Updated 5.43pm
THE TRIAL OF Gayle Newland, 25, who allegedly sexually assaulted her friend with a prosthetic penis while disguised as a man resumed in Chester, England this morning.
Newland, of Hooton Road in Willaston, Heston, seduced the alleged victim online under the male persona Kye Fortune.
The woman developed feelings for the fictional Kye, but he would only agree to meet if she wore a blindfold at all times, due to what he claimed was embarrassment over scars from cancer surgery.
The prosecution claims Newland wore a prosthetic strap-on penis to have sex with the alleged victim.
The complainant says she discovered the ruse after becoming suspicious and ripping off the blindfold.
The crown claims she did not consent to sex with a woman, and Newland has been charged with five counts of sexual assault.
However, Newland claims the woman knew all along she was having sex with a woman.
She was back in the witness box today, questioned by by the prosecution and defence teams.
Here’s what happened:
Nigel Power QC, defending, asked what happened after first contact was made between Kye and the victim.
The defendent says the messages were frequent, and moved from Facebook to text messaging and phone calls.
Newland says there was a brief period where working and holidays interrupted the pair, but Newland says the contact was “constant” after that.
Mr Power: “You were doing the talking but did you say Kye was from the Wirral lived in Manchester?”
Newland says she did after the victim asked questions.
Mr Power: “Did you enter into a relationship as boyfriend and girlfriend?”
Ms Newland: “Girlfriend and girlfriend, yeah.”
Judge Dutton questions that, and says: “But you were talking as Kye, are you saying she knew from the very beginning Kye was a girl?”
Ms Newland: “Yeah.”
“To other people she was never in a relationship with a girl, to friends and stuff, she was in a relationship with a guy called Kye. She would say I was her friend but never her girlfriend, she wanted to be straight.
No-one knew about her sexuality, no-one knew about my sexuality.
Judge Dutton asks why she was playing Kye when the two were communicating in private.
Ms Newland: “I didn’t on the phone, just in texts and stuff.”
She claims she did it because the complainant was uncomfortable about being seen as gay.
Mr Power questions the fact that Newland had two phones, one which was used to message as Kye and one to message as her true self.
Mr Power asks why she provided details about Kye’s background, where he was born and other information.
Ms Newland: “The main reason, as I said, no-one knew she was gay, no-one knew I was gay, she always pretended she was straight. When she found out, at the very start, that I spoke online as Kye, she sort of used that.
The second reason is that I had spoken as Kye since I was 13, it was something I was used to, to a certain degree. I wasn’t comfortable either to come out and say I was lesbian.
Newland says she and the victim got on “great” and the victim told her personal details about her family and her past.
Mr Power: “Did she confide in you about her previous relationships with men?”
Ms Newland: “Yes”
Mr Power: “Did you or not get the impression she had sex with more than one man in the past?”
Ms Newland: “Yeah she said she had had sex with around 10 guys, including her ex.”
Newland says the complainant was “not shy” and almost “boastful” about her sexual experience.
Newland says the pair were “always together” in their normal personas.
Mr Power: “When you on the phone as Kye did you change your voice?”
Ms Newland: “Nope, never.”
The jury also heard the defendant helped her move house. Newland says she spoke to the landlord on behalf of her friend and helped out with money.
I gave her £700, I am a student so I’m not made of money, I gave her money for food, I gave her money for rent.
The court heard that the complainant sent “loads” of intimate pictures, whereas ‘Kye’ only sent one.
Newland says she sent a large number of naked pictures in one go, “not asked for by me”.
Judge Dutton intervenes: “From the very beginning, you say she knew Kye was a girl. At this stage, when she had been introduced with you, are you saying she knew she was corresponding with you as Gayle?”
Ms Newland: “Yeah.”
Judge Dutton: “Second question, how do you know that?”
Ms Newland: “I established from the very beginning that I spoke online to people as a guy, and it wasn’t something we never spoke about.”
Judge Dutton: “You spoke about it in conversation?”
Ms Newland: “Yeah, yeah, of course.”
Mr Power asks whether the conversations between Kye and the complainant were a “role-play” or a fantasy.
Ms Newland: “I think it was a combination of both, role-play and a sexual fantasy for herself.”
Mr Power: “Did Kye tell the victim when her birthday was?”
Newland says Kye told the victim the exact same date, and also suggested Kye had exactly the same music taste. Newland says she told the victim, as Kye, that she liked things clean.
