Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / The Murder of Alice Ruggles

Transcript

The Murder of Alice Ruggles · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Have you ever noticed how human intuition often works just
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: like miles ahead of the actual systems we build to
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: protect ourselves?
• 0:06
  Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely. Yeah.
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: You can feel a chill in the air or you
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: can sense that a situation is escalating way before a
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: thermometer registers a drop in temperature.
• 0:14
  Speaker 2: Right. Your gut just knows.
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: Exactly.
• 0:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: But when we build legal and protective frameworks, we just
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: strip away all that intuition. We demand cold, hard data.
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: We want the physical proof.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: Right. We demand a physical injury or a broken lock.
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: You know, a quantifiable threat. But what happens when the
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: danger isn't quantifiable in a way that like a police
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: database actually understands?
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's the scary part.
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: What happens when a person's life is being systematically dismantled?
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: But because there are no bruises yet, the system just
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: looks at the evidence and says, well, we don't see
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: a crime here.
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: And that gap, right, that huge chasm between a victim's
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: terrifying reality and a bureaucracy's demand for physical proof, that
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: is exactly where the most insidious predators operate. They know
• 0:57
  Speaker 2: exactly how to walk right up to the line of
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: legality without actually crossing into the territory of undeniable, prosecutable violence.
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: I mean, they literally use the rigidity of the system
• 1:08
  Speaker 2: against the victim.
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: And bridging that gap is basically the mission of our
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: deep dive today. We are looking at a case that
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: forced the entire United Kingdom to look directly into that chasm.
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: It really did.
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: It's a tragic, chilling, and just heavily documented case of
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: stalking and coercive control. The murder of 24-year-old Alice Ruggles. Yeah.
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: And to understand how this happened, and I think more importantly,
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: why it was entirely preventable, we are relying on some
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: deeply harrowing source material today.
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: We really are.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: We're unpacking transcripts, real-time 999 emergency calls. police interview logs,
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: and detailed court records, primarily drawn from the documentary A
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: Providable Tragedy, The Murder of Alice Ruggles by Truly Criminal.
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: Anne, I think we need to warn you, it is
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: a heavy journey we are taking you on today. But
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: the purpose here isn't just to revel in the true
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: crime details, you know?
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: Right. Definitely not.
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: The goal is to dissect the actual mechanics of nonviolent obsession.
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: We are going to take a magnifying glass to the critical,
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: just fatal missteps made by law enforcement.
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:18
  Speaker 2: And we are going to look at how a grieving
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: family took this unimaginable pain and forged it into a
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: nationwide educational and legal legacy.
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: So if you are listening to this, I need to
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: be upfront. We are dealing with a tragedy. But to
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: truly grasp what was lost here, we have to start
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: by understanding who Alice Ruggles actually was.
• 2:40
  Speaker 2: We have to.
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: Because you cannot understand the cruelty of coercive control until
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: you understand the vibrancy and the independence that it sought
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: to destroy.
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: Right. The contrast is everything.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: So Alice was born on Christmas Eve in 1991. She
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: grew up in this very quiet rural village called Turlangton
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: in Leicestershire. And she was the third of four kids
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: in a really tight-knit family led by her parents, Sue
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: and Clive.
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: And when you look at the accounts from family and
• 3:06
  Speaker 2: her friends. I mean, the picture that emerges is of
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: a remarkably magnetic person.
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: Oh, totally.
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: And they describe her as mischievous, incredibly funny, and just
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: a natural entertainer.
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, she was always making people laugh.
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: Exactly. She had that highly sought-after emotional intelligence, you know,
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: where she could just walk into a room, instantly read
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: the energy, and know exactly how to cheer people up.
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: She had this boundless energy, and she channeled a lot
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: of it into something really specific and Honestly fascinating. She
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: was a competitive fencer.
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: Which is such a unique detail.
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: It is. She picked up a sword when she was
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: like 11, and it just became this huge cornerstone of
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: her identity. She ended up representing Leicestershire in the East
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: Midlands region multiple times. Wow. Yeah. And when she went
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: off to Northumbria University to study product design, she actually
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: became the captain of the fencing club. And in 2012,
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: she won the Women's Epee at the Leeds Open.
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: I am so glad you brought up the fencing because
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: if we think about what fencing actually requires, it tells
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: us so much about her internal wiring.
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: Oh, that's a good point.
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: Right? Because fencing is often described as physical chess. It
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: requires intense strategic thinking, rapid boundary setting, the ability to
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: read your opponent's microexpressions, and just profound mental resilience.
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: So she was a person who understood strategy and defense.
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: Completely. She was incredibly sharp.
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: And she applied that drive straight into her career, too.
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: After university, she fell in love with Newcastle, decided to
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: put down roots there, and got a job at Sky's
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: Newcastle Hub. Right. And her work ethic was just undeniable.
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: By October 2015, at just 24 years old, she was
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: already promoted to site coordinator.
• 4:53
  Speaker 2: Which is really impressive for that age.
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: It really is. She was building this beautiful, independent life.
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: But that same month, October 2015... is when she connected
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: on Facebook with a 26-year-old named Tremond Dillon. Everyone just
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: called him Harry.
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: And Dillon was a Lance Corporal based at Glencourse Barracks
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: in Edinburgh. But we need to highlight, he wasn't just
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: a regular rank-and-file soldier.
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: Right, there was more to it.
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: Much more. He was deeply ambitious, specifically training for the
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: Special Reconnaissance Regiment, the SRR.
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: Wait, that's a pretty intense unit, right?
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: Extremely intense. Okay. And that detail, the fact that he
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: was actively training for a covert surveillance unit, is a
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: critical piece of psychological context that we really have to
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: keep in mind as this entire timeline progresses.
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: Wow. Yeah, I didn't even think about the surveillance aspect
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: of that.
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: It becomes incredibly relevant.
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: And they didn't even meet in person at first because
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: when they connected online, he was actually serving a tour
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: in Afghanistan.
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: So they spent months just messaging, talking on the phone.
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: building this really intense digital connection before finally meeting face
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: to face in January 2016. And Alice's friends said she
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: was absolutely besotted.
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: She was completely swept off her feet.
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah, he was attentive. He was caring. He just seemed
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: entirely considerate of her. They had a brief two weeks
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: together in the UK before he had to deploy back
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: to Afghanistan for another two months.
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: And if we look under the hood of this early
• 6:22
  Speaker 2: relationship dynamic, there is a fascinating, if really dark, psychological
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: mechanism at play here.
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: Okay, lay it on me.
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: When a relationship begins with a vast physical distance like that,
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: especially one that's fraught with the implied danger of a
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: military deployment, the emotional intimacy is artificially accelerated.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: How so? Because, I mean, you'd think distance would make
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: it harder to bond, right?
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: Well, it makes it harder to bond in a grounded,
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: realistic way, yes, but it makes it incredibly easy to
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: trauma bond or to form what we call a fantasy bond.
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: Oh, I see.
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: Through a screen, a predator can curate a completely flawless
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: version of themselves. They don't have to navigate the daily
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: frictions of life, you know, like, whose turn it is
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: to wash the dishes, how they react to getting cut
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: off in traffic, how they treat a waiter at a restaurant.
