Baby Reindeer: Lawyer Analyses If Netflix Can Be Sued By Fiona Harvey
A woman believed to be the inspiration behind the character Martha in hit Netflix series Baby Reindeer has said she is going to sue Netflix and creator-turned-star Richard Gadd over the “defamatory” depiction.
Fiona Harvey said she has been “forced” into telling her side of the story after receiving death threats from “internet sleuths” following the release of the Netflix show.
Media lawyer Mark Stephens joins Talk to discuss whether Netflix could be sued by Harvey. He says that online sleuths had identified Fiona Harvey despite Netflix's efforts to anonymize her, and argues it would be possible for to take legal action if she can demonstrate she has suffered "serious harm".
In the drama series inspired by the real-life experiences of comedian and writer Gadd, his character Donny is stalked by a woman named Martha Scott after he serves her a free cup of tea in the pub where he works.
On Piers Morgan Uncensored, Ms Harvey repeatedly denied stalking Gadd in real life, describing the show as “a work of fiction, a work of hyperbole”.
Click here for more from Talk talk.tv
If you need any help visit: talk.tv/helplines
#piersmorgan #piersmorganinterview #babyreindeer #netfix #richardgadd #fionaharvey
But neither Netflix nor R.Gadd has said Fiona is Martha so the mountain of proof begins with FIONA proving SHE IS MARTHA
😂😂😂😂
Not really. She’s admitting contacting him but not to the extent he claims.
Its enough that people realise who the real person is...
Pretty good point there
True… there could be another slightly odd,chubby, Scottish bird out there who’s just watching and laughing at all this. 😂
I can’t imagine Netflix not doing their homework on this…
I can
100%. Their legal team has to be very experienced with this sort of thing, and I'm sure they have a highly vetted and refined process by now for protecting themselves.
@@ChromeDrone. you would assume so , the proof will be in the pudding as they say.
In the end credits, it says that 'This program is based on true events however, certain characters, names, incidents, locations and dialogue have been fictionalised for dramatic purposes
Remember the Cleopatra documentary??? Did Netflix do the homework there? Netflix is selling entertainment, they are the ones to ones to push the truth, it does not mean she js 100% innocent but I think the truth has been pushed here
She's going to sue a show she hasn't seen and claims that the character in the show isn't her? Ok.
You dont have to watch the show to know the story of the show
she could have easily given her phones and social media to investigators to prove that she did not send those messages, but she still hasn't...
@@Crimson11100He also hasn’t provided receipts of the messages. That’s a double edged sword.
She has a photographic memory, but didn't do as well or can't remember her marks from law school? Having a photographic memory is so rare only a very very small percentage of the population in the entire world has that gift..She would remember everything she's ever read ,including grades...She acts like the character Martha who seems delusional and believes her own lies... I'm sure Richard knowing that making up outrageous claims would hold him liable and doubt he would've been so careless as to say she committed such extreme acts of harassment and I'm sure along with people around at the time along with a "paper trail" of voicemails, emails... She just said oh, he forged them... I personally don't believe her , just by going by the responses she gave during this interview, which I'm sure paid her a lot to give.I don't think she's being honest . What a situation for Gad now.. He himself has been through enough with her..
No she didnt say it wasn't her but that it was'nt true.
The worst part is I’m the show she also basically got away with everything for 23 years because she knew the law. She knew not to be on his property, she knew to record their conversations. She knows how to play the legal system and it’s scary
Thats the thing- if she was just crazy i woud feel sorry for her. But she 100% knows what she's doing.
You don't know if its true yet. Wait for facts before making accusations. She might be slightly weird but a lot of people have personality quirks and that doesn't make one a criminal stalker.
@@oh_k8if someone said I was a stalker, but didn’t mention me by name.. I def wouldn’t come out of the wood work screaming “I am her! But I didn’t do that”. That’s crazy to begin with.
We need piers to interview Gadd
I don’t think piers did a good job with it tho.
