It’s Not a Crime to be Gullible

#GayleNewland #KyeFortune in #RapebyFraud Case

Gayle Newland- Kye Fortune and Rape by Fraud

Twenty-five year old Gayle Newland of Willaston, Cheshire UK, will be sentenced in November for three sexual assault charges. She created a catphish profile of Kye Fortune, a young man who’d undergone serious medical treatments that had disfigured his body. “He” requested that his victim, a woman who’d engaged in a two year relationship with him, wear a blindfold during sex because of his appearance concerns. She obliged.

Ultimately, the victim discovered that her boyfriend was a woman wearing a prosthetic device to sexually penetrate her. She’d had sex with “Kye Fortune” ten times. She was mortified and brought the case to the police.

The UK tabloids have had a field day with this story! And most of the comments hurl insulting remarks at the victim, decrying her for “stupidity, naivete,” etc. There seems to be little recognition that no one has the right to commit a crime against a victim, regardless of how gullible they are.

As in all sexual exploitation, Gayle Newland wanted sex. And she didn’t care the least for the interests of her victim. She felt the victim would not consent based on the truth, she’s a woman, so she simply altered the truth to get what she wanted. The difference between sexual assault by violence and sexual assault by fraud is the tool which is used to undermine the victim’s consent. But they both lead to the unconsented act of sexual penetration by the offender. Their covert manipulation causes the victim to grapple with defilement.

Please join me in setting the record straight about the harm in sexual assault by fraud with the readers at Spiked, (right click the title) a UK tabloid where the contributors need to be educated.


6 thoughts on “It’s Not a Crime to be Gullible”

  1. She was sentenced to 8 years in jail not 8 months. Big difference lol.

    1. Jon Palmer- You’re a hundred percent correct. In my prior comment, I confused this case with another. The judge handed her an 8 year sentence, which I believe to be excessive. She was just convicted, yet again, in a second hearing on the same case. The sentence on the second case will be issued on July 20th.

      Newland had previously attempted suicide. Upon hearing the guilty verdict the second time, she stated, “I can’t go back to prison.” Her emotional welfare seems very much in jeopardy, but certainly does not excuse her criminal behavior toward the victim. I believe there should be a jail term, but I also believe that 8 years is excessive. This is not a case of violent rape. It’s a case of rape by deception. She was found guilty of the offense of sexual assault by penetration.

      To me, this case underscores the difference between violent rape and rape by fraud. Although rape by fraud is a, indeed, a heinous act, the punishment should not be uniform for both.


  2. Just curious if a follow up could be given concerning the precise laws broken. I’m not too familiar with British penal codes so I don’t really know where this would fall legally. Obviously the woman deserved jail, but the reference would be a nice addition. Great article otherwise!

    1. Thanks Aria-

      This case was tried in Canberra, Australia, not the UK. The charge was sexual assault by fraud. You may want to check out my later post on the matter. On Thursday of last week, she was sentenced to 8 months in jail, which I believe is excessive for this crime, particularly as a first offense.

      The same judge, Roger Dutton, had sentenced pedophiles to less jail time then he handed down on this case.

Comments are closed.