Eight years for a kinky love affair

Eight years is a long time to go to jail. That kind of sentence is only given for very severe crimes, whilst the courts seek lower sentences and non custodial punishments for offences such as shop lifting, burglary and fraud, which previously carried a stiff sentence.

To get that long a stretch from a British court these days you need to have been very bad indeed; you need to have had sex with the wrong person, at the wrong time, in the wrong place or perhaps in the wrong year.
This could apply to a man, now old, who fondled girls at parties in the 1970s or to a Chelsea pensioner who got into bed with a consenting adult who then fell asleep but reported him the next day for groping her.

It can even apply to a sexually deviant woman, though this is rare.Women are most often the ‘victim,’ and in the case of Gayle Newland, 25, she did go to some lengths to pose as a man. It doesn’t say in court reports how tall she is, she could be four foot ten, or the depth of her voice, that kind of evidence has not been considered. The grave crime she committed was to deceive a fantastically gullible woman, creating another female victim.

Gayle, from Cheshire, was dragged screaming from the dock today, 12/11/15 after being sentenced to eight years in prison after she disguised herself as a bloke with the unconvincing name, to me anyway but not to the judge, of ‘Kye Fortune.’

In 2013, while posing as Kye, Newland spoke on the phone to her partner putting on a man’s voice and persuaded her to put on a blindfold so they could meet up and, on occasions, have sex. The woman agreed and went along with it as Newland presented her with a prosthetic penis whilst wearing a swim suit and a woollen hat, and perhaps a funny voice. Her victim wore the blindfold during sex ten times, before she decided to rip it off and have a proper look. Or so she says. No one else was there to say what exactly happened during the 100 hours or so that this sexual relationship, if that is what it was, lasted.

Newland claimed her accuser always knew she was pretending to be a man as they engaged in role play while struggling with their sexuality. She told Chester Crown Court that the female friend did not wear a blindfold and denied claims that she strapped bandages to her chest, or had worn a swimsuit and a woollen hat, surely a new crime in itself. The court did not accept her version of things. She had been ‘up to something’ in the bedroom which is now something with which our courts will not put.

Sentencing her, Judge Roger Dutton ominously labelled her, ‘an intelligent, obsessional, highly manipulative, deceitful, scheming and thoroughly determined young woman.’

None of those qualities are against the law in themselves, but he obviously didn’t think much of them. The jury found Newland guilty of three counts of sexual assault and she is going down for eight years, the same sentence you might get for man-slaughter or shaking a baby to death.

‘To successfully pass off a deception of this complexity was a major undertaking involving dedicated mobile phone lines as well as regular texts from you purporting to be Kye’s relatives,’ said the judge, as if he was discussing the Great Train Robbery or the Hatton Garden heist.
‘You pursued this course of conduct over a lengthy period during which you played with her affections, acting entirely for your own sexual satisfaction and choosing to ignore the devastating impact that the eventual discovery of the truth would have on her.’

So he condemned her finally for romantic reasons, that the victim would be upset after having her affections toyed with for so long in a situation which she could not possibly have seen was odd or suspicious. He obviously found it quite usual to be in bed with someone wearing a plastic penis and a woollen hat, whilst blind-folded.

Perhaps Judges themselves still live in that strange world of black silk stockings and throttling games, perhaps they would not be suspicious of a lover who wore a woollen hat in bed and insisted on binding their eyes and arms. Most of us would regard the whole thing as laughable and throw it and all those involved out of court with a wigging. But that would be to live in the distant past, when serious crime involved violence, murder, rape, larceny, arson, fraud and treason, and no matter how convincing the circumstantial evidence, real hard proof had to be found before anyone could be found guilty and sent down.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*