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: Right. They just show the highlights real. Exactly.
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: It's just pure, uninterrupted, positive reinforcement. The distance creates this
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: dopamine loop of intermittent validation. So by the time Dylan
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: returned to the UK permanently in April, Alice wasn't just
• 7:25
  Speaker 2: casually dating.
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: A new guy. She was deeply emotionally invested.
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: Yes, deeply invested in a highly curated avatar of a
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: perfect partner.
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: That makes total sense. I kind of think of it
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: like a false foundation in architecture.
• 7:39
  Speaker 2: Oh, that's a great way to put it. Right.
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: Like it looks beautiful and solid from the outside, but
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: it's structurally designed to trap the person inside once the
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: walls finally go up.
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: That is exactly what it is.
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: And it seemed to hold up for a little while,
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: at least. In July 2016, she even invited him on
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: her family's annual holiday. They seemed just inseparable. But the
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: timeline shows that almost immediately after they got back from
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: that trip, The mask didn't just slip. It completely shattered.
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: And the shift from the honeymoon phase into active coercive control,
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: it is rarely an explosion. It's an erosion.
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: An erosion. Yeah.
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: The people close to Alice noticed that this vibrant, outgoing,
• 8:18
  Speaker 2: emotionally intelligent woman began to change rapidly. She became distant.
• 8:23
  Speaker 2: She withdrew from her social circles. And the root cause
• 8:27
  Speaker 2: was Dylan's sudden, just hypercritical behavior. He began criticizing her
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: in literally every conceivable way.
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: Let's pause there because I think people hear he criticized
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: her and they just think of, you know, normal relationship bickering. Like, oh,
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: you load the dishwasher wrong. But how does criticism actually
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: serve as a tool of isolation?
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: It's a calculated dismantling of self-esteem.
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: If a partner constantly criticizes how you speak, how you dress,
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: or how you interact with your friends, you start to
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: second guess your own behavior. You start to feel like
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: you are a burden or an embarrassment to the people
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: around you.
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: So you just stop trying. Exactly.
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: Consequently, the victim often voluntarily withdraws from their support network
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: to avoid the anxiety of being judged or to avoid
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: the inevitable argument with the controller afterward. The controller doesn't
• 9:18
  Speaker 2: even have to lock the door to isolate the victim.
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: They just make the outside world feel too exhausting to
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: engage with.
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: Precisely. They do the heavy lifting from the inside out.
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: And we see the biological toll of this psychological warfare
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: on Alice. The records show she lost a significant amount
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: of weight, like the stress was literally consuming her physically.
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: It's awful.
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: She fell out with friends she used to be incredibly
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: close to, and the tension peaked to the point where
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: she had a severe falling out with her housemates, which
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: actually forced her to move out into a ground floor
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: flat on Rawling Road in Gateshead with a work friend
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: named Maxine.
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: Her whole life was uprooted.
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: Her entire life had been upended in a matter of weeks.
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: But the critical thing to remember about Alice's resilience, you know,
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: that fencer's mindset we discussed, is that she didn't just
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: surrender to it.
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: No, she didn't.
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: In August, the final catalyst occurred. Other women began contacting Alice,
• 10:11
  Speaker 2: revealing that they were also seeing Dylan. He was living
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: a complete double life.
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 10:17
  Speaker 2: And Alice drew a hard line. She ended the relationship
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: for good.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: Which is incredibly brave when your self-worth has been systematically
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: targeted for months. But here is where we run into
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: a major, major societal blind spot. If you're listening, think
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: about how often we watch a movie or hear a
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: story from a friend. And the moment they say, I
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: dumped him, we just exhale. We think, OK, the conflict
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: is over. She's out. We treat the breakup as the
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: finish line of the danger.
• 10:49
  Speaker 2: Oh, and it is the exact opposite. Right. Criminologists and
• 10:52
  Speaker 2: domestic abuse experts will tell you that the moment a
• 10:55
  Speaker 2: victim leaves is statistically the most dangerous period of the
• 10:59
  Speaker 2: entire relationship.
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: The absolute most dangerous.
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: We have to understand the psychology of the coercive controller here.
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: They do not view relationships as partnerships based on mutual affection.
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: They view them as acquisitions.
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: Like property.
• 11:12
  Speaker 2: Exactly like property. So when Alice ended the relationship, Dylan
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: didn't experience heartbreak. He experienced a catastrophic loss of dominance.
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: A breakup is the ultimate defiance, and a controller will
• 11:24
  Speaker 2: escalate to unimaginable extremes just to reestablish their authority.
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: And his escalation was just immediate and relentless. The transcripts
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: detail a barrage of harassment that kicked off in August.
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: He bombarded her with calls, texts, and emails.
• 11:40
  Speaker 2: Constant digital noise.
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: And it wasn't just anger. It was this dizzying, whiplash-inducing
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: mix of tactics. One minute he was leaving voicemails, sobbing, begging, saying, please,
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: I just want to speak to you. And then the
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: very next minute, the messages would turn aggressive, threatening, and
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: intensely vindictive.
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: And that whiplash, that is entirely intentional. It's a tactic
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: designed to keep the victim utterly off balance.
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: Oh, interesting.
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah. He's basically running through a psychological diagnostic check. He's thinking,
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: will pity work? No. No. Will fear work?
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: No.
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: Will guilt work? He is blindly searching for the specific
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: emotional lever that will force her to re-engage with him.
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: And when she wouldn't engage, he just went around her.
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: He started contacting her family. And this part is truly bizarre.
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: He began texting Alice's mother, Sue.
• 12:29
  Speaker 2: This is where it gets incredibly disturbing. Right.
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: He was actually calling her mom in the texts, begging
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: her to intervene and convince Alice to take him back.
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: And then when Sue obviously didn't comply, he immediately flipped
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: the script and started trying to convince Sue that her
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: daughter was a horrible person.
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: We call that enmeshment, and it's a profound violation of boundaries.
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: Enmeshment, okay.
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: He is attempting to bypass Alice's defenses by manipulating the
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: people she trusts the most. By calling her mother mom,
• 13:00
  Speaker 2: he's trying to artificially insert himself into the family hierarchy
• 13:04
  Speaker 2: and And then when that fails, the narcissism just takes
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: over entirely, and he attempts to devalue Alice in the
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: eyes of her own mother.
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: He is literally trying to sever her lifelines. Exactly.
• 13:15
  Speaker 2: He wants her to have nowhere else to turn.
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: And then he moved into digital warfare. He hacked into
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: her social media accounts. He threatened to publicly release intimate
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: photos he had taken of her. And in early September,
• 13:29
  Speaker 1: he used his illicit access to her Facebook account to
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: discover that Alice had started quietly dating an army officer
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: named Mike.
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: And for a possessive stalker, discovering a new partner is
• 13:39
  Speaker 2: the ultimate narcissistic injury.
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: It just shatters their illusion of control.
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: It proves that the victim can survive and even thrive
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: without them, and they cannot handle that reality.
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: His reaction was completely unhinged. Dylan actually found a way
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: to contact Mike, and he lied to him. He told
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: Mike that he and Alice were still sleeping together, still
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: seeing each other behind Mike's back.