There is some laughter in court as Judge Dutton seemed to think this was a euphemism for something he “never heard of”, but is corrected by Mr Power that Newland just meant hygienic.
Newland says as she became more comfortable, these two people, Kye and her real self, began to converge as one person.
Mr Power asks about the decision for Kye and the victim to “meet up.”
He asks why Kye appeared reluctant to meet up.
Newland says: “How could I meet up with her as Kye? He wasn’t a real person.”
She also says the victim had told family and friends that Kye was ill, and that was why they could not meet.
Newland claims although she had used the same excuse to other woman, when speaking to them online as Kye, in this case it was the victim’s idea.
Mr Power asks about a statement from Corneilia Chin, a woman who Newland had chatted to online as Kye.
A statement from Ms Chin has been read to the jury, in which she claims she became infatuated with an online persona called Kye Fortune.
Newland says when she would discuss meeting up with the alleged victim in character, the victim would say: “There are ways we could meet up.”
Mr Power: “Before you as Kye and the victim first met, had you ever had any intimacy with another woman?”
Newland says no.
She says she eventually agreed to meet because she felt it was the only way she could enter into an intimate relationship with the victim.
Mr Power asks if she bought a ring for the alleged victim.
Newland says she purchased an eternity ring from H Samuel jewellers.
Mr Power: “Was it supposed to represent some commitment between you acting as Kye and the victim?”
Ms Newland: “Sort of. It was a present but it became something else. It was the only piece of jewellery she had.”
The jury hears it was paid for before the pair met. Newland says she handed it over face to face.
Mr Power asks about why the pair met and had sex for the first time at a hotel.
“The flat she lived in she really really didn’t like it, it wasn’t the greatest of flats in the greatest of conditions,” says Newland, adding that it was her own idea.
Mr Power: “At that time, did you own or have a prosthetic penis?”
Ms Newland: “No.”
She says she eventually purchased one some time after. The jury is told they met at hotels on four occasions.
Mr Power: “Did you own, or have a prosthetic penis, at any time when you met in the hotels?”
Ms Newland: “No.”
She says she arrived first in her red Mazda. The jury hears that Newland bought flower petals and laid them on the bed. Mr Power asks if the victim was wearing a mask and blindfold when she arrived.
Newland says no.
Mr Power: “Were there times that the victim ever wore a mask or blindfold, or anything to obscure her vision?”
Ms Newland: “Yeah, but not in the way she said.”
She claimed the pair had discussed how Newland wore a sleeping mask, and the victim decided to buy one herself.
She says the victim had a problem with her eye which gave her headaches, and wore it to help her sleep.
Mr Power: “Did she wear it during times of intimacy ever?”
Ms Newland: “No.”
Mr Power returns to the hotel meeting: ”Were you wearing a swimsuit or bandages at the hotel?”
Ms Newland: “No”
Judge Dutton: “Did you ever wear bandages?”
Ms Newland: “No, I never had any need to.
There was one time we were messing around with bandages that she used on her foot, because she was a dancer.
Mr Power: “Were they ever applied to your breasts?”
Ms Newland: “No.”
Mr Power asks if she was acting in role as Kye.
Ms Newland: “Again not really, it was in and out. Sometimes it would be constant but yeah.”
She says she took items of clothing off but was not completely naked.
“The least I had on was a t-shirt and underwear,” she says.
She was quite sexual, I wasn’t really expecting us do do anything at all. She was quite sexual, wanting me to touch her and stuff.
The jury hears the pair touched each other sexually.
Newland claims the complainant touched her breasts, and she was not wearing a bra. This contradicts the victim’s account which claimed she only touched her arms and hands.
Mr Power asks if the whole time at the hotel was taken up by sexual activity. Newland says around half of the encounter was taken up by sexual activity and half by talking.
Judge Dutton:“Talking about what?”
Ms Newland: “Life I guess.”
Judge Dutton: “Life as Kye or Life as Gayle?”
Newland says they were “almost one and the same”.
Ms Newland: “Sometimes it would be role play, but sometimes we would fall out of role play.”
Mr Power: “Was what happened similar to the meeting at the (first) hotel or not?”
Newland says she got texts from the alleged victim saying: “Sorry if I was too full on.”
In the other times it wasn’t similar at all. The second time there was nothing at all, there was kissing and touching, but nothing else.
Mr Power asks her to confirm that the touching was not sexual.
