Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A WOMAN HAS been jailed for eight years after being found guilty of tricking a friend into having sex with her by disguising herself as a man.
Gayle Newland, 25, met the victim on a social network in 2011 using the profile name Kye Fortune and spoke to her on the phone impersonating a man’s voice.
They finally agreed to meet face-to-face in 2013.
But Newland insisted that the other woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, wear a blindfold for the meeting, claiming to feel insecure after brain surgery.
They subsequently spent more than 100 hours together in which the other woman always wore a blindfold during activities which included watching television together and sunbathing.
The couple had sex around 10 times before the woman ripped off her mask and saw that Newland was wearing a prosthetic penis.
Newland, of Willaston, Cheshire, northwest England, claimed the victim always knew she was only pretending to be a man and that they were engaged in role play as they explored their sexuality.
She insisted that no blindfold was used and denied strapping bandages to her chest and wearing a woollen hat to disguise herself.
Sentencing Newland for sexual assault at Chester Crown Court, judge Roger Dutton called her a “deceitful, scheming and thoroughly determined young woman”.
He added: “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.”
Watching tv while wearing a blindfold. How does that work?
Netflix and chill
The judge clearly missed that salient point.
Fair City, Eastenders or Coronation street, no problem.
Is that the first question that comes to your mind in this story?!
They had to be watching porn all the time. Sure your one was always rock hard…….
Sad.
There’s nought as quare as folk
Can’t have a laugh with ur mate anymore it seems :-/
There were holes cut out for the eyes
This has to be one of the craziest stories ever in print !!
Wait until you see the movie, if you haven’t already.
The crying game part deux
Something just doesn’t fit here.
Can’t wait for the late late show or ray Darcy show appearance. Would be good to get some insight as to the mindset of the victim, ie ask her straight out the hard and awkward questions.
Just me or does 8 years seem a bit steep for this one, I almost wished the judged the other for 8 years for stupidity ;)
She was convicted of a series of sexual assaults. Why not 8 years?
If consent is not informed then it’s not free. The nature of what she was taking part in was withheld from her. The victim did not consent to being penetrated with a prosthetic. If she’d thought the victim were likely to consent then she wouldn’t have deceived her. If a man had done this no-one would be laughing. The question is; how is this NOT rape?
Wow, le Tigre, I actually agree with you in this case
It has to be a real penis under the definition of English legislation for it to be classed as rape.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/contents
Yeah you’re right. I actually went and looked that up myself after I posted. I still think the length of time isn’t excessive.
She didn’t consent to the act performed on her. More than that, she was intentionally deceived on multiple occasions.
For a sentence of 8 yrs there must be a lot more to this story than we have been told. On the surface it seems excessive.
How the victim, if victim is what she is, a woman, would not know from the feel of the perps skin that she wasnt a man defies belief.
All the evidence, that we know, shows that the victim allowed herself to be fooled. Willingly joined in and took part. Stupidity of such nature is not normal.
It’s ok to sexually assault the abnormally stupid?
You have to really stretch your imagination to see where the sexual abuse is.
Contrast with the Anna Stubblefield case.
Is the state of the victims intelligence or their feelings the offence?
It’s in shoving something into a woman’s vagina without her permission
I didn’t have to stretch that far
You wont easily shove a lump of plastic into a woman’s vagina, especially when its held in place by a strap, without her willing participation.
Does this mean, if you tell a bird that you’re doctor, pilot, whatever, just to get into her pants, that you’re a sex offender? What about a false name? All constitute deceit.
8 years seems a bit harsh to me. Very odd tale however.
I don’t know why. but I actually feel a little sorry for her tbh.
@ Mer Curial, i have to agree with you on the stupidity of it all…..
Who in their right mind would agree to meet anyone blindfolded for the 1st meeting, and moreover a person that has had head surgery, the penny should have dropped then..Then came the sexual side, did the blindfolded lady just lay there, her arms down by her side, and do nothing, i can’t believe this happened 10 times.
Why did the lady that was charged have to wear a hat, when she could’nt be seen anyway, dozens of unanswered questions here…….Not a bad looking lady though…
8 years . bloody hell u wouldn’t get that for murder
Maybe if your murdered someone with a plastic willy.
