive behaviour, saying he was thinking of ending it but was worried about how she'd react. Because, Kel's surprise, Jane was up to her old tricks,

threatening to throw herself in the river or take an overdose every time they argued. Their relationship grew increasingly toxic with frequent rouse. On one occasion, Jane left a drunken, sobbing voicemail referring to herself as loony bin Janie, screaming that Tommy didn't care about her walking home alone. Friends describe how he would walk on eggshells around Jane, terrified of threats that she would hurt herself whenever she felt wronged by him. Tommy was sick of the constant drama, but he was too afraid to push Jane's limits by ending it. Still, the couple stayed together for over two years. According to Jane's later claims, Tommy had very specific tastes in the bedroom. He particularly

particularly liked her to dress up in skimpy costumes for role play. He had a thing for leather and a particular predilection for anal sex. Jane later insisted that she never liked these kinks, but she went along with them because she desperately wanted their relationship to work. Even so, during their explosive rouse, she'd often threatened to humiliate Tommy by spilling the beans about his dirty habits to his family members and business associates. They're all fucking at it too.

That's vanilla for them. Yeah, I was going to say it's the wrong group of people. to be thinking they're going to be put off by a bit of anal. And then there was the other constant threat of tension beneath everything. Jane's desperation for a ring and Tommy's reluctance to give up his bachelor lifestyle. Jane described herself as the ultimate in insecurity. And Tommy as the ultimate in commitment phobia, a volatile mix that was a sure-fire recipe for disaster.

also things that come into play quite early on I would argue and so I don't think those are particularly hidden secrets by either of them no and I guess like there is ego at play here for Jane as well as just like cold hard pragmatism of wanting a rich man because like if you just want a ring on your finger and a man who is like wealthy and going to take care of you and you do like you know engage in those circles that you're able to come across a man like that why are you going after the one man that everybody notoriously says no one has ever been able to get him to commit to anybody? Well, that's my man.

Just pick the fucking guy that's like, I don't know, twice divorced and like needs basically hasn't got a subscription to the lady magazine, but essentially just needs like a nurse and a maid and a, you know, someone who'll do a bit of anal with him. Like, why have you set your target on the hardest person that's in this circle? Maybe the lady does have a section for anal these days. Maybe, maybe. But yeah, I think it's obviously a bit of ego there for Jane, like getting the, getting the, the man that nobody else could tame, that nobody else could get. But I'm like, you've made it very difficult for yourself, lady.

But anyway, in March 2000, the first rogue sparks started to ignite when Jane went through Tommy's inbox and found racy emails to a woman in Las Vegas. In these X-rated messages, where he and this mystery woman discussed potentially meeting up in the future, Tommy referred to Jane as, quote, being like a pair of old slippers I can't get rid of. That's a weird mixture of analogies. A pair of old slippers I can't get rid of. You can very easily get rid of an old pair of slippers.

It's like an old pair of slippers, like comfortable, worn in, like yeah, no woman wants to be described like that by her husband or her partner. But I feel like he means like a rash. I can't get rid of. But, sure, Tommy, whatever. But, yeah, I mean, I definitely. have held onto shoes. I've never been a slippers person. I think it's weird. I've definitely hung onto shoes for way longer than I should have because I don't want to have to break new ones in.

Oh, okay. So are we saying it's actually not a rash? Yeah, she's just like, she's very comfortable, but I don't. But she's not. She's fucking arguing with you and say she's going to throw us out the building all the time. What's what slipper is that? Yeah, well, the devil you know. I am a slippers person and that's horrific. After the inevitable breakdown that followed. After Jane discovered these racy emails, Tommy managed to calm Jane down by taking her on a romantic break to the Cotswolds to look at houses together. Also like Tommy, this was your perfect opportunity to fucking chuck those slippers in the bin. Why are you taking on a romantic mini break to the Cotswolds?

This is not how you break up with somebody. Anyway, they go there. They even go and speak to estate agents and allow these estate agents to call them Mr. and Mrs. Cressman, even though they are not yet married, because of course that is a big point of contention for Jane. Now for Jane, the fact that Tommy allows this mistake to be made and doesn't correct the estate agents, it was a sign to her that Tommy was finally willing to give up, you know, all his sewing of his wild oats and put down roots with her. And that she was one step closer to getting that fairy tale ending she had been longing for.

I know people who've read into a lot less than that. Yeah, for sure. I think, you know, that's like. Yeah, all right, he's letting people think you're married. That's a pretty good, that's a pretty good indicator. But, you know, who knows? But I also can see from, what is he going to say? Oh, my God, no. What else is he going to do?

We're just looking at houses together at the Cotswolds. We're not married. God, heaven for men. In September 2000, it looked like Jane's prayers may have at last been answered. After a swanky boating holiday to Italy's Lake Isio, Tommy took Jane to visit his family at their sprawling villa in the south of France. Tommy, stop it. I can see why she's picking up what he's putting down, you know?

