Speaker 1: Novel.
Speaker 2: I started reporting on the case when Derek had been
Speaker 2: arrested but not yet sentenced.
Speaker 3: This is Rachel Monroe in twenty seventeen. She was a
Speaker 3: reporter for The Atlantic, and she set about covering a
Speaker 3: huge story unfolding in Texas.
Speaker 2: They live in Texas, and so everything's bigger in Texas,
Speaker 2: including the crimes.
Speaker 3: The arrest of Derek Wodrett for scamming a woman in
Speaker 3: the colony.
Speaker 2: This was kind of the first time that there was
Speaker 2: like a hope that this is all going to be connected.
Speaker 2: You know, people are going to understand that this isn't
Speaker 2: just a bunch of individual crimes, but like a larger pattern.
Speaker 2: On the one hand, I think they wanted to share
Speaker 2: about the case and like make it really clear that
Speaker 2: this was a pattern of behavior. But also at the
Speaker 2: same time they were cautious because he cut so many
Speaker 2: times before and it hadn't really seemed to matter.
Speaker 3: But the process of writing the piece wasn't exactly smooth.
Speaker 3: A lot of women had spoken to the media before
Speaker 3: in twenty fourteen. In twenty sixteen, before any arrest was
Speaker 3: on the horizon, meticulously reported pieces alleging a long history
Speaker 3: of fraud.
Speaker 2: I do want to give a ton of credit to
Speaker 2: Laura la Manchek, who's the reporter in Minneapolis who really
Speaker 2: broke this story and did a lot of the legwork.
Speaker 2: So some of these women had told their stories publicly
Speaker 2: with some level of anonymity through her. But I had
Speaker 2: a hard time tracking these people down, and so I
Speaker 2: flew to Minneapolis, like not knowing whether anybody would speak
Speaker 2: with me or not.
Speaker 3: And even when she did, they were also really spread
Speaker 3: out all over the country Texas, Hawaii, Arizona, and a
Speaker 3: whole bunch in Minnesota. And even once Rachel tracked them down,
Speaker 3: she encountered a growing hesitancy to speak to the media.
Speaker 2: They were reluctant, I think for understandable reasons.
Speaker 3: Probably the key reason among those understandable reasons was.
Speaker 4: This, I can't describe the bashing that the public gave us.
Speaker 4: People are very powerful behind their computers.
Speaker 3: Even the most thoughtfully, carefully sensitively reported stories can't guarantee
Speaker 3: how an audience will react.
Speaker 4: You know, everybody said we were stupid to give him money.
Speaker 4: How can we be so stupid?
Speaker 3: If you've been listening closely, you'll know as well as
Speaker 3: I do that this is a stupid question for anyone
Speaker 3: to be asking any of these women, let alone dorry.
Speaker 4: None of us gave him money. He went through files,
Speaker 4: he went through purses, he went through wallets, he went
Speaker 4: through checkbooks. He waited till you were out of the room.
Speaker 4: People just absolutely crucified us.
Speaker 3: It didn't really matter how exactly actually got his hands
Speaker 3: on the money. Every time this case got reported over
Speaker 3: the years, the women at the center of it came
Speaker 3: face to face with a pervasive idea that they were,
Speaker 3: in some way or another, partly to blame for what
Speaker 3: happened to them, that they were at best vulnerable, naive,
Speaker 3: and at worst.
Speaker 2: Oh, how stupid are these women? They're just desperate, y'all
Speaker 2: are an embarrassment. Y'all are pitiful.
Speaker 3: Rachel's article came out in twenty eighteen, four months before
Speaker 3: that sentencing here in Showdown. It's good, really thoughtful and
Speaker 3: sensitively reported, but her peace didn't escape the inevitable backlash either.
Speaker 2: I think there's a resistance to admitting. Part of the
Speaker 2: pleasure of these scammer stories is like, as the reader,
Speaker 2: you're kind of occupying this all knowing position, like it's
Speaker 2: already happened. You know that it's a scam, and that
Speaker 2: kind of gives you a false sense of security. I
Speaker 2: think that like, oh, I'm smarter than that. Yes, I wouldn't.
Speaker 2: I wouldn't fall for it.
Speaker 3: I'm fascinated by this kind of response. Deep down, if
Speaker 3: we're honest, maybe we all sometimes think it couldn't happen
Speaker 3: to me.