Yeah, she got shafted…
Where’d I leave that coat.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/may/26/rape-sentence-average-eight-years-justice-figures
She got an average UK sentence. 8 years is the UK average.
8 years for the crime of “dicking about”
Was the strap on heated or what?. Surely a woman would know the difference between a real cock and cold plastic?.
She gave it 6 seconds in the microwave each time.
Would like to know why it took the other lady this length of time to rip her mask off as they had met on a good few occasions.
Would she not have known from touching her body? It’s just weird.
Did you say ‘lady’? :)
I know some people can be niave and all but I find this very hard to believe . it’s very weird .
I am sure the victim found it hard to swallow too.
Very strange
Reminds me of the Neil Sedaka song “Is this the way to ram a dildo”
stiff sentence
Very hard.
strap on.
Very brave comment from someone with that surname…
LUKE ! I’m am not your father, I’m your ex girl friend Gayle Newland Nooooooooooooo! Nooooooooooooo…
This story is mental
So at the time was there consent to have sex ? It reads like there was consent to have sex?
Watching television together with a blindfold on? How do you do that exactly?
A bit like the way I listen to my wife with ear plugs in.
Bizarre. The victim must have had a huge set of panda eyes from all of the sun bathing with the blindfold on. Not to mention watching TV with her eyes covered. Horror films only or the Miriam O’Callaghan Show perhaps. Surely the only other activity was ‘pin the tail on the donkey’. I mean what more can you do? There are so many questions.
So the ‘victim’ was happy to have sex with a barely known, insecure man who’d had brain surgery, wore a woolly hat all the time and insisted she wear a blindfold. Well there was certainly part of him insecure.
I don’t think this lady is a danger to society. Is being sent to a large building full of sex starved females for eight years really appropriate!?
When you put it like that, it is very appropriate.
The jokes are obvious but I can’t help but feel that it is the atypical nature of the relationship and the same sex aspect which has resulted in such a draconian sentence.
It is human nature to be repulsed by what is perceived as sexually abnormal and this is expressed by a revulsion based sentence.
There is real sadness in this, perhaps two victims. I don’t know enough to be sure but I worry that this case may be more about societal prejudice than individual culpability. It is certainly far from a black and white situation.
Fiona, to a point I agree with you, but, imagine the lady with the prosthetic penis would have been a man, trying to have sex without consent, I think the sentence is maybe a bit harsh, but still fair
It’s a black and white situation. Someone set out to deceive her for their own sexual gratification and put something inside her, knowing she didn’t and wouldn’t consent. Look at the humiliation she’s suffering now.
If a man had done this, you would not say he was a victim.
If a man had done it with his real penis there would be no case to answer. This is the weirdest BS I’ve ever heard.
James your point is the exact reason she was convicted.. It was not a penis, but the victim thought she was in a relationship with a man she was deceived, and never consented to sex with a female therefore there was no consent.. I think sentence is appropriate
Yes, there would be no case to answer because that’s what she consented to. She did not consent to what happened.
Reverse it – if she consented to lesbian sex and a man deceived her and stuck his penis inside her, would that be ok? Would that be funny?
There is much ambivalence in all of this. The victim appears to have been at least partially complicit. Clearly both were struggling with a binary notion of gender and a wish to define the relation as heterosexual in nature. The victim, when faced with the definite knowledge that her partner was female, not male, reacted with a feeling of great emotional upheaval. Undoubtedly, the relationship was founded on a degree of deception, however unlikely the basis of deception, but it was enough to allow that doubt and assumption that enable the victim to participate in the relationship.
This is all a very grey area, the victims may not have fully understood what was happening, it was about love and intimacy, however dysfunctional and misdirected, not the hate, power and dominance that typically characterises rape.
It was found to be rape and I believe that it was rape, inexcusable and unacceptable, but I suspect that the attitudes of society may have played a major role in what led up to all of this.
It’s all very sad, terribly tragic and awful,outcome.
Le Tigre , when you put it like that , it makes perfect sense .