The jury hears there was a three or four week gap between the second and third meeting.
Mr Power asks if she saw the victim, as Kye, in this period.
Ms Newland: “I don’t think so no.”
Mr Power asks about the third meeting. Newland says this was similar to the second meeting, and the pair massaged each other.
During the morning evidence, Mr Power showed the jury some bank statements, including a PayPal payment on 13 April 2013 of £19.90.
Newland confirms it was an online purchase of a prosthetic penis.
Newland is shown a box, recovered from her house, which the sex toy was delivered in to her parents house.
She says it was discreetly packaged inside an external box.
Mr Power: “Why did you buy it?”
Ms Newland: “The victim would always talk about having sex and stuff.”
Mr Power: “To Kye?”
Ms Newland: “Yeah. It was not something I was really ready for, but she would say there is things you could buy.”
Mr Power: “Have you ever owned more than that one prosthetic penis?”
Ms Newland: “No, never.”
Mr Power: “Did you use prosthetic penis to have sex with the complainant?”
Ms Newland: “Yeah.”
She says this took place in the complainant’s flat. Earlier in the trial the complainant said the sexual encounters took place in the hotels.
Mr Power asks about the first time the sex toy was used: ”Were you there as Kye?”
Ms Newland: “Yes.
When I got there, it was just normal, kissing, watching telly, eating. Standard really. Then I remember her asking if I had got it with me, which I did.
She says the pair were kissing on the bed before the sex toy was used.
Mr Power asks what the pair were wearing when it was used. Newland said she was in her underwear, and the complainant was naked.
Mr Power: “Was she wearing a mask?”
Newland: “No.”
Mr Power holds an example of the sex toy up to the jury.
He asks about how she wore it.
Ms Newland: “I just put it on like a harness.”
She claims the victim saw her putting the object on. Mr Power asks if a condom was used.
Ms Newland: “Not that time.”
Mr Power: “Was a condom used most of the time, sometimes.”
She says they used condoms sometimes as the complainant found it more comfortable.
Ms Newland: “I didn’t really know what the hell I was doing to be honest.”
The jury were told more graphic details of the encounter.
Mr Power: “What happened afterwards?”
Ms Newland: “I just took it off.”
Mr Power asked this morning about Whatsapp messages sent from the complainant to Newland. In the messages, the complainant says she witnessed Newland do a sexual act.
She claimed yesterday this message was an attempt to get Kye to allow her to remove the blindfold, as she had seen things anyway. Newland says this explanation is not true.
Judge Dutton asks how many times the pair used the prosthetic in the course of their relationship. Newland says about 10 times.
Mr Power is asking about a woolly hat and swimsuit.
Newland admits she wore a woolly hat but not during sex – except on one occasion – and that she sometimes wore a swimsuit under her clothes as after visiting the complainant, she would go to the gym for a swim.
Mr Power asks about a claim by the complainant yesterday, that Kye would make her wear a mask and blindfold when the pair were watching television.
Newland says this is not true.
Mr Power asks if the pair performed oral sex.
Newland says this happened just the once, near the end of the relationship.
Mr Power asks about a trip out the pair took in Newland’s car.
Newland says they went to her parents’ house, which the complainant had visited before.
Mr Power: “What happened when you got to the house?”
Ms Newland: “She wasn’t feeling too good that day so we thought we would just lie in the sun. We had a patio at the rear of the house. We spent some time with my dog and then I cooked for her.”
She says she later drove back to the complainant’s flat.
Newland tells the court that she told her parents she was gay shortly before 30 June 2013.
Mr Power: “Was that something that was easy to do or not?”
Ms Newland: “No.”
Mr Power: “Did you tell the complainant that?”
Ms Newland: “I told her I was going to.”
She says she went to the complainant’s flat on 30 June and found her to be a “bit off” and “quiet”.
Mr Power asked if there was “kissing and cuddling”. Newland says there was. The court heard they also had sex using the prosthetic penis.
Newland says she sensed the complainant was upset about something, but she kept saying, “I’m fine.”
I said I love you and she said I love you too, and she said she was fine.
Mr Power: “Did something change?”
Ms Newland: “We stopped having sex, and she just switched. She started acting startled and saying what the hell, what’s this? I said what do you mean?”
Newland becomes emotional.
I kept saying what do you mean? And she would not give a direct answer at the start. She said, ‘Gayle, what are you doing here?’