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: He is engaging in a scorched earth campaign. If he
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: cannot occupy the territory of her life, he is going
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: to salt the earth so nothing else can ever grow there.
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: Wow. Salt the earth.
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: It's an attempt to poison her future out of pure,
• 14:12
  Speaker 2: unadulterated spite.
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: Initially, the source material notes that Alice tried to handle
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: all of this with empathy. She felt bad that he
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: was struggling so much with a breakup. But the sheer
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: suffocating volume of this harassment eventually forced her to block
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: him and cut him off entirely. She should have. Which
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: brings us to the moment the digital obsession crossed the
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: threshold into physical space. September 30th.
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: This is a massive, pivotal escalation point.
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: Dylan drove from his barracks in Edinburgh all the way
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: down to her flat in Gateshead. He walked up to
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: her front door and repeatedly rang the doorbell. Then he
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: would hide.
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: Like a game.
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Alice looked out the window, and while she didn't
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: see him, her gut told her it was him, so
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: she kept the door locked. But a few hours later,
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: he escalated even further. He climbed the fence into her
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: enclosed back garden, walked up to her ground floor bedroom window,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: and knocked on the glass.
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: The psychological violation of this cannot be overstated.
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: It's terrifying.
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: A home is a person's final sanctuary. It is the
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: one place where you possess total control over who has
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: access to you. By scaling that fence and knocking on
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: the glass of her bedroom, I mean the most intimate
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: space in the house, He is sending a very clear message.
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: Which is?
• 15:30
  Speaker 2: Your locks do not matter. Your boundaries do not matter.
• 15:34
  Speaker 2: I can reach you whenever I choose.
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: And when she finally opened the curtains, he had left
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: flowers and chocolates on the windowsill. And she watched him
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: slowly backing away with his hands up in the air,
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: almost like he was surrendering.
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: Such theatrical manipulation.
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: And as he drove back to Edinburgh, he left her
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: a voicemail. And I want to read this directly because
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: It is one of the most chilling things in this
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: entire case. He said, I just wanted to give you
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: flowers and chocolates to prove that, no, I don't want
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: to kill you. I'm not intending to kill you. That's
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: all he wanted to say, actually.
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: We have to stop and deconstruct that sentence because this
• 16:12
  Speaker 2: is what I call a linguistic Trojan horse.
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: A linguistic Trojan horse.
• 16:16
  Speaker 2: Yes, because to the untrained ear or to a flawed
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: police risk assessment algorithm, that sentence might actually register as non-threatening.
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: I mean, he explicitly says he isn't going to kill her, right?
• 16:27
  Speaker 2: But psychologically, it is an act of terrorism.
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: Exactly, because why bring up murder at all?
• 16:32
  Speaker 2: Precisely. Unsolicited reassurances are massive red flags. By introducing the
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: concept of murder into the dialogue, he is intentionally planting
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: the seed of mortal terror in her mind. But he's
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: doing it wrapped in the plausible deniability of an apology.
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: So he can just say, what, I was just trying
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: to be nice.
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: Exactly. If the police confront him, he can play the
• 16:53
  Speaker 2: victim and say, look at the transcript. I literally told
• 16:56
  Speaker 2: her I wouldn't hurt her. But he knows exactly what
• 16:59
  Speaker 2: he's doing to her nervous system. It is a death
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: threat disguised as reassurance.
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: And it worked. Alice was absolutely terrified. That night, she
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: finally made the decision to call the police. She dialed
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: the non-emergency number 101.
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: Which is a huge step for a victim to take.
• 17:15
  Speaker 1: It is. And when you read the transcripts of this call,
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: it is profoundly frustrating. You can hear Alice, who's clearly
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: shaken to her core, trying so hard to sound reasonable
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: and calm while describing behavior that is objectively terrifying.
• 17:32
  Speaker 2: And she provides a remarkably clear and detailed chronological account.
• 17:36
  Speaker 2: She tells the operator about the breakup three months prior.
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: She details the hacking of her phone and Facebook. She
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: explains the relentless, unwanted contact despite her explicit request for
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: him to stop.
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah, she lays it all out.
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: And she reports the physical intrusion that just happened, climbing
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: the wall into her back garden and knocking on her
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: bedroom window. She gives them everything they need.
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: She even admits her own hesitation, saying to the operator,
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: I've been putting off... My friends have been telling me
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: to call the police, but I just feel a bit
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: shaken up tonight.
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: She's almost apologizing for bothering them. Right.
• 18:09
  Speaker 1: And the operator listens and says... Well, it can be
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: classed as harassment, which is a crime. The operator then
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: gives Alice a choice. She can hire a solicitor to
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: get an injunction or she can report it to the
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: police and they will issue something called a police information notice.
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: The operator explicitly tells Alice that if a pin is
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: issued and he contacts her again, he'll be arrested.
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: And Alice quite logically chooses the police route. She wants
• 18:35
  Speaker 2: immediate state protection. She gives them Dylan's full name. his
• 18:38
  Speaker 2: nickname Harry, his military base in Edinburgh. She even explains
• 18:43
  Speaker 2: his tactics, noting that he creates fake Snapchat accounts to
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: bypass her blocks. I mean, she gives them a complete
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: intelligence package.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: So they log in as harassment and decide to issue
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: this pin. But I want to play devil's advocate for
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: a second here.
• 18:55
  Speaker 2: Sure, go ahead.
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: If I'm a police operator and a woman calls in
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: and says, my ex-boyfriend left chocolates on my windowsill and
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: sent a lot of texts, I can kind of see
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: how a bureaucratic system doesn't immediately dispatch a SWAT team.
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: So legally speaking, what actually is a PIN and why
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: did they rely on it?
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: It's a vital question. A police information notice historically was
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: designed for low-level neighborhood disputes.
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: Like what?
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: Imagine two neighbors arguing over a property line and one
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: keeps shouting over the fence. The police issue a PIN
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: to formally say, we have a record that a complaint
• 19:29
  Speaker 2: was made. Knock it off. Applying it to domestic abuse
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: and stalking is a catastrophic category error.
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: Because it has no actual legal power, right?
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: None whatsoever. A PIN is not a court order. It
• 19:41
  Speaker 2: does not carry a criminal penalty. Signing it does not
• 19:44
  Speaker 2: constitute an admission of guilt. It is essentially an administrative
• 19:48
  Speaker 2: slap on the wrist.
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: That is wild.
• 19:50
  Speaker 2: But the true danger of a pin in a stalking
• 19:52
  Speaker 2: case is twofold. First, it infuriates the stalker, acting as
• 19:56
  Speaker 2: an escalation trigger. Second, it lulls the victim into a
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: false sense of security.
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: Because the operator told Alice he'd be arrested. Exactly.
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: Alice believed that the full weight of the law was
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: now standing between her and Dylan.
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: And to make this bureaucratic failure even worse, there was
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: a massive procedural error in how the pin was actually delivered.
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: On October 3rd, the warning was issued to Dillon up
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: at his barracks in Edinburgh. But the police didn't deliver it.
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: They arranged for Dillon's military major to hand him the notice.
• 20:27
  Speaker 2: Which completely violates national policing guidance.