This whole case is incredulous. There is nothing black and white about it at all. It sounds more like a woman throwing her friend under the legal bus to appease her pangs of conscience. 8 yrs no matter how you look at it is way excessive.
So Fiona says it was rape – and also that “the victim was at least partially complicit”.
Your values are quite easily shed, Fiona
Fiona, is it a draconian sentence for an ongoing abuse and I think, multiple rapes? This wasn’t one isolated incident. She also had form in trying to deceive another woman according to the court.
So, I think we may well have had a serial rapist on out hands here if she was not caught.
It was rape in the sense that it was not fully and clearly consensual . It was legally inexcusable. It is the obligation of anyone engaging in penetrative sex with another human being to be sure that there is no uncertainty or ambivalence of the question of sex.
That said, there was no violence, no aggression, no hate, no power dynamic, but a misguided, misplaced and misdirected expression of love.
Niall’s inference is purely speculative and has no evidential basis. No evidence was adduced to indicate that the Defendant was prone to this action or would be recidivist in nature. It may be the case that there was a degree of erotomania and an obsessional degree of love.
In this particular case, I think that the victim bears a degree of complicity, however unintentional. That is not to excuse what happened but it does provide context and perhaps a degree of mitigation which points to an excessively harsh sentence.
I doubt that in the closest comparable case of rape by deceit that a male perpetrator would have been as harshly sentenced. The jury’s verdict was justified by the evidence but the Judge’s sentence was, in my opinion, too severe. Since, I’m not a criminologist, lawyer or expert in penal policy, my opinion is merely my own opinion.
I have a feeling that the verdict and sentence may bring very little comfort to the victim.
It would be interesting to look at the theory of punishment underlying the punishmentWas it deterrent, symbolic, retributive or an expression of the Judge’s moral outrage? I would be interested in hearing an expert’s analysis.
I assume that the harshness of the sentencing will be appealed.
So you say “That said, there was no violence, no aggression, no hate, no power dynamic, but a misguided, misplaced and misdirected expression of love.”
And the judge after listening to the evidence says -
“JudgeRoger Dutton called her a “deceitful, scheming and thoroughly determined young woman”.
He added: “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”
You might want to fill in the gaps in your own time.
For the record, I’m unconvinced about this case myself. I find it difficult to see how the jury could not have had big doubts about this. But she was certainly highly manipulative and new exactly what she was doing. She was led by self serving reasons and not, as you’d like to portray it, matters of the heart.
The judicial comments were expressed on the basis of the Jury’s finding of guilt. The Judge opined on the back of that finding. It’s standard for Judges to give the proverbial pasting once the guilty verdict is brought in.
The former nun Nora Wall received a strong tongue lashing from the Judge in very similar terms. Ultimately the guilty verdict was quashed. Judges often feel the need to express the sense of opprobriium they imagine that society feels. It’s to express society’s presumed indignation. There is a theatrical quality to this, at times.
I accept the verdict of the Jury based on the evidence presented. I would not take the traditional Judicial condemnation too seriously or indeed literally.,
Fiona slipped the old “power dynamic” line in there because she wants to differentiate this rapist from make rapists to justify her literal blaming of the victim
Wake me up when you’re finished
Fiona, like a lot of people are only interested in ala carte justice and equality. Its actually quite sad really that people are trying to justify the accuseds actions by trying to position her as some sort of victim of society/the legal system. She didnt just rape someone she raped someone 8 times over the course of 100 hours of manipulation and deceit. How on earth can people actually feel sorry for her?
Im having a hard time trying to get my head around this one
My missus makes me wear a blindfold as well, makes sense now maybe she has a strapon fanny.
She does ;)
He does
This is the strangest case ever !! How did she not know ?
I agree. Like how did she disguise her voice? Did the victim not realise she sounded like a woman? How could you meet someone 10 times & wear a blindfold everytime? Wouldn’t you be dying to get a look at the person? And also, women DO KNOW the difference between a rubber willy & a real one! I dunno, It’s all a bit bizarre really.
Hmm agree Lisa. This sentence is crazy. The other party was mea-culpa.
a classic made for tv movie in the making
F***’in Hell!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEvUt2kUg0c
What the fck is this?