“She then started covering herself and saying what are you doing here with a [prosthetic penis]? She went out of the room first and then went into the bathroom.”
Newland says she “did not have a clue what was going on” before the complainant “forced her out” of the bedroom so she could get undressed.
“I was right outside her bedroom banging and banging on her door, she eventually answered saying leave her alone, she would call the police and she couldn’t believe I had done this,” says Newland.
The court hears the complainant called the police but then cancelled the call.
“She had pushed me and I fell down the stairs, and she just climbed over me, didn’t stop to check if I was ok or anything, and she left,” says Newland.
Newland says she followed the complainant outside.
“I kept saying I don’t understand, but she was so adamant.”
The court heard this encounter was caught on CCTV. A tape of the argument was shown to the jury yesterday.
Mr Power: “What did you think of the relationship?”
Ms Newland: “It was over. She said she didn’t want anything to do with me, she said I was sick and why was I pretending to be Kye?”
Newland became extremely upset in the court during this part of evidence, telling the jury that she was in love with the complainant. She broke down in tears and struggled to speak.
Mr Power: “Were you in love with her?”
Ms Newland: “Yes.”
Mr Power: “You were in the car, where did you get to?”
Ms Newland: “I was so anxious, I had no self control. All I want when I am anxious, I want to get out of that situation. I just thought, ‘Am I never going to see her again?’
I felt bad because I said she was crazy and stuff and she felt sensitive about that.
“I wanted to drive to a junction and be hit by the traffic but I didn’t have the courage. I just thought I need to kill myself. I can’t copy with not having her in my life, because I love her so much.
I went to a bridge, I just wanted to kill myself. I called my mum and dad because I loved them so much and I didn’t think I had done this because of them.
“I called the complainant as well but she didn’t answer, she didn’t want anything to do with me. I stood on the bridge, I thought maybe she would come back, and I just jumped.”
Several members of Newland’s family became upset at this juncture and the judge called a break due to the extreme distress of the defendant.
On returning to the witness box, Newland says the bridge she jumped off was over water.
Mr Power: “Did you hurt yourself?”
Ms Newland: “I smashed my foot on the bottom (of the canal).”
She says she managed to get herself out of the water. The court heard a member of the public had seen her standing on the bridge and called the police.
She says a police woman arrived, and found her in a “mess”.
Ms Newland: “In the hospital she kept asking what was wrong and stuff, and I kept saying, ‘You wouldn’t understand’.”
Mr Power: “Were you kept in hospital?”
Ms Newland: “Quite a while but not overnight, I went in the early hours of the morning.”
Mr Power turned to phone records relating to after the incident. He pointed to a number of calls from the “Kye phone” and her own phone. He said they were short and did not connect.
“I wanted to say sorry,” Newland said.
Mr Power: “Had you done anything wrong?”
Ms Newland: “I felt like I had. It was hard to describe, she was upset and I never ever wanted her to be upset. It’s hard to describe. I wouldn’t react like that now, but at the time I trusted her, I trusted every word that came out of her mouth. Why would she lie to me? I loved her, I was in love with her.”
Mr Power pointed to a text from the complainant which said, “You are sick and a piece of work.”
Ms Newland replied: “It’s not what you think it was.”
He says there were some longish calls after the texts. ”What were those about?” Mr Power asked.
She was saying she didn’t know it was me.
He read texts from Newland to the complainant saying, “It was still my personality”.
“I am so sorry I said lies to hide lies but I didn’t lie about everything, It was still me.”
Another says: “I am so sorry I will pay for it and already am.”
Mr Power: “What did you mean by this?”
Ms Newland: “Again it sounds ridiculous now and I don’t really know why I thought it, but a part of me then thought, although she is a strong person and intelligent, but sometimes I wouldn’t say she is crazy but a bit unbalanced I guess. She would flip out and convince herself people were doing things and saying things they weren’t.”
Judge Dutton asks: “What about the text about lies?”
Ms Newland: “It was a panic almost, I knew the way she is, I thought the only thing I could do was apologise and hopefully she would stay with me. It was desperation I guess.”
She says she would say anything because she “wanted to stay with it for life”.
“All I knew I needed her in my life, I didn’t want to be without her at all. Stupid to say but I would have said absolutely anything, and done absolutely anything, for her to stay in my life.”
Judge Dutton asked if they had fallen out before. Newland says they had, and it “never ended well”.
