Thread 8: To feel disappointed after reading this in The Observer about the author and her husband from The Salt Path book and film?

[DisappointedReader]

Well, this has turned out to be slightly longer than the dozen or so replies I expected when I started the first thread!

The Observer The real Salt Path: how a blockbuster book and film were ...

2nd Observer
https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/the-salt-path-whats-in-the-book-and-what-the-observer-has-found

3rd Observer
https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/the-salt-path-the-truth-behind-the-blockbuster-book-video

4th Observer
‘I felt I was being gaslit’ – the landlord who helped Ray...

Thread One ^www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5368194-to-feel-disappointed-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?^

Thread 2 Thread 2. To feel disappointed after reading this in The Observer about the author and her husband from The Salt Path book and film? | Mumsnet

Thread 3 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5369425-thread-3-to-feel-disappointed-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?

Thread 4 https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5370609-thread-4-to-feel-disappointed-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?

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

Thread 6
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5372494-thread-6-to-feel-disappointed-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-
husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?

Thread 7
www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5373425-thread-7-to-feel-disappointed-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?

Raynor Winn/Sally Walker's statement Raynor Winn

New posters welcome. It would be helpful to read at least the four Observer items above before posting.

To all - Please be extremely cautious when it comes to naming or implicating people and addresses not in the public eye or with no direct connection to the story, and around the understandable health speculations, especially where details are unclear or still emerging. Please do not engage with possible visitors who seem to have their own agenda and seek to derail.

We have done amazingly well together - in the main that is, not mentioning any names but you know who you are! - for seven threads so far. I can't be on the threads as much as I'd like so all help with keeping our discussion ticking along in a healthy and civil fashion is very welcome.

No saltiness. Keep to the path. Thank you.

1. did Raynor Winn embezzle money from an estate agent? Or was she accused of doing so? They are different things. Where is the proof either way? Many contributors on here have jumped to a quick conclusion based only on who they prefer to believe.

If the accusation was false or unfounded (proof or no proof) then RW had every opportunity to say so in the statement she made responding to the Obverser article.

@Humankindness i thought you were just dropping in? But I am enjoying your questions and am happy to answer

1. did Raynor Winn embezzle money from an estate agent? Or was she accused of doing so? They are different things. Where is the proof either way? Many contributors on here have jumped to a quick conclusion based only on who they prefer to believe.

I think it vanishingly unlikely that anyone innocent would
a) run away rather than attend a police interview
b) borrow money at a high interest rate to pay back the money they "didn't steal"
c) pay an expensive lawyer to draw up an NDA

2. a non-disclosure agreement was signed by the estate agent, meaning both parties agreed to it and both were protected. Why is his widow disrespecting this? What does that say about her character? We’ll probably never know what happened here. But either way it’s not relevant to the story of the walk.

NDAs to cover up crime are at best immoral,. arguably illegal.
The widow has shown huge quiet dignity in not talking till approached

3. what evidence does anyone have that the Winn’s made up the story about investing in Cooper’s business? If they did lose money in this way, the start of the book is correct. The observer has not been able to refute this.

I can believe money may well have been lost in unwise investments, I don't think anyone is disputing that. But that was one facet of the story and by no means the whole truth. And the story as told in the book made no sense at all to anyone who understands business or law.

4. where is the hard evidence that any money is still owed? Can the garage owner produce evidence? If not, this is hearsay. Is the anonymous person conveniently cited by the Observer real? Where is the hard evidence? How can 400k still be owed when the house was sold and proceeds used to pay the debt? And what relevance does any of this have to the Salt Path journey?

Where's the hard evidence has the money has been paid back? I haven't seen any

Sally and Tim can sue for libel if this is so wildly untrue.

But on balance - We as good as know that Sally was happy to steal north of £60000 from a small family business that trusted her. And Sally in the books admits to petty theft from shops and campsites on route. So it's fairly believable that they owe others money.