That’s a bit hard.
The one wearing the blindfold must feel a bit of a dick.
Anyone that literally goes on a blind date like this is asking for trouble. A right pair of edjits
What crime did she actually commit?
How is this any different to wearing makeup or getting plastic surgery done to attract a potential partner?
Jesus, what kind of make up does your wan wear? Does it vibrate?
What a cock up. Stiff sentencing to hard time!
Both ladies need some sort of help I would think. Imagine being in the jury for this case.
What date is it ?
They do say love is blind
Ridiculous she gets such a stiff sentence while other muppets can be repeat offenders and get f**all
Justice system is a joke !
Bet it was made in China: Taiwan on
Was she sent to the Male or Female wing !
Up there in the ‘I’ve heard it all now’ stakes. Surely between it and the ‘Man killed by Super Wedgie’ headline from few months back as most outrageous story of the year
AS I said on the other thread ( feminists) what is the proper title for this lady? is it female gender fluid or what? Just curious.
Penis
Total utter bullshit! Joke for ALL involved, can’t believe it actually even got to court.
did she not wonder why he was stiff all the time and he did not ejaculate? and if he did would it have been sap???
I can see this sentence being reduced on appeal. The fact that they met ten times must indicate the victim was complicit to some degree. Maybe the full detail isn’t being released? was the victim mentally challenged? An eight year sentence rings of Islamic State type ‘justice’.
The development of the new jurisprudence on consent defeats reason.
A ridiculous case and I cannot see how the alleged “victim” could have been believed.
This will damage the credibility of every genuine rape victim.
But she was believed, and the judge has to sentence the dependent on the basis that she did the thing she was convicted of. How could it be otherwise?
It should have been thrown out of court.
Yeah cause that would have set a great precedent. Its ok to commit rape if you’re a woman and you cry after you are sentenced. A la carte equality. A la carte justice.
Paul, tbh the only sane post on here.
It’s strange how when it’s a female offender ppl joke about the rape
Needs to be a documentary on this whole case madness
Tripping the velvet meets 50 Shades of Grey.
Good porn film in there somewhere.
A rubber mickey get 8 years? Wtf?
You would think she’d have been cocksure it was a strap on…
This story really takes the Mickey.
very harsh sentence. suspended sentence the most.
Disgrace nobody can comment on pat Carey or maria Cahill stories
Surely when she said no to a Beetle Juice a few times she would have copped it’s not a man??
Bwwahhhahahahaha!
She was only taking the micky
I wonder is there a full boby selfie of the two of them,could you imagine what thats like
This is longer than the average sentence a man would get for stranger-raping a woman. I actually feel some sympathy for the perpetrator here. If only the poor divil had been born with a dick there would have been no problem. As is, technically it’s not even rape. I’d say the sentence will be overturned in appeal.
You have to look at UK average – http://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/may/26/rape-sentence-average-eight-years-justice-figures
8 years on average. She won;t win anything on appeal.
Average sentence or not, I think 8 years is excessive in this case.
Sex was consented to, just not the type of sex that the perpetrator was capable of supplying. It wasn’t the her fault she didn’t have a real penis and had to use a dildo instead. It seems to me she’s more guilty of false advertising than of rape.
This story is full of holes. Of course the woman knew!!!
You don’t get 8 years for some of the worst crimes in this Country.
This woman has to be innocent. Madness.
Strapadicktome!
WTFF.
When did she put the blindfold on?
How can you put a blindfold on & then go for a date? Surly she knew her ‘friends’ car, couch, home layout etc..
Mad story.
The accused raped the victim 8 times over the course of 100 hours of deceit and yet people think the sentence is harsh and and feel sorry for the accused mainly because she is a woman and she cried after her sentencing. The mind boggles. Some people clearly only want equal treatment for womem when it suits them.
Id give her a munch!!
I think both girls got shafted here!
Some balls to go public with that story…
Jaysus. ..Some weird people out there…
Boys don’t cry movie. https://youtu.be/mYpUhVvfGeg
Test
have your say