YES!
Piers Morgen is overrated. He is the worst at interviewing people. He bullies them and doesn't let them talk.
She admitted to sending him a letter, but she didn't know where he lived ? Lol
She sent 18 in fact no... 16 . Only 6 emails actually in fact only q 1letter and actually I didn't speakto anyone about the show... But all my friends and family.. But I've not seen it
Lots of people are saying this, did any of you even watch the interview? She literally said she sent the letter to the theatre!
@@sonyamcintyre6692 no she did not ha ha, I take it you are her friend "she's going to hurt herself" Worlds to harsh for me to care
Na she did
@ND-lu6dv watch the bloody interview! She said she sent the letter to the theatre! those were the words that came out her mouth! Where did I say I believe a damn word she said? I didn't! Her interview was a car crash, maybe don't jump the gun 🤣🙈
I think Netflix did their research first before agreeing to produce the show. If they had lawyers involved I’m sure they asked for receipts to show that he’s telling the truth.
Then why didn’t they know she wasn’t jailed doh
If there are emails as mentioned or actually went to jail that should be easy to prove.
@@Pollyferganstien Richard added that in as an ending intentionally. He said that ill people need help not jail time.
Regardless, they should’ve done far more to protect her identity. She’s clearly a very sick woman + they cashed in on her. People with personality disorders WILL respond … terribly/trigger another cycle. Her behaviour + perception of reality is completely normal for someone as ill as her. They could’ve and should’ve adapted her character + taken some other measures so she couldn’t be tracked down in 5mins. It wouldn’t have impacted the storyline if done well. I feel sorry for her. She needs help. I hope she at least gets some money out of it… Or someone in the Psychiatric world reaches out and offers her help or inpatient program free of charge… and goes public educating the public of her illness. I have a friend who ran one of the only programs in Australia for people with personality disorders (6mths of full time, Mon-Fri, group therapy + practical life skills)… what those people go through (and the impact they have on those around them) if left untreated is really sad. There’s apparently only a few types of therapy styles that can help them… their illness is very difficult to treat (most interventions are ineffective/a lot of therapists won’t see them). I find that really sad/can’t imagine what it must be like. Sure she creates hell for those around her… but she doesn’t deserve not to have her identity protected.
@@Pollyferganstien it's common knowledge that every single movie/show that's based on a true story has fictionalized parts and is heavily dramatized to make it more entertaining. Richard Gadd has spoken on the fictional aspects of the show well before Fiona ever came forward about anything, and he very explicitly stated that the real Martha never went to jail and that the ending was entirely fictional for the sake of drama and conclusion.
I don't know the law, but I imagine, for a victim, there is no distinction between 20k and 40k emails. Any amount is a nuisance and harassment
He didn't say 20k - he meant literally 20 emails, as she stated in the interview
Except Gadd ran to her house UNINVITED and initiated having with her! I don't see he can then claim he was 'stalked,'
@@thesupergreenjudyFalse. The show alleges 40k worth of emails. Not 20. She has said that to try & minimise her involvement & discredit his claims.
A woman came forward today to say she was stalked by her for 5 years..... so apparently she is a stalker.
She did an interview with Neil Sears from Daily Mail a couple days before the Piers Morgan interview and harassed him within 10 minutes of ending that interview. Several threatening voicemails and texts. Contradicted herself between the 2 interviews. She told Neil that her boyfriend died, then in the Piers interview, talked about him.
Look up Fiona Muir. Her full name is Fiona Muir-Harvey, but she normally goes by Muir. I think she thought she was being clever by just using Harvey on Piers. If you look up Fiona Muir, you'll find an article from 1997 about her stalking someone. She's crazy.
@@Jasonxknot Ya, I looked into it and read the articles. That poor family, even trying to get social services involved making fake accusations of child abuse. Insane for sure!
Fiona will sue, and they will settle out of court. She wants a piece of the pie, imo.
