Page 39 | Thread 5: To feel disappointed after reading this in The Observer about the author and her husband from The Salt Path book and film?

FurryHappyKittens · 12/07/2025 23:22

Wundy · 12/07/2025 23:20

Would there have been much of a market for a powder blue suit from the 50's? (Or was it the 60's)? Can't imagine the sale of that made much of a dent in the £9000.

Show quote history

I very much doubt it. It was 1954.

FurryHappyKittens · 12/07/2025 23:22

Choux · 12/07/2025 23:21

I’m old enough to remember buying the Sunday papers outside Charing Cross at about 10pm on Saturday night. Now we have to wait patiently till they want to release it.

Edited

Show quote history

Gnashes teeth!

AnAlpacaForChristmasPleaseSanta · 12/07/2025 23:23

Bruisername · 12/07/2025 23:19

Also - it looks like her real name was only added to her wiki after the observer article came out

That'd make sense. Not much point trying to conceal ones real identity whilst simultaneously plastering it all over Wiki.

BadDinner · 12/07/2025 23:24

Bruisername · 12/07/2025 23:02

The way she presented the losing of the house in the book to the actual facts was completely different! She claimed her book was true and she was the victim of a swindler when she was actually the swindler and reason the house was lost!

i’m always amazed how people will look the other way when their heroes are shown to be less than palatable

but hey, it happened 18 years ago so who cares! I didn’t realise there was a time limit to these things - given the book was only published 7 years ago - is 7 years ok?

Is it not possible (are the exact details of this known? I admit to not having kept up with every single bit of info) that Sally Walker perceives her ex boss as having stitched her up for something she wasn't truly responsible for?

That might explain why she has presented herself and Moth as victims who were 'taken advantage of' by a 'swindler'

Let's say the accounting was a mess, and some mistake was genuinely made and you were accused of being responsible for the total loss, but there wasn't any way in which you could prove yourself not to have done it. So you feel if it went to court it would just be 'he said, she said' what can you do in such a situation? Let's say you did genuine F up. But not deliberately.

So let's say to avoid the stress a possible record and because you care about the people you used to work for, you take a loan to just make it go away.

You then feel you lost your home unfairly

I have some experience working for a small family business, and I swore I would never work for a small business again. It is not like working for a big corp where you feel no obligation beyond doing your job and can take a day off sick without knowing everyone will struggle with you missing and the shortfall is deftly dealt with. No, it's like the business is their baby or child. The pressure can be more focused. If someone falls short there isn't necessarily a backup person to filter the mistake, and the impact can be massive! In this family business I worked for, all invoices were paid months and months late, whilst things were acquisitioned. I never did the accounting thank god, but I dread to think if I did.

It does just sound odd to have been responsible for something like that and have the raw nerve to put yourself in the spotlight where it could inevitably be dug up.

And you still can't prove you weren't responsible now when a journalist comes sniffing around.

FurryHappyKittens · 12/07/2025 23:24

AnAlpacaForChristmasPleaseSanta · 12/07/2025 23:21

She also says in her video interview with The Observer that she didn't think she would be believed and didn't know who to contact at a newspaper.

This rings so true to me. Everyone knows that major companies like Penguin will have access to whole teams of lawyers are PR people, not to mention lots of money. I cannot imagine how daunting it must be to pit yourself up against them. And when your grieving too.

I think if she'd had a mind to contact ten newspapers none of them would have taken her remotely seriously.

Bruisername · 12/07/2025 23:24

Excellent investigative journalism in the observer about an anti apartheid campaigner assassinated in Paris - worth a read

ThatFluentHedgehog · 12/07/2025 23:25

Wundy · 12/07/2025 23:20

Would there have been much of a market for a powder blue suit from the 50's? (Or was it the 60's)? Can't imagine the sale of that made much of a dent in the £9000.

Show quote history

Think the wed dress comment was just tugging on the heartstrings/poor me'ing when she was knowingly paying the Hemmings back only a fraction (several thousand or £9000, reports differ) of the £64000 she'd taken.

As an aside, and this is completely inconsequential, but couldn't help spotting the mum's wedding suit was powder blue and so was that expensive Aga...

Pianogirl1994 · 12/07/2025 23:26

I’m not being obtuse - it’s just that any sensible person would question why these allegations come to light a couple of months after the release of a popular film.

