Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

What we're reading

Find your new favourite book or recommend one on our Book forum.

Truth About The Salt Path Author

44 replies

AWanderingFool · 06/07/2025 05:18

This comes as no surprise, I always thought her description of them losing the house was so vague that it hid a less blameless account.

A journalist has been investigating "Raynor Winn", aka Sally Walker, who seems to have left a trail of criminality behind her.

https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/the-real-salt-path-how-the-couple-behind-a-bestseller-left-a-trail-of-debt-and-deceit

The real Salt Path: how the couple behind a bestseller le...

The real Salt Path: how the couple behind a bestseller le...

Penniless and homeless, the Winns found fame and fortune with the story of their 630-mile walk to salvation. We can reveal it was far from the truth

https://observer.co.uk/news/national/article/the-real-salt-path-how-the-couple-behind-a-bestseller-left-a-trail-of-debt-and-deceit

OP posts:
NormaSnorks · 06/07/2025 13:43

Yes, I always thought the bit about the circumstances in which they lost the house was glossed over, but thought 'oh well, law can be complex'.

People are usually forgiving of a little bit of 'creative licence' for the sake of a good story, but there are so many unforgiveable deviations from the truth. So we're meant to feel sorry for them being homeless and penniless yet they actually have land and a (derelict) house in France?

namechangeaaargh · 06/07/2025 14:26

I'm not surprised. I was suspicious about their finances and how they lost the house when I read it and ISTR there was an Amazon review of it that hinted that there was much more to it than what was in the book, though it may have been taken down since.

starfishmummy · 06/07/2025 16:18

NormaSnorks · 06/07/2025 13:43

Yes, I always thought the bit about the circumstances in which they lost the house was glossed over, but thought 'oh well, law can be complex'.

People are usually forgiving of a little bit of 'creative licence' for the sake of a good story, but there are so many unforgiveable deviations from the truth. So we're meant to feel sorry for them being homeless and penniless yet they actually have land and a (derelict) house in France?

Film glossed over things even more than the book did, Not just the background but also the events of the walk.

Maybe she should have marketed the book as fiction. I'm sure that's how most people will view the film anyway.

ginasevern · 06/07/2025 16:48

Blimey, so they were going to saddle someone with the house in North Wales via a raffle. I guess they were going to abscond with the proceeds and leave some poor sod to unravel the mess. I also read somewhere that they stole food and helped themselves to honesty boxes along the route of their walk. I don't think it was much in the scheme of things, but they don't seem to have repaid any of it since their new found fame.

faffadoodledo · 06/07/2025 16:50

ginasevern · 06/07/2025 16:48

Blimey, so they were going to saddle someone with the house in North Wales via a raffle. I guess they were going to abscond with the proceeds and leave some poor sod to unravel the mess. I also read somewhere that they stole food and helped themselves to honesty boxes along the route of their walk. I don't think it was much in the scheme of things, but they don't seem to have repaid any of it since their new found fame.

I can't remember if they admitted to robbing honesty boxes in the book, but they definitely admitted to gleefully scarping a camp site without paying.

Kaftanesque · 07/07/2025 05:53

Yes the bit about not paying for the campsite and also I seem to remember her attitude towards someone with a large house that helped them out really seeming unpleasant. I finished the book but didn't feel the need to read any others or see the film.Now I'm glad I didn't bother.

LadyJaneGrey18 · 07/07/2025 07:57

They both sound like awful people really.

ObelixtheGaul · 07/07/2025 10:03

AnnaQuayInTheUk · 06/07/2025 06:59

Our book group read the book when it came out and we agreed that there was something "off" about the story especially about how they lost their house.

We couldn't understand why they seemed to have no friends or family apart from the woman who they went to stay with for a bit in the middle of the book. No parents or siblings to help them out. The book also skimmed over how their poor DC were affected. It seemed to be a case of "you're over 18, sort yourself out"

Well, to be fair, she did say in the book they didn't want to stay with friends and end up being a burden, which I sort of understood when I read it. I'd be the same, TBF.

But our book club had the same doubts, along with 'wouldn't you just try to get a job?'. It seemed odd they spent all that time trying to find the legal way out but neither of them thought about trying to make some money in case the worst happened. This version of events explains why they couldn't do that rather better than the presentation in the book of two unworldly innocents who appeared to have lived a sort of off the grid lifestyle working for themselves.