Nah. She just wants the attention
@@vexnaexBoth, I’d say. It’s also a way to continue to punish him for rejecting her.
She will not sue. She knows he has all the emails and texts. His family and friends would testify.
Imagine if u were fiona, she should sue because its defamation
@@bcoull290 I honestly don't know the legal ins and outs but I think the concern isn't lack of proof (I think likely there's plenty of it) but whether he didn't sufficiently disguise her identity. She IS on a press tour now and clearly living for it, but people inclined to do so had also already figured out who she was.
So wait. She is suing over a show she never saw. About someone not her. She seems stable.
If this does go to court and is televised it will be as big as the Jonny Depp Amber Turd case.
How would there be a case when she went on Piers Morgan and said that what was depicted wasn't her. No case.
@@LogicalVelocity killjoy
listen I don't care about either side in that trial, but I've gotta tell you, calling her "Amber Turd" makes you sound like a child.
@@timeiswhat please elaborate? Giving her any semblance of respect by calling her Amber Heard seems redundant seeing the way she has behaved for the majority of her life. I can call her whatever I want and you sound more of a child by being upset by my terminology :(
She said that she is not a stalker but she had already done a full research about Piers Morgan' life, "oh I am younger than you " .
So, you can’t be fans of people
It's called being prepared & doing research; eg if you're researching a company for a job interview or your meeting well known people you want to know their background
These little asides she said to Piers were a little unsettling .
@@kristinefletcherwode4640maybe she might want to actually research and watch the show then if she is claiming it’s about her and it’s all false.
@@gabrielleandrew542 Narcissism is all about control - and that was one of many, many little examples of her attempting to assert control of the conversation.
It's clearly hyper ball.
I heard that too. "Hyper-bowl"
@@annknows802The championship game of Hyper Ball is the Hyper-Bowl.
I think she means hyperbole, look it up. She clearly has only ever seen it written down, not heard how it is actually spoken.
Hyperbole! X
@@avrilmitchellgriffiths7307 When I was younger I pronounced it Hyper Bowley for fun 😀
Sent from iphonn
Getting old already
The film is HIS side of the story. I'm convinced he took some "artistic liberties." Don't forget: he's the guy who would do almost anything for fame. He did almost nothing to hide "Martha's" true identity. This film feels at least partly like revenge. Not saying anything Fiona did was right, but she didn't deserve to be exposed and swatted. She needs help, not harassment. We could see 10 different versions of BR and still not get at the truth. Gadd and Harvey are both wrong in different ways and the truth always lies somewhere in the middle. Get in and get your coin for defamation and being exposed, girl.
It does almost seem like something an abusive ex partner would do to someone, I must admit. I don’t think he is entirely innocent.
@@mysticjen379 No nor does he attempt to portray himself as being entirely innocent - that part comes through loud and clear.
@@pjpredhomme7699 I think you and many people are being far too generous with him. Nevertheless, hopefully the truth will come out and we’ll know for certain.
The one thing I don't get is why she went on Piers Morgan Uncensored. Surely employing a solicitor/lawyer to deal with it and make a statement on her behalf would have been more sensible. This interview didn't help her cause.
@@PM-vd2fs You could say the same about him though, couldn’t you. Why did he make it so public? Why didn’t he go to therapy? I think it he was going to put that out there (and play himself which I thought was strange) do little to hide her identity at least from herself if no one else, then she had the right of reply.
she wanted to be found, this is HER doing.
100% agree, i was goinf to say the same.
Also for someone who claims to be so bright. She doesn't even put her social media on private. And sounds obsessive about Richard and the ex staff of The Hawley Arms and not in a good way.
Absolutely. Its part of her very clearly portrayed behaviour. What about the whole programme suggested otherwise? People obviously missed the whole thing about her being a crazed stalker???!!! A dangerous crazed stalker. Of course shes here. Where was Piers duty of care to her victims?
