Baby Reindeer #4

[50sGirl]

I've finished watching the series now. Whilst I had some sympathy for Donny he made it very difficult by making poor choices throughout, not to mention actually sleeping with her 🫣
The attack on Teri wasn't reported or the attack on him at the bar when there were other witnesses. I know he was pressured by his scummy boss not to report it but that was out of order.

Loved his parents, particularly his dad. I know he was deeply affected by the rape but again why did he keep going back? He had terrible self esteem issues that must have started before the abuse and rape.

Anyway it beggars belief that the real life Martha has apparently never been prosecuted if she really was as bad as that.

He didn’t sleep with Martha, he was fantasising.

 

[repairshoplover]

My niece did a law degree, then had to do the diploma to get a legal traineeship. She was at a Scottish Uni too. The traineeship is the final stage of qualifying in Law. To apply to the traineeship you need a degree in Scots law, the diploma and an entrance certificate from the Law Society of Scotland. Once you do the traineeship you are fully qualified.

My niece doubts that FH is a fully qualified lawyer. So has most certainly never practiced either. The behaviour mentioned by Laura Wray would indicate that FH has probably never held down a job, but in her delusional way tells people she is a lawyer. Because she believes she is despite not being one.

 

[judgejohndeed]

I don’t think she will get anything and if she does then Laura said she would sue her for defamation…presumably the only reason people haven’t done that already is because she has no job or assets etc so damages wouldn’t be recoverable anyway - if Netflix do pay her off (I’m betting the chances of this getting near a trial are practically zilch as they won’t pass the damages threshold) there could be quite a few people with actual reputational loss (lawyers, politicians, Gadd himself now) coming at her for defamation damages so it’s not really a win

 

[CaptainHolt]

Like the kind of people who can sympathise with this woman can’t be normal either. She is fucking awful. I think all the attention is only fuelling her as she’s getting more and more awful with the things she’s saying

Initially I was sympathetic because I thought there was serious mental health or a learning disability of some kind. Not that I ever sympathised with her actions, just that I wanted to make sense of it all. However she's shown that she is a properly nasty piece of work over and over and it cements Gadd's portrayal of "Martha" at her worst.
---

While I think she's absolutely crazy. I find it strange that GAdd stars as the leading role in this film and he's quite the actor. Something's not adding up. Where is the proof she did time and is a convicted stalker

He said not all of it was true to life. I don't quite get what you're saying about Gadd either, why is that not adding up? They had a really messed up "relationship" however you look at it and she has proved with her Facebook ranting about numerous people and organisations that she's like a dog with a bone and obsessive (not to mention abusive) when she doesn't get the adoration or respect she believes she deserves.

 

[Square Peg]

It's a shocking turn of events to think that this awful woman, who is serial stalker, might actually walk away with some money here.
She has caused misery to a number of people and has apparently got away with it. The rates for conviction over stalking are very low in the UK.

If she can prove that Gadd lied about her having a conviction in the show, she might have a legal case against him and win. I sincerely hope that doesn't happen because she outed herself and its appalling to think that she could be rewarded for her horrible behaviour.

But also if she ends up with money, those she has stalked can sue her, plus she will lose all her housing benefits and other benefit payments that are means tested.

 

[evie1975]

If she can prove that Gadd lied about her having a conviction in the show, she might have a legal case against him and win.

RG has never named FH as the perpetrator though

 

[Ametrine]

I haven't read the whole court document left, but I laughed at this paragraph:

I like how they've just skimmed past how she stalked someone else; an accusation taken so seriously that a newspaper wrote an article about it.

 

[maggisojuicy]

Gadd never named her. She willingly put herself forward as the inspiration for Martha by plastering it all over social media. She told Peirs Morgan that she unwittingly wrote half the show and came up with the name for it. She NEVER needed to go on a television interview and out herself lol. No-one would have even suspected her if she wasn’t putting stuff out in writing all over the internet implicating herself in the whole thing. The only person who could legitimately be sued for defamation would be Fiona herself

I suspect this is why she has hidden her FB, maybe on the advice of her ‘legal team’

 

[oogling]

I hope she receives NOTHING, not a penny. I personally feel this is just an extension of her stalking - to make his life hell and destroy any happiness.