Speaker 2: You can kind of intellectually know like, oh, this could
Speaker 2: happen to anybody. But truly, these techniques are time tested
Speaker 2: and they really work, which means they could work on
Speaker 2: any of us.
Speaker 3: It's been a few years now since Rachel Monroe's article
Speaker 3: came out, so she's had some time to reflect on
Speaker 3: it all. I asked her to sit down with me,
Speaker 3: give me the benefit of her hindsight, explain how it
Speaker 3: all unfolded for her.
Speaker 2: He's like in his jail uniform as a fraudster, and
Speaker 2: he's telling me this stuff, and I'm like, oh, amazing, Yes.
Speaker 3: And tell me about her face to face with Derek.
Speaker 2: If anybody should know better, If anybody should know better,
Speaker 2: it was me. You learn a lot by being hom old.
Speaker 1: I guess.
Speaker 3: I'm Annasonfield and from the teams at Novel and iHeart Podcasts,
Speaker 3: you're listening to the girlfriends trust me both bonus episode one,
Speaker 3: Get back down here, Off your high horse.
Speaker 2: Maybe every story is a manipulation, but in true crime
Speaker 2: the stakes are pretty high. What drew you to the
Speaker 2: Derek Aldred case a person who is close to me
Speaker 2: had fallen for a romance. Just learning about it through
Speaker 2: her it kind of caught me off guard. Having it
Speaker 2: hit close to home made it feel much more visceral.
Speaker 2: And then also just like a really incredible woman, like
Speaker 2: super savvy, super attractive, and this scam lasted for like
Speaker 2: months and months and months, was incredibly elaborate. You know,
Speaker 2: the guy like knew her kid's names. You know, they
Speaker 2: would have these like long, long, long phone conversations, and
Speaker 2: the fact that so much work was being put into,
Speaker 2: you know, scamming this like one individual person, that it
Speaker 2: was happening at this really intimate level, and then also
Speaker 2: just seeing how it impacted her life and her emotions.
Speaker 2: You know, it's one thing to lose a bunch of money,
Speaker 2: and it's another thing to lose trust in yourself and
Speaker 2: lose trust in the world. And you know, just seeing
Speaker 2: the emotional ramifications made me think that this form of
Speaker 2: it is new. It certainly seems to be growing, and
Speaker 2: it's like having an impact beyond just you know, financial loss.
Speaker 2: I remember looking at the FBI statistics and seeing that
Speaker 2: this was, like, you know, among the top ways that
Speaker 2: people were losing money online was to these romance scams.
Speaker 2: If you think back like seven or eight years ago,
Speaker 2: this kind of romance scam was really not on the
Speaker 2: radar of a lot of people. I think that now
Speaker 2: there's been a lot of Netflix documentaries and podcasts like
Speaker 2: this one, and it's much more well known. At the time,
Speaker 2: I think it was something that was certainly happening a lot,
Speaker 2: but not necessarily getting the attention that it deserved. And
Speaker 2: that just kind of blew my mind that it was
Speaker 2: the scale of it combined with how much it wasn't
Speaker 2: being talked about. So that was also something that was
Speaker 2: interesting to me, like why why aren't we talking about this?
Speaker 3: The kind of scamming Derek was doing seemed like such
Speaker 3: an extreme example of the kind of thing Rachel was
Speaker 3: reading about.
Speaker 2: In order to scam these women, he was paying so
Speaker 2: much attention to them and like really kind of watching
Speaker 2: them and listening to them and learning about them to
Speaker 2: know like what would work on them and what they
Speaker 2: wanted and what would appeal to them. And it's pretty
Speaker 2: close to somebody like listening to you and figuring out
Speaker 2: what you like and trying to please you because they
Speaker 2: like you. I was single at the time, and I
Speaker 2: was dating, and so I think there was also like
Speaker 2: a personal element for me where thinking about those early
Speaker 2: stages of getting to know someone and that feeling of
Speaker 2: like really falling for someone, which happens like way before
Speaker 2: you actually know them. The feelings kind of come before
Speaker 2: the facts in any case, like even if it turns
Speaker 2: out to be like a really good situation. And so
Speaker 2: I think thinking about how the romance scammer performs so
Speaker 2: many acts that like a good boyfriend also does, and
Speaker 2: it's just you know, like how do you know which
Speaker 2: one is which? It's really kind of scary.
