# The Regulator Speaks

An episode of [Badge of Betrayal](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1852919243), 30 Apr 2026, 22 min.

Audio: https://p.podderapp.com/2544644999/traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/2fb3740d-3436-44af-8cc0-a91900716aa5/fbab9570-a7a3-4fd4-a673-b3940044b1b8/02335084-641d-4b0d-8b43-b43c003ed067/audio.mp3?utm_source=Podcast&in_playlist=2f1fa4b5-119b-41b5-8749-b3940044b5a4

***Trigger warning: This episode contains discussions of child sexual abuse, grooming, trauma, sexualised behaviour toward minors, and suicide. It may be distressing for some listeners. Please take care while listening. In this episode of Badge of Betrayal, we speak with Tasmania’s Independent Regulator, Louise Coe, about a serious gap in the state’s child safety oversight system. The Office of the Independent Regulator was created to oversee organisations that work with children and young people, including how they respond to allegations of reportable conduct. But in August 2025, Tasmania Police told the regulator they had received legal advice that they were not captured by the scheme meaning they stopped providing key information, including the identities of police officers involved in reportable conduct matters. For eight months, that gap remained. Louise explains why independent oversight matters, why the reporting scheme exists, and why police interactions with vulnerable young people require close scrutiny. She also discusses the importance of backdating the law to cover the period where reporting stopped, and why culture change inside institutions is just as important as technical compliance. Later in the episode, we share part of an anonymous email from another victim of Paul Reynolds. The email includes graphic and deeply distressing details of alleged grooming, emotional manipulation and sexual abuse, and shows how hearing this podcast has helped some people reframe what happened to them. If you have information that you would like to share, email us anonymously at podshape@proton.me If this episode is triggering, please pause and seek support. • Lifeline: 13 11 14 — https://www.lifeline.org.au • Kids Helpline: 1800 55 1800 — https://kidshelpline.com.au • 1800RESPECT: 1800 737 732 — https://www.1800respect.org.au See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

## Transcript

[0:05] Speaker 1: A Podshape production. Since our last episode, information has been
[0:17] Speaker 1: coming in thick and fast on memories of Reynolds and
[0:21] Speaker 1: information some people think might help. You can do the
[0:24] Speaker 1: same by emailing us anonymously at podshape at proton.me. Thanks
[0:30] Speaker 1: also to the numerous people who pointed out lots of
[0:32] Speaker 1: Reddit threads around Reynolds and the Ashley Youth Detention Centre.
[0:36] Speaker 1: and more recent allegations of abuse and police visiting the
[0:39] Speaker 1: centre after hours. We're currently looking into some of those allegations.
[0:45] Speaker 1: A few episodes ago, we took you inside the Parliamentary
[0:48] Speaker 1: Committee meeting. It was an episode which brought to light
[0:52] Speaker 1: the fact that Tasmanian police had not been mandatory reporting
[0:56] Speaker 1: to an oversight committee. Today, we're lucky enough to chat
[1:00] Speaker 1: to the Independent Regulator of Tasmania, So my.
[1:03] Speaker 2: Name's Louise Coe.
[1:05] Speaker 3: I'm the independent regulator at the Office of the Independent
[1:08] Speaker 3: Regulator in Tasmania.
[1:10] Speaker 1: And how did that role, the independent regulator, come about?
[1:13] Speaker 1: Has it always been there in Tasmania or is it
[1:15] Speaker 1: something that has been installed?
[1:18] Speaker 3: No, so it started, the office actually came into being
[1:21] Speaker 3: on the 1st of January 2024. So we're just into
[1:24] Speaker 3: our third year of operation. And it was created under
[1:28] Speaker 3: the Child and Youth Safe Organisation Act of 2023. And
[1:33] Speaker 3: the role of the office has come out of from
[1:36] Speaker 3: the Federal Commission for Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse,
[1:41] Speaker 3: as well.
[1:42] Speaker 2: As the Tasmanian Commission of Inquiry.
[1:45] Speaker 3: And it really showed that there was a need for
[1:48] Speaker 3: someone to scrutinise what's happening in organisations in relation to
[1:54] Speaker 3: employee conduct as they relate to children. and to also
[1:58] Speaker 3: implement the Child and Youth Safe Standards and the Universal
[2:02] Speaker 3: Principle for Cultural Safety.