I thought if she was not in my life that’s it, I am done. She was my only chance of being happy. She was my only chance of being me. It sounds so pathetic but I believed she was my only possible chance of being with a girl. It sounds so stupid but I never thought I would ever be able to pursue that side of me.
Mr Power: “In due course the police arrested you, and they found the box and a mask in your bedroom, what do you want to say about that?”
Ms Newland: “It was a sleeping mask, I always use sleeping masks. It was nothing to do with the complainant.”
Mr Power holds the mask up to the jury. He asked why she answered no comment in the police interview on 4 July.
Newland says she was advised to do this by her solicitor. ”I was in a ridiculous state of mind,” she added.
She was bailed and later returned, providing a prepared statement. This is a statement written in advance. She again answered no further questions.
That concludes Mr Power’s questioning.
This afternoon, prosecuting barrister Matthew Corbett-Jones resumed his questioning of the defendant.
“You knew by 4 July, when you were arrested, that the allegation against you was that you sexually assaulted the complainant, and you knew her evidence was that she had been led up the garden path didn’t you?” he said.
She agreed.
Mr Corbett-Jones: “At no stage did you say, hang on she knew I was a woman all along?”
Ms Newland: “I thought it would be obvious. Also, as I said before, I was following the advice of my solicitor. I have never ever been in that situation before, and I was going to listen to my solicitor.”
She says she did not think it “would go this far”.
The jury was read a line from Newland’s prepared witness statement, which said:
There was an occasion when the complainant applied bandages to the defendant’s chest. But she would have been aware that the defendant was a woman with breast.
Mr Corbett-Jones said this was in “direct contradiction” with what she said in court.
Earlier, Newland claimed she never wore bandages, and there had only been one occasion when the pair “messed about” with bandages which the complainant, a dancer, used on her feet.
Mr Corbett-Jones says: “The reason is, you have forgotten what you said, and you have given a different account in court.”
“This document suggests there would have been opportunities for the complainant to see you were a woman. That is a completely different thing.”
He pressed the point that before the break she told the jury she “never” wore bandages around her chest.
“It says the complainant applied them, I never said I had them around my breasts,” she retorted.
Judge Dutton intervenes and highlights the difference between the statement and what she told the jury.
He asks: “But doesn’t that mean the bandages were around your upper torso?”
She says: “Yes but not like she said, the sole reason was that we were messing about, there was no other reason.”
Mr Corbett-Jones read the jury extracts from greeting cards sent from the complainant to Kye.
One, from just before the relationship ended, said:
I love you more and more every day, these two years have flown by. Soon to be your wife, from (the victim) aka your little one.
“Was there nothing that happened, for this person who wrote about being your wife and fiance, to call 999 and give the account she did?” the prosecutor put to Newland.
She responded, “She found it harder and harder coping with her sexuality and that’s the only reason I can think of.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “Harder and harder from the embarrassment?”
Ms Newland: “It was more than that.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “Then why did she go to the police?”
Ms Newland: “I wish I knew. She never told me what happened. I think if she could pretend the reason she was with a girl was these ridiculous lies then it meant she was straight.”
He expressed doubt that this was the only reason the complainant could do that.
I wish I knew, I cannot tell you why someone would do that, the only thing I can tell you because she found it hard with her sexuality, is it a valid reason? No. But I can’t understand why someone would put someone else through that embarrassment.
Newland became highly distressed again during this afternoon’s session.
She said: “None of what she said was the truth. I don’t think any of what she said to me was the truth, I don’t think she ever loved me.”
Mr Corbett-Jones suggested the complainant was tricked.
Ms Newland: “Why would she believe that, she was an intelligent young woman, why would she believe it, she wore a blindfold the entire time for two years? Really? I have never heard of that in my life.”
Mr Corbett-Jones suggested the victim had “no reason” not to believe the stories about Kye going into treatment.
He pointed to messages from a third person suggesting that Kye was “in treatment”.
Newland says she sent some of them but she claims the complainant sent messages to herself so she could show her friends and family.
Mr Corbett-Jones suggested that Newland is lying about where she first met the defendant: ”I am suggesting you contacted her as Kye and then you introduced her to Gayle.”
Ms Newland: “That’s not true.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “You used Marl (the persona of Kye’s brother) and Gayle to isolate her from a friends?”
“She had a number of friends,” the defendant said, before listing names of the complainant’s friends mentioned in the trial.
