The Salt Path was apparently full of lies- I’m gutted!

[thundertoday]

The Salt Path has been one of my favourite books and I haven’t seen the new movie yet - was looking forward to it though. Has anyone else just read the article on the news? In today’s Observer the front page is devoted to a piece of investigative journalism which has uncovered the backgrounds and histories of Raynor Wynn and Moth - and it turns out the book is all lies! (Allegedly as they haven’t commented). But the investigation is robust and they have documents and multiple witnesses showing that the cause of their financial woes was not a dodgy investment in a friends business, but theft, (Raynor allegedly embezzled tens of thousands from her employers) and that Raynor took an enormous loan from a family member to pay for solicitors to make a settlement and non-disclosure order with the people she stole from, and this was the debt that eventually got passed to debt collectors! They also set up a scam to raise money with a prize draw, the prize being the home that they didn’t actually own!

They also owned a farmhouse in France at the time of the walk which they went on because they had “nowhere to live”. On top of that the journalist casts doubt over Moth’s diagnosis with some neurological doctors sceptical about the symptoms and saying it doesn’t seem to be true given no-one has lived past 8 years with this condition but he is still going strong 14 years later.

I am in shock and so bloody gutted about this having loved the book! Raynor and Moth aren't even their real names - she’s called Sally Walker!! Has anyone else just read this?

I liked The Salt Path as I wasn’t particularly interested in how they lost the house, more the descriptions of scenery and the physical challenges.

I feel for victims she stole from, and anyone who has been given false hope by Moth’s apparent good health, but it doesn’t really spoil my appreciation of the book. There have been a few “memoirs” that I’ve read that don’t ring true for me (The Glass Castle by Jeanette Walls for one) but are engaging and well written, so I just mentally file them under “fiction”. I guess TSP will be joining the pile!

I had long anticipated reading and enjoying the book and finally got to it a few months ago - didn't finish the book as I found it mediocre, and found them both rather stupid and annoying and not particularly inspiring and the legal stuff at the beginning rather implausible. Was still shocked to read about the fraud and embezzlement, but at least my instincts were right in not liking them.

What really pissed me off in the story was that they were like "Oh well, the kids are at university now, they'll manage."

I have a DD at university and she still very much needs financial support from us and a home to go to as they are only there for about half the year!

If we lost the house I'd make sure I had a job and was paying rent on a new place, even if it was tiny, so DD had somewhere to come home to! It would be my absolute priority, not yomping around the south coast on some kind of misery fest walking holiday in my own backyard.

What else do you expect from an author who, quite unashamedly, talks about she stole from shops along the way, and stayed on campsites without paying ? Whole thing struck me as a scam, ripping off the gullible.

I wish people would stop banging on about her publisher ‘fact-checking’. They’re publishing a memoir, not doing due diligence on a business they’re thinking of buying, or a DBS check on an employee.

This is not what happens. Memoirs get the lowest level of editorial ‘fact-check’ because they’re inherently based on experiences that happened to an individual, and their subjective recall of them.

Copy editors ‘fact check’ in the sense that they check the MS for factual continuity eg if Raynor Winn says Moth started reading from Beowulf in St Ives but next morning they wake up in Mousehole after having only walked for a two hours, that will be flagged. But the onus is on the author rather than the editorial team to be the provider of ‘facts’. It would not routinely be part of the copy editor’s job to require Tim Walker’s medical records, for instance, or require them to provide all previous aliases so they can check for a police record.

@Wellwater it sounds like you have some knowledge in this field. I would be genuinely interested, if what you say is correct, as to why Random House settled about Million Little Pieces?

Well that's quite a bad system that's opening itself up to all sorts of liars making things up then isn't it? Having worked as a writer and editor of fiction I genuinely would expect a memoir marketed as a "true story" to be held to higher standards, otherwise you fall foul of making false claims that it's not a true story at all, as in this case. Surely the ASA would have something to say about that if you're marketing it on a false premise and you haven't even bothered to do any basic checking?

I would have expected them to do some basic fact checking like when I spoke to journos from major news outlets about something huge that happened at my place of work, I had to show payslips to prove I actually worked there and emails to prove that what I said was true.

Really surprised this gets past any publisher's legal department that it's just "her truth".

The short answer is that it was much cheaper to settle.

RH had set aside $2.5 million for the court case, but settling on the terms they did cost something like $1.4 million, including legal costs, and involved only refunding those readers who could prove they bought the book before the revelations were made and who actually provided that proof — the terms were quite onerous. I seem to remember you had to provide evidence of purchase and a particular page, probably more. I don’t know numbers, but only a small proportion of readers sought the refund they were offered.

The readers who sued were in Illinois, Seattle and LA, and were all suing for slightly different reasons — misrepresentation, breach of contract ( ie I only bought this book because the publisher said it was non-fiction, and, as I wouldn’t have bought it if it were a novel, I was induced to buy it under a contract which the seller breached). I think one group wanted to be compensated for their ‘wasted time’. I know very little about US law (and I’m sure some things will depend on which state), but some things would have been difficult to prove. Like how do you prove you definitely wouldn’t have bought the book if you knew it was fiction, if you do also read fiction? Would you have to provide proof that your home library contains no fiction?

And I suppose it also comes down to whether RH’s claim that A Million Little Pieces was really false. Do we believe every word of a memoir is literally true, given that the genre typically involves subjective recollections? Would we believe every word of a politician’s memoir? The truth of Tara Westover’s Educated (another huge seller) has been disputed by some of her siblings. If the substantial claim of The Salt Path is true (that the Walkers walked the coastal path at a nadir in their lives and found peace), is it still a memoir? I haven’t read AMLP, but the author had been an addict and stopped being an addict. That was true, even if things like claims about spending months in prison and someone’s suicide were false.

I thinks courts would hesitate before awarding big damages to creative works that usually involve some creative licence. Otherwise no one would ever publish a memoir again.

I think it’s a bit more complicated than that. I think I read a piece by a US lawyer (it came into my mind when Tara Westover’s siblings were disputing some of her claims) about stuff like whether a blurb calling it a memoir constitutes a description of the books contents or advertising, for one thing. If it’s not advertising, then it can’t be false advertising. If I can find it, I will post a link.

It would have been interesting if the A Million Little Pieces case had actually gone to trial. And I actually don’t know whether Frey’s UK publisher, John Murray, also offered a refund. They’ve published other stuff by him since, though.

ETA. Sorry, typos. Also, I should say I’m absolutely no expert. I write fiction, but have been a first reader for friends who have written non-fiction.

That’s really interesting. Thanks @Wellwater

I know they shouldn't have to but you would think the publishers would carry out some research On the accuracy of what's presented. For example asking to see consultants letters with diagnosis. They've absolutely no need to share this information if they prefer to keep it private but maybe it would be part of due diligence to show If you want something published that contains medical information. That is one element that would be easily evidenced.

I think all we poor souls who have been deceived by their story should parcel up her books and send them back to her. Raynor Winn, Cornwall, should find her OK.

I wish the copy editor had done their job with my current book - inconsistencies all the way.

It gets worse!

From the Observer today. The article is paywalled but you can read enough in the first few lines. What an evil, psychopathic bitch.

observer.co.uk/news/national/article/dont-look-for-the-money-ive-taken-it-all-raynor-winns-confession-that-she-stole-from-her-family