She’s said some disgusting things about him on her Facebook, you’re telling me he can’t counter sue for very CLEAR defamation, using his correct name etc?!

She really needs to get some mental health support.

This is what bothers me! These Lawyers, the likes of Morgan looking to boost their own profile, on the back of furthering victims distress! They have given Harvey a platform to continue her abuse! I hope she stalks Morgan! And the lawyers! And even the sick fucks setting up the ‘Fiona Harvey Support Group’ shite!!! What the fuck is wrong with people?
I really hope she makes Morgan’s life absolute HELL! The greedy egotistical twat deserves nothing less!!! He keeps banging on that she should sue Netflix. He gave her a new bone to chew…clearly the woman is barking. She needs sectioning not given media attention, a platform and a fucking fan base!
These arseholes have FUELED her delusions!
---

What Piers did was not really like a real cross examination at all. He kept touching upon things she’d lied about then basically just moving on, apart from odd things that don’t really matter at all for her case such as her degree classification.

I think Piers displayed that he is in fact a TERRIBLE interviewer, with banal leading questions. The interview with Laura Wray pointed this out more. The ‘has it made you cry?’ WTF??? It caused her distress. Why do you need to try to paint a picture of her ‘weeping on the floor’…absolute moron! He’s catering for people who need to be ‘spoon fed’.

 

[wiglay]

I’m surprised they asked for a jury trial because she comes across terribly on PM’s show and I don’t think a jury will take to her at all. The way Gadd wrote her was much more sympathetic than how she is in real life IMO. I felt sorry for Martha, Gadd wrote her like she was a victim of her own mind, Fiona couldn’t be further from that. She struggled with Piers’ questioning, in the States I believe they have less stringent rules on how to cross examine than we do here, I reckon she would completely fall apart with under a ruthless cross examination. Very strange strategic choice.

 

[thomasthetank82]

I think her ranting about Sean Foley is a huge mistake, can see him taking legal action as he's already been to the police about being falsely named. She could be in trouble here - even though she's not referring to him as the rapist, she can't raise his name in her rants and get off with it!

 

[wiglay]

So someone who hasn’t worked for a long time isn’t more appealing to hire for say a shop job or a cleaning job than someone known to be a sex offender? I know which of the two I’d rather hire.

Unless she’s dead, she has job prospects. It might not be a glamorous job, but a job is a job.

I don’t have legal background, never claimed I have

Thought not.
The point is that a court is not going to find that someone who has been on benefits for tens of years has any realistic job prospects to have ‘lost’. Realistically Fiona is never going to work again and she doesn’t have a job loss or prospect of losing a profession because she’s been defamed. You can’t seem to separate the way a court would view things and how the average person might, they aren’t the same.
---

I hope she receives NOTHING, not a penny. I personally feel this is just an extension of her stalking - to make his life hell and destroy any happiness.

Quite. I was glad to see Netflix say they will defend this, she’s now using legal proceedings to keep bullying Gadd. Also can’t see an American court wanting to restrict what can and can’t be shown in TV dramas given all the references to Los Angeles…it’s a big business. The firm she’s instructed don’t look very good if you skim their website

 

[Elle Woods]

I hope Fiona sues Netflix after all this bullying she's having due to the programme.

I'd like to see her try. I'm sure many would love to sue her for the vitriol and bullying she spiels on a daily basis

 

[Scotch Mist]

I've only just watched the first 3 episodes (plus the Piers Morgan interview) so my comments are based on what I've seen so far.

Gadd appears to have done what most scriptwriters do and has presented a fictionalised and perhaps exaggerated version of a real story. He's not telling the exact truth but essentially I do believe this woman was stalking and harassing him. She has outed herself online when she didn't need to do that. She is clearly mentally ill and very unpleasant.

In the first few episodes he was annoying me as much as her because he did lead her on by acting like a coward. He should have nipped the whole thing in the bud when she kept coming to see him at work and made it clear he wasn't interested in any sort of relationship with her. I don’t believe that his motivations in entertaining her were entirely based around him feeling sorry for her. I believe he covered up the fact that he was involved more with the other men at work and they all thought they could have some sport with her. A big mistake because they clearly thought she was just a 'loser' they could all make fun of.

The fact that this woman has outed herself and was apparently sending messages to Keir Starmer as well is pretty mind boggling

I'll try to watch the rest if the series before drawing my final conclusions.