Speaker 3: Yeah, of course, like you fall in love with the
Speaker 3: fantasy of someone when you were like dating before you
Speaker 3: actually know who they are completely God help the people
Speaker 3: that you were dating while you were reporting on this story,
Speaker 3: were you like quizzing.
Speaker 2: Them, show me your fan, who are you talking to?
Speaker 3: Rachel would go on to speak to a lot of
Speaker 3: women who were scanned by Derek for her peace in
Speaker 3: the Atlantic, but building trust after all they'd been through
Speaker 3: was a challenge.
Speaker 2: They had been deeply violated by this experience. Somebody that
Speaker 2: they trusted had lied to them, So there was like
Speaker 2: that level, and then I think a lot of them
Speaker 2: felt really traumatized by how they had been depicted, just
Speaker 2: this idea that they were dupes, that they were suckers,
Speaker 2: that they were pathetic. So I think that there was
Speaker 2: some hesitancy to trust, and understandably so.
Speaker 3: One of the central women in Rachel's article is Linda.
Speaker 3: You've not heard from her directly in this series, but
Speaker 3: some of the details of her story will sound familiar
Speaker 3: to you. Linda was in a relationship with Derek Wodread
Speaker 3: back in twenty sixteen when he was pretending to be
Speaker 3: Richie Peterson, the military vet. Linda went public with her
Speaker 3: story that same year.
Speaker 2: We met at a restaurant and then she and then
Speaker 2: afterwards she was like, let's go get a pedicure, and
Speaker 2: so I just remember sitting in the salon, you know,
Speaker 2: side by side, getting her toes painted and buffed, and
Speaker 2: that's when she really kind of started to open up.
Speaker 2: I've never done that on a reporting trip before, but
Speaker 2: It helped me understand her as a person, and there
Speaker 2: was some feeling of like female solidarity I think in
Speaker 2: you know, just sitting side by side talking about her
Speaker 2: dating life before, during, and after this guy. That helped
Speaker 2: me connect with her emotionally, and it broke down some
Speaker 2: of the barriers that can sometimes be there as a journalist,
Speaker 2: and sometimes we need those barriers. But it was a
Speaker 2: way to really feel like, how this head hurt her.
Speaker 3: I love that It's such a nice opportunity when people
Speaker 3: are up for just kind of doing a thing with you.
Speaker 2: The people working at this land must just have the
Speaker 2: best gossip of anybody. I do remember, you know, after
Speaker 2: kind of having this bonding moment at the salon with Linda,
Speaker 2: she suggested that we go over to Missy's house, which
Speaker 2: I was like, that's yes, that's amazing, let's go.
Speaker 3: Missy was another woman that so called Richie Peterson had
Speaker 3: been dating at the same time. She had discovered the
Speaker 3: truth about Richie that he was actually Derek after finding
Speaker 3: his real ID card in his wallet while he showered.
Speaker 3: She also found Linda's credit card, looked her up on Facebook,
Speaker 3: and reached out to her, warning her of the truth.
Speaker 3: Like Dorian Tracy over in Texas. Linda and Missy had
Speaker 3: struck up a friendship.
Speaker 2: And seeing the two of them together, Linda, she's a
Speaker 2: real kind of strong, blonde Texas woman, and Missy was
Speaker 2: really different, you know, the small and dark haired and
Speaker 2: just has kind of a single mom, had like a
Speaker 2: different energy about her and looking at them, at the
Speaker 2: two of them, and just you would think like, there's
Speaker 2: no way they would have anything in common. They never
Speaker 2: would have met otherwise, but they connected through sharing this
Speaker 2: experience that most people haven't had.
Speaker 3: But just show how broad Derek's scope was when it
Speaker 3: comes to the sort of women that he was pursuing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, if anything, the pattern was that these were all
Speaker 2: like kind of savvy professional women, and it makes sense
Speaker 2: that if you're trying to scam people out of money,
Speaker 2: you want to have find people who are like doing well.
Speaker 2: That really was kind of the only consistent thing about
Speaker 2: them was that they were women who, in a lot
Speaker 2: of ways we were thriving in their lives and you know,
Speaker 2: just looking for a man to kind of add to
Speaker 2: the picture. And he was good at presenting himself as
Speaker 2: a catch up.