[2:04] Speaker 2: So it's an office set up independent.
[2:07] Speaker 3: I'm a statutory officer appointed by the Governor, and my
[2:11] Speaker 3: role is to oversight organisations under the Reportable Conduct Scheme
[2:16] Speaker 3: and also make sure organisations providing services to children are
[2:22] Speaker 3: implementing the Child and Youth Safe Standards and Universal Principle.
[2:26] Speaker 1: Could you talk to me about that reportable conduct scheme
[2:28] Speaker 1: and how that actually works on a day-to-day basis in Tassie?
[2:33] Speaker 3: Yeah, so the reportable conduct scheme in other states has
[2:36] Speaker 3: been around for a long time. Originally, it came out
[2:39] Speaker 3: of the Wood Royal Commission in New South Wales, where
[2:42] Speaker 3: they were looking at actions of police, which expanded into
[2:45] Speaker 3: pedophilia rings that were happening within organisations. So it's really
[2:50] Speaker 3: about where there's an allegation within an organisation about a
[2:53] Speaker 3: worker of an organisation and a worker also includes a
[2:57] Speaker 3: volunteer by definition and where there's been inappropriate conduct towards
[3:03] Speaker 3: or in the presence of a child. And that puts
[3:05] Speaker 3: an obligation on the head of that organisation to report
[3:10] Speaker 3: the allegation and then to conduct an investigation. And at
[3:14] Speaker 3: the end of that investigation, they've got to report the
[3:17] Speaker 3: findings and the action they've taken or haven't taken through
[3:21] Speaker 3: to the Office of the Independent Regulator.
[3:23] Speaker 2: So it's an oversight scheme.
[3:25] Speaker 1: What powers do you have in that oversight?
[3:28] Speaker 3: So it's as an oversight, the powers that the organisations
[3:34] Speaker 3: should be reporting and they must report within three days.
[3:37] Speaker 3: So the obligations on the head of the entity is
[3:40] Speaker 3: to report an allegation within three days of becoming aware
[3:44] Speaker 3: of that obligation and then to commence an investigation and
[3:49] Speaker 3: then to provide the outcomes through to my office. So
[3:52] Speaker 3: there's compliance powers within the Act that I can enforce.
[3:57] Speaker 3: And then I also have very strong information sharing powers.
[4:01] Speaker 3: So if I have concerns with what I see or
[4:03] Speaker 3: don't see, I can report to other bodies, such as
[4:07] Speaker 3: the Register for Working with Vulnerable Persons, if I think
[4:11] Speaker 3: someone's Working with Vulnerable Persons check should be reassessed.
[4:15] Speaker 1: When did you first become aware about Tasmanian police had
[4:19] Speaker 1: stopped complying with the reporting requirement?
[4:21] Speaker 3: 1 August 2025.
[4:25] Speaker 2: And that was through email correspondence.
[4:28] Speaker 1: From TASPOL?
[4:29] Speaker 2: TASPOL, yes.
[4:30] Speaker 1: And so what were you exactly told by police about
[4:32] Speaker 1: why they believe they were exempt from reporting?
[4:36] Speaker 3: So it was communicated to me that they had received
[4:41] Speaker 3: legal advice from And that it was in response to
[4:45] Speaker 3: other questions they'd asked around whatever they were doing at
[4:49] Speaker 3: the time. And they received the advice that they were
[4:52] Speaker 3: not within the reportable conduct scheme. So they were notifying
[4:55] Speaker 3: me of that fact and that they were unable to
[4:59] Speaker 3: report police officers or provide their identities because they were
[5:04] Speaker 3: now determined not within the scheme.
[5:07] Speaker 1: And that determination, was that simply a technical legal issue
[5:12] Speaker 1: or was it something more than that?
[5:14] Speaker 3: I don't have the details of the advice. I did ask,
[5:18] Speaker 3: but that wasn't shared and there's privilege that attaches to that.