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: Really? Yes.
• 20:32
  Speaker 2: A pin, if used, is supposed to be delivered by
• 20:35
  Speaker 2: a police officer in person, specifically to convey the authority
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: of the state and to physically assess the perpetrator's demeanor.
• 20:43
  Speaker 2: By outsourcing this to his commanding officer, they kept it in-house.
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: Like it was just an HR issue.
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: They allowed it to be treated as a minor disciplinary
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: issue within the military hierarchy rather than a civilian criminal warning.
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: And considering Dillon was training for the Special Reconnaissance Regiment,
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: he likely viewed this administrative warning with complete contempt. I mean,
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: he ignored it instantly. He didn't just ignore it, he
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: weaponized it. Within days of receiving this supposed legal warning,
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: he sent Alice a parcel in the mail.
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: And let's look at what was in that parcel because
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: it is a master class in psychological manipulation.
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: He sent a letter, photographs of the two of them together,
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: and a notebook that Alice had given him during their relationship.
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: And the letter was just dripping with manipulation and lies.
• 21:29
  Speaker 2: Total fabrication.
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: He claimed that because she called the police, he was
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: in a lot of shit, and his commanding officers had
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: confiscated his laptop and phone, which was entirely fabricated. He wrote,
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: I'm in a lot of shit now, but hope you
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: feel happy now wishing you a happy life. I will
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: never come in your life again.
• 21:46
  Speaker 2: He is playing multiple psychological games simultaneously here.
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: Break that down for me.
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: First, he is attempting to induce profound guilt. He wants
• 21:55
  Speaker 2: Alice to feel responsible for the imaginary destruction of his
• 21:58
  Speaker 2: military career. He is reframing himself as the victim of
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: her quote-unquote overreaction.
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: Oh, that is so twisted.
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: Second, by sending the notebook and the photos, he is
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: demanding emotional real estate. He is forcing her to hold
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: physical objects that trigger memories of their intimacy. Even from
• 22:15
  Speaker 2: a distance, he is invading her mind.
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: Alice was absolutely terrified by this parcel. Not because of
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: the items themselves, but because of what it represented. That
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: he wasn't stopping. So she calls the police for a
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: second time.
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: Seeking that protection she was promised.
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: Exactly. She gets on the phone and explains, somebody's been
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: issued with a pin so that they can't contact me. However,
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: I've had a letter off them. And the operator's response,
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: this is where the system completely breaks down. The operator asks,
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: was it threatening or was it harassing?
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: And that single question reveals a fundamental flaw in how
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: law enforcement is trained to assess risk in domestic cases.
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: The operator is looking for a Hollywood-style threat. A sentence
• 22:57
  Speaker 2: written in blood saying, I am going to hurt you.
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: Right. And Alice, being painfully honest, says, no, not threatening.
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: It just says he knows I called the police and
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: he won't contact me again. But he said that a
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: lot of times and he never does seem to stop.
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: Because the operator doesn't hear an overt threat of violence.
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: The urgency just evaporates.
• 23:19
  Speaker 2: The operator fails to understand the context of coercive control.
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: The parcel itself is the threat.
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: Because it proves he doesn't care about the rules. Exactly.
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: The fact that a man was officially warned by the
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: police to cease contact and his immediate response was to
• 23:34
  Speaker 2: locate her package items and send them to her home
• 23:38
  Speaker 2: demonstrates a complete disregard for authority and an uncontrollable obsession.
• 23:43
  Speaker 2: The defiance is the danger.
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: But the bureaucratic algorithm doesn't have a checkbox for defiance.
• 23:49
  Speaker 2: No, it doesn't.
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: The operator just tells her that they'll have someone call
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: her back Alice asks if she can speak to the
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: specific officer who dealt with her case initially, and the
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: operator says they can't guarantee who will call. But someone
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: will be in touch. Anytime, really. Alice hung up, feeling
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: completely palmed off. She realized in that moment that she
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: was entirely on her own.
• 24:11
  Speaker 2: The system minimized her terror. This is the cumulative effect
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: of systemic failure. The victim realizes the cavalry isn't coming.
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: The psychological toll this took on her is devastating to
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: read about. She told her sister Emma that she had
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: this terrifying premonition. Alice said she felt the police would
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: only actually respond when he stabs me.
• 24:34
  Speaker 2: Victims of stalking are incredibly accurate risk assessors.
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: They really are.
• 24:39
  Speaker 2: They understand the creditor's capacity for violence because they have
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: absorbed the microaggressions, the unsaid threats, the escalating boundary violations.
• 24:47
  Speaker 2: Alice's intuition was vastly superior to the police department's risk
• 24:51
  Speaker 2: assessment matrix.
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: She started living in a state of constant hypervigilance. She
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: was 24 years old, and she was too terrified to
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: walk to her own front door. She had to ask
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: her colleague at Sky, Paul, to drive her all the
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: way to her door every single day after work.
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: Just existing was terrifying for her.
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: And the moment she stepped inside, she would immediately double
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: lock it. She was living in a fortress of her
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: own making.
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: And her instincts were entirely validated by Dylan's actions. The
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: outline points to the rapid escalation over the following days.
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: Just prior to the fatal attack, Dylan made another trip
• 25:23
  Speaker 2: down from Edinburgh.
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: Right, on October 10th.
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: He didn't knock this time. He climbed into her back garden,
• 25:29
  Speaker 2: took a photograph of her bathroom window, and then drove
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: back to Scotland.
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: If I'm trying to understand the mindset of a stalker,
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: why drive two and a half hours, scale a wall,
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: take a picture of a window, and leave without making contact?
• 25:41
  Speaker 1: What does that achieve?
• 25:43
  Speaker 2: It achieves two things. First, it is tactical reconnaissance. Remember,
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: he is training for a military surveillance unit. He is
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: mapping the structural vulnerabilities of her home, figuring out sight lines,
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: testing access points. He is treating her flat like a
• 25:57
  Speaker 2: hostile compound.
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: Oh my god.
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: Second, it is about psychological dominance. Even if she never
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: knew he was there that night, he knew. He is
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: proving to himself that he has total, undetected access to
• 26:08
  Speaker 2: her most private spaces whenever he desires. It is predatory preparation.
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to the tragic, inevitable climax of this
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: systemic failure. October 12th. I want to walk through the
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: timeline of this afternoon carefully because the window of opportunity
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: was so terrifyingly narrow.
• 26:27
  Speaker 2: It all happened so fast.
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: Alice's day at work proceeded normally. Her colleague, Paul, gave
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: her a lift home, dropping her directly at her front
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: door at 5.30 p.m. When she was inside and double-locked
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: the door, she felt safe enough to relax a bit.
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: She messaged some friends regularly. showing them a new outfit
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: she had bought, and she was chatting on her phone
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: with her new boyfriend, Mike.
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: But then, without warning, the messages abruptly ceased.
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: Less than an hour later, just before 6.30 p.m., her flatmate, Maxine,
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: returned to the flat. She found the front door locked.
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: Maxine walked around to the back of the property and
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: noticed a window was open. She crawled through the window
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: to get inside.
• 27:08
  Speaker 2: And what she finds is just beyond comprehension.