I used to know a woman who was stalking someone I knew some years ago and Martha rang alarm bells for me immediately because I recognised the MO. I can relate the story if anyone is interested.

 

[evoway13]

I get the feeling when her lawyers start discovery and see what she’s not telling them it all goes real quiet real fast. The submission omits some key info such as the Netflix disclaimer at the end of the episodes. I kind of think she maybe wrote it herself ngl.

Yes, they send this submission to a judge, the judge decides on jurisdiction (I've been following the Tati Westbrook case for years- it's bounced around Washington state/California/Nevada/Delaware)....and whether there's any chance of the plaintiff winning the case. If it can, then the 'researchers' (student lawyers) try and find cases similar and tidy up Fiona's claims. To say she hasn't watched it - she knows a lot about it!
---
Edited to add - I cannot believe Fiona is doing this in the first place - they don't mess around with discovery over there. They're going to dig up every single comment/email/text/tweet she's ever made and wipe the floor with her.....

I forgot to add, now Fiona has filed, Netflix have so many days to respond to her claims - and they've got some excellent lawyers at Netflix ....and I'm sure they'll draft some other experts in!

 

[BingoFlamingo]

All Netflix have done is asked an actress to put on a Scottish voice. Fiona states she's never been as big as 'Martha' in size (Fiona is a horrid person) . Even if they'd chosen a woman with a London accent, Fiona would still have come forward - she's an attention seeker

Exactly. No one forced Fiona to come and do and interview (that has now got 14m views.)

she could’ve stayed in the shadows and waited for it to blow over.

she wants money and fame. I suspect Netflix will win. As someone mentioned above this is a true story of Donny and Martha. Not Richard and Fiona.

 

[maggisojuicy]

Has she written that herself? Doesn’t look very professional. Also whenever she says ‘we’, it makes me think of her speaking in the 3rd person eg ‘we are not amused’

It’s actually embarrassing! Her spelling and grammar is so poor

Also Gadd NEVER said it was about her! She has no case for defamation whatsoever.

 

[evoway13]

Can you imagine her standing up in court to give evidence? I know she’ll be getting a lot of advice but I get the impression she wouldn’t be able to help herself and would completely go off on one.

.....she said that Piers Morgan is a 'bully' - wait until she's face to face with highly experienced lawyers in a courtroom

 

[evoway13]

Legally she is entitled to have her own socials though.

The biggest fuck up is Netflix saying "This Is A True Story" instead of "Based On A True Story". While the thousands of messages allegedly exist as evidence, the accusation of sexual assault is harder to prove, and that's a serious allegation. Also if she didn't actually go to prison, that's another problem.

The 'true' story of Donny Dunn - who doesn't exist

Legally she can have social's but, if I was in her position, I would've made them private - so people couldn't identify me. There's also the issue of Baby Reindeer existing as a play from August 2019 (and as a book) and she was aware of the play but, didn't take steps back then to stop Gadd with legal threats. It had a five week run at the Bush theatre in London after the Edinburgh Fringe , and then went on an extended run at the Ambassador's theatre in London (it was postponed due to lockdown) before going to BAM in New York

Fiona is after a quick pay out - that's the reason she has come forward

 

[CaptainHolt]

no, what you mean was later in the show when it already escalated. in the first episode werent the other guys in the bar trying to push them very hard into being a thing (jokingly) and he went along with it? And then she thought it was serious? It's exactly what this article also implies?

Exactly! I took it that he egged her along to fit in with the "laddish" colleagues and he knew it was wrong but he did it anyway.

When i watched it I took it that he was saying he took the piss out of her for his own social standing, to look good and fit in with the gang in the pub. The pub staff were portrayed as misogynistic, it was shown numerous times to be a toxic environment and RG portrayed himself as part of that.

I don't get the article making out like this is new information?
---

Imo, it's a lot different if, as the article says, she was already a regular (didn't go in there only to see Gadd), sat at a table in the corner (didn't go to sit at the bar to be close to him, for the whole of his shift), only went in 2 or 3 times a week (not every day), didn't get anything free off him.

He said he'd changed some stuff to fit the retellling of the story and to protect Martha's identity (badly!). The sitting at the bar could be part of the changes?