Yeah, why are you doing this? What are you trying to achieve here? Stop it. Enchanted by the romantic views of the French Riviera, Jane confided in friends that she was hoping but actually expecting Tommy to finally pop the question. on this trip, but he didn't. The story goes that under pressure from Jane, Tommy actually ended up blurting out that he had no intention of

ever putting a ring on her freshly manicured finger. And, as you might expect, Jane lost her shit. In one of her by now familiar tantrums, Tommy's family claimed she stole his brother's car and threatened to drive it off a cliff into the main. Mediterranean? I mean, look, I think maybe this explains a lot about why their relationship sort of drags on and then he is like, no, no, no, because he knows deep down, I can't marry this woman. She's absolutely fucking nuts. But at the same time, it's that, like, thing that some

people are addicted to, right? That drama of, like, the arguments and the volatility and the passion and the, like, screaming at each other. And, like, she is not fully A-OK. Like, all these threats of, like, I'm going to kill myself. I'm going to hurt myself. And I'm going to hurt myself. stuff like this intense fear of abandonment that she had kind of screams towards some sort of like personality disorder, a category B personality disorder like something, history on a borderline, something like that. But that can also be very alluring because those people can also be very, very fun and enchanting and engaging when you're on the right side of them. So Tommy, maybe his analogy of a slipper does make sense, but it's a slipper that also kind of bites you

every now and then. But I don't know, what do you do with this person? Like, what do you do? She's like, stolen the car and threatening to drive herself off a fucking cliff. I mean, I think you don't take it to meet your family in France in the fucking first place is what I think. Don't do it. Don't do it. Don't do it. Just run away. Just don't, don't do this. Don't do it. But I also appreciate that if you are in a relationship with somebody who is like that, it's also very hard to get out of that situation. Like, they can be very dangerous and there's no point denying it. Of course there is. Like, they're either going to hurt themselves or they're going to hurt you. Which spoilers is what happens. After calming Jane down, Tommy drove her to the airport with his mum and his nephew in what must have been the most awkward car journey known to man.

Jane reportedly screeched down the phone to her friends back home that it was over and that Tommy had said he would never propose and he had wasted two years of her life. According to Tommy's family, Jane didn't seem to care that they were in the car too. In fact, she wanted to make the biggest scene possible and humane. humiliate him in front of all of them. Jane would later deny that Tommy told her he didn't want to marry her, claiming this was just her go-to line when she was trying to goad him. But no matter what actually went down in France, the one thing clear to absolutely everybody who knew them

or even had been in the same room as them, the relationship had grown seriously toxic. Probably always had been, but these things only tend to get worse. Back in London, after their holiday, Tommy and Jane had a series of absolutely blazing rouse. On the morning of the Saturday, 16th of September, Tommy even made a 9-99 call to the police asking for help. We'll play it for you now. Is anyone injured?

Not yet. And where's your other half of them? Right here. And what are they doing? Staring at me. Right. So they'd be a soldier doing one stuff. Not really.

It's a question. What do you want the police to do? I would like the police to come and split a couple. I would like somebody to stop us, running each other. Because if you're right, and you don't have somebody in, say somebody here.

So in the call, you can hear the dispatcher has a quite dismissive tone as they ask Tommy what is it he wants the police to do. And Tommy says he wants someone to, quote, come and split us up before we end up hurting each other.

But the dispatcher basically shrugs that if nobody's actually been in, injured already, there's no way the police can intervene. And again, we've seen this before, time and time again, until someone's actually been hurt, until someone's actually been injured, there has been a historical president of the police saying, well, we can't actually do anything. What do you want us to do? But like, okay, is that the best policy? Because yeah, I guess it technically makes sense as no crime has been committed. But when we look at this call in context with everything that we know, and with hindsight, obviously, of what happens next, it actually does

ring a whole lot of alarm bells. Back in 2000, of course, we didn't have the same understanding of domestic abuse as we have today. People basically thought that male victims didn't exist. So for Tommy to even make this call to the police at all, even if he was framing it as a mutual fight, tells us a lot. He might not have had the language to call himself a victim, but he was clearly afraid for his life to the point where he was asking someone to come and help and physically de-escalate the situation. But nobody came. If Jane had been the one making the call, probably willing to bet that the emergency services would have been more likely to send an officer to at least do a welfare check. But after this call, zero action was taken. Tommy's friend Richard Gore

distinctively remembers him saying that the police are only interested if there's a body bag. And tragically, he was right. Within 48 hours, Of making that call, Tommy Cressman would be dead. The details of what exactly happened next are slightly sketchy, but here's what we do know. In the hours after Tommy called the police, there was a lull in the argument where Jane left the house for a while. She was on a one-woman mission to destroy his life.

Remember those naughty emails Tommy sent to a woman in Las Vegas? Well, Jane printed those off and delivered them by hand to Tommy's mum and business partner, the famous racing driver Sterling Moss with a sarky note saying a little of what I have to contend with. She also faxed copies of the emails to the woman's boss for good measure. Two days later, on the morning of Monday the 18th of September, one of Tommy's colleagues went to his flat after he didn't show up for work.