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: And the 999 call that Maxine made moments later, it
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: is honestly one of the most harrowing, visceral pieces of
• 27:18
  Speaker 1: audio you can imagine.
• 27:20
  Speaker 2: Maxine is thrust into an unimaginable nightmare, and she is
• 27:23
  Speaker 2: trying to process profound trauma while simultaneously relaying critical information
• 27:29
  Speaker 2: to an emergency dispatcher. She immediately tells the operator, my
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: flatmate is covered in blood in the bathroom.
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: The operator, trying to establish the scene, asks if the
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: door was open. Maxine says, no, it wasn't. I crawled
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: through my window. There was a knock on the back
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: door and she's lying covered in blood. She's turning blue.
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: The operator desperately asks Maxine to check if Alice is breathing.
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: Maxine says no.
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: It's just horrific.
• 27:54
  Speaker 1: She describes a scene of total chaos. Alice's leg looks broken.
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: Things are tipped over everywhere in the bathroom. It is
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: immediately obvious that a violent, brutal struggle took place.
• 28:04
  Speaker 2: And amidst all this chaos and shock, there is a
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: moment of absolute piercing clarity for Maxine. A clarity that
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: the entire police force lacked for weeks. Yes.
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: While standing over her murdered friend, Maxine shouts at the operator,
• 28:18
  Speaker 1: please let me know this absolute psychopath. She put in
• 28:21
  Speaker 1: a complaint about her ex, and she phoned 101, and
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: they said they were going to do nothing. Now this
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: is happening.
• 28:28
  Speaker 2: She knew immediately.
• 28:30
  Speaker 1: The operator asks who the ex is, and without a
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: second of hesitation, Maxine says, Harry Dillon.
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: That contrast is the crux of this entire tragedy. A
• 28:40
  Speaker 2: highly trained police force with access to national databases, threat
• 28:45
  Speaker 2: assessment models, and dedicated personnel looked at Dylan's behavior and
• 28:49
  Speaker 2: saw a minor nuisance. A 20-something flatmate standing in a
• 28:54
  Speaker 2: blood-soaked bathroom knew instantly, with zero doubt, exactly who had
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: done this and exactly why. The threat was blindingly obvious
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: to everyone in Alice's life. It was only invisible to
• 29:06
  Speaker 2: the bureaucracy that was supposed to protect her.
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: Alice was officially pronounced dead at 7.30 p.m. The coroner's
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: report is devastating. She died from catastrophic blood loss. Her
• 29:20
  Speaker 1: throat had been slit at least six times, cutting all
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: the way through to her spine.
• 29:26
  Speaker 2: The violence is just staggering.
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: She suffered 24 injuries in total, many of them defensive
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: wounds on her hands and arms. She fought so hard.
• 29:36
  Speaker 2: The sheer unrestrained brutality of the attack speaks volumes about
• 29:41
  Speaker 2: the psychology of the killer. This was not a quick,
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: sterile act. The number of wounds, the specific targeting of
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: her throat, this is an act of annihilation.
• 29:53
  Speaker 1: Annihilation, yeah.
• 29:54
  Speaker 2: It is the physical manifestation of his resentful rage.
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: It was his.
• 29:59
  Speaker 2: Final punishment for her independence.
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: Because Maxine identified him immediately on the 999 call, Dylan
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: became the sole suspect instantly. The police began running his
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: vehicle's registration plates through the automated number plate recognition system,
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: the ANPR.
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: Which is a very powerful tool.
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: For those who don't know, this is a vast network
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: of cameras on UK roads that instantly cross-references license plates
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: against police databases. They got a hit almost immediately. The
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: ANPR cameras had captured his car traveling from Edinburgh down
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: to Newcastle earlier that afternoon, and then heading back north
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: shortly after the murder.
• 30:37
  Speaker 2: Armed with that tracking data, police arrived at Glencourse Barracks
• 30:41
  Speaker 2: in Edinburgh just before midnight and arrested Dylan on suspicion
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: of murder.
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: He was transported down to Gateshead Police Station, and at 3.24 a.m.,
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: the formal interview began. And this is where we see
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: the absolute apex of his narcissism and self-preservation.
• 30:58
  Speaker 2: It is truly galling to read.
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: During the interview, he couldn't deny being a Newcastle because
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: of the cameras. So he spun this elaborate fabrication. He
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: claimed he only drove down because he wanted answers and
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: closure about the end of their relationship.
• 31:14
  Speaker 2: It is uncanny how abusers use therapy speak to justify
• 31:18
  Speaker 2: predatory behavior. Closure is a convenient, socially acceptable narrative.
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: Everyone wants closure.
• 31:25
  Speaker 2: He uses it to frame his cross-country stalking mission as
• 31:28
  Speaker 2: a sad romantic necessity rather than a targeted hunt.
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: He explicitly denied entering her flat. He told the detectives
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: that Alice actually came outside to speak to him. And
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: then he invented this truly bizarre, twisted story.
• 31:44
  Speaker 2: This part is just absurd.
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: He claimed that while they were talking, Alice suddenly said
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: she was terrified of him. That she had heard stories
• 31:51
  Speaker 1: about men killing their girlfriends and she was scared he
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: was going to do the same to her. He claimed
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: that he reached out gently to hold her hands to
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: calm her down, but she reacted wildly, scratched him deeply
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: across the face, and then he just turned around and
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: drove back to Scotland.
• 32:06
  Speaker 2: The psychological projection in the interview room is staggering.
• 32:10
  Speaker 1: It's sickening.
• 32:12
  Speaker 2: He takes his own premeditated murderous intent and he literally
• 32:16
  Speaker 2: puts it into Alice's mouth in his recounting of the story.
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: He uses the very real, visceral fear she undoubtedly felt
• 32:24
  Speaker 2: to paint her as a hysterical, paranoid woman and paints
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: himself as the misunderstood, gentle victim of an unprovoked scratch.
• 32:34
  Speaker 2: He is trying to gaslight the detectives.
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: But the detectives had the timeline and they soon uncovered
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: exactly what he was doing before the murder. And I
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: think this detail is one of the most disturbing elements
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: of the entire case.
• 32:46
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: The digital forensics show that Dylan drove down, parked his
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: car near Alice's flat, and waited for her to come
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: home from work. And while he was sitting in his car,
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: parked outside the home of the woman he was about
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: to butcher, he opened Tinder.
• 33:02
  Speaker 2: He was actively messaging another woman on a dating app.
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: He was literally making plans to meet up with a
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: girl from Tinder later that same night.
• 33:10
  Speaker 2: That specific detail shatters any potential defense that this was
• 33:13
  Speaker 2: a crime of passion or a sudden loss of control.
• 33:17
  Speaker 2: It demonstrates a level of psychopathy and profound emotional detachment
• 33:21
  Speaker 2: that is hard to comprehend.
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: How does someone even do that?
• 33:25
  Speaker 2: He is perfectly compartmentalizing his intent to commit a savage
• 33:29
  Speaker 2: murder alongside casual flirtatious dating plans. It proves that to him,
• 33:34
  Speaker 2: Alice wasn't a person he loved and lost. She was
• 33:36
  Speaker 2: an object that had defied him. Slaying her was just
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: a task on his daily agenda. Once he eliminated the
• 33:44
  Speaker 2: possession he could no longer control, he was fully prepared
• 33:46
  Speaker 2: to go on a date and start grooming the next one.