[5:22] Speaker 3: My understanding is that they weren't captured by the definition,
[5:26] Speaker 3: but I don't know for sure because that wasn't communicated
[5:29] Speaker 3: to me. But they were not within jurisdiction and because
[5:32] Speaker 3: they were not in jurisdiction and While they wanted to
[5:36] Speaker 3: notify me of the conduct, I wasn't able to get
[5:40] Speaker 3: the identity of the police officer and I assume, again,
[5:43] Speaker 3: that was because of privacy implications.
[5:46] Speaker 1: And so there was, from what I understand, an eight-month
[5:49] Speaker 1: gap in reporting between when you were notified and when
[5:53] Speaker 1: then they stopped reporting. Is that right?
[5:55] Speaker 3: So they notified me on the 1st of August 2025.
[5:58] Speaker 3: I immediately sought a meeting with the Deputy Commissioner and
[6:02] Speaker 3: then I said... We talked about it and I said,
[6:04] Speaker 3: when is this coming into effect? And they said, well,
[6:07] Speaker 3: from 1 August 2025 when they notified me. And then
[6:11] Speaker 3: it wasn't remedied until the 1st of April this year.
[6:15] Speaker 3: So that is the gap that I'm concerned about.
[6:19] Speaker 1: When you describe this situation, I think the words you use,
[6:22] Speaker 1: and I'll paraphrase, but you tell me if I'm right
[6:24] Speaker 1: or wrong, I think you said the word was untenable.
[6:27] Speaker 1: What made it so serious from your point of view?
[6:30] Speaker 3: Well, I think the intention was always to have police
[6:33] Speaker 3: within the reportable conduct scheme. And I think that's important
[6:38] Speaker 3: to have that independent oversight, looking at matters that are
[6:42] Speaker 3: allegations that were raised. And, you know, from the Commission
[6:46] Speaker 3: of Inquiry and the Paul Reynolds matter, you can see
[6:49] Speaker 3: why that's important. And also looking They interact with young
[6:53] Speaker 3: people all the time and they're young people who are
[6:56] Speaker 3: vulnerable and often heightened in situations with interactions with police.
[7:00] Speaker 3: So I think it's just expected that there would be
[7:03] Speaker 3: oversight of those kind of high-risk engagements to make sure
[7:09] Speaker 3: everything was appropriate. And if there's an allegation that something
[7:12] Speaker 3: was inappropriate, that that's actually investigated thoroughly and with a
[7:17] Speaker 3: child-focused lens.
[7:18] Speaker 2: Attached to it.
[7:20] Speaker 1: Throughout that eight-month period that there was no reporting, is
[7:24] Speaker 1: it fair to say that there were investigations going on
[7:26] Speaker 1: inside TASPOL and we're aware of one in particular? Would
[7:30] Speaker 1: that have been one that fell within that eight-month gap? So.
[7:35] Speaker 3: Obviously prior to August they were reporting and so they
[7:38] Speaker 3: have to report at the initial allegation stage and then
[7:41] Speaker 3: they have to give an update within 30 days and
[7:44] Speaker 3: then they have to give the final report. So there
[7:47] Speaker 3: are obviously investigations on foot that may have been finalised
[7:52] Speaker 3: and I can think of a couple that probably were
[7:55] Speaker 3: finalised during that eight-month gap and I want to follow
[7:58] Speaker 3: up on those matters and if there are other matters arising,
[8:01] Speaker 3: obviously I want to be able to have oversight of
[8:04] Speaker 3: those matters as well.
[8:05] Speaker 1: Do you know how many matters fell into that eight-month
[8:08] Speaker 1: reporting gap?
[8:09] Speaker 2: Not as yet.
[8:10] Speaker 3: I've written to the Commissioner asking for information to be
[8:16] Speaker 3: provided and I'm just waiting on that to be provided.
[8:19] Speaker 1: So without going into the specifics, because obviously you can't
[8:22] Speaker 1: comment on individual matters, but are there any in that
[8:25] Speaker 1: period from what you understand that you could be especially
[8:29] Speaker 1: worried about?
[8:31] Speaker 2: I'm worried about all of them really.
[8:33] Speaker 3: As I said, usually when it's police involvement and allegation
[8:36] Speaker 3: against a police officer, it's very serious.