The scene they found waiting for them was nightmarish. Thomas Cresman's pyjama-clad body was found wedged between his bed and the wall, with blood soaking through the carpet. He had a 19-centimeter kitchen knife clutched in his cut-covered hands, with his final act clearly having been trying to pull it out of the gaping wound in his chest. There was a bruised dent in his forehead

and a cricket bat lying nearby. A bloody dressing gown cord was tied loosely between the doorknob and the banister outside the room and there was no sign of Tommy's living girlfriend, Jane Andrews. Still, there were clues as to what had gone on here. Police found a torn-up letter in the bin from Tommy to Jane that addressed her mood swings, her jealousy and her possessiveness, insisting that he did care about her and hated seeing her upset,

but that she needed to make him part of her life, not all of her life. He was clearly desperately trying to get through to Jim. Jane to appease her anger. There was also a post-it note written in Jane's handwriting that had been left out for investigators to find, and this is what it read. My dearest parents, I'm so sorry, no more hurt inside me anymore.

Jane, kiss. She added, almost as an afterthought, the following sentence. Tom hurt me so much, he was so cruel to me. To investigators, it sounded like a confession, and a suicide note. all in one. So the hunt was on to track down Jane Andrews before she could take a second life, her own. Jane was on the run for four days. During this time, police did their best to track her movements by car across the south coast of England using licence plate recognition, though she

never stayed put for long. Meanwhile, Jane was in contact with several friends and her ex-husband via calls and texts, where she played dumb about what happened. She asked where Tom, Tommy was and then acted surprised to learn that he'd died, claiming he was fine when she saw him on the Saturday, which police knew was total bullshit. She even tried to muddy the waters by suggesting that Tommy had been blackmailed by dodgy business associates a year earlier, which turned out to be false as well,

all the while protesting her ignorance and innocence, Jane sent increasingly cryptic texts, including, please look after mum and dad, I love you all, I'm innocent. and I'm upset I must die and be at peace God bless

On day three Jane walked into a shop in Penzance in Cornwall and bought two bottles of painkillers though she did try to get more and also a pack of lacy thong underwear fears were growing that she would commit suicide before the police could find her so investigators turned to Jane's loved ones

to smoke her out of hiding including a certain red-headed ex-royal. At the urging of police, Sarah Ferguson, left two voicemail messages urging Jane that she must come forward and help the police. But once again, Jane pleaded innocence and said that she didn't know why they wanted to speak to her.

Eventually, Jane's friend Lucinda Ellery heard her slurring over the phone and knew instinctively that something wasn't right. And Lucinda herself said it a bit less tactfully by saying I was totally sure she was going to top herself. Lucinda managed to guide police to Jane's whereabouts and they found Jane curled up under a blanket in the back of her Volkswagen polo

in a Cornwall lay by. She had taken an overdose but was responsive. After being taken for medical treatment, Jane was arrested and questioned by senior investigating officer Jim Dickie and his team. That's when Jane told her version of events and it was quite a story. According to Jane, she did stab Tommy, but it was in self-defense.

She claimed that Tommy attacked her that night, accidentally falling onto a knife that she'd grabbed to simply protect herself. But Jane's rambling story didn't quite add up for multiple reasons. Firstly, the kitchen knife didn't belong in the bedroom. So rather than defending herself in the heat of the moment, police felt that Jane must have specifically gone downstairs to the kitchen with the express purpose of using the weapon on her boyfriend. During that time, she had every opportunity to flee rather than stabbing him.

What's more, Tom was in his pajamas and didn't even have his glasses or contact lenses on when he was stabbed. It looked like he was either getting ready for bed or was already asleep. The bat-shaped wound to his forehead suggested that Jane hit him first to incapacitate him before plunging the knife into his. to his chest, which is absolutely horrific. But yeah, if you are going to go after a target that is probably that much bigger than you, that much stronger than you, trying to incapacitate them before you stab them and make them very angry, seems like a smart thing to do and seems a lot less my self-defense again. Because for you to get a blow squarely on the forehead, kind of seems like he was probably

asleep. Now finally, Jane's claims that Tommy wasn't in danger when she left also didn't quite past muster. The man literally had a huge kitchen knife sticking out of his chest. So how could she claim that she didn't realize that she was leaving him there to die? Jane had also taken a shower, packed a bag and left a note for her parents whilst Tommy was bleeding out, suggesting more rational thought than she was letting on. She also leaves and then lies about it repeatedly and says she has no idea what's going on and pretend she doesn't even know that Tommy's dead. Police also reckoned that her tying the dressing gown cord to the door was a calculated

attempt to stay to the scene to look like she had been afraid of Tommy and trying to trap him inside. But the cord was tied so loosely that anyone could have yanked it free. For the police, Jane Andrew's sob story simply didn't ring true. And they believed that they had a cold-blooded killer on their hands. Whether they did or not was up to a jury to decide. On the 23rd of April 2001, Jane's trial began at the old Bailey in London. With Jane's past association with Fergie now splashed across the headlines, it became a massive case for the tabloid hacks who sniffed out any hint of a royal scandal. This was more than just a domestic homicide. It was yet another embarrassing stain on the royal family who still hadn't quite

restored their reputation after the death of Princess Diana in 1997 when the Queen knocked her off Jane was represented by prestigious defence barrister John Kelsey Frye, while the equally respected Bruce Holder Casey led the prosecution. While it's not necessary for a British court to prove a motive, it always helps. And in this case, the prosecution weaved a compelling narrative to convince jurors what had happened between Jane Andrews and Thomas Cressman on that fateful night.