Also, criminal charges were never filed. Given how serious embezzlement is, you wouldn’t just “reach a settlement” to avoid prosecution. If she was indeed arrested but not charged, then it means that the police did not find enough evidence to charge her.

The books all went through what’s called a legal read (as all non fiction does), where basically a team of lawyers go through all aspects of the book to make sure it’s accurate. I wonder why nothing cropped up then. A major publishing house like Penguin also do background checks on people before endorsing them, so then why wasn’t this known about?

Bruisername · 12/07/2025 23:26

@BadDinner

she forged cheques and paid them to herself over years

FurryHappyKittens · 12/07/2025 23:26

BadDinner · 12/07/2025 23:24

Is it not possible (are the exact details of this known? I admit to not having kept up with every single bit of info) that Sally Walker perceives her ex boss as having stitched her up for something she wasn't truly responsible for?

That might explain why she has presented herself and Moth as victims who were 'taken advantage of' by a 'swindler'

Let's say the accounting was a mess, and some mistake was genuinely made and you were accused of being responsible for the total loss, but there wasn't any way in which you could prove yourself not to have done it. So you feel if it went to court it would just be 'he said, she said' what can you do in such a situation? Let's say you did genuine F up. But not deliberately.

So let's say to avoid the stress a possible record and because you care about the people you used to work for, you take a loan to just make it go away.

You then feel you lost your home unfairly

I have some experience working for a small family business, and I swore I would never work for a small business again. It is not like working for a big corp where you feel no obligation beyond doing your job and can take a day off sick without knowing everyone will struggle with you missing and the shortfall is deftly dealt with. No, it's like the business is their baby or child. The pressure can be more focused. If someone falls short there isn't necessarily a backup person to filter the mistake, and the impact can be massive! In this family business I worked for, all invoices were paid months and months late, whilst things were acquisitioned. I never did the accounting thank god, but I dread to think if I did.

It does just sound odd to have been responsible for something like that and have the raw nerve to put yourself in the spotlight where it could inevitably be dug up.

And you still can't prove you weren't responsible now when a journalist comes sniffing around.

Show quote history

She embezzled £64,000.

She forged cheques.

She didn't deposit cash from the business into the bank.

She made up invoices and paid herself.

How is any of that accidental?

HonoriaBulstrode · 12/07/2025 23:27

I’m old enough to remember buying the Sunday papers outside Charing Cross at about 10pm.

I remember seeing them at Victoria Station when on my way home from an evening out.

(And in fiction, characters were always waiting up for the first editions of the morning papers to read the first night reviews of the new play what they had just wrote/directed/starred in.)

Aspanielstolemysanity · 12/07/2025 23:27

BadDinner · 12/07/2025 23:24

Is it not possible (are the exact details of this known? I admit to not having kept up with every single bit of info) that Sally Walker perceives her ex boss as having stitched her up for something she wasn't truly responsible for?

That might explain why she has presented herself and Moth as victims who were 'taken advantage of' by a 'swindler'

Let's say the accounting was a mess, and some mistake was genuinely made and you were accused of being responsible for the total loss, but there wasn't any way in which you could prove yourself not to have done it. So you feel if it went to court it would just be 'he said, she said' what can you do in such a situation? Let's say you did genuine F up. But not deliberately.

So let's say to avoid the stress a possible record and because you care about the people you used to work for, you take a loan to just make it go away.

You then feel you lost your home unfairly

I have some experience working for a small family business, and I swore I would never work for a small business again. It is not like working for a big corp where you feel no obligation beyond doing your job and can take a day off sick without knowing everyone will struggle with you missing and the shortfall is deftly dealt with. No, it's like the business is their baby or child. The pressure can be more focused. If someone falls short there isn't necessarily a backup person to filter the mistake, and the impact can be massive! In this family business I worked for, all invoices were paid months and months late, whilst things were acquisitioned. I never did the accounting thank god, but I dread to think if I did.

It does just sound odd to have been responsible for something like that and have the raw nerve to put yourself in the spotlight where it could inevitably be dug up.

And you still can't prove you weren't responsible now when a journalist comes sniffing around.

Show quote history

She ran away before her police interview and then borrowed over £60,000 in a very expensive way to pay Mr Hemmings back in exchange for an NDA

Mr Hemmings solicitor has confirmed there were falsified invoices.

You would have to be mind bogglingly naive to think she didn't steal it.

Original poster

DisappointedReader · 12/07/2025 23:27

Pianogirl1994 · 12/07/2025 23:09

Ah, it seems you didn’t see the letter from 2019 which states that certain symptoms “caused us to formulate this as an atypical form of CBD”.