Speaker 3: Until that point, Rachel had been focusing a lot on
Speaker 3: the harm and pain and the story.
Speaker 2: And just seeing the two of them sprawled on the
Speaker 2: couch with Missy's daughter, like watching TV, you know, eating snacks,
Speaker 2: like gabbing. I was like, oh, yeah, this is a
Speaker 2: really important part of the story too, like how these
Speaker 2: women were able to take care of each other when
Speaker 2: they were being in some cases failed by law enforcement
Speaker 2: and dismissed by other people in their lives.
Speaker 3: What was the public reaction to your piece, specifically when
Speaker 3: it came out.
Speaker 2: I remember getting so many emails from people being like,
Speaker 2: I have a story like this. This happened to me,
Speaker 2: This happened to my aunt, this happened to my mother,
Speaker 2: and you know, will you follow up? Will you write
Speaker 2: about this man? Will you write about this man? And
Speaker 2: I sort of it was sort of heartbreaking to have
Speaker 2: to write back to all of these people and be like, look,
Speaker 2: I'm sorry, I've kind of done my romance scammer story
Speaker 2: and now I'm not covering that field anymore. And some
Speaker 2: of those stories I like passed on to other reporters
Speaker 2: that I that I knew that. I was just so
Speaker 2: struck by how much any stories like this must be
Speaker 2: out there and that aren't being told.
Speaker 3: I've read Rachel's piece. It's really good. You should go
Speaker 3: find it. It's called The Perfect Man Who Wasn't. It's
Speaker 3: really sensitively and thoughtfully written, and I get a real
Speaker 3: sense of these women from reading it. But alas the
Speaker 3: Internet is the Internet.
Speaker 2: There was like the original harm of being lied to
Speaker 2: install infirm by this man, and then this kind of
Speaker 2: secondary harm of like the victim blameing.
Speaker 3: That's coming up after the break.
Speaker 1: So your piece came out in twenty eighteen.
Speaker 3: And you spoke about how the women in subsequent stuff
Speaker 3: that's come out about their story, we have experienced kind
Speaker 3: of lots of victim blaming from the public who are
Speaker 3: reading it.
Speaker 1: Do you think there's been a shift in.
Speaker 3: The way the public react to those kind of stories now?
Speaker 2: I like to think so. As a person who's like
Speaker 2: spent a lot of time reading consuming true crime and
Speaker 2: looking at the way people talk about true crime on
Speaker 2: the Internet, it's like really shocking to me, how no
Speaker 2: matter what, if you believe that it was the victim's fault,
Speaker 2: then that's a way of thinking, like, oh, this would
Speaker 2: never happen to me because I wouldn't make the mistakes
Speaker 2: that they did. So I you know, I'm not that
Speaker 2: hopeful about I mean, I do think that on some
Speaker 2: level the discussion of romance scams, like as people have
Speaker 2: become more aware of them and as more people's lives
Speaker 2: have been touched by them, there is a better understanding
Speaker 2: of how pervasive this is and how it could really
Speaker 2: happen to anyone. But you know, victim blaming in general
Speaker 2: and specifically when it's a situation that involves women and relationships,
Speaker 2: those bad ord narratives still persist. And that's why it's
Speaker 2: important to do podcasts like this, is to remind.
Speaker 3: People over and over again, you know, I mean, that's
Speaker 3: what I was gonna ask, because of course, like we,
Speaker 3: as the people putting these stories out, are responsible for
Speaker 3: the information that we give, and there's a lot that
Speaker 3: we can do to paint a picture of a person
Speaker 3: that the audience is going to run with. I mean,
Speaker 3: I absolutely have experience of putting shows out and telling
Speaker 3: stories where I think I've been really kind of ethical
Speaker 3: and I feel like pleased with the way that I've
Speaker 3: portrayed someone, and I've really thought it through and tried
Speaker 3: not to add to these awful stereotypes, and then still
Speaker 3: obviously people are gonna say what they say on the
Speaker 3: internet and you can't escape that.
Speaker 2: I think it's also like letting survivors be fully human,
Speaker 2: not making what happened to them the only thing in
Speaker 2: their life, you know, like letting them be in the
Speaker 2: stories that we're telling full complex people, even flawed people.