But this just wasn't a heat of the moment crime of passion that Jane might get off with a lighter manslaughter sentence for, although that is so much harder than you think and almost. It's like it's so rare. It's so, so, so rare. Instead, this was a case of premeditated murder. Whilst the jury weren't allowed to hear about Jane's history of obsessive behaviour with her ex-boyfriends, several of the couple's friends and Tommy's relatives testified for the prosecution to paint a picture of Jane as a possessive, vindictive.

woman, desperate to secure her future with a rich man. Bruce Holder urged jurors that after years of instability, the holiday in France, was a crisis point that had finally caused Jane to snap. Realising that she couldn't have Tommy, she instead resorted to killing him. Jane's actions before and after Tommy's death showed what Holder called a capacity for thought, cunning action, deliberation and revenge. The fact that she'd armed herself with a cricket bat and a kitchen knife when Tommy was at his most vulnerable, indicated that she planned to kill him. And her movements after his death, playing dumb about what had happened, staging the scene and

going on the run were all proof of her ability to lie through her teeth. None of this suggested a woman in fear for her life or acting in self-defense. And the prosecution had cold, hard evidence on their side as well. Their chief forensic witness pathologist Dr. Nathaniel Carey testified that Tommy was likely incapacitated by a severe skull fracture from being hit with the cricket bat. But the fatal wound itself came from the stabbing. The 19 centimetre knife skewered, that's a quote, his right lung and went into the sack surrounding his heart, which damaged the structures coming in and out of the organ.

Death would have occurred within three minutes, with the cuts on Tommy's hand indicating he'd spent his last desperate moments pulling the knife from his own chest. So, the fatal wound came from the knife, no argument there, but could Dr. Carey prove how the knife got there? Jane admitted on the stand to whacking Tommy with the bat, but stuck to her story that he fell onto the knife whilst attacking her. According to Dr. Carey and anyone with a brain, that was implausible. Carrie felt that the wound was instead consistent with a third party plunging a knife into the body and pointed to signs that it had been partially withdrawn and pushed in again. Jane's defence tried to argue that this could be explained by Tommy trying to remove the weapon,

but not really. Dr Kerry's testimony came as a crushing blow for the defence. But the show had to go on, and Jane had a massive plot twist. for the jury, insisting that Tommy wasn't the affable bachelor that he appeared to be in public. Jane claimed that behind closed doors, he was abusive. She told the court about his alleged kinks, including aggressive anal sex and forcing her into roleplay situations that made her feel uncomfortable. Jane testified that Tommy had been physically violent with her on previous occasions, to the point that she had armed herself with the knife to defend herself that night. The allegations came as a shock

to friends and family in the gallery, who had never heard anything like this about Tommy before. While several acquaintances agreed that Tommy could trigger Jane's insecurities and even hurt her feelings, nobody had ever seen any indication of physical violence. When pressed about why she had remained silent about the alleged abuse, Jane claimed that she had been afraid that she wouldn't be believed. She felt ashamed about the sex acts that she had been subjected to

and also that she was in love with Tommy and so was desperate to make the relationship work. So despite allegedly living in fear of his temper and sexual appetites, she didn't dare tell the truth about his darker side, until that it, she was facing life in prison for his murder. And this was very shocking for the jury to listen to, but Jane had more up her sleeve. She didn't stop. On the witness stand, she dropped a bombshell that even her own defence lawyer wasn't prepared for.

Those are the best, those are the best bombshells. When the defence lawyer looked shocked. Look, you've got to keep your own. defense on their toes, if anything. Sure. The allegation that Tommy had anally raped her the very morning of his death. Jane described a terrifying scene, where Tommy jumped on top of her, put a pillow on her head to shut her up, tied her up with the dressing gown cord, and then violated her.

Jane claimed to have been so shaken up by that assault that she armed herself with the knife and bat at bedtime, since she was afraid that it might happen again. Yet another revelation came as Jane claimed she'd been sexually abused by a relative as a child, though not by her parents, but Tommy's abuse triggered flashbacks. When Tommy advanced angrily on her in another row that Saturday evening, claiming that he was going to fucking kill her,