There’s also one dated February 2025 which mentions “his prior CBS diagnosis”.

Both of which prove that, at the time the book was written, he had been given that diagnosis, regardless of what may be the case now. Perhaps the newspaper would be able to publish their conversations with the medical experts they spoke to, to prove that they are telling the truth as well? Surely that’s only fair?

Show quote history

When do you think the TSP book was written @Pianogirl1994 and when do you think the house was repossessed and RW/SW claims they set off on their walk? You seem to need to check the date of the repossession and departure because that is also the date RW/SW claimed in her book and in numerous interviews that Moth/Tim received a terminal diagnosis of CBD with a likely 2 years to live.

OP posts:

AldoGordo · 12/07/2025 23:28

Pianogirl1994 · 12/07/2025 22:50

But there is ample evidence that the husband’s illness is real (look at her website for letters from the NHS, which clearly mention a CBD diagnosis). So why on earth would anyone tip off a journalist over something which is a) none of their concern and b) actually true?

Given the evidence provided which does in fact prove the diagnosis, surely any reputable journalist and newspaper would do their own checks to make sure their claims are accurate before printing?

None of it makes any sense whatsoever. The article lost me when they mentioned the different names too - most authors will use pen names these days, so I don’t know why a journalist would supposedly take offence at that…

And the incident with the employer happened almost 18 years ago. That sounds like a very long time to bear a grudge, especially since she’s been paid back (according to the newspaper article). Wouldn’t one just move on?

I just find the timings of the article a little odd, especially since the book doesn’t make that much mention of the supposed bad business deal ( literally, it’s mentioned once right at the start - so why make such a fuss?)

I think you're putting a little too much faith in the book version of events. Try reading this MN thread from the beginning of thread one to see how it all unravels.

Bruisername · 12/07/2025 23:28

@Pianogirl1994

i don’t think you’ve read the allegations properly tbh so not really much point discussing

and I would have thought around the time a highly publicised film coming out is the obvious time for this all to break

ThatFluentHedgehog · 12/07/2025 23:29

BadDinner · 12/07/2025 23:24

Is it not possible (are the exact details of this known? I admit to not having kept up with every single bit of info) that Sally Walker perceives her ex boss as having stitched her up for something she wasn't truly responsible for?

That might explain why she has presented herself and Moth as victims who were 'taken advantage of' by a 'swindler'

Let's say the accounting was a mess, and some mistake was genuinely made and you were accused of being responsible for the total loss, but there wasn't any way in which you could prove yourself not to have done it. So you feel if it went to court it would just be 'he said, she said' what can you do in such a situation? Let's say you did genuine F up. But not deliberately.

So let's say to avoid the stress a possible record and because you care about the people you used to work for, you take a loan to just make it go away.

You then feel you lost your home unfairly

I have some experience working for a small family business, and I swore I would never work for a small business again. It is not like working for a big corp where you feel no obligation beyond doing your job and can take a day off sick without knowing everyone will struggle with you missing and the shortfall is deftly dealt with. No, it's like the business is their baby or child. The pressure can be more focused. If someone falls short there isn't necessarily a backup person to filter the mistake, and the impact can be massive! In this family business I worked for, all invoices were paid months and months late, whilst things were acquisitioned. I never did the accounting thank god, but I dread to think if I did.

It does just sound odd to have been responsible for something like that and have the raw nerve to put yourself in the spotlight where it could inevitably be dug up.

And you still can't prove you weren't responsible now when a journalist comes sniffing around.

Show quote history

Apparently she was writing cheques, forging Martin Hemming's signature, to pay for her shopping, so not an inadvertent error at work, much as she may want the public to think so by framing it as "mistakes were made".

Aspanielstolemysanity · 12/07/2025 23:29

Pianogirl1994 · 12/07/2025 23:26

I’m not being obtuse - it’s just that any sensible person would question why these allegations come to light a couple of months after the release of a popular film.

Also, criminal charges were never filed. Given how serious embezzlement is, you wouldn’t just “reach a settlement” to avoid prosecution. If she was indeed arrested but not charged, then it means that the police did not find enough evidence to charge her.

The books all went through what’s called a legal read (as all non fiction does), where basically a team of lawyers go through all aspects of the book to make sure it’s accurate. I wonder why nothing cropped up then. A major publishing house like Penguin also do background checks on people before endorsing them, so then why wasn’t this known about?