Speaker 2: You know. I think that sometimes one potential risk of
Speaker 2: centering the victims or the survivors is there can be
Speaker 2: an incentive or like a feeling that we need to
Speaker 2: make the survivors into heroes or angels or as like
Speaker 2: a way to head off those internet commenters. But it's like,
Speaker 2: in a way, I think that does harm to the
Speaker 2: cause of you know, telling full complete stories about full
Speaker 2: complete people, Like we all make mistakes, victims and survivors
Speaker 2: should be allowed to like express their full humanity in
Speaker 2: the story.
Speaker 3: Yeah, because it's really tempting, I think, especially in romance
Speaker 3: scam stories. And I mean it's also sometimes inescapable because
Speaker 3: it is just true. But it's really tempting to talk
Speaker 3: about how small everybody is because you want to be like, no,
Speaker 3: they're so small, like therefore it could happen to all
Speaker 3: of us. But then also it's like it would also
Speaker 3: be a terrible thing if they were right, like objectively,
Speaker 3: not that smart.
Speaker 2: Right exactly exactly. It's like, it's not terrible that it
Speaker 2: happened to a smart person, it's terrible that it happened
Speaker 2: to anybody. Stories that kind of portray victims as like,
Speaker 2: you know, pure almost like non human angels does do
Speaker 2: harm for like other survivors, other victims, because you know,
Speaker 2: you look at a story like that and you're like, wow,
Speaker 2: I'm not that perfect, like maybe I did deserve what
Speaker 2: happened to me, And it's like, no, no, no, that's
Speaker 2: not true. It's like we're all just humans kind of
Speaker 2: trying to get through life not harming other people and
Speaker 2: not being harmed. Like you don't have to be an angel,
Speaker 2: a person who's never made a mistake, a fully virtuous
Speaker 2: person to you know, deserve our sympathy.
Speaker 3: I think according to the Justice Department, only about fifteen
Speaker 3: percent of fraud victims actually report the crime to law enforcement,
Speaker 3: and that's because of shame and guilt, embarrassment kind of
Speaker 3: belief about what they've gone through. Why do you think
Speaker 3: it's so difficult for people to report these crimes.
Speaker 2: Through reporting, the story became clear to me that some
Speaker 2: of that is justified because of law enforcement's response. You know,
Speaker 2: when law enforcement is dismissive, then why would you tell
Speaker 2: this to a cop if the cop is just gonna
Speaker 2: blame you and not do anything about it. So, to
Speaker 2: a certain extent, the shame is internal, but it's also
Speaker 2: like coming from the people who are supposed to be
Speaker 2: helping too.
Speaker 3: Do you think there are things that we can do
Speaker 3: to kind of fairly portray survivors without adding to the stigma.
Speaker 2: This is something that is a lot better than it
Speaker 2: used to be, as centering survivors in the stories and
Speaker 2: not fixating on the perpetrator, you know, making it all
Speaker 2: about him. Even if the story is like he's so bad,
Speaker 2: he's so bad, the subtext of that is like, but
Speaker 2: he's also kind of special and brilliant, and he's the
Speaker 2: one we're paying attention to. So I think that has
Speaker 2: gotten a lot better, and not just for romance scams,
Speaker 2: but you know, these kind of mass shoot and like
Speaker 2: all of this stuff about you know, not repeating the
Speaker 2: perpetrator's name, just not making them kind of accidentally into
Speaker 2: heroes or anti heroes, just not making them the center
Speaker 2: of the story.
Speaker 3: I've tried my best over the years to make sure
Speaker 3: the girlfriends doesn't center a perpetrator like Derek Aldred. But
Speaker 3: I also couldn't ignore him altogether, and neither could Rachel.
Speaker 2: A lot of these reflections about not centering the perpetrator
Speaker 2: were things that I learned through the process of writing
Speaker 2: and reporting this story.
Speaker 3: You actually meet Derek Aldred mm h more after the break.
Speaker 2: When I went to go meet him, I was still
Speaker 2: really in that kind of traditional true crime mode of like, well,
Speaker 2: you got to meet the bad guy and try to
Speaker 2: get him to tell you all of his secrets, Like
Speaker 2: that's that's what makes for an exciting, thrilling story.
