Thread 24 : To feel disappointed - and now disgusted and vindicated too - after reading this in The Observer about the author and her husband from The Salt Path book and film?

[DisappointedReader]

NO POSTS PLEASE UNTIL THREAD 23 IS FULL

The Observer's original exposé: The real Salt Path: how a blockbuster book and film were ...
First thread: To feel disappointed after reading this in The Observer about the author and her husband from The Salt Path book and film? | Mumsnet
Links to threads 2-16, the other 20 Observer articles and videos to date, Raynor Winn/Sally Walker's statement, our timeline and sources can all be accessed in the OP and first few posts of Thread 17: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5403285-thread-17-to-feel-disappointed-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?
Links to threads 18-20 can be found in the OP of Thread 21: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5460943-thread-21-to-feel-disappointed-and-now-disgusted-too-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?
Thread 22:www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5470952-thread-22-to-feel-disappointed-and-now-disgusted-too-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?
Thread 23:www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5475246-thread-23-to-feel-disappointed-and-now-disgusted-too-after-reading-this-in-the-observer-about-the-author-and-her-husband-from-the-salt-path-book-and-film?

Most recent:

• Salt Path: A Very British Scandal, available on Sky Documentaries and NOW TV, 15th December 2025
• ‘Don’t look for the money. I’ve taken it all’: Salt Path author Raynor Winn’s ‘confession’ that she stole from her family | The Observer
• Observer Newsroom: The Real Salt Path Story, Thursday 8th January 2026

New posters joining us in the genuine spirit of our civil discourse are welcome. It would be helpful to get the background from at least some of the Observer exposé items 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. Remember, even Hollywood rabbits attract the odd flea. Please do not engage with drive-by scolders and ploppers who seem to have their own agenda and seek to derail. Avoid @'ing and quoting them as - from experience - this will only encourage them back to the threads. For over 6 months we have done amazingly well together for 23 very interesting, very serious and very silly threads so far. I can't be here as much as I'd like so all help with keeping our discussion walking along in our usual reasonable and respectful fashion is very welcome.

After 23,000 posts there are still new things to look out for on the path:

• Podcast series (7 episodes) from The Observer's award-winning Investigative Journalist Chloe Hadjimatheou (and including a shoutout to our threads), 13th January 2026:

The Walkers: The real Salt Path | The Observer

• The Observer, 18th January 2026:

The Salt Path scandal: a hunch, a hint and six months of ... and Publishers agree The Salt Path crossed a line | The Observer

• BBC Podcast, 28th January 2026 (to be confirmed)

Please start each post with the podcast episode you are commenting on, for clarity and to help others avoid spoilers if they wish to do so. Many thanks.

After listening to of The Walkers: The real Salt Path podcast episodes from The Observer my thoughts are even more with the victims. I also believe that the publishers, agent and prizegivers must now act and be seen to act.

As always, keep to the path, no saltiness, eat fudge and drink cider.

NO POSTS PLEASE UNTIL THREAD 23 IS FULL

Thanks you're a ⭐- thought it would be a bit of light and apt relief. Sorry for the extra work you've been caused here and as for over there on the AMA ......!

I work in the music industry and you do meet a lot of Tim’s - basically charming rogues. It’s well known Richard Branson was originally like this and admits as much, but became successful, so the rogue aspect was kind of no longer needed . It’s Sometimes managers, sometimes agents or promoters, occasionally band members often scamming each other in various ways.

i think TW is just as liable for all this as she is , in fact possibly more so if he has indeed been telling large exaggerations related to his health - I think half the problem here is Sally was probably a pretty ordinary average person and was totally enraptured by a guy with a lot of surface charm and decent looking, I suspect he probably had grand ideas above his actual earning power or work ethic and she was constantly trying to keep him happy, in ways that involved having cash and it all got totally out of hand . She’s to blame, but he most certainly is too - maybe if they had made money from the first one and then kept their heads totally down woukd have been wiser move - the higher your profile and success the more likely that you will get caught out in your web of tall tales

My pleasure. Linking YT to MN has caught me out in the past @BeachcombingBrandy . I think it's the ads. Try copying the YT link but only up to, not including, the &. After adding it to your post click on preview and test the link before posting. If it doesn't work in preview, perhaps only shows a black box rather than the image of the video, the link isn't right so no point posting it until you've edited it.