The relevance is that the Salt Path claimed to be "unflinchingly honest" and now looks to be anything but

But on balance - We as good as know that Sally was happy to steal north of £60000 from a small family business that trusted her. And Sally in the books admits to petty theft from shops and campsites on route. So it's fairly believable that they owe others money

Let me just add to your post - we as good as know that Sally was happy to steal North of £60,000 from a small family business that trusted her AND THE OWNER HAD CANCER

I don't know how anyone can defend her.

Other posters have done a very good job of answering your queries so I won't go over old ground, plus if you read the threads, most of what you ask has already been discussed, and with fairly stated opinions and caveats.

Indeed, I would confidently assert that these 8 threads show an admirable level of objectivity and scrutiny of all facts and evidence available. I would even go so far as to say that I consider these threads a surprising and welcome breath of fresh air compared to the outrage one often sees on social media platforms these days. You seek objectivity, well it is definitely here. Meanwhile, you also ask for kindness and empathy. Unfortunately, kindness and empathy are subjective and irrelevant when striving for objectivity. You can't have both.

If there has been any mean-spiritedness, which I can appreciate could be mistaken for bias, I would argue that, on the whole, such comments and the basis of them are no different to a bad book review on Amazon. The facts (and scrutiny of them) and any meanness on these threads, as you will see when carefully reading back over them for the answers you seek, are as far apart as Moth looking like Simon Armitage.

We could be neighbours 😉

I logged on, saw 128 new messages and wondered what on earth had happened.

Panic over, just one of those planted flouncy posters who wants to let us know they think we are all nasty harradinds and flounce off again.

Eviction circumstances
The original lender of circa £100k testified in court that the purpose of the loan, at 18% per annum interest, secured against the property, was to enable SW to avoid criminal charges.

The Walkers' former residence of a Welsh farmhouse apparently sold for in July 2016 for £280,000. They already had £230k in mortgage debt, which took priority over the creditors when it sold. One states that they are now owed £400k, due to the interest on the loan.

Health
Whilst TW may well have a health condition, medical evidence shared by the author suggests only a 2015 prognosis of CBS/D, which comes with some lack of clarity, that uncertainty is echoed in later letters.

It's important, as the 2 main pillars of the "unflinchingly honest" account in TSP are:

• not their fault they were evicted and are penniless, instead the fault of a friend recouping an investment

• walking off a terminal illness, diagnosed the same week as the eviction (2013)

These original dishonesties are what disappointed the readership, including many to whom it had been suggested that by not doing long walks they weren't doing enough to combat their neurological conditions, and, crucially, called both SW's and TW's integrity into question.

With all this in mind, it seems most peculiar to describe various interviews and firsthand accounts with key parties as hearsay, but insist SW's words be the truth.

And yes, posters on here certainly do doublecheck sources and hold each other to account!

Finally, a damp squib is a firework that has been wet and therefore fails to go off correctly.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/damp_squib
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/squib

Probably on Thread 2, I suggested to a "contrarian poster", ‘You’re late to the party bring a rope.’ I should’ve added: ‘Bring an axe as well!’.

Without wanting to exonnerate the original embezzlement, the repayment loan which led to the house reposession, the trail of unpaid debts and the possible deliberate exaggeration of the first CBD/CBS diagnosis and possible shift in chronology of first CBD/CBS diagnosis from 2015 to 2013 to retrofit a compelling narrative ( all pretty heinous errors of judgement imo).

My question is to what degree are PRH complicit in this sorry saga?

• change in title to TSP?
• rewriting of much of the first draft?
• spinning the story for commercial impact?
• not fact checking a first time author whom they had little idea would be such a commercial blockbuster?
• rewriting much of the first drsft because it was so illiterate? "who would of thought it?" etc

Currently a lot of ire and invective beiing thrown at the Walkers, but I think PRH aren't innocent bystanders in this fiasco.

This couple are on Channel 5 now - Cornwall: A year by the Sea. On catch up at 8pm

Agree - but I think PRH will ride it out and say it’s just industry standard.