The ending was really odd. Who just offers a flat to a couple they just met? I'd love to know how that really came about.

Maura555 · 07/07/2025 19:18

Are Dave and Julie real people? Have they ever been interviewed by the media? I have not seen photos of the four of them on their trips together.

TheMerryCritic · 10/07/2025 15:39

Shoplifting. Not paying to camp on established sites. Financing the walk with working tax credits awarded for a now defunct glamping site on their former land. Truth seems like shifting sands for Raynor Winn aka Sally Walker (and Moth is, prosaically, short for Timothy, her husband’s actual name, nothing to do with being an eco warrior, as she told Radio 4).

helenc1976 · 01/10/2025 20:19

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

helenc1976 · 01/10/2025 20:34

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

helenc1976 · 01/10/2025 20:35

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

helenc1976 · 01/10/2025 20:45

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

LadyJaneGrey18 · 01/10/2025 20:47

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

It’s fairly obvious why people feel strongly about it . Surely.

SugarRoad · 01/10/2025 20:57

@helenc1976 You should check out the veracity of the (auto)biographies of others mentioned in this book (even incidentally).

llamasmother · 17/02/2026 00:50

The podcast 'The Walkers" by the Observer journalist is so thorough and a great piece of investigative reporting.
It raises the question - Why aren't the Walkers in jail?

NormaSnorks · 28/02/2026 12:15

llamasmother · 17/02/2026 00:50

The podcast 'The Walkers" by the Observer journalist is so thorough and a great piece of investigative reporting.
It raises the question - Why aren't the Walkers in jail?

Yes, I found that podcast thorough and fascinating!

I guess that in order for them to be found guilty of a criminal offence which could lead to a jail sentence someone would actually have to charge them, and I'm not sure anybody has?
The family all just seem to want to have nothing to do with them, but sweep it under the carpet as an unfortunate incident.
The publishers are unlikely to sue them for any kind of breach of contract, as ironically, the controversy is fueling book sales 😡
The money stolen from the employer was repaid in part I believe in return for him signing a non-disclosure/ not bringing criminal charges.
I guess there might be utility companies or councils trying to recoup ££ for unpaid bills, but in my experience they tend to write it off under a certain level?

There may be stuff on-going and about to come to light though?

RavelTrio · 28/02/2026 12:38

NormaSnorks · 28/02/2026 12:15

Yes, I found that podcast thorough and fascinating!

I guess that in order for them to be found guilty of a criminal offence which could lead to a jail sentence someone would actually have to charge them, and I'm not sure anybody has?
The family all just seem to want to have nothing to do with them, but sweep it under the carpet as an unfortunate incident.
The publishers are unlikely to sue them for any kind of breach of contract, as ironically, the controversy is fueling book sales 😡
The money stolen from the employer was repaid in part I believe in return for him signing a non-disclosure/ not bringing criminal charges.
I guess there might be utility companies or councils trying to recoup ££ for unpaid bills, but in my experience they tend to write it off under a certain level?

There may be stuff on-going and about to come to light though?

Yes, exactly. The people they stole from were either repaid with borrowed money (and when they defaulted on the loan, their house was repossessed) or never pressed charges and are now dead, their bank accounts wound up etc. One of the nieces who spoke on the podcast said she’d phoned around a couple of police stations, but that no one was interested, presumably because there are no living victims and the sole evidence of those thefts is family memories and a typed, undated confession letter Sally Walker says she didn’t write.

Someone like Bill Cole, the landlord of the cider farm they left abruptly having not paid the utility bills and without ever, in five years, making the cider their contract required, would definitely have a case for unpaid utilities and breach of contract (he is reported on the podcast as saying they’d cost him tens of thousands in lost earnings), but sounds too bewildered and hurt by it all to want to press charges.

And faking a serious illness in itself is not a crime. Nor is lying in your ‘memoir’. If, as we assume, Sally Walker signed the standard memoir contract, that contract will have stipulated that the book is substantially true to the best of her recollection, other than some identifying details changed for privacy reasons, so she will have breached that contract. But as the book was a huge bestseller, and made them lots of money, her publisher has no reason to bring a legal case, especially as it would only draw more attention to their lack of due diligence in fact checking.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page