I don't think you can categorise people in this way, as you say. it's the actions of these people that we are concerned with. Are their actions good or bad, their family love them, but have experienced some of the bad things that Raymoth have done, most have forgiven them because of the family bond. Their other victims do not all forgive them and are entitled to feel that they have been treated badly.

All throughout Chloe's investigations Raymoth have been treated fairly, Chloe has given all those she interviewed the freedom to express how they feel, many have said nice things, they have found Raymoth likable people, until they have suffered some bad behaviour. I can't remember who pointed out long ago, that confidence tricksters are usually likable and thought of as being of a good character by people, until they are conned.

After the posts (now deleted) on the AMA thread, it has set me to pondering whether things would have been much different for the Walkers if they had handled things differently, as Chloe’s investigation gathered momentum?

Part of me feels that there is still a lot of deep disappointment / disgust / unhappiness about the Walkers partly because of the way that they have failed to respond with integrity to what are inherently reasonable questions. From the statements that I have read, there seems to be so much fudgery of the facts, and hiding behind semantics, it is clear that they are still hoping to come out of this in some way with reputations - if not actually intact - then reasonably clean.

My view is that perhaps if they had taken pre-emptive action to make a statement admitting that some of the material facts of the book were not correct, and given a very fulsome apology, and perhaps drawn on their obvious vulnerabilities to offer as some sort of explanation, and done this before the initial Observer exposé, then they could have potentially taken the heat out of the situation.

I think integrity in public life is a really fundamental requirement. I am sure the general public would have had anger at the deceit, but this would have been considerably tempered through understanding what lay beneath the falsehoods - I imagine foolishness, naïveté, a sense that these things would matter little as they may make some money from the book, but probably never in a million years did they imagine that it would be such a runaway success that they would become very widely known. She obviously caught the zeitgeist with the book.

I think the fact that she has continued firm in her stance that it is her ‘truth’ has contributed to the issue maintaining interest. They need to do something to close this down - and they need to show regret and understanding of the damage that has been caused.

There are numerous people in public life who have been exposed for actions that fall below standards expected - or that even cross the line into criminality in one way or another. I wonder if a response showing dignity and integrity helps when it comes to the speed at which a story becomes ‘tomorrow’s chip wrapper’ or stays current?

As a cheeky (but relevant) aside - I found myself rooting for the traitors during this last series… I think they were obviously very strategic, but showed a lot of integrity towards each other which I think makes a difference in terms of how you are viewed by the general public!

@Stoufer I agree. So much of this could have been prevented if instead of threatening the Observer with legal action, Sal had admitted to her wrongdoings and admitted that much of the books had been 'reimaginings' rather than having been written exactly as happened. I think she would have been cut a lot of slack if she'd come clean.

Although this wouldn't have helped in the instance of, for example, having TSP entered for a 'First Book Prize' when she knew very well it wasn't her first published book!

Good afternoon everyone. I hope you are well today. By the time I got to sit down yesterday for my supper and to catch up with the threads it was actually today and after 4am. I ended up with a cup of tea and leftover Christmas biscuits (not Jammie Dodgers, shortbread!) rather than food and then nodding off. I'm going to catch up properly later as the sun is shining for once and I need to get out again with the DC for some more much-needed fresh air, big skies and exercise before the sun sets. No interpretive dance this time - too tired!

There have been some deletions on the AMA thread now and I've also posted a reminder that it is a thread specifically for questions for Chloe. I agree that it would be a shame if it continues to be derailed by individual posters or discussions between posters. If you're concerned about a post please consider clicking on report to alert MNHQ. Engaging, even with the very best intentions, tends to keep the poster coming back and derails the thread.

Finally, I've seen a pp mentioning that there is a piece due in The Observer on Sunday. Sorry to say that I think mistakes are being made there. The piece from Phoebe was actually meant to appear last Sunday alongside the other two TSP pieces, but was bumped off by editors due to lack of space thanks to Trump. Phoebe thought it would appear online on Monday but Chloe now tells me senior editors haven't used it. Disappointing, I know, and Chloe and Phoebe are disappointed too, but these things happen. We can content ourselves with the very positive mentions from Chloe in two podcasts and with two hours of AMA here on Wednesday, all thanks to our threads and Chloe.