Jane panicked and lashed out. Jane said that she'd swung the bat blindly and didn't even realize that she'd hit him, at which point Tommy grabbed her by the hair and that's when she reached for the knife that was in the bedroom apparently. According to Jane, the next thing she knew he was slumped on top of her

and the knife must have gone into him. Then she crawled out from under him and fled from the house in a state of shock, focused purely on escaping with her life. And there's no doubt that Jane's account is harrowing. The problem was it was completely and utterly inconsistent. Jane repeatedly contradicted herself, came out with new details that she'd never mentioned before,

and you turned on details that made absolutely no sense. As senior investigating officer, Jim Dickie put it, every time she opened her mouth, a different story came out. Even the account we just told you is a mishmash of all of the different versions that Jane Andrews told during police questioning on the witness stand and then in later interviews. Under cross-examination, you'll be unsurprised to hear, Jane fell absolutely to pieces. She admitted that she'd left the house after the alleged rape that morning. Remember those vindictive emails that she'd sent out? She had to go out to do them. But then she said she returned of her own volition and got into bed with Tommy

despite supposedly being scared for her life. She also confessed to lying about thinking Tommy was okay when she left the house and couldn't give a straight answer about her evasive texts while she was on the run. Even trivial details like the thong underwear that she bought in Penzance, Lance came under fire. If she had been assaulted like she claimed, why would she choose that style of knickers was asked? And also, if you just bought two bottles of painkillers to kill yourself, why are you buying lacy thongs? I don't understand the connection there. I totally understand that. She wants to be found looking fit. That's what that is. That's very

open and shut for me. I also, you know, don't love the, if you've been assaulted, why are you wearing a thong argument? Like, that's, like, some people only have thongs. So, like, you know, That I don't like, I really don't like that. I don't get that question. Like if you've been assaulted while you're buying a thong, I don't get that. Well, it's there been like, well, you're asking for it, surely. Like, you know, that's the logic. She wants to be found looking for it.

I can vibe that with her personality for sure. It might sound brutal to interrogate a woman's claims of sexual assault. But this was a woman who had a proven record of lies and manipulation. and the man she was blaming it all on, can't really argue back, can he? As Bruce Holder argued, Jane played a strong victim card throughout the trial and relied upon smearing a dead man's name as a core part of her defence. Jim Dickie said it was as though Jane had murdered him in life and murdered him again in death by trying to ruin his reputation.

Tommy's family were horrified by what they saw as Jane's stage-managed attempt to drag their son's name through the mud to escape the consequence. of her violent actions. His grieving mum Barbara insisted Tommy was a gentleman, and several of his former girlfriends testified that they had never suffered physical violence from him. With no concrete evidence for Jane's claims, it became a delicate, he said, she said situation

where the jury had to follow their instincts about whether Jane was telling the truth. And for reasons, I think we all are aware of, Jane's credibility was not looking good. Jane's bombshell revelations on the stand inspired her defense counsel to change tack. Rather than self-defense, they were now gunning for diminished responsibility. They argued that since Jane's memories of childhood abuse were triggered by Tommy's alleged assaults, she wasn't in her right mind when she killed him.

Psychiatrist Dr Trevor Turner testified that Jane's judgment was significantly impaired, and that she was in a fugue state detached from reality at the time of his death. Turner insisted Jane's complex depression and trauma gave her a flight-fight response to perceive threats that would be irrational for an average person and also claimed that her hormonal problems linked to PCOS affected her behaviour. And while this might sound laughable, in court, it was huge. According to Dr. William Clegg Casey, Turner's evidence provided a route to manslaughter that was open even if the jury rejected her account of what had happened

in the bedroom. Naturally, the prosecution pushed back. Their own expert witness, Dr Damien Gamble, argued that while Jane was suffering from depression, there was no abnormality of mind that could sufficiently prove a lack of criminal responsibility. There is absolutely no question that Jane Andrews was a deeply troubled woman. She's obviously really, really unwell. but there's just no way, certainly not in my book, that her mental illness legally accounts for what she did to Thomas Cresman. And it turns out I'm correct. No, fucking good.

Like, it's ridiculous. Obviously they're going to try to do this. They're the defence. Like, that makes sense. There'll always be this argument of like, oh, a mental illness and like when it's somebody like Jane Andrews. But if it had been the other way around and Thomas Cressman had stabbed her to death, no one would be like, oh, Tommy was just really unwell.

They'd be like, oh, he's a piece of shit abuser and that's why he killed her. And I'm like, yeah, good. I'm glad that that didn't work. Her ploy didn't work in court. Even Dr. Turner had to admit on the stand that he could not identify a mental health condition considered serious enough to class Jane's judgment as substantially impaired under the law.

And that was a watershed moment for the case, because if Dr. Carey had dug a hole for Jane's defence strategy, ironically, their own witness testimony might just have driven the final nail into Jane's coffin. After a 13-day trial, Judge Michael Hyam directed the jury to consider three options. If they believe Jane intended to kill or seriously injure Thomas Cresman, they must find her guilty of murder. If they believe she was acting in self-defense, they must acquit her. And if they believed she had diminished responsibility, they may consider a verdict of manslaughter.

The jury deliberated for over 13 hours across three days before returning a verdict. With a majority of 11 to 1, they found Jane Andrews guilty of the murder of Thomas Cresman. Bruce Holder called it an inevitable verdict in hindsight. In a statement, the Cresman family said that while nothing could bring Tommy back, their faith in British justice had been rewarded with the verdict. During sentencing, the judge told Jane, quote, Nothing could justify what you did. You were consumed with anger and bitterness and left him to die without remorse.