[8:39] Speaker 2: So they're matters that we look at.
[8:41] Speaker 3: We look at all matters closely, but they're ones that
[8:43] Speaker 3: we're particularly interested because of the vulnerability of the young people.
[8:47] Speaker 2: In that situation.
[8:49] Speaker 1: You've asked for this law to be backdated to the
[8:52] Speaker 1: day that they stop reporting, which is August 1, 2025.
[8:55] Speaker 1: That's really important for accountability over that period.
[9:00] Speaker 3: It is because, as I said, we had matters that
[9:02] Speaker 3: were reported through previously to 1 August that haven't been finalised,
[9:07] Speaker 3: so I'd want to know where those matters are at
[9:09] Speaker 3: and obviously any new issues that arose during that period.
[9:12] Speaker 2: It's a significant period of time.
[9:14] Speaker 3: It needs to be reported so I can track it
[9:17] Speaker 3: in our system and I can look for any patterns
[9:20] Speaker 3: of behaviour if there's particular officers, and this isn't just
[9:25] Speaker 3: with police but with all matters, it's looking at the
[9:28] Speaker 3: conduct of of people within sectors, not just within one organisation.
[9:34] Speaker 2: It's across the sector.
[9:36] Speaker 3: So you might be a police officer, but you might
[9:38] Speaker 3: also be volunteering in sport. You might be volunteering in
[9:41] Speaker 3: other areas. So it's being able to have that visibility
[9:45] Speaker 3: of workers across the whole domain if they're engaging with children.
[9:50] Speaker 1: And I guess, you know, the case in point is
[9:52] Speaker 1: Paul Reynolds. He was obviously a police officer, but also
[9:56] Speaker 1: very visible in the sporting community through AFL, through netball.
[10:00] Speaker 1: He was in contact with vulnerable people for a large
[10:04] Speaker 1: part of his career. And we now know that he
[10:06] Speaker 1: was offending during a large part of his career.
[10:09] Speaker 2: That's correct.
[10:10] Speaker 3: And that's exactly the type of situation. And obviously, there
[10:13] Speaker 3: are other people who have that sort of profile across
[10:16] Speaker 3: the community. I'm not saying they're at risk to children,
[10:19] Speaker 3: but The whole point of the reportable conduct scheme is
[10:22] Speaker 3: to pick up those low-level behaviours and looking at that
[10:25] Speaker 3: behaviour and then tracking it and attaching it to a
[10:29] Speaker 3: particular person so we can track it and if it
[10:32] Speaker 3: comes up again, we can look at it in the
[10:34] Speaker 3: circumstances of prior behaviour.
[10:39] Speaker 1: Louise, there's the job you do, which is a regulator
[10:42] Speaker 1: and the oversight of this really important law in Tasmania
[10:45] Speaker 1: and throughout Australia, but there's also the personal law. And
[10:49] Speaker 1: I just want to ask you, when you heard from
[10:51] Speaker 1: police that they were not reporting and had ceased to
[10:55] Speaker 1: stop reporting in 1 August 2025, how did you feel?
[11:01] Speaker 3: Well, very confused at first because I didn't understand on
[11:03] Speaker 3: what basis they weren't reporting. And then we made our
[11:07] Speaker 3: own kind of inquiries or research to look at why
[11:10] Speaker 3: that might.
[11:10] Speaker 2: Be a case. And then the immediate reaction was, how
[11:13] Speaker 2: do I fix this? How do we change this?
[11:16] Speaker 3: And police had said they still wanted to report through matters,
[11:19] Speaker 3: but they couldn't provide the identity. And to me, that
[11:23] Speaker 3: was pointless because I need the identity to actually create
[11:27] Speaker 3: the profiles within our database. So they were clear that
[11:30] Speaker 3: they intended they wanted to provide, you know, continue to
[11:33] Speaker 3: sort of be part of the scheme. But I explained
[11:36] Speaker 3: it wasn't really being part of the scheme and it's
[11:38] Speaker 3: not keeping children safer in that sort of context. So Yeah,
[11:43] Speaker 3: we took steps to really to try and push for
[11:46] Speaker 3: that change as soon as possible.