What nonsense . Of course you would accept the money rather than risk never seeing a penny of it. Also kinder to let the person pay you back than face a criminal case.

What you wouldn't do if innocent, is pay over £60k to someone rather than face some police questioning

Orangesandlemons77 · 12/07/2025 23:30

Pianogirl1994 · 12/07/2025 23:26

I’m not being obtuse - it’s just that any sensible person would question why these allegations come to light a couple of months after the release of a popular film.

Also, criminal charges were never filed. Given how serious embezzlement is, you wouldn’t just “reach a settlement” to avoid prosecution. If she was indeed arrested but not charged, then it means that the police did not find enough evidence to charge her.

The books all went through what’s called a legal read (as all non fiction does), where basically a team of lawyers go through all aspects of the book to make sure it’s accurate. I wonder why nothing cropped up then. A major publishing house like Penguin also do background checks on people before endorsing them, so then why wasn’t this known about?

Thew police may have charged her but she didn't turn up to their second day of questioning when she was asked to, she ran away

ThatFluentHedgehog · 12/07/2025 23:32

ThatFluentHedgehog · 12/07/2025 23:29

Apparently she was writing cheques, forging Martin Hemming's signature, to pay for her shopping, so not an inadvertent error at work, much as she may want the public to think so by framing it as "mistakes were made".

Show quote history

Regarding raw nerve, it's been posited on here that she has a psychological disorder that enables her to act in ways it's hard for others to imagine (or stomach).

FurryHappyKittens · 12/07/2025 23:32

ThatFluentHedgehog · 12/07/2025 23:25

Think the wed dress comment was just tugging on the heartstrings/poor me'ing when she was knowingly paying the Hemmings back only a fraction (several thousand or £9000, reports differ) of the £64000 she'd taken.

As an aside, and this is completely inconsequential, but couldn't help spotting the mum's wedding suit was powder blue and so was that expensive Aga...

Show quote history

It was actually a Rayburn...

But good spot. How weird!

Pianogirl1994 · 12/07/2025 23:36

Aspanielstolemysanity · 12/07/2025 23:29

What nonsense . Of course you would accept the money rather than risk never seeing a penny of it. Also kinder to let the person pay you back than face a criminal case.

What you wouldn't do if innocent, is pay over £60k to someone rather than face some police questioning

Show quote history

Do you remember the Post Office
scandal which was in the news recently? Where hundreds of people were accused of embezzlement and it turns out they’re all innocent after all? A lot of them agreed to similar settlement deals and paid a load of money back too.

Just a case in point that agreeing to pay money to avoid a prison charge doesn’t necessarily mean one is guilty.

With Martin long gone, it seems like people will never know the truth. At the end of the day, the money was paid back so there isn’t any point in dragging this on - especially given that it’s barely mentioned in the book at all.

(I wonder how many of the people commenting on here have actually read the book? Not many, judging by the huge fuss they’re making…)

AldoGordo · 12/07/2025 23:36

Aspanielstolemysanity · 12/07/2025 23:27

She ran away before her police interview and then borrowed over £60,000 in a very expensive way to pay Mr Hemmings back in exchange for an NDA

Mr Hemmings solicitor has confirmed there were falsified invoices.

You would have to be mind bogglingly naive to think she didn't steal it.

Show quote history

Precisely. This isn't like the Post Office scandal where innocent workers couldn't prove missing money was actually due to faulty software, causing them to pay back the Post Office and face criminal charges. Sally was caught out and she did everything in her power to avoid criminal proceedings.

AnAlpacaForChristmasPleaseSanta · 12/07/2025 23:36

@Aspanielstolemysanity What you wouldn't do if innocent, is pay over £60k to someone rather than face some police questioning

🤣🤣 I'm sure you'll be told soon she must've just paid him as a kind gesture or something.

Tis strange though that Mr Hemmings carelessly lost 64k and Sally Walker just happened to have the same amount down the back of her sofa.

Wundy · 12/07/2025 23:38

Oh yes - the "powder blue" aga and wedding suit.

As an aside, we had an aga years ago. My FIL made many derogatory comments in general (mostly about me), but the final straw for me came when he described it as "a pretentious bit of kitchen art".

FurryHappyKittens · 12/07/2025 23:39

(I wonder how many of the people commenting on here have actually read the book? Not many, judging by the huge fuss they’re making…)

Hi Sally!