In killing the man you loved, you ended his life and ruined. ruined your own. Jane was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 15 years behind bars. While three judges threw out an appeal on the basis of fresh psychiatric evidence, apparently supporting her allegations of childhood sexual abuse, Jane did successfully get her minimum tariff reduced to 12 years. But this wasn't the end of the story for Jane Andrews. In 2001, psychiatrist Trevor Turner, yep, the same guy who went to bat for Jane during her trial, diagnosed her in prison with borderline personality disorder,

which isn't the most surprising development we've ever seen on this show. We've done it before, but let's do it again. We're going to run through the core symptoms of BPD and see how Jane measures up. You have to meet at least five of these clinical criteria to get a diagnosis. An intense fear of abandonment that often manifests through extreme over-the-top reactions to perceived rejection. Intense and unstable personal relationships rapidly swinging between idealisation and devaluation of people you love.

A distorted sense of self-image, self-esteem and identity. Impulsive and risky behaviour such as reckless driving, substance abuse or overspending. Self-harm and suicidal ideation and behaviour often triggered by moments of perceived rejection or abandonment. Extreme emotional instability with intense mood swings. And lastly, stress-related disassociation or paranoia. where you lose contact with reality or feel paranoid that people are after you. And I think we can say that Jane has a full house. And while this does shed light on her behaviour,

it doesn't excuse it in a legal sense or otherwise. I think about this a lot. Nobody who does something like that is well. But that doesn't matter. You're still responsible for your actions in the sense of I'm not talking about responsibility versus diminished responsibility. I'm talking about the way you move through the world has impact and that impact needs to be dealt with.

Like there needs to be weights and measures. You can't just be like, oh, well, she's bonkers, so never mind. Obviously this is so dumbed down and so blanket, but the only instance in which mental illness equals diminished responsibility is if your relationship to reality is so distorted your right and wrong is upside down. I know we talk about it all the time, but Andrea Yates, I think, is the case that I find the most useful in explaining what I mean by that.

Yeah, I mean, I think it's breaking down into two different types, right? So when people talk about mental illness, like, yes, you can talk about personality disorders because they absolutely affect a person negatively or can affect a person negatively or even different types of, you know, cluster A, cluster B, cluster C. But then you're talking about psychosis. and that psychosis would be the only thing that for me would be like, okay, that is. And not just for me, like it matters, in the law, it makes sense that that is the only thing that can be deemed to affect your culpability, criminally speaking.

I was listening to a forensic psychologist talk about their personality disorders and why they rightly are not included when it comes to diminished responsibility because typically they say it's not really even worth diagnosing somebody specifically with like, oh, it's borderline personality. Of course, for some people, that can be helpful, but it's more like cluster B because there's so much overlap between the different personality disorders that exist within there. And it can also change. So what she was saying was that cluster A personality types can be just quite odd, just quite odd. So you're looking at things like schizetipple, things like, you know, Brian Koberger.

He was a great example of somebody who would fit into that sort of cluster A. Again, his disconnection from reality and his like inability to connect with people probably did lead to him committing those. crimes. But just because it is an influencing factor, it doesn't make it a diminishing factor for his culpability. It can be explanatory, but it does not make it exculpatory for his responsibility. Then you have cluster B personality types, which are things like histrionic, narcissistic, borderline personality disorder. And these are ones in which people can be a danger to themselves or a danger to other people. And then you've got cluster C personality disorders in which people are just more like, you know, depressive and just more insular, more unlikely to go outside, unlikely to cause any sort of

difficulties in the relationships with their in or in society because they're probably not even going to engage in those sort of relationships or going outside or engaging with the wider world. So I think while you can absolutely say that it is worth understanding what led to a person doing what, and I'm sure that she did have some sort of cluster B situation, it absolutely does not interfere with her culpability or interfere with her ability to have done it. So yeah, the law is correct in the way that it handles these things for sure. Yeah, that's much more succinct than I could have managed that explanatory and exculpatory are not the same thing and I do think that does get confused. Yeah. Because a diagnosis of BPD does shed light on Jane's behaviour,

it does not excuse it. In British law, personality disorders rarely qualify for criminal defences because a person still understands right from wrong. It's a pretty murk. area in terms of the intersection between psychology and the law, while around 4.4% of the British public are thought to have a diagnosable personality disorder, this rocket's up to 60 to 70% amongst the prison population. Amar Jane may have benefited from this insight into her psyche. It didn't stop her getting back on her bullshit behind bars. In 2006, Jane struck up a friendship slash romance with a male inmate from another prison, convicted fraudster Mark Elson.

Jane sent countless lovety-dovey cards addressed to My Husband and seemed to think that she'd backed herself a new man. Mark, however, didn't quite seem to share Jane's devotion. He visited her a few times after finishing his sentence, but failed to mention that he already had a girlfriend and a child. When Mark tried to call things off and missed a planned visit at East Sutton Park, the open prison in Kent where Jane was living as of November 2009, needless to say she did not take it well.