[11:49] Speaker 1: What's the likelihood Tasmanian Police will backdate to when they
[11:53] Speaker 1: stop reporting?
[11:55] Speaker 2: I'm very hopeful that they would.
[11:57] Speaker 3: They were part of the scheme previously and were reporting,
[12:01] Speaker 3: so I have no reason to suspect that they won't
[12:04] Speaker 3: do that.
[12:06] Speaker 1: When do they advise you of that or is that
[12:08] Speaker 1: then on their timeline?
[12:09] Speaker 3: That's my expectation and I'm happy to raise it. And
[12:12] Speaker 3: as I said, when it was identified as a gap,
[12:17] Speaker 3: Peter Woolcock in his independent review made a recommendation and
[12:21] Speaker 3: I know the police commissioner was supportive of the premier
[12:24] Speaker 3: and the deputy premier were both supportive of having them
[12:27] Speaker 3: in the scheme. And I actually think the regulation change
[12:31] Speaker 3: happened pretty quickly.
[12:33] Speaker 1: Do you think this issue of the non-reporting suggests a
[12:36] Speaker 1: deeper cultural problem inside TASPOL beyond just that legal interpretation,
[12:40] Speaker 1: or do you think it is just the legal interpretation?
[12:44] Speaker 3: It's definitely the legal interpretation, but culture is a big
[12:48] Speaker 3: part of this whole scheme. It's about changing culture and
[12:52] Speaker 3: creating reporting cultures and then also then making it child-focused.
[12:57] Speaker 3: So culture doesn't change overnight, and that's Systems have to
[13:02] Speaker 3: change and processes have to be implemented and policies have
[13:06] Speaker 3: to be created.
[13:08] Speaker 2: But you really need to drive.
[13:09] Speaker 3: That culture from the leadership positions and drive it through
[13:14] Speaker 3: the organisation. So it's a cultural question and it needs
[13:19] Speaker 3: everyone to be on.
[13:20] Speaker 2: Board with it.
[13:22] Speaker 1: Are there warning signs that an organisation, and we're not
[13:25] Speaker 1: necessarily just talking about TASPOL here, we're talking about organisations
[13:28] Speaker 1: that fall into this scheme. Are there warning signs that
[13:32] Speaker 1: organisations like that are treating child safety as paperwork instead
[13:35] Speaker 1: of a real safeguarding duty?
[13:38] Speaker 3: Look, I think there's always going to be organisations that
[13:41] Speaker 3: don't appreciate the.
[13:42] Speaker 2: Importance of the scheme.
[13:44] Speaker 3: And a big part of my office's education role is
[13:48] Speaker 3: doing the why it's important, because as you can get
[13:51] Speaker 3: technical compliance, but it's not changing culture and it's not
[13:55] Speaker 3: making things better for children. So it's really trying to
[13:58] Speaker 3: drive this is why we need to change. The Federal Commission,
[14:03] Speaker 3: the Commission of Inquiry, all those experiences of children and
[14:07] Speaker 3: young people are why things need to change.
[14:10] Speaker 2: So that's a.
[14:11] Speaker 3: Really important part of what needs to happen. It's really important.
[14:17] Speaker 3: I think organisations have to do a lot of things
[14:19] Speaker 3: to make it happen. And as I said, my office
[14:22] Speaker 3: started on the 1st of January 2024. I don't think
[14:25] Speaker 3: many big organisations were necessarily prepared to implement these schemes.
[14:31] Speaker 1: And was that just about the paperwork or was it
[14:33] Speaker 1: the culture?
[14:34] Speaker 2: It's not just paperwork.
[14:36] Speaker 3: You have to set up a reporting system and then
[14:38] Speaker 3: you have to set up an investigation system. So the
[14:41] Speaker 3: warning signs are often there. Either they're not reporting or
[14:45] Speaker 3: they're under-reporting or the investigation they do is lackluster or
[14:50] Speaker 3: it's drawn out. So there's a lot of different signs
[14:52] Speaker 3: to say whether it's working well in organisations.
[14:56] Speaker 2: But when we.