Mr Corbett-Jones referenced a message sent from Kye to the complainant, saying:
I have seen friends turn to foes, anyone who wants to be in my baby’s life needs to be pretty special. My guard is up. Maybe I care too much.
He added, “That was you trying to manipulate the situation. You made her give up her job at River Island didn’t you?”
Newland denied manipulating the complainant.
“She is a strong woman who without a doubt makes her own decisions. No-one could tell her what to do,” she responded.
Mr Corbett-Jones suggested she made the complainant fall in love with a man and then sexually abused her.
Ms Newland: “I never sexually abused that girl, I never sexually abused anyone, never.”
Mr Corbett-Jones pointed to a message from the complainant to an unknown friend which states: “I don’t know, everyone will know I never see Kye.”
He says that suggested the complainant did not believe Kye was the same person as Gayle.
Ms Newland: “We don’t even know who that was to.”
Mr Corbett-Jones pointed to another message: “What can you do when your best is not good enough, I just feel deflated worrying about Kye. I know he has got a big op on Monday. I can’t say this to Kye because he will just stress and say he hates himself.”
He suggested this is more than her going along with a fantasy.
“She is talking about someone in her life who exists isn’t she?” he put to her.
He read another message: “If being with Kye has taught me anything, if something is pure and makes you feel real emotions, it can heal you.”
Mr Corbett-Jones says the complainant talked to Newland, in her real persona, about her relationship with Kye.
But she said it was just “how we talked”.
He read a text from the complainant to Newland, referring to Kye “being out of hospital”.
Newland says she doesn’t remember the messages, and “can’t say” they were actually sent to her.
Another message in which Newland appears to warn the complainant that another woman was expressing interest in Kye on Facebook was also read in court.
He pointed to other messages in which the complainant appears to ask Newland for Kye’s cousin’s phone number.
Mr Corbett-Jones: “Why on earth would she ask you for that phone number?”
Ms Newland: “It was just keeping up the pretence.”
She suggested maybe the complainant was “keeping everything on text” about the existence of Kye.
He pointed to other messages in which the complainant told Newland: “I will ask Kye to lend me some money.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “It’s one thing to be acting this fantasy, that this man exists who she knows is you, and to talk to you on the phone as if you’re a man, but to be texting saying she would ask Kye for money, it’s just absurd.”
Newland says the complainant may have done this because it “would make it easier in her head to pretend to be with a man”.
As time went on it became the norm, as hard as it is to believe that’s what happened.
Mr Corbett-Jones: “You tell us it was her that contacted Kye, because you told her that Kye was a persona, you talked and messaged one another very frequently as Kye, you had two phones.”
Newland: “I have always had two phones, that wasn’t the reason. But I would use one phone to text as Kye, yes.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “There comes a point where the two of you meet because she wants to meet Kye, yes?”
Newland: “Yes.”
He reminds Newland of her version of events about the first meeting.
Mr Corbett-Jones: “Given this had been going on the best part of two years, what on earth did that achieve, you going to the flat not dressed any different?
Newland: “Because she was more comfortable with that in the role play, I respected that, I stupidly went along with that.
It was a first step for both of us to be intimate with a female.
Mr Corbett-Jones suggests she was shaking not because she was nervous about kissing a girl, but because she was nervous about the complainant discovering she was Kye.
Mr Corbett-Jones: “Did you tell her that Kye was a virgin, to explain his nervousness and strangeness?
Newland: “I was a virgin and Kye was a virgin.”
She denies saying that Kye had a chest monitor and needed bandages to cover it up, as the complainant suggested to the jury.
Mr Corbett-Jones asks about the swimming costume she was found wearing when she attempted suicide.
She claimed in court she had been intending to go to the gym after seeing the complainant.
Newland: “I’m quite a lazy person, it sounds ridiculous but I couldn’t be bothered putting clothes on, getting changed, putting the swimsuit.”
Mr Corbett-Jones asks about the prosthetic penis.
Newland says she did not take it to her house on that occasion, she says she left it there most of the time.
He asks if she told the complainant that Kye had to shave for his hospital treatment.
Newland denies this.
Argument
Mr Corbett-Jones asks about further text messages, between Kye and the complainant.
There appears to be an argument about money, supplied by Kye for her to buy shoes.
The messages appear to end with Kye thinking he has been dumped.
There are other messages from the phone, appearing to be from a third party, suggesting that Kye is in intensive care and is ill.