Oh I agree, in fact I think the really big question/scandal isnt about these two individuals but about what publishers are churning out and marketing as non - fiction. Particularly when it is non-fiction with a dubious health claim.

I would like to see much more interrogation and discussion in the media about responsibilities of publishers and whether there needs to be more regulation

Embezzlement is an appalling crime. These 2 went on to gleefully steal from a campsite and a small shop which in my eyes is the same crime.. therefore no lessons learned. We can get a feel for their moral code from this. However, was RW legally or even morally obliged to disclose the embezzlement as the reason behind the loss of home? She was still technically right that they lost the home after a bad business deal..it is sort of within the bounds of a certain kind of truth. I do believe the illness was exagerrated massively for the emotional hook without which there was only a thin story. Very poor taste. But I blame the publisher, all the sources who gave the book glowing reviews and the reading public who lapped it up when it was glaringly obvious that it was full of holes. A momentum got behind it which is sadly indicative of the kind of thinking that's going on out there.

@everyoneon Channel 5 now

My daughter went to school with a Moth, he hated the name Timothy. 😁

Yes, I have wondered how much, if any of the coast path they have actually walked.

when I read the book, which I loved when it was first out, I was disappointed by the lack of description of my personal favourite sections. She seemed to talk about the obvious features only. Things you could know without actually walking the entirety of it.

following the recent revaluations ( I do feel extremely disappointed) I thought I’d re read the book, only I find I gave it to a friend ages back so I don’t have it. But I want to read it again to see if I’m correct. Because I wondered if using the Paddy Dillon book, the went and visited sections , walked a very sort bit, made notes ( as shown in the photo their copy of the book) and constructed the story from that.

@Catwith69lives
Where was the rewriting of the first draft talked about please? I think I've missed the reference and I'd like to know more.

We were just discussing that an hour ago, not sure if you saw, with all the brouhaha going on?

@notwavingbutdrowning1 brought up the fact that SW told the Big Issue they were evicted in 2013 in the same week as a terminal diagnosis, which reduces how much spinning of the story for commercial impact PRH could have done.

Unless the publishers' involvement preceded the Big Issue article, but as I understood it SW showed her agent the Big Issue article used it as leverage.

To your other points:

• change in title to TSP? – why was this a bad thing to do?
• rewriting of much of the first draft? – did they?
• not fact checking a first time author whom they had little idea would be such a commercial blockbuster? – I agree they should have, many sources from the publishing world say to so would have been uncommon though and the onus is on the author who signed a "this is all true" contract.
• rewriting much of the first draft because it was so illiterate? "who would of thought it?" etc – again, did they? I didn't know about that.

I'd be inclined to describe the MN reaction as outrage, shock, empathy for Ros Hemmings, for some: a feeling of having had the wool pulled over their eyes, and, of course, disappointment.

it wasn't! But I suspect that for a first time author with no writing experience there was probably a fair amount of rewriting between the first draft of the MS and the final published MS.

Ah, OK. I'd misunderstood.

did Raynor Winn embezzle money from an estate agent? Or was she accused of doing so? They are different things. Where is the proof either way? Many contributors on here have jumped to a quick conclusion based only on who they prefer to believe.

The willingness to take out a loan that put their house at risk suggests that they didn't think they could defend a claim of innocence. The stories told by the Hemmings family and the 'distant relative' corroborate with each other and are backed up by court documents. Obviously people are sometimes falsely accused of stealing money cf: post office scandal, but no explanation has been offered of how mistakes were made here, and the accusations are quite specific.

a non-disclosure agreement was signed by the estate agent, meaning both parties agreed to it and both were protected. Why is his widow disrespecting this? What does that say about her character? We’ll probably never know what happened here. But either way it’s not relevant to the story of the walk.

That kind of NDA suggests guilt, and is rather morally dubious. It's not clear whether Hemming's widow signed an NDA herself, but I think any moral obligation to stick to the terms evaporated when the Walker/Winns started to sell an alternative version of events.