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: Around 6 p.m., he put his phone away. He climbed
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: over the back wall, forced his way in through the
• 33:55
  Speaker 1: bathroom window, and grabbed a long carving knife from Alice's
• 33:59
  Speaker 1: own kitchen. When Alice walked toward the bathroom, he cornered her.
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: He knelt heavily on her back to pin her to
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: the floor, and he ended her life.
• 34:10
  Speaker 2: And all of his lies in the interview room were
• 34:12
  Speaker 2: systematically dismantled by forensic science.
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: Thankfully.
• 34:16
  Speaker 2: The police found Alice's blood on the steering wheel of
• 34:18
  Speaker 2: his car. They found her blood soaked into a Help
• 34:21
  Speaker 2: for Heroes charity wristband he was wearing. Furthermore, cell tower
• 34:25
  Speaker 2: data proved that after the murder, he had taken Alice's
• 34:28
  Speaker 2: phone and the signal was tracked traveling north back to
• 34:31
  Speaker 2: Edinburgh in his vehicle. The evidence was insurmountable.
• 34:35
  Speaker 1: He was officially charged with murder. And the trial commenced
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: in April 2017 at Newcastle Crown Court. He pleaded not guilty,
• 34:43
  Speaker 1: but because the forensic evidence placed him definitively inside the
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: flat and covered in her blood, he and his defense
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: team had to abandon the story he told in the
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: police interview. He can no longer claim he just got
• 34:53
  Speaker 1: scratched outside and left.
• 34:55
  Speaker 2: So cornered by empirical evidence, he pivoted to the absolute
• 34:58
  Speaker 2: last resort of the coercive controller. He blamed the victim
• 35:02
  Speaker 2: for her own brutal murder.
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: He took the stand. and claimed that he did go inside,
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: but only to retrieve his belongings. He claimed that Alice
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: was the aggressor. He testified that Alice flew into a
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: rage and attacked him with a carving knife. He spun
• 35:17
  Speaker 1: this fiction that a struggle ensued, and in the process
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: of him simply trying to disarm and defend himself, Alice
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: somehow managed to inflict 24 horrific injuries and slit her
• 35:26
  Speaker 1: own throat through to the spine.
• 35:29
  Speaker 2: Which is medically, physically, and logically absurd.
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: Completely absurd.
• 35:33
  Speaker 2: The pathologist's report made it abundantly clear that the depth, angle,
• 35:37
  Speaker 2: and severity of those wounds could not have been self-inflicted
• 35:39
  Speaker 2: during a defensive struggle. But Dylan wasn't just trying to
• 35:43
  Speaker 2: manipulate the physics of the crime. He used his time
• 35:46
  Speaker 2: on the witness stand to engage in one final grotesque
• 35:50
  Speaker 2: act of psychological abuse.
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: He testified about Alice's final moments. He claimed that as
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: she lay bleeding to death on the floor, her final
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: words were about how much she hated her family.
• 36:00
  Speaker 2: It's just so cruel.
• 36:02
  Speaker 1: And when the prosecution asked him what was going through
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: his mind as he looked down at her body, his
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: response was that he felt terrible for her father, Clive,
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: because Clive had failed to protect his daughter.
• 36:13
  Speaker 2: That testimony is an act of emotional terrorism directed squarely
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: at the family sitting.
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: In the gallery. That's exactly what it is.
• 36:20
  Speaker 2: Even while facing a life sentence, his need for control
• 36:23
  Speaker 2: is paramount. By claiming her last words were full of
• 36:27
  Speaker 2: hatred for her family, he is attempting to isolate Alice
• 36:30
  Speaker 2: from her loved ones posthumously. He wants to taint their
• 36:33
  Speaker 2: final memories of her. And the comment about her father?
• 36:36
  Speaker 2: That is a deliberate, sadistic attempt to inflict lifelong guilt.
• 36:41
  Speaker 2: He is mocking a grieving father under the thin veil
• 36:44
  Speaker 2: of sympathy. It is peak, unadulterated narcissism.
• 36:48
  Speaker 1: During the course of this trial, another piece of information
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: was revealed to the public that really sparked outrage. The
• 36:55
  Speaker 1: court heard that an ex-girlfriend of Dylan's had actually taken
• 36:58
  Speaker 1: out a restraining order against him three years prior. After
• 37:02
  Speaker 1: that relationship ended, he had tracked her down in the street,
• 37:06
  Speaker 1: spat directly in her face, and hurled horrific abuse at
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: her and her new boyfriend.
• 37:11
  Speaker 2: So there was a clear, legally documented history of him
• 37:15
  Speaker 2: escalating to abusive physical behavior following a breakup, a proven
• 37:19
  Speaker 2: behavioral pattern.
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: But when Alice made her desperate calls to 101, the
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: officers at Northumbria Police had absolutely no knowledge of this
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: prior restraining order. You have to wonder, How on earth
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: does that happen? How does a police force not know
• 37:33
  Speaker 1: that you're dealing with a documented abuser?
• 37:36
  Speaker 2: It comes down to the catastrophic siloing of police databases.
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: Meaning they don't talk to each other? Exactly.
• 37:43
  Speaker 2: Historically in the UK, different regional forces, and especially the
• 37:46
  Speaker 2: military police versus civilian police, operated on different IT systems
• 37:50
  Speaker 2: that didn't automatically cross-reference intelligence. The police national computer might
• 37:55
  Speaker 2: hold major convictions... But local intelligence about restraining orders or
• 37:58
  Speaker 2: harassment complaints often stayed within the regional force's local database.
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: That is a massive flaw.
• 38:05
  Speaker 2: If the 101 operator had been able to press a
• 38:07
  Speaker 2: button and see that this man had a history of
• 38:09
  Speaker 2: tracking down and assaulting ex-partners, the entire risk assessment matrix
• 38:13
  Speaker 2: would have shifted. Alice wouldn't have been handed a toothless pin.
• 38:16
  Speaker 2: She would have been flagged as high risk.
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: After an agonizing 11-day trial, the jury saw through every
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: single one of his fabrications. It took them barely two
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: hours of deliberation to return a unanimous guilty verdict for
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: the murder of Alice Ruggles. The judge sentenced him to
• 38:32
  Speaker 1: life imprisonment. But there is a specific legal technicality in
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: the sentencing that I want us to unpack because, frankly,
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: it is infuriating.
• 38:40
  Speaker 2: You're referring to the calculation of the minimum term he
• 38:42
  Speaker 2: must serve.
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: Yes. The judge handed down a minimum term of 22
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: years before he is eligible for parole. The court records
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: explain that under U.K. sentencing guidelines, If a perpetrator brings
• 38:53
  Speaker 1: a weapon to the scene of a murder, the starting
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: point for the minimum term is 25 years. But because
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: Dylan didn't physically bring a knife with him from Edinburgh
• 39:02
  Speaker 1: and instead grabbed a weapon from Alice's kitchen once he
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: broke in, his sentence was mitigated. It was reduced by
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: three years.