[14:57] Speaker 3: See those things, so We can tell if someone's under-reporting
[15:01] Speaker 3: and we will talk to the head of those entities
[15:03] Speaker 3: to say what's going on, you should be reporting, your
[15:06] Speaker 3: numbers aren't aligning with others in your space. So we'll
[15:10] Speaker 3: raise those issues.
[15:11] Speaker 2: We offer education.
[15:13] Speaker 3: As the first port of call, but as you know,
[15:15] Speaker 3: we've got compliance powers that if we need to implement,
[15:18] Speaker 3: we will implement. But it's really trying to get people
[15:22] Speaker 3: on board with the, this is why you need to
[15:25] Speaker 3: do it and you need to set up these systems
[15:28] Speaker 3: and you need to do an investigation. And we give
[15:30] Speaker 3: feedback along all those domains.
[15:34] Speaker 1: My final question, and we've spoken to a bunch of
[15:38] Speaker 1: victim survivors, of Reynolds, witnesses. They look at the system
[15:42] Speaker 1: and they still think that it protects the institution first.
[15:46] Speaker 1: What do you say to them?
[15:48] Speaker 2: I think it's fair for them to have that view.
[15:50] Speaker 2: I would say the system's changed.
[15:54] Speaker 3: It's the people within the system that needs to catch
[15:57] Speaker 3: up and need to change their ways. So it's the
[16:02] Speaker 3: culture of these institutions that need changing, and culture consists
[16:06] Speaker 3: of shared values reflected in behaviours and informed by attitudes.
[16:11] Speaker 3: All that needs to adapt to be actually child-focused and
[16:16] Speaker 3: to put those systems in place and processes and do
[16:20] Speaker 3: their job, do what they're intended to do. I don't
[16:23] Speaker 3: think Anyone that heads an organisation is out there to
[16:26] Speaker 3: create any harm for children.
[16:28] Speaker 2: They're trying to do the exact opposite. They're trying to
[16:30] Speaker 2: provide services.
[16:32] Speaker 3: They just need to make sure they've got these systems
[16:35] Speaker 3: in place and they're operating and they have to do
[16:38] Speaker 3: the hard work to make that happen now.
[16:43] Speaker 1: I mentioned at the start that we've had lots of
[16:45] Speaker 1: contact on the anonymous email account we've set up, podshape
[16:49] Speaker 1: at proton.me. It seems like people are now just starting
[16:53] Speaker 1: to find the podcast or maybe starting to think that
[16:56] Speaker 1: what they know might help. We're chasing various leads at
[17:00] Speaker 1: the moment which might not fit into the Reynolds matter
[17:02] Speaker 1: but do widely look at what some believe are systemic
[17:06] Speaker 1: issues within TASPOL and other government institutions. Without going into specifics,
[17:13] Speaker 1: there are allegations that there is a wider sexual abuse
[17:16] Speaker 1: culture within our high-profile institutions. We've also been compiling a
[17:21] Speaker 1: large case file on a senior figure in Tasmania who
[17:24] Speaker 1: has multiple investigations against them. And now we've had several
[17:28] Speaker 1: whistleblowers coming forward with their own information. Outside of our reporting,
[17:34] Speaker 1: there's been great work done in Tasmania exposing more allegations
[17:38] Speaker 1: inside TASPOL, including a recent story by the ABC on
[17:42] Speaker 1: a rape investigation and how TASPOL handled family violence by
[17:46] Speaker 1: serving officers. will bring you more on this in future episodes.
[17:51] Speaker 1: There's multiple stories from the 90s that need more investigation
[17:55] Speaker 1: and there are connections between other cases we've reported on
[17:58] Speaker 1: in our other podcast, Our Little Edie, and this case
[18:02] Speaker 1: around Reynolds. These are all important stories that are in
[18:06] Speaker 1: the public interest and ask more questions than we currently
[18:10] Speaker 1: have answers for. And then there's the matter of the
[18:14] Speaker 1: parliamentary inquiry that's been asked for by the Greens in
[18:17] Speaker 1: February of this year. But as yet, it's not yet
[18:21] Speaker 1: been approved. But to finish this episode, I'd like you
[18:26] Speaker 1: to hear some details of an email that arrived just
[18:28] Speaker 1: before publication of this episode. It's from another victim of
[18:32] Speaker 1: Reynolds who didn't really understand they were a victim until
[18:35] Speaker 1: I heard about our podcast. We've used a voice actor
[18:40] Speaker 1: to read the email... and taken out details to keep
[18:43] Speaker 1: this person anonymous. This following email is graphic in parts.