In fact, she jumped a fence and escaped after a group therapy session. Mark was understandably shitting himself, with the police even providing him with a panic alarm and guarded his family for 24 hours whilst Jane was at large. As it turned out, the whole thing ended up a bit of an anti-climax. To be fair, thankfully, because Jane was found in a hotel room, a few miles from the prison with her parents and her older brother three days later

and promptly shipped back behind bars. Despite all this, Mark Elson bizarrely kept up communication with Jane through phone calls before he finally cut off contacted early 2011. With her trademark refusal to accept it, Jane bombarded him with angry answer phone messages accusing him of fucking up her life. But in 2012, with her release date looming, Jane started sending loved up cards again as if nothing had happened. Mark went to the tabloids with his story insisting that he wanted people to quote, get to know the real Jane before her release and warn them about her obsessive nature.

But there is a pretty large elephant in the room here. Mark Elson is also a convicted murderer. A year after selling his lauried stories about Jane, he was jailed for bludgeoning an elderly coin dealer, Giuseppe Joe Misselli, to death in a botched burglary. As Giuseppe's brother put it, Mark and Jane deserve each other. So I think Just take the cap off the salt shaker

And just throw it around And then over your left shoulder Into the eyes of the devil spit three times You're fine Got it Still all this goes to show That Jane didn't seem to turn over a new leaf While she was in prison

Doesn't look like there was much rehabilitation Going on here That's what personality disorders mean Like you cannot cure them You can't even really treat them You have to manage them And if you don't want to No one can help you

So yeah, while she was considered for early release several times during her sentence, the probation board repeatedly judged Jane to be a danger to the public and denied it. In June 2015, after having served two years longer than her minimum tariff, Jane Andrews was finally released on licence. Tommy's family was absolutely furious. With his brother, Rick arguing, I'm afraid our justice system seems pretty soft when you can commit the most heinous crime and walk away after just 14 years.

Like Mark Elson before him, Rick urged the public to watch out for Jane, warning that any men out there in the wider world should give her a wide birth. And as it turned out, Rick's prophecy did sort of come true, because in 2018, Jane's license was revoked, and she was once again called back to prison after she was accused of harassing a married man. The subsequent police investigation ultimately found no evidence for harassment, but we think it's fair to say that with Jane Andrews, probably no smoke without fire. Once the investigation concluded, Jane was finally released for good in August, She found work stacking shelves at two supermarkets just in time for the COVID pandemic,

when evidently their HR teams had got a bit slack with their vetting procedures. In 2020, she was outed by journalists and got sacked from both of her jobs as a result. Jane moaned in an interview, is that what people want, me to not even be allowed to earn my own money and pay tax? Which, I don't know, does she have a point? I guess I'd rather her work and do whatever than sit around and claim benefits. Yes. Keep her busy, stack and shell. I think so.

And also, it was the fucking pandemic. It's not like there was loads to report. Like, so, oh, yeah, oh, no, we are all still inside and everyone's depressed. Yep, still the same. Oh, but Jane Andrews, though. You know, like, I understand. We'll all go inside and we'll let the criminals outside to live their life. How's that?

Anyway, after this, Jane slivered back under the radar. Now in her late 50s, as we've heard, she lives a pretty reclusive life and works at an animal hospital charity. And while Jane might shun the spotlight, public interest in her story has never quite totally died out. Here we all are, after all. Just this year, ITV released a drama adaptation titled The Lady, based on the case starring Mia McKenney Bruce as Jane and Natalie Dormer as Fergie. The timing literally could not have been more fitting since the show's release coincided. with the latest revelations linking Fergie to the Epstein files. And I'm sure that was a lovely day in the ITV press office.

Amid all the hoo-ha, actress Natalie Dormer controversially announced that she would be donating her fee for the show to a sexual abuse charity after condemning Fergie's sympathetic post-arrest emails to Jeffrey Epstein as inexcusable. The ITV show also drew criticism from those who still support Jane Andrews because, yes, those people do exist. Solicitor Harriet Wistrick, CEO of the feminist legal charity, Center for Women's Justice,

slam the show for failing to consult Jane, despite it being about her. Instead, presenting the public with a one-sided and sensational view that fails to explore why a vulnerable woman in her circumstances may have been driven to kill. Harriet, I reckon there's women out there who need your help more than fucking Jane Andrews do. Yes, I think I agree.

because even 26 years later, Jane Andrews case is still provoking debate about how the laws treat female offenders who kill their allegedly abusive partners. The overturning of Sally Chalyn's convictions in 2019 was a landmark moment in the UK. And if you don't know the case, we did cover it a long time ago when it happened. Sally Challin was originally found guilty of murdering her husband by battering him with a hammer in August 2010. But after multiple appeals, that conviction was quite. quashed after a judge agreed that Sally's husband Richard had subjected her to years of coercive control that justified a plea of manslaughter with diminished responsibility.