Speaker 3: Back in twenty seventeen, Derek was real keen to talk
Speaker 3: to Rachel about her pace.
Speaker 2: I think I was just hoping to get a sense
Speaker 2: of who he was, his background, how did he explain,
Speaker 2: what he did, what made him tick, you know, all
Speaker 2: of those questions that you have as a journalist trying
Speaker 2: to get inside somebody's head.
Speaker 3: At that time, Derek was being held on ramond in
Speaker 3: Texas awaiting his sentencing hearing.
Speaker 2: And so I made an appointment to go out there
Speaker 2: and see him. They wouldn't let us meet in person,
Speaker 2: although like I was at the place where he was incarcerated,
Speaker 2: was still like a video call. It was a very
Speaker 2: weird kind of setup to almost like talking on a
Speaker 2: payphone with this like grainy little video where I can
Speaker 2: see him in his prison uniform. He says everything that
Speaker 2: you would want a source to say, right, like, there's
Speaker 2: more to this story. I'm really happy to talk to you.
Speaker 2: I'll tell you all about it. He said he was
Speaker 2: going to like give me the password to his email.
Speaker 2: He was like, Oh, there's all of these like files.
Speaker 2: You could go into my email and you can see
Speaker 2: the emails between me and these women. And I was like, wow,
Speaker 2: that'll be so amazing, Like what a great thing to have.
Speaker 2: Then I could quote, you know, like how he's seducing them,
Speaker 2: and see all this behind the scenes and figure out
Speaker 2: the timing, and I got really excited, and you know,
Speaker 2: that all fell apart. Later.
Speaker 3: Of course, when Rachel says it could happen to you,
Speaker 3: she really does mean it, because in a way it
Speaker 3: happened to her.
Speaker 2: Of Course he didn't do that. Of course that never happened.
Speaker 3: All the exonerating detail Derek promised never quite materialized.
Speaker 2: He's like in his jail uniform as a fraudster, and
Speaker 2: he's telling me this stuff, and I'm like, oh, amazing, Yes,
Speaker 2: I just really brought it home that you can kind
Speaker 2: of intellectually know like, oh, this could happen to anybody.
Speaker 2: These tricks of manipulation, they work on us, you know,
Speaker 2: on a human level, and we're all humans. But then
Speaker 2: to just really like experience it, well, okay, humbling, humbling.
Speaker 1: I can empathize with that.
Speaker 3: I mean I did a show once with a very
Speaker 3: prolific organized criminal and there was a point where I
Speaker 3: suddenly realized I was being worked.
Speaker 2: You know, well, they're good at what they do, Like
Speaker 2: that's that's why, you know, that's why I good at it.
Speaker 1: And I fell for it.
Speaker 3: And then suddenly I was like, you know, in a
Speaker 3: weird industrial estate about to be you know, off, and
Speaker 3: I was like, no, this is I should have seen this.
Speaker 2: I think I'm going to go home. Now.
Speaker 3: Have your thoughts on the story changed. Do you think
Speaker 3: between when you wrote it and now?
Speaker 2: It's funny? I like, continue to read and watch and
Speaker 2: listen to these stories when they come out. I find
Speaker 2: them really heartbreaking, but I find them really compelling. We're
Speaker 2: all just so vulnerable to this because we do all
Speaker 2: want connection and lah. Then it's I understand why the scammers,
Speaker 2: you know, target the heart, because we're all very vulnerable there.
Speaker 2: But it's it's just really terrible what it does, the
Speaker 2: sinister way that this kind of crime undermines people's sense
Speaker 2: of self, trust in themselves, trust in the world, and
Speaker 2: their understanding of reality. I think about that a lot.
Speaker 2: You know, when there's a murder, the harm is very
Speaker 2: very clear. You know, somebody who was alive is no
Speaker 2: longer alive. It's easy to understand the harm, and this
Speaker 2: kind of crime, just the psychological effect of it is
Speaker 2: more subtle. And that's what's really stuck with me.
Speaker 3: It's one of the most kind of dirty and excusable.
Speaker 1: Crimes, isn't it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, dirty, I think is the right word for it.
Speaker 1: I mean other people, yourself included.
Speaker 3: Everyone is really intrigued by romance scams. This story in particular.
Speaker 3: Why do you think people keep coming back?
