How wolf in sheep’s clothing Stephen proved to be the apex Traitor

Even if his calculating fellow Traitor Rachel makes it to tonight’s final, the man in impeccable knits has shown that warmth makes the predatory instinct more dangerous, writes Patrick Smith

Two chests sit on a round table. One contains a shield. The other contains nothing. If Rachel, a communications manager, or James, a gardener, picks the latter, they’re gone. After such a gripping fourth series of The Traitors – 11 episodes of psychological warfare and strategic brilliance – making it to the final now hinges on what’s essentially a glorified coin toss. It was the cliffhanger to end all cliffhangers, leaving millions of viewers no doubt screaming at their tellies as the credits rolled.

While we’ve been watching Rachel observe every emotional leak, though, her fellow Traitor Stephen has been quietly getting on with something far more cunning, being a wolf in sheep’s clothing – or rather, in a cavalcade of impeccable knits tucked into high-waisted jeans. He’s a cybersecurity consultant who knows his way around threats. Including being one.

With just a handful of Faithfuls left – Faraaz, Jack, Jade, and possibly James – the prize could still go to anyone. But the real contest has always been between Traitors Rachel and Stephen themselves.

Team Traitor: Rachel and Stephen have outwitted many Faithfuls, but the latter is now looking the more confident of the two (BBC)

It’s been a series that has pushed everyone past their psychological (and sometimes physical) limits. James vomited through exhaustion on a Highland hill. Rachel conducted FBI-level preparation for a reality show. Harriet, a barrister turned crime novelist, became so embarrassed by her outburst at Roxy (“Set a cat amongst the pigeons!”) that she issued a public apology and admitted she couldn’t watch herself back on television. Everyone’s marinating in paranoia, slowly losing their grip.

Except Stephen. Far from crumbling under pressure, he’s emanated a sort of breezy contentment; the only thing he seems to take completely seriously is an eye-catching jumpsuit. Yes, his face has launched a thousand memes – those rosy-cheeked, worried expressions – but they might be the greatest misdirection of the series. Stephen’s apparent haplessness has become his greatest asset.

The 32-year-old’s journey makes the strategy clearer. Stephen grew up on the Isle of Lewis, one of Scotland’s more remote islands. He was the first to go to university in a family where it wasn’t the done thing. His father was a butcher who’d always dreamt of being an artist, and his parents made financial sacrifices to push him through. But being gay in a rural community came with a cost of its own. In last week’s episode, Stephen opened up: “For the longest time, I kind of hated myself, actually. I lost my teenage years going to church, trying to pray myself normal,” he said. That he’s made it this far in the series without anyone truly questioning his sincerity speaks to how effectively he’s wielded warmth. His vulnerability is his secret weapon: it’s real, not fake.

Rachel, by contrast, has mobilised her competence – and it’s become her downfall. James nailed her problem at the Round Table: “Rachel is too good of a player to not have been murdered yet if she wasn’t a Traitor.” Her fatal flaw is that her competence became a liability. For seven hours or so, her FBI training – studying micro-expressions, analysing blink rates – paid dividends. The kitchen showdown with Fiona, the strategic dominance, the alliance-building. She knows how to handle heat, too. But this week, the wheels came off. There’s a limit to how many fires you can extinguish before people wonder why you’re always near the flames. Every defence sounds rehearsed, because she’s so accomplished at defending herself. Yet the Traitors’ error – killing Roxy, who trusted them both, instead of youngster Faraaz with his spot-on Rachel theory – might have finally doomed her.

Face that launched a thousand memes: Stephen has played a blinder in ‘The Traitors’ (BBC)

While Rachel’s drawn all the fire, Stephen’s played a quieter game. Track his evolution: in early episodes, he was the tentative lieutenant, wide-eyed and nodding along. When Fiona was banished, aided by a vote from Stephen, the latter summoned up an Oscar-worthy crying performance. Then came the pivot. In the semi-final, speaking to camera, Stephen admitted that although he’d promised Rachel he wouldn’t vote against her, he’d be “stupid” not to plant seeds of doubt. “I’ve got to put my big boy pants on and go with it,” he said. Everything had crystallised. He told Jack they should “consider Rachel”, and at the Round Table, he accused her of using “a carbon copy” of Harriet’s Hugo takedown. Yet when it counted, he stayed loyal to her.

Though Stephen’s appeared genial, guileless even, he’s been protean – shapeshifting depending on who’s watching. In a way, he’s like a much less creepy Uriah Heep from David Copperfield. “I’m a very ’umble person,” Heep insists, while accumulating power through performative weakness. Stephen’s done it through visible anxiety and nice attire. Every cardigan was armour.

ADVERTISEMENT. If you sign up to this service we will earn commission. This revenue helps to fund journalism across The Independent.

ADVERTISEMENT. If you sign up to this service we will earn commission. This revenue helps to fund journalism across The Independent.

Also, let’s not forget he’s been lucky – think of how much attention he was getting before Fiona imploded. Ultimately, though, Stephen was never Rachel’s junior partner. She was his heat shield, burning up on re-entry while he glided through untouched. Rachel lists achievements and sounds guilty; Stephen expresses confusion and sounds Faithful. Tonight reveals whether his survival was genius or fortune. Whatever the outcome, I can’t wait to see what he’s wearing.