• 39:08
  Speaker 2: It is a profoundly rigid, anachronistic application of the law.
• 39:12
  Speaker 1: It makes no sense.
• 39:14
  Speaker 2: The legal philosophy behind the 25-year starting point is that
• 39:17
  Speaker 2: bringing a weapon proves clear, calculated premeditation to kill. The
• 39:21
  Speaker 2: law values the premeditation of the tool.
• 39:24
  Speaker 1: But that completely ignores the premeditation of the act. He
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: drove hundreds of miles across the country. He conducted reconnaissance
• 39:31
  Speaker 1: days prior. He scaled a perimeter wall. He forced open
• 39:34
  Speaker 1: a window. He waited outside for her to come home.
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: How does the fact that he used her carving knife
• 39:39
  Speaker 1: instead of a pocket knife make him any less premeditated
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: or dangerous?
• 39:43
  Speaker 2: It doesn't. And this is where the legal framework struggles
• 39:46
  Speaker 2: to quantify the specific psychology of stalking and coercive control.
• 39:50
  Speaker 2: Stalking isn't a single spontaneous act of violence. It is
• 39:54
  Speaker 2: an atmospheric, long-term campaign of terror. The intent to destroy
• 39:58
  Speaker 2: her was entirely premeditated. The law is binary, but human
• 40:02
  Speaker 2: behavior is complex. And in this case, that rigid legal
• 40:05
  Speaker 2: binary handed a sadistic killer a three-year discount on his sentence.
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: The presiding judge, Paul Sloan, was visibly disgusted by Dillon
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: during the sentencing. He didn't mince words. He described the
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: murder as an act of utter barbarism. He looked directly
• 40:19
  Speaker 1: at Dillon and stated, not a shred of remorse have
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: you shown from first to last. Indeed, you are only
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: concentrating so hard in getting your story right when giving evidence.
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: You forgot to even shed a crocodile tear.
• 40:31
  Speaker 2: That is a brilliant summation from the judge. It perfectly
• 40:35
  Speaker 2: encapsulates the narcissistic void inside the killer. The only thing
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: they care about is the survival of their own fabricated narrative,
• 40:42
  Speaker 2: human empathy doesn't even factor into the equation.
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: The conviction put him behind bars, but it left Alice's
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: family completely shattered. Her parents, Sue and Clive, released a
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: statement saying, none of our family or any of Alice's
• 40:54
  Speaker 1: closest friends will ever be the same again. We will
• 40:57
  Speaker 1: live the rest of our lives knowing that Alice should
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: have been here with us, wondering what she would have become,
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: imagining all the people she would have continued to affect
• 41:06
  Speaker 1: with her infectious sense of humor and her sheer love
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: of life.
• 41:10
  Speaker 2: The grief of losing a child is unimaginable. But to
• 41:13
  Speaker 2: lose a child to a violence that was loudly broadcasted beforehand,
• 41:18
  Speaker 2: a violence that the state was explicitly asked to prevent,
• 41:22
  Speaker 2: that adds a layer of profound systemic betrayal to the grief.
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: And Sue and Clive recognized that betrayal immediately. They stated
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: publicly that Alice's death was entirely preventable. Because the truth is,
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: Alice did everything right. She recognized the danger. She reached
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: out for help. She provided the police with evidence, names, locations,
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: and tactics. The failure was entirely on the institutions tasked
• 41:49
  Speaker 1: with protecting her. And that institutional failure triggered a massive
• 41:54
  Speaker 1: backlash against Northumbria police.
• 41:56
  Speaker 2: Rightfully so. The police force was forced to undergo an
• 42:00
  Speaker 2: intensive internal review. Furthermore, their handling of the case was
• 42:04
  Speaker 2: referred to the Independent Office of Police Conduct, the IOPC.
• 42:08
  Speaker 1: Which is a big deal.
• 42:09
  Speaker 2: Very much so. For those unfamiliar, the IOPC is the
• 42:13
  Speaker 2: external watchdog in the UK that investigates serious complaints and
• 42:17
  Speaker 2: misconduct involving the police. They do not work for the police.
• 42:20
  Speaker 2: They hold them accountable.
• 42:22
  Speaker 1: And the IOPC's findings were damning. They ruled that the
• 42:26
  Speaker 1: officers involved fundamentally failed to properly investigate Alice's claims. They
• 42:31
  Speaker 1: failed to recognize the severity of the stalking. Two officers
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: ultimately faced disciplinary action. the Northumbria Police Force issued a
• 42:39
  Speaker 1: formal apology to the family.
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: In addition to the IOPC investigation, the Gateshead Community Safety
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: Board conducted what is known as a Domestic Homicide Review,
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: or a DHR.
• 42:50
  Speaker 1: What exactly does that entail?
• 42:52
  Speaker 2: A DHR is a multi-agency deep dive that occurs when
• 42:55
  Speaker 2: someone dies as a result of domestic violence. It brings
• 42:58
  Speaker 2: together police, social services, health professionals, and the military in
• 43:02
  Speaker 2: this case, to figure out exactly where the safety net broke.
• 43:06
  Speaker 2: The DHR for Alice concluded that she had been subjected
• 43:09
  Speaker 2: to significant escalating stalking, and it produced a list of
• 43:12
  Speaker 2: 20 sweeping recommendations to overhaul how these agencies communicate and
• 43:17
  Speaker 2: assess risk.
• 43:18
  Speaker 1: You know, those reviews and apologies are necessary, but they
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: are cold comfort after a vibrant 24-year-old has been murdered.
• 43:25
  Speaker 2: Absolutely.
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: But what Sue and Clive did next is what truly
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: altered the landscape of the UK. They didn't just retreat
• 43:32
  Speaker 1: into their grief, right? They weaponized their pain into action.
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: They established the Alice Fruggles Trust.
• 43:40
  Speaker 2: The Trust is a formidable organization. Their mission is highly specific,
• 43:44
  Speaker 2: to raise national awareness about the specific nuances of stalking
• 43:48
  Speaker 2: and coercive control.
• 43:50
  Speaker 1: And they are relentless about it.
• 43:51
  Speaker 2: They are. They campaign relentlessly to ensure that stalking offenses
• 43:55
  Speaker 2: result in immediate, robust police action, rather than administrative warnings.
• 44:01
  Speaker 2: They want to protect the victim instantly while simultaneously holding
• 44:04
  Speaker 2: the stalker accountable.
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: One of the most brilliant, proactive things the trust has
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: done is focus on education. They developed the Alice Ruggles
• 44:12
  Speaker 1: Trust Relationship Safety Resource. This isn't just a pamphlet. These
• 44:16
  Speaker 1: are comprehensive, expertly designed teaching materials and lesson plans that
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: are provided entirely free of charge to secondary school teachers
• 44:24
  Speaker 1: across the UK.
• 44:25
  Speaker 2: This educational component is vital because it attacks the root
• 44:29
  Speaker 2: of the cultural problem. Think about the media teenagers consume.
• 44:32
  Speaker 2: Pop culture constantly romanticizes obsessive behavior.
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: Like the guy holding the boombox outside the window.