Those who support Jane Andrews argue that if her case had been tried today with our modern understanding of domestic violence, the outcome may have been similar. But I think we also have to be... No, it wouldn't. Like, I really take issue with people using Sally Chalon to defend people like Jane Andrews. I actually find it

like thoroughly distasteful to the point of disgust. Like, it's not the same thing. What happened to Sally Chalin and what happened to Jane Andrews are worlds apart. It's, you cannot compare them and by doing that, it just cheapens everything

and you're like, you're disgracing Sally Chalin is what you're doing. Yeah. And infantilising women all over the fucking world. Like this idea that Jane Andrews is a victim purely because of her sex, because she's a woman, because there could be no other world in which she was the abuser in that relationship. It just makes everything so hollow and it makes women's,

it robs women of their agency. Like, she can be just a killer. She can be someone who was just fucking bat shit crazy and wanted a rich husband and was like, well, if I'm not going to have you, no one's going to fucking have you, have that. Like, yeah, it's all just so embarrassing. And yeah, distasteful. So we do not buy Jane's story that this was a straightforward case of battered woman killing her abuser in self-defense, but like those are never straightforward. Trust me. We're not saying that Tommy Crespin was a perfect person either because they literally don't exist. Nobody is a perfect person.

Anybody could see that their relationship was deeply unhealthy, emotionally volatile and toxic for both of them. Jane was psychologically vulnerable. That's true with large abandonment issues and Tommy's lack of commitment and infidelity pushed a lot of buttons. but even taking all of that into account, the circumstances of Tommy's death are really difficult to square with a genuine act of self-defense. Jane was proven to have lied repeatedly

in an attempt to cover her tracks and later deliberately reshape the narrative to cast herself as the victim. Whether or not elements of abuse truly existed in her relationship with Tommy, Jane absolutely knew exactly how powerful the narrative could be and she tried to use it

to dodge the consequences of her own actions and at the end of the day, whatever turmoil Jane Andrews was in, however much he cheated or strung her along, Tommy Cressman did not have to die. Those two things don't even exist in the same fucking universe. Now we're going to leave you with a more recent Fergie footnote in the sweaty nonce legacy.

Fergie is all over the Epstein files. That's old news, we all know that. We read out her emails to Jeff discussing her daughters over and under the duvet when they first came out. She claimed that she had cut off contact with Jeffrey Epstein in 2011 after his conviction, but that is resoundingly not true, even going as far as to call him, quote, a steadfast, generous and supreme friend to me and my family.

But now there is new information, connecting the former Duchess of York to none other than Sean P. Diddy Combs. courtesy of author, historian and monarch enthusiast Andrew Launy. In December 2025, Fergie was kicked out of Royal Lodge along with his sweaty nonseness, Andrew Mountbatten Windsor. Apparently it was well known that Fergie was keen to marry a rich American. If Epstein had proposed, she would have snapped up that offer with glee, despite him being a convicted sex offender.

If we believe Andrew Launy, Diddy was another one of her romantic targets. Which, when I first saw that, I was like, come man. But then I sat down and thought about it. Same. Sean Combs calls his eldest son King. He is obsessed with royalty. He is obsessed with monarchy. So when I was like, of course, that makes so much sense when you actually think about it.

Because Sarah Ferguson, ex-royal, and she would go to the opening of an envelope. It wouldn't have been difficult for Diddy to get close to Sarah Ferguson at all. And he would often, apparently, brag about slamming Fergie, and he was eagerly anticipating Beatrice and Eugenie reaching the age of consent. Those are things he apparently discussed quite openly. And we know for a fact that Fergie and Diddy absolutely knew each other. There are multiple pictures of them together after they were introduced in 2002 by Galane Maxwell. Of course, that makes so much sense.

And apparently, if we believe Andrew Launy, they began a friends with benefits situation about two years after they met. And in 2006, Diddy launched a perfume called Unforgivable, which he openly stated was inspired by Fergie and how she liked men to smell. You can find those articles. He said that. And Fergie had no problems with her daughters being around Diddy either. she took Eugenie with her to one of Sean Combs's yacht parties. And you don't have to believe me. You can read those things.

They're all out there. But I buy it, man. That would have been such an easy win for P Diddy to shag Sarah Ferguson straight away. Oh, absolutely. I believe it. And look, I've watched the interviews with Andrew Launy, who's talking about his book. And he is like, I haven't read his book. But he's like, it's all fact check.

It's all in there. I've got the receipts. I've got the sources. is like, do you think we would have been allowed to publish this without the lawyers going back and forth on every claim I made in there? Not a fucking chance if I was making allegations against someone like Sarah Ferguson. And he's like, everything I say in there is true. Sean Diddy Combs and Sarah Ferguson were banging. She wanted to marry him and he wanted to fucking bang the kids as well. And she was like, yeah, all right, maybe. Let's see. Gross. They're all so gross. And this again

just tells you why Jane Andrews, for all the things she was, her like, Like very singular focus on anal being something that was going to turn these people off is the most laughable thing about it. So that's it, guys. That's all, that's all I've got. There you go. Jane Andrews. Yeah. Nothing will ever be Fergalicious again.

Oh, thank God for that. We hope you guys learn something. I didn't even hear about this drama on ITV with Natalie Dawn, but that's very, very funny. So I might go watch that actually. not sponsored. Watch it if you want. ITV is a lot of pile of shit though. And we will see you next week

for another episode of Red Handed. Goodbye. Bye.