I have a suspicion that she has been in a run-away train, downhill, with no way of putting the brakes on or getting off. From an initial assumption that it might bring in a few thousand, or a few tens of thousands, but still retaining the status of an unknown author - it must then have been so difficult to refuse the juggernaut that kicked in when it became a bestseller… probably huge pressure on her to allow book to be submitted for CB prize. Probably the requirement to ‘just do a couple of small book signings’ mushroomed into having to appear on radio / tv. The promise of a big windfall by selling the film rights - was probably too much to resist, and if she felt she had got away with it all by that point, she probably didn’t anticipate that the film would catapult her image into the way of the people from her past, that had perhaps suffered from the Walker’s actions. I imagine they just didn’t anticipate how much of a slap-in-the-face it would feel to those people, seeing the film trailed and publicised, and on the high street.

edited to add: this was in response to Vroomfondle’s post above, in particular about why she may have put the book forward for the CB prize.

Very interesting points @Stoufer, I think they could have stopped at any point. Salray could have said, no more Moth is too ill, I'm devoting my time to him. But no, she has gone along with it writing more books and allowing a film to be made, endless interviews, even gigging. If PRH and all those involved really believed the lies that Salray wrote about Moth and her devotion to him, they would have had no option but to accept her decision. Greed has been the thing driving her, possibly enjoying the status as well all in the knowledge that Moth was not dying.

More pondering - maybe she can’t come out with a statement admitting everything as maybe that would then make her vulnerable to being sued.. not necessarily by PRH, as they probably have not suffered any losses, but maybe by the company producing the film - as I understand that the film run / distribution was markedly different to what was anticipated, pre-exposé?
I wonder if there was a part of the contract selling the film rights that was signed asserting that it was materially true, and an original work?

If that is the case, then that is a very unfortunate position for the Walkers to be in, as they must be between a rock and a hard place (as the saying goes)..

Is there a risk that they get sued by the film company even if they don't openly admit their guilr as the weight of evidence suggests that they have been lying through their teeth and TSP is far from being an unflinchingly honest account of their life changing 630 mile walk on the SWCP?

I'm not sure about the film contract @Stoufer, I seem to recall in past discussions about the film, that it was different from the book, as such an adaptation of the book, so it didn't have to be 'true' like the scene written in to show them being kind. Also the leg dragging, not to accurately portray Moth, but represent CBD.

@Freshsocks Yes, I see what you mean. I was thinking not so much about the content of the film, rather if she had signed a contract (like she did with PRH) stating that it was materially true, and an original work, and whether the investigation (arising out of claims that the work is not true, or original - to this book) was the cause of the film having reduced release / distribution, thereby resulting in reduced returns for those involved in the film.

I'm not sure @Stoufer, I'm hoping someone who has more of a grasp of this can offer some information. I'm just trying to remember, I'm sure we discussed this issue, it was because of the extra scenes and the portrayal of Moth. I think the conclusion was that it didn't matter that the origin story wasn't true, because the film was fictionalised? I see what you are saying about the film not being released in America because of the revaluations, but I don't know if they have grounds to sue.

With the CB prize, I'm not sure when Salray entered for the prize @Vroomfondleswaistcoat will know, if she had already made a substantial amount of money from TSP, she could have argued that she didn't need the prize or the money, been all magnanimous. Salray and Tim have not shown much generosity, the money raised for the charities that supported them, was just marketing, reinforcing their lies.

I don't think Sal (well PRH because she will likely have been entered by her publisher rather than entering independently) would have gone for the CB prize for the money. I think she did it for the kudos of having 'Prize Winning' on the book cover. I also wonder how many other book awards it was entered for where it didn't even shortlist?

I think Tim did contribute £1,000 via JustGiving to PSPA as part of his 2023 London marathon walk.

Maybe they gave much more to charities. But the cynic in me suggests that the charitable concerns masked the commercial desire to exploit homelessness and severe neurological illnesses for book sales, their brand and their own financial benefit.

If so, that is beyond the pale imo.

Sorry @Stoufer, I still didn't answer your question about the contract, I don't know if the film contract was the same as the book, I'm not sure that Salray did have to sign anything for the film, to say that it was a true story because it was an adaptation?

Thank you @Vroomfondleswaistcoat, when this has been discussed before, the conclusion has been that Salray wanted the prize, she wanted to be a well known writer.

Totally agree with your post @ThompsonTwin, £1,000 was peanuts, compared to what they were earning out of the scam.