• 44:38
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Movies and music often teach young people that extreme jealousy,
• 44:42
  Speaker 2: controlling who you text, or relentlessly pursuing someone after a
• 44:46
  Speaker 2: breakup are signs of deep, passionate love. The Trust's curriculum
• 44:50
  Speaker 2: steps into classrooms and systematically rewires that narrative. It teaches
• 44:55
  Speaker 2: teenagers how to identify early-stage isolation tactics. It teaches them
• 44:58
  Speaker 2: that A boundary violation isn't romantic. It's a precursor to
• 45:02
  Speaker 2: control and potential violence.
• 45:04
  Speaker 1: Sue put it so perfectly. She said, we really want
• 45:08
  Speaker 1: to raise awareness if anybody else is in that situation.
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: They recognize it for what it is. So they're thinking,
• 45:14
  Speaker 1: hang on, this is a warning sign, and I need
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: to be careful here. If Alice's friends or even Alice
• 45:20
  Speaker 1: herself have been taught these specific warning signs in school,
• 45:24
  Speaker 1: the outcome might have been different.
• 45:26
  Speaker 2: Beyond education, the trust's campaigning has forced genuine legal evolution.
• 45:31
  Speaker 2: In 2020, partly due to the relentless advocacy following cases
• 45:35
  Speaker 2: like Alice's, the U.K. government introduced Stalking Protection Orders, or SPOs.
• 45:41
  Speaker 1: Let's break down why an SPO is so much more
• 45:44
  Speaker 1: effective than the PIN that failed Alice.
• 45:46
  Speaker 2: The difference is night and day. A PIN was an
• 45:49
  Speaker 2: informal warning. A Stalking Protection Order is a formal court order. Right. Crucially,
• 45:54
  Speaker 2: the police can apply for an SPO at the very
• 45:56
  Speaker 2: early stages of an investigation before they even have enough
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: evidence to formally charge the perpetrator with a crime. The
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: order immediately blocks the stalker from contacting or approaching the victim.
• 46:07
  Speaker 2: And here is the teeth. Breaching an SPO is a
• 46:11
  Speaker 2: criminal offense in and of itself, punishable by up to
• 46:14
  Speaker 2: five years in prison.
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: So it flips the burden entirely. The police don't have
• 46:19
  Speaker 1: to wait for the stalker to commit a violent act
• 46:21
  Speaker 1: to arrest them. The mere act of Sending a letter
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: or climbing a fence becomes an instantly jailable offense because
• 46:28
  Speaker 1: it breaches the court order.
• 46:29
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It gives law enforcement the legal mechanism they lacked
• 46:32
  Speaker 2: in Alice's case. It allows them to freeze the perpetrator's
• 46:36
  Speaker 2: movements while they gather the digital and physical evidence required
• 46:39
  Speaker 2: for a long-term stalking conviction. Since the introduction of SPOs
• 46:43
  Speaker 2: and the increased training advocated by the trust, police forces
• 46:46
  Speaker 2: are recording significantly higher numbers of stalking incidents.
• 46:50
  Speaker 1: Which might sound like a bad thing. that stalking is
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: going up, but it's actually a positive metric. It means
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: the police are finally identifying the behavior correctly. They are
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: no longer logging it as a minor harassment dispute. They
• 47:02
  Speaker 1: are labeling it as stalking and treating it with the
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: severity it demands. They are finally seeing the smoke and
• 47:08
  Speaker 1: calling the fire department before the house burns down.
• 47:11
  Speaker 2: It is a profound systemic shift, but it is a
• 47:15
  Speaker 2: bittersweet victory because it highlights the devastating cost of the
• 47:18
  Speaker 2: system's previous ignorance.
• 47:21
  Speaker 1: The family is incredibly transparent about the enduring reality of
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: their pain. They shared a statement saying, It's really, really
• 47:27
  Speaker 1: hard coping with the fact that Alice isn't here anymore.
• 47:30
  Speaker 1: We sort of thought originally it would get better, but
• 47:33
  Speaker 1: we realize it's not going to get better. We're just
• 47:35
  Speaker 1: going to get used to living with it. We miss
• 47:37
  Speaker 1: her every day. But they have vowed to keep her
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: memory alive. They ensure that her spirited, affectionate, brilliantly funny
• 47:45
  Speaker 1: personality is what defines her legacy, not the man who
• 47:48
  Speaker 1: took her life.
• 47:50
  Speaker 2: Her voice, quite literally, continues to echo. The lessons learned
• 47:54
  Speaker 2: from her horrific ordeal are now being taught in the
• 47:57
  Speaker 2: training academies of police departments. And the story of her
• 48:00
  Speaker 2: life is empowering students in secondary schools across the country
• 48:04
  Speaker 2: to set firm boundaries.
• 48:06
  Speaker 1: As we bring this deep dive to a close, I
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: want to turn this outward to you, the listener. We've
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: spent a lot of time today talking about digital infiltration, hacking,
• 48:15
  Speaker 1: fake Snapchat accounts, using location data.
• 48:17
  Speaker 2: It's everywhere now.
• 48:18
  Speaker 1: If you are listening to this on your commute or
• 48:21
  Speaker 1: at your desk, think about your own digital footprint right now.
• 48:25
  Speaker 1: We live in an era where constant connectivity is the default.
• 48:28
  Speaker 1: We share our locations with friends on apps. Our calendars
• 48:32
  Speaker 1: are synced. Our social media broadcasts our routines. The tools
• 48:36
  Speaker 1: of connection are identical to the tools of surveillance. Where
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: is the line between normal, modern relationship behavior and digital
• 48:44
  Speaker 1: coercive control? Are we, as individuals and as a society,
• 48:49
  Speaker 1: properly equipped to spot the subtle, modern tools of obsession
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: before they escalate into a figure standing outside our bedroom window?
• 48:56
  Speaker 2: It is a question that requires constant, vigilant re-evaluation, because
• 49:01
  Speaker 2: the technology of control is evolving far faster than our
• 49:05
  Speaker 2: legal frameworks can adapt. We have to rely on our intuition,
• 49:08
  Speaker 2: and we have to demand that our systems listen to
• 49:11
  Speaker 2: that intuition.
• 49:12
  Speaker 1: Because if the tragic, beautiful life of Alice Ruggles teaches
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: us anything— it's that we cannot wait for physical proof
• 49:18
  Speaker 1: of danger to validate our fear. When the behavior turns obsessive,
• 49:23
  Speaker 1: when the boundaries are repeatedly breached, we have to recognize
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: the threat for what it is, and we have to
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: act decisively. We want to thank you so much for
• 49:31
  Speaker 1: joining us on this incredibly heavy but undeniably vital deep dive.
• 49:35
  Speaker 2: Thank you for listening.
• 49:37
  Speaker 1: Please remember, if you or someone you know has been
• 49:40
  Speaker 1: affected by any of the issues raised today surrounding coercive control,
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: domestic abuse, or stalking, you're not alone and there are
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: resources available. The Truly Criminal documentary has links provided in
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: its description, and organizations like the Alice Ruggles Trust, the
• 49:56
  Speaker 1: Susie Lamplew Trust, and Women's Aid are ready to help.
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: Trust your gut. Hold your boundaries. We'll see you next time.