Traitors 2026

[Unabomber]

3 minutes ago, deejdeej said:

Really stupid bunch, why would someone thats been confirmed as a faithful go that convincingly against somebody and they're just brushing it under the carpet! 

Roxy being the thickest and most annoying of the group 

Yeah Roxy was extremely irritating in that one. Also why didn’t Harriet stress the fact that she got both other traitors correct. 

[Foxdiamond]

6 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

Yeah Roxy was extremely irritating in that one. Also why didn’t Harriet stress the fact that she got both other traitors correct. 

Yes. Roxy got the arse because she thought Harriet was rude at breakfast. Harriet simply decided not to bother defending herself against gormless group think. Even now there is more heat on Matt and Roxy than Rachel. Matt deserves to go not just because he was so wrong but for his crime against trousers.

[Foxdiamond]

Nobody has twigged that Fiona went after Rachel. As a traitor she knew Rachel was a fellow traitor. Yet even with Harriet spelling it out the faithful are not on it

[Tommy Fresh]

So ****ing thick aren't they, what Harriet said was a pretty good theory about Rachel I thought, she just ****ed it with the breakfast outburst 

Edited 14 January by Tommy Fresh

[foxfanazer]

I get what people are saying about the faithfuls being thick but Harriet went about that completely the wrong way imo. Just far too much of an erratic shift in behaviour and it clearly shook a few

[Tommy Fresh]

1 minute ago, foxfanazer said:

I get what people are saying about the faithfuls being thick but Harriet went about that completely the wrong way imo. Just far too much of an erratic shift in behaviour and it clearly shook a few

Hmm not so sure, I thought she articulated it very well at the end, add in Fiona had gone after her the day before as well and it points to them just being crap

[foxfanazer]

1 minute ago, Tommy Fresh said:

Hmm not so sure, I thought she articulated it very well at the end, add in Fiona had gone after her the day before as well and it points to them just being crap

I think it was the aggression at the breakfast table that just came across as OTT. They are useless though 

[goose2010]

Harriet was obviously bored and just went shit or bust. She knew she messed it up at breakfast. She basically did a ' Hugo' 

 

But yeah they are thick. Why are they now convinced it is Roxy and Matt?? And not Rachel?! 

 

Saying that the traitors have lost the plot too should never have gone for a murder tonight! 

[Tommy Fresh]

The line about Rachel being trained by an ex FBI agent was possibly the cringiest thing I've ever heard

[Voll Blau]

Harriet's now making more out of book sales than she could have done from the prize pot. Smart move.

[goose2010]

Just now, Voll Blau said:

Harriet's now making more out of book sales than she could have done from the prize pot. Smart move.

Was already worth £15m apparently. Her book says are also up 75% since she has been on it. So yeah I think she was just bored 😅

[Stadt]

The maddest thing is Fiona had the tirade against Rachel, then didn’t vote for her! Obviously she was confirmed as traitor - why wouldn’t you question that? 

Edited 14 January by Stadt

[Tommy G]

Too many thick people but it makes good viewing, I think Rachel has got her biggest threat gone now. 
 

James the Gardener is incredible - what a chaotic bloke 

[Dollfhin]

1 hour ago, Tommy Fresh said:

The line about Rachel being trained by an ex FBI agent was possibly the cringiest thing I've ever heard

Literally laughed when she said that, most pointless thing to say and even stupider to actually do.

[brookfox]

10 hours ago, Tommy Fresh said:

The line about Rachel being trained by an ex FBI agent was possibly the cringiest thing I've ever heard

i.e. she watched a couple of YouTube videos!

[CosbehFox]

11 hours ago, foxfanazer said:

I get what people are saying about the faithfuls being thick but Harriet went about that completely the wrong way imo. Just far too much of an erratic shift in behaviour and it clearly shook a few

Should have just waited for the round table and then she could judge the support in the room for getting rid of Rachel. By doing it early, it gave the entire day for the speculation to build on herself. Was no need to mention her background as well. 

[Tommy G]

2 hours ago, CosbehFox said:

Should have just waited for the round table and then she could judge the support in the room for getting rid of Rachel. By doing it early, it gave the entire day for the speculation to build on herself. Was no need to mention her background as well. 

Not sure her ego could hold onto it any longer!

[Stadt]

She'd just had enough, that's why she was so abrasive about things, she's astute enough to not blow it up deliberately. What is laughable is both a traitor and a faithful have self-destructed trying to get Rachel out and the gorms are like, "All the evidence points to... Jade"

 

 

[Robo61]

28 minutes ago, Stadt said:

She'd just had enough, that's why she was so abrasive about things, she's astute enough to not blow it up deliberately. What is laughable is both a traitor and a faithful have self-destructed trying to get Rachel out and the gorms are like, "All the evidence points to... Jade"

 

 

Easy to say when you know, but what real evidence did either of them have. It a fascinating study in human psychology, but simply proves that not everyone reacts to stressful situations in the same way, despite most people our way is the only way.

[CosbehFox]

31 minutes ago, Stadt said:

She'd just had enough, that's why she was so abrasive about things, she's astute enough to not blow it up deliberately. What is laughable is both a traitor and a faithful have self-destructed trying to get Rachel out and the gorms are like, "All the evidence points to... Jade"

 

 

Normally two direct clashes lead to a suspicion of a traitor. In Rachel’s case, still hasn’t happened 

[foxfanazer]

20 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

Easy to say when you know, but what real evidence did either of them have. It a fascinating study in human psychology, but simply proves that not everyone reacts to stressful situations in the same way, despite most people our way is the only way.

Yeah there certainly wasn't a "smoking gun" piece of evidence to evoke such a reaction. She could've tried to play it a bit slower and gain some confidence from other faithfuls. The blow up was just bizarre and unwarranted imo

[kingcarr21]

Genius TV and i cant wait to see how the murder goes tonight. You would assume faithfuls would just decide to get rid of Rachel now just to test out Fiona and Harrietts theories. Though i think she will go at the final table

[Robo61]

1 hour ago, kingcarr21 said:

Genius TV and i cant wait to see how the murder goes tonight. You would assume faithfuls would just decide to get rid of Rachel now just to test out Fiona and Harrietts theories. Though i think she will go at the final table

Not sure there was a theory from either of them though was there,  Harriet simply had a hunch and Fiona knew but couldn't say she knew. You have to remember whoever they gun for at this stage there is very little to go on and whoever they choose is an even money gamble.  Fascinating though.

[Chris_OGrady]

I thought the whole Fiona vs Rachel bust up was pretty damning evidence that Rachel was likely a traitor, especially when Fiona was revealed to be a traitor. It came out of absolutely nowhere, and this is consistent with previous series where traitors turn on each other out of the blue and it has a slightly greater edge to it. Why would it just blow up like that unless there was something greater to it. I was surprised Harriet didn't play on this more because she called it right straight after the original incident happened. 

[LCFCJohn]

16 hours ago, goose2010 said:

Was already worth £15m apparently. Her book says are also up 75% since she has been on it. So yeah I think she was just bored 😅

I was going to say this. She had also said I believe that she would give the winnings to a cancer charity so she didn’t need the money. In fact given it’ll be less an £100k, she could still give to charity form her work and book sales.

 

She was just doing it for either the challenge and/or (probably both) the exposure for book sales.

 

I agree she just wanted to stir things up.