Sorry to disagree but my assessment of the film was that it followed TSP book pretty closely, so much so that I'm sure the story line would not have made much sense without having first read the book. Also didn't JI spend a whole day with Moth because he was anxious not to "overact" re. Moth's physical impairment? In the cinema it was all my DW could do to restrain me from LOL!* JI had, I assumed, been assured by Moth that he had got the limp just right!
I did enjoy the film but only because the scenery reminded of my Minehead childhood.
On return home, research revealed that difficulties in accessing Culbone church caused the producers to substitute shots of a churchyard in Cornwall for that scene. Also the location sequence in the film was I think out of order, as having reached Cornwall the couple then appeared to be back in North Devon. (Clovelly.)
*because IMHO there was no way that they would have surmounted that first hill!

This is a fair point. I can, at times be animated and lively, but if you spent 24hours with me you would see a lot of flatness. I often say I’m too exhausted to have any personality. This is a common problem with many chronic illnesses.

Tim has never had an appearance where he’s a bit flat.

I agree with you @UpfromSomerset, the film made little sense if you had not read the book or had knowledge of it. I'm just remembering Salray, in an interview saying that the limp was not strictly representative of moth, but was to convey the physical movement of someone with CBD?
The question being asked originally was, whether Salray had stated in a contract, that the film was a true story, and could the film makers sue her.

It’s me, I’m the snitch. I report the bad actors. Essentially, I’m keeping an eye on it and hitting “report” to alert MNHQ, however there is a delay whilst they look into it.

I’m not having Our Chloe trawling through derailments and bad faith points masquerading as “questions”

@Freshsocks This is why I think losing the CB prize would really hit Sal, because it's the only prize that any of the books have actually won. If she was forced to relinquish it then they'd have to take 'prize winning author' off any of her publicity material. I'm sure she was beyond delighted to win, not so much for the money but for the kudos, I think it is important to her to feel as though she is 'the best' in some category.

But it would be interesting to know how many other awards TSP (and maybe the others) were entered into. If they had shortlisted then it would be out there somewhere ("Shortlisted for the 'Slightly Massaged Truth' Award"), but that doesn't seem to be the case and it would be unlikely for PRH to have only entered such a high-seller in the one award, which makes me suspect that all other awards saw through the flimsy writing and the cliches and it didn't even list.

Ahoy there. Interesting times continue for the talented twosome, I see!

@RueMouffetard i personally don’t see biscuits as a typical first-thing-in-the-morning thing, but when I was pregnant it was suggested to prevent morning sickness. However, Rich Tea can feel very plain and wholesome compared with the decadence of a Custard Cream, so I suppose it has a certain Puritanism to it.

As for that poster asking how we’d all feel if S committed an act of self harm- obviously none of us wants that, but I would also argue that this thread is neither bullying nor harassing. Firstly, it’s none of it personal- it’s all about the behaviour- and secondly, she can easily avoid it. We aren’t constantly tagging her or messaging her or bringing our discussion to her attention, it’s taking place entirely separately to her, so I can’t see it as harassing at all. She would have to actively seek it out to even see it. If she can’t cope with her/their behaviour coming to light, well that’s a different matter, and isn’t our responsibility- it’s hers, and what a shame that she/they behaved in ways she wouldn’t want people to know about.

(I realise nobody asked, but it annoyed me that it was even brought up. We’re all held to certain standards of behaviour, and if we don’t want our behaviour scrutinised and discussed and condemned, we really shouldn’t behave in ways we know are shameful.)

When Sal submitted her first rebuttal statement (in the wake of Chloe's Observer exposé) which included a copy of the June 2015 neurologist's letter, I half expected an earlier letter to subsequently appear, confirming the CBD diagnosis which would have correlated with the events recounted in TSP. However, 7 months on, no such letter has appeared.

If Chloe's Observer article allegations had been libellous rather than grounded in fact, then by now I would have expected Sally Walker/Raynor Winn to have launched a libel suit against the Observer. 7 months on, no such libel suit has materialised.

Raynor Winn has issued a couple of vacuous statements alleging her truth in the wake of Chloe's allegations. But such rebuttals aren't backed up with evidence or action.

Imo her legal inaction is a de facto admission of guilt.

Actions (or the lack of them) speak louder than words.

I agree - I was trying to keep in mind (while listening) that illness can be hidden and that people have good and bad days, and may also mask…but certainly there was not a hint of anything other than bouncy cheeriness.
As they reminisced about their cups of tea and walks and journey in general, there was only one brief mention of any symptoms (relating to his exhaustion and anxiety at the Falls of Glomach). Again, this might not mean anything at all. I just find this apparently unscripted (well probably lightly scripted) bonus material quite interesting as it’s such a rare opportunity to hear Tim -
and also to hear Sal not being so fully in “being interviewed” or “spouting poetry” mode!