This is all key to the story told in The Salt Path. It's a story with an arc and heroes and villains, and the instigating moment is the Walkers losing their home through no fault of their own. It would of course be possible to tell a story about losing your home through your own feckless and irresponsible decisions, but that story is not the story of Salt Path.

what evidence does anyone have that the Winn’s made up the story about investing in Cooper’s business? If they did lose money in this way, the start of the book is correct. The observer has not been able to refute this.

They might have invested in his business, but there is still no explanation of why he would owe them money, or why they wouldn't be able to support this with a paper trail, or why they would then agree to the 18% loan and charge on their house when apparently he had access to cash to just pay them back. Their story just isn't believable.

The story at the beginning of the Salt Path as described in the book is not correct, and this has been admitted.

where is the hard evidence that any money is still owed? Can the garage owner produce evidence? If not, this is hearsay. Is the anonymous person conveniently cited by the Observer real? Where is the hard evidence? How can 400k still be owed when the house was sold and proceeds used to pay the debt? And what relevance does any of this have to the Salt Path journey?

Who knows? I suspect the garage owner can produce evidence if he keeps his books in order. I assume that if the debt for £400K is genuine the creditor will instigate proceedings. The relevance is that there are plenty of people who will corroborate the idea that the Walkers, at the very least, managed their finances in a very chaotic way. Again, this is relevant to the story because it hinges on the idea that they were not the authors of their own misfortune.

If none of this mattes to you, you should certainly buy the next book, which I suspect will be published if it is believed that it can make money.

Yes, I have wondered how much, if any of the coast path they have actually walked.
when I read the book, which I loved when it was first out, I was disappointed by the lack of description of my personal favourite sections. She seemed to talk about the obvious features only. Things you could know without actually walking the entirety of it.
following the recent revaluations ( I do feel extremely disappointed) I thought I’d re read the book, only I find I gave it to a friend ages back so I don’t have it. But I want to read it again to see if I’m correct. Because I wondered if using the Paddy Dillon book, the went and visited sections , walked a very sort bit, made notes ( as shown in the photo their copy of the book) and constructed the story from that.

I think very complicit, by the time they got to the third book.

We 'helped' host Simon Armitage on his South west travel.
The kids were back in school by the time he got to us, so a lot less tourists on the path. And the weather was already autumnal.
It was extremely well organised from Simon's end and most of us involved kind of knew each other or had common ground in a Radio 4, arts centre kind of way.
His grumpy troubadour face would have been on the odd poster stuck in a bus stop notice board to get people to listen to him in the local community centre. It was very much local community events and people rather than tourists.
Anyone who long distance walks is obsessed with kit - boots, socks, bags, how you pack your rucksack. Even down to always using a ratty old t -shirt because it's soft and the perfect cut. We also use quite a lot of kit bought decades ago. I was surprised to hear Raymoth had walked in their youth because where was their vintage kit, not in the photos! an old scout Vango rather than a new one, an original karrimor rather than a Sports direct version.
I also don't get the painkillers thing. The coast path at Minehead, Barnstaple, Bideford, Appledore, Bude, etc is full of pharmacies and branches of boots. Some of the coastal towns also have temporary summer pop up surgeries just for tourists. So there's a porta cabin in a supermarket carpark for sand in your eye, forgotten epi pens, weaver fish stings.... We're also out on a limb, if I had a rare, neuro thing, I'd want to be close to the niche specialists not on a waiting list at Trellisk.
living on the coast path, I don't recognise the Winn/Walkers version for lots of reasons.

I don't think there's any way of ever establishing how much of the path they walked. I'm not too fussed about exact timeliness..I think it's pretty accepted that timelines can be jiggled about in non fiction for sense making. Matt Hancock ( bad example!) I seem to recall being upfront about dates being jiggled. The author of The Peregrine non fiction classic admitted he had crammed everything into a single season as I recall..though think this might have been in the foreword.