Watch: BBC Newscaster Admits Killing Lover Suffering from AIDS


Police are investigating BBC newscaster Ray Gosling after he admitted, in an Inside Out documentary on death and dying broadcast last night, that he killed a lover who was dying of AIDS.

Said Gosling: "And maybe this is the time to share a secret that I've kept for a very long time. I killed someone once. Not in this region. Not in our East Midlands, but not so far away. He was a young chap. He'd been my lover. And he got AIDS, and inthe hospital one hot afternoon, the doctor said 'there's nothing we can do.' And he was in terrible, terrible pain. And I said to the doctor, 'leave me, just for a bit,' and he went away, and I picked up the pillow and smothered him till he was dead. Doctor came back. I said 'he's gone.' Nothing more was ever said." 

Watch Gosling's confession, AFTER THE JUMP...

Gosling told the show's presenter he had no regrets: "Absolutely none. He was in terrible pain - I was there and I saw it. It breaks you into pieces. I don't think it's a crime. If he was looking down on me now he would be proud that I did it and proud I've told other people. Some [of the man's family] know, some don't. It's best that way. Let it be."


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Sorry, but I don't think this is acceptable. Murder is wrong, period.

    Posted by: Jack M | Feb 16, 2010 9:12:14 AM

  2. Holy Shit! Murder has no statute of limitations. He must be out of his mind for admitting this to a reporter. I understand why he did it and I feel his sympathy but that is irrelevant in the eyes of the law. Oh my goodness is all there is left to say.

    Posted by: Jay | Feb 16, 2010 9:15:52 AM

  3. without consent, this man had probably brought a great deal of projection and his own baggage to the situation, and indulged his revulsion to the horror of aids just as much as he acted out of compassion. yeah, that's probably murder.

    Posted by: brad | Feb 16, 2010 9:22:52 AM

  4. "Some [of the man's family] know, some don't. It's best that way. Let it be."

    Well, they'll all know now, won't they?

    I'm sorry, but I can't regard this as anything else but murder, unless the patient requested that someone end his suffering. I am in complete support of voluntary euthanasia, but not this.

    Posted by: Zach | Feb 16, 2010 9:23:25 AM

  5. You people have no idea.

    NO IDEA.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Feb 16, 2010 9:27:38 AM

  6. That's horrible! I'll admit that watching that was really awkward. I feel sympathy for him because he had that eating away at him for so long, but he really made the wrong decision.

    Posted by: Scott E. | Feb 16, 2010 9:30:21 AM

  7. o_O... thats awkward...

    Posted by: Drew | Feb 16, 2010 9:37:24 AM

  8. What a generation gap we have today. Those of us who remember and lived through and survived the horror of AIDS and those it never touched either hiding from it in the suburbs or being too young to remember.

    At the end of life, we are kinder to our companion animals than we are to our human loved ones.

    Posted by: Nick | Feb 16, 2010 9:37:57 AM

  9. Some of us have every idea, David. Don't be condescending.

    For this guy to confess on television and, in the same breath, say "Let it be" to the relatives who didn't know shows that he is a lunatic.

    Whether you think it is right or wrong to put someone out his misery, the one thing we should agree on is that, if you do, you obey a code of silence. You certainly DON'T go on television for an over-dramatic mea culpa.

    He's now admitted murder. Let the law decided. I hope he hasn't gotten that poor doctor in trouble.

    Posted by: JeffNYC | Feb 16, 2010 9:40:56 AM

  10. "At the end of life, we are kinder to our companion animals than we are to our human loved ones."

    Animals are not people, and it's not about being 'kind' in this case. It's about respect for human individuality. We make all sorts of decisions for our pets that we do not - and should not - make for other people. If his lover requested his life be ended - fine. I would fully support such an action. But for him to make that decision on his own is murder, and he should answer for it.

    Posted by: Zach | Feb 16, 2010 9:45:01 AM

  11. ...well I think considering the "times" with NO REAL meds ...the man WAS suffering ..esp. IF the Drs said there was NOTHING else they could do......sounds to me, that he Loved this man, and did not want him to suffer another minute.....I say - "Let it Go"..if he is to do anything - let him wrk with AIDS patients...throwing him in Jail serves NO purpose now!

    Posted by: rextrek | Feb 16, 2010 9:46:11 AM

  12. Oh David shut the fuck up. Who do you think read this blog? Of course we know. And that's why we are better able than anyone to tell if his story is plausible or not. For me, the fact that he doesn't ever mention what his friend wanted, whether he was conscious or not, whether he gave consent or wasn't capable of doing so speaks volumes.

    Posted by: Christopher | Feb 16, 2010 9:49:03 AM

  13. Yeah, he has obviously suffered some mental illness to just casually go admitting that on camera, unless he sincerely believes he has nothing left to lose, which is possible.

    I thought he was gonna say he pulled a plug or something, but smothered with a pillow....jeez. I would never suggest that I understand what losing a loved one is like, and I fully support euthanasia, but jeezuschrist smothered with a pillow?! Doesn't exactly seem like euthanasia.