The message asks the complainant: “Kye would never do anything to upset you, that’s not Kye and you know that. He needs our prayers right now.”
One message says: “He came round, he wasn’t with it, he was asking for you.”
Mr Corbett Jones: “The significance of these messages is that you say the complainant knew Kye was you. That makes absolutely no sense does it?”
Newland: “No”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “This is not fantasy between two people, this is her believing Kye is real isn’t it? That’s the only way this makes sense?”
Newland: “Again, no.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “That row is real isn’t it?
Newland: “A lot of it is yeah.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “This is her fed up of the situation, things have not at all worked out how she expected with Kye, and then you message her as someone else saying that Kye is in sedation. If she knew you were Kye, why would that have any effect on her at all?”
Newland: “I’m pretty sure this was an argument between me as Gayle and the complainant.”
She claims she always carried on with the role play.
Newland: “Whether you want to believe it or not, that’s not what it is.”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “There’s pages and pages of this.”
Mr Corbett-Jones points to further texts about Kye’s treatment.
Newland: “She always followed it to a tee, I can look back now and see that.”
Mr Corbett-Jones points to message from the complainant to Kye: “I’m not saying you are lying, and after this I will drop it. If you are hiding anything, it will come out anyway.”
Newland says this was a message about her thinking that she, as Gayle, had told anyone about their relationship.
She says: “I never told anyone, under strict instruction from her.”
Mr Corbett-Jones suggests Newland targeted her because the complainant was “vulnerable.”
Newland: “I wouldn’t call someone vulnerable who happily admitted she had slept with 12 guys, It may be judgemental but I knew her and she was not vulnerable. She is very street wise and that’s the last, last word I would use to describe her.”
Mr Corbett-Jones reads a message from the complainant after the relationship ended, in response to Newland texting “I love you.” It says: “You should be locked up for what you have done.
The messages describes her as “sick” and asks “why me?”
Another reads: “”You have no explanation Gayle other than you are pure evil, worse than my ex. If I had not ripped off the mask I would not have known the evil truth”
Mr Corbett-Jones: “You played her like a puppet.”
Newland: “I don’t believe it’s physically possible for anyone to have gone along with what she is saying she went along with, especially not (the complainant)”
Another message from Newland, says: “Please can I talk to you, it’s really not how you think it is.”
He asks what this means.
Newland: “I can’t be specific, I sent these messages in the worst period of my life, aside from now. I can’t pinpoint certain things, I can’t give you a perfect explanation.”
He reads other messages: “I promise, I know my promise means nothing know, that I only had good intentions.
“I am so sorry, I said lies to hide lies, and it was still me doing it.”
He asks what she could have meant by this.
Newland: “It is how I felt about it, but I have explained the reasons I sent those messages.”
He reads more messages from Newland to the complaint: “I’m not evil though, otherwise I wouldn’t have felt guilty about what I have done every single day. The second I jumped off that bridge I regretted what I had done.”
Newland: “I would have done anything to make her happy, even if it meant saying sorry for something that I had never done.”
She becomes extremely upset
Newland: “If you make one person your foundation, your entire world and you tell that person your deepest secrets, I have never loved someone as much as I loved that girl.
I would have done anything to keep that girl. Yes I look stupid, I look like a f***** weirdo. Its embarrassing I have my whole family to hear this, they are the nicest family in the whole world they don’t deserve this. I have done nothing wrong.”
Judge Dutton says: “If these questions were inappropriate I would stop them, but they need to be asked.”
She is given time to compose herself.
Mr Corbett-Jones: “Why would you send this message?”
Newland: “I can’t say anything more, I wish I could some amazing explanation but there is not explanation I can give. I know it looks bad but its the only explanation I can give. She always knew. I don’t know why I’m here.”
There are calls from the public gallery: “Can we not stop?”
The court is adjourned as the defendant appears to have a panic attack. Her family rush over to help as the jury are dismissed.
Judge Dutton says proceeding will resume tomorrow at 10am.
During yesterday’s hearing, the court heard that Newland jumped into a canal in an apparent suicide bid on the day the alleged victim claims she discovered the truth.
The jury also heard how the victim went on holiday to Ibiza in the months after the incident while claiming to be a “shell” of her former self and having difficulty socialising.
Newland also claimed the victim told her she was gay when the met in a nightclub and that she knew she was behind the Kye Fortune persona from the beginning.
The trial continues.
- Copyright Trinity Mirror
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say