[18:48] Speaker 1: Please take care while listening, and there's help if you
[18:51] Speaker 1: need it in the show notes.
[18:55] Speaker 4: I wish to remain anonymous, at least for the time being.
[18:59] Speaker 4: For some reason, a few months ago, I just Googled
[19:01] Speaker 4: Reynolds and came across your podcast, Badger Betrayal, and started
[19:05] Speaker 4: listening to the podcast. What I experience, I've tried to
[19:09] Speaker 4: forget for various reasons. I didn't consider it abuse, however,
[19:13] Speaker 4: on reflection. Given what has been revealed to me through
[19:17] Speaker 4: your podcast, I consider what has happened is nothing short
[19:20] Speaker 4: of grooming, blatant emotional manipulation and sexual abuse. My formative
[19:25] Speaker 4: teenage years were very emotionally challenging. At the time, I
[19:29] Speaker 4: was very emotionally vulnerable, naive, looking for approval and guidance
[19:34] Speaker 4: about life. Reynolds being a trusted person, who I'd known
[19:39] Speaker 4: for years, would have seen this and offered it all
[19:41] Speaker 4: to me. The first instance when it happened was October-November 1993.
[19:46] Speaker 4: We were alone at his house. I don't remember if
[19:51] Speaker 4: alcohol was involved, but we were talking guy stuff. He
[19:54] Speaker 4: asked me if I had any sexual experiences with anyone,
[19:58] Speaker 4: which I said no. He then told me how glorious
[20:01] Speaker 4: it is. As the conversation progressed, he offered to give
[20:05] Speaker 4: me my first experience, but I would have to do
[20:08] Speaker 4: the same to him. When I was hesitant to accept,
[20:13] Speaker 4: He then offered a freebie first experience and no reciprocation,
[20:17] Speaker 4: which was accepted. There were a few other instances over
[20:21] Speaker 4: the next two and a half years, and it ended
[20:24] Speaker 4: with me stating this isn't going to happen again. I've
[20:27] Speaker 4: treated this as a bad experience and tried to forget
[20:30] Speaker 4: about it, not realising that it has probably contributed to
[20:33] Speaker 4: me having major depression and find life genuinely pointless. I
[20:38] Speaker 4: haven't had any drug issues because I really don't need
[20:41] Speaker 4: another problem. I'd heard Reynolds had issues with depression from 2012,
[20:46] Speaker 4: understandably from the stress of his job, but I had
[20:49] Speaker 4: an assumption it was to do with me and this secret.
[20:53] Speaker 4: Cynthia told me he had no sexual contact with any
[20:55] Speaker 4: other males, which I now know is a lie. There
[20:59] Speaker 4: was a curious interaction I had with Reynolds in 2018,
[21:02] Speaker 4: maybe a month before his death.
[21:05] Speaker 1: This person also told me of an incident in 2018,
[21:09] Speaker 1: but we've excluded it from this part of the podcast entirely.
[21:12] Speaker 1: as it might be identifying. However, it goes into detail
[21:16] Speaker 1: of Reynolds running into this person and this person questioning
[21:21] Speaker 1: Reynolds on what happened all those years ago. Reynolds didn't
[21:24] Speaker 1: apologise and made it seem like it was someone else's fault.
[21:30] Speaker 1: Back to the email.
[21:32] Speaker 4: I found out he died by Facebook the day after
[21:34] Speaker 4: it happened.
[21:38] Speaker 1: There is also other detail in this email. You'll remember
[21:42] Speaker 1: a few episodes ago that we're trying to track down
[21:45] Speaker 1: an alleged exchange student that lived with Reynolds for a
[21:48] Speaker 1: short time. This person that wrote that recent email remembers
[21:54] Speaker 1: that boy and has given us more detail which we're
[21:57] Speaker 1: following up on. Remember, if you know anything that can help,
[22:02] Speaker 1: please contact us, podshape at proton.me.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.