    Posted by: JeffRob | Feb 16, 2010 9:50:33 AM

  14. " Those of us who remember and lived through and survived the horror of AIDS and those it never touched either hiding from it in the suburbs or being too young to remember."

    And I may never have lived through the worst of AIDS, but I have watched people I love succumb to cancer, spending their last few months in agonizing pain. Being in the midst of AIDS doesn't make it more permissible to murder someone.

    Posted by: Zach | Feb 16, 2010 9:51:20 AM

  15. Yesterday I was reading the electronic version of the Bay Area Reporter (San Francisco) and noticed that they had archived all their obituaries going back to 1979. So I started going back and rereading the obits of friends and loved ones who died over the past 25+ years. I remembered each and every one; how young, handsome, and vibrant they had all been, and how we watched as that horrible illness slowly drained them first of their dignity and ultimately their lives. IMHO, what Gosling did was not a crime, but he should've just kept quiet about it

    Posted by: Paul | Feb 16, 2010 9:53:36 AM

  16. In another segment from the interview he mentions a pact between he and his partner. It is posted at

    I agree that the public confession seems awkward and certainly opens him up to a lot of questions but I don't think any of you should judge unless you've been in a similar situation. At the height of the epidemic there wasn't anything that could be done and death was slow and painful.

    We need to have more discussion of end of life issues. Immediately labeling him a murderer doesn't help.

    Posted by: matt | Feb 16, 2010 10:05:33 AM

  17. It is incumbent upon those of us who survived these last 25 years to educate those who came after about what it was like and that Gosling, I'm certain isn't alone in his guilt.

    We neglected to do that job, therefore we get comments like "...but I have watched people I love succumb to cancer, spending their last few months in agonizing pain."

    It's not the fault of those who weren't there, it's ours for not telling them about the horror. The responsibility for these comments is ours for not explaining what it's like to bury someone every week of every year for years on end.

    Gosling, it's obvious, has been wracked with guilt for a long time, but his admission seems ill-considered.

    There were 9 of us in my little circle of friends. I am the only one left. When that came to be I was 34. That was 18 years ago.

    Live with that.

    Posted by: Sean | Feb 16, 2010 10:18:21 AM

  18. This was quite common back in the early years of AIDS. I'm sure there are a lot of folks still around who are carrying this same burden. I don't believe it was murder considering the circumstances, however it is something that probably should be taken to the grave.

    Posted by: niles | Feb 16, 2010 10:29:41 AM

  19. There's a second clip in which he DOES mention what his friend wanted. They had talked about doing this.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Feb 16, 2010 10:30:42 AM

  20. I don't think euthanasia necessarily has to be wrong. Of course, it can be awkward, if the person has not expressed what they want and are unable to. But in this case it seems this was already something they had decided they would do for each other. I don't know... Telling everyone like this might be a bit... iffy? But at the same time, he is opening up a topic that does not come up a lot but it should.

    Posted by: Kári Emil | Feb 16, 2010 10:38:48 AM

  21. David Ehrenstein is exactly right - you folks calling him a murderer really have no idea what it takes to do what this man did - the love and compassion and heroism required for this act of devotion. You should hope you are never in a position to find out.

    Posted by: ant | Feb 16, 2010 11:09:36 AM

  22. "...well I think considering the "times" with NO REAL meds"
    "At the height of the epidemic there wasn't anything that could be done"

    While it's true that there was not any therapy for HIV/AIDS, remember that this was the 1980's, not the 1580's, and there was a great deal available in terms of pain management and alleviation. The young man's suffering probably could have been alleviated without smothering him to death.

    Posted by: Will | Feb 16, 2010 11:10:19 AM

  23. Proper medical care including pain meds and assistance were not available to many during this time. Remember that patients were shunned not only by society but by the medical establishment as well. When the patients did die, it was even difficult to find a funeral home willing to take them.

    Posted by: niles | Feb 16, 2010 11:43:41 AM

  24. Regardless of whether he acted appropriately 20 years ago - and that is the most significant question - what does he think he is accomplishing by so casually, and in such a matter-of-fact manner, talking about this now in this forum? Reflects a lack of regard for the feelings of his lover's family and fails to treat his lover's passing as the somber, sacred moment it was. It's as if he was talking about brushing his teeth.

    Posted by: Guest | Feb 16, 2010 11:54:20 AM

  25. I am sorry for this man. I feel like he is feeling all this guilt and just can't do it anymore. I honestly don't feel he should be charged for murder, but...isn't that what this is? I know this man loved him unlike that which many of us have ever known (it makes you do some unbelievable things); why would he come forward with this? Obviously he knows the impartiality of the law, the importance of that impartiality is paramount and must be maintained. So, give him what he wants...?

    God, what of the man's family? What a tragedy.

    Posted by: davii | Feb 16, 2010 11:56:51 AM

  26. 1 2 3 »

Post a comment


« «First Look: Lady Gaga 'Telephone' Video Stills« «