Speaker 2: I think they tie into the vulnerability that we all
Speaker 2: feel when we open ourselves up to the prospect of love.
Speaker 2: I think as more and more dating happens through these
Speaker 2: apps and through these online mechanisms. The people that were
Speaker 2: meeting aren't people who are being introduced to us by
Speaker 2: somebody that we know. There aren't these kind of social ties,
Speaker 2: and every time you go on a date with a stranger,
Speaker 2: there's like some level of exposure and trying to figure
Speaker 2: out how much do you trust, how much do you
Speaker 2: open up, how much do you believe? Or are you
Speaker 2: going to be super suspicious and weird in that way.
Speaker 2: So I think it's like the more extreme version of
Speaker 2: what so many of us are going through, like on
Speaker 2: a weekly basis. It's such a deeply intimate crime. This
Speaker 2: is what really broke my heart. It's like the parts
Speaker 2: of these women that wanted to trust somebody and believe
Speaker 2: what they were saying and you know, think the best
Speaker 2: of someone, which is like those are all like really
Speaker 2: beautiful qualities that we all have. Hopefully we get to
Speaker 2: move through the world and when we meet somebody and
Speaker 2: they tell us who they are, we aren't suspicious and
Speaker 2: trying to pick it apart and asking to look at
Speaker 2: their passport. I mean, that's no way to live. But
Speaker 2: this crime kind of takes those beautiful parts of us
Speaker 2: and you turn against yourself. The shame is that I
Speaker 2: should have known better. The shame is that I'm a fool.
Speaker 2: But that's really so heartbreaking to me, because there's nothing
Speaker 2: foolish about wanting to trust people and believe people, and
Speaker 2: like wanting to fall in love. You know, it's deeply
Speaker 2: vulnerable but also deeply relatable. What I don't want people
Speaker 2: to take away from these stories is like, don't trust anyone.
Speaker 2: The answer is not, you need to build a castle
Speaker 2: around yourself and never open up to anybody ever. Again.
Speaker 2: It's like, no, you need to find the people who
Speaker 2: do have your back. Answer is not trust no one.
Speaker 2: I don't want to live in that word. And I
Speaker 2: think that's why it's so wonderful and so lovely that
Speaker 2: these women were able to trust one another.
Speaker 3: Coming up on the next bonus episode of The Girlfriends
Speaker 3: Trust Me Babe.
Speaker 2: So if you are that friend, step up and help
Speaker 2: that person get the support that they need.
Speaker 3: You worried that your friends dating a con artist, maybe
Speaker 3: a scammer, a bit of a liar.
Speaker 1: Next episode is for.
Speaker 2: You when we care for people and we have to
Speaker 2: tell them hard things.
Speaker 3: The Girlfriends Trust Me Babe is produced by Novel for
Speaker 3: iHeart Podcasts. For more from novel Visit Novel dot Audio.
Speaker 3: The series is hosted by me Annisinfield and this episode
Speaker 3: was produced by Valeria Rocker and Leona Hamid.
Speaker 1: Our editor is Joe Wheeler.
Speaker 3: Production management from Sharie Houston, Joe Savage and Charlotte Wolfe.
Speaker 3: Fact checking by Dania Suleman, Sound design, mixing and scoring
Speaker 3: by Daniel Kempson and Nicholas Alexander. The Girlfriend's theme was
Speaker 3: composed by Daniel Kempson and Louisa Gerstein and performed by
Speaker 3: Daniel Kempson with vocals by Louisa Gerstein. Music supervision from
Speaker 3: Daniel Kempson and Anna Sinfield. The series artwork was designed
Speaker 3: by Christina Lemcol. Story development by Susie Baker and Olivia Smart.
Speaker 3: Novel's director of development is Selena Metta. Max O'Brien is
Speaker 3: the executive producer for Novel. Katrina Norvell and Nikki Etoor
Speaker 3: are the executive producers for iHeart Podcasts, and the marketing
Speaker 3: lead is Alison Cantor. Special thanks to Carrie Lieberman and
Speaker 3: Will Pearson at iHeart Podcasts, Julie Sansulo, Ann Langston, Carolyn
Speaker 3: sher Levin, Katie Gillis, Kelly Hunt, Rachel Munroe, tom Old
Speaker 3: Dag I'm tad Festno.