Yeah I agree. She is going to be crazy now for us all. Mark my words
Well no the daily mail contacted her saying they know its her
I hope she does sue. She deserves privacy which the Netflix show has robbed her of. The UK has very different rules about defamation. It's nearly impossible to prove in USA.
Perhaps he's just another Jesse smollet. We will eventually all find out
even if every claim proves out, Netflix sure didn't do much to change the name and appearance so she is subject now to harassment. I think she has a darn good case either way
This woman is very unwell. We don’t need to debate whether she’s lying or not it’s beyond clear she is.
As a lawyer she should know how to pronounce ‘hyperbole’ !
It tracks with the way the show portrayed her. Mispelling simple words, correctly spelling more difficult words. Hyper bowl...
Yes
Lol hyper bowl. That's right she came top of her class, can't remember her grades or what degree she has... yet has a photographic memory. She is pure evil making sure she has little attacks of Richard Gadd during the Piers interview - he is the victim. She's loving the attention.
@@mymai5859she said she wasn't top of the class but got good grades..couldn't remember what.
Yes and no. I'm dyslexic and misspell words constantly, and mispronunciation is part of that.
I don't know how this is so controversial. They'd have an IP address for the emails. And she'd have a criminal record. It's so easy to prove
I mean, they say in the credits that some things were changed for artistic or dramatic effect. Which is essentially a disclaimer that it's not 100% accurate, so it's not stating slander as fact. Not to mention, the creator admits openly some things were embellished. Slander is lying about someone with malicious intent to hurt them. If it were a documentary claiming everything was true and outed her ID, she might have a case. This is a drama series. She has no case.
I think you made the best comment I read.
Unfortunately that's not how the law works - 1) Netflix said at the outset that "This IS a true story" and only mentioned about the dramatization in the credits that nobody watches 2) The public is really quite stupid, they will take the whole thing at face value which they did and some decided to harass her at her own home because the film makers included information that made her easily identifiable (Her twitter posts at verbatim) 3) Netflix did not specify WHICH parts were dramatized (eg that she went to prison, that it was 40k emails instead of 18 or 20 odd emails as she claimed which wouldn't make for a good story, would it?) - Only a court case could verify her and his claims properly 4) It doesn't mean she is innocent and not a stalker but if any of these claims are exaggerated to the point that it would cause public outcry, yes it is a problem and defamatory - especially if it, ironically, leads to her being stalked 5) Even if the entire story is correct to the T, Netflix must follow due diligence in protecting her identify which they hopelessly failed at (even though Gadd thinks otherwise - but it took the public all of 5 minutes to find her)
@thesupergreenjudy It doesnt matter where they put the disclaimer. All that matters is they put somewhere where everyone can read it. Some people watch credits, others dont. You cant prove in court that no one watches the credits, but you can prove the disclaimer was in the show and available to everyone who watched it. This lady was lying through her teeth on Piers. Court records arent available to the public in the UK like they are in the United States, so you cant look up if she has criminal records. But, if you look up her real name, you'll find news articles on her stalking history, going back to 1997. Her name is Fiona Muir-Harvey. She normally goes by Fiona Muir, but chose Harvey for Piers Morgan. Look up Fiona Muir and you'll find the articles. What she did in 1997 sounds very similar to what's portrayed in the show.
@@Jasonxknot Well we may have to agree to disagree (by the way, I am not claiming she is an innocent victim but the law is still the law) - a court may indeed find that Netflix should have made it clearer - especially as they started it off on the premise that it is a true story just to backtrack later in the credits. Words matter. Now, even if the story was correct to the T, Netflix may still be liable if she can prove that they haven't done their due diligence in protecting her identity (quoting tweets at verbatim which can be found on Google within 5 minutes is a big red flag). And even if it was all correct, that doesn't change the fact that the harassment of her by the public is a crime of which the driving motivator was that Netflix show. If she has a good lawyer (Even a No win - No Fee lawyer) , she could probably win
Scanning through the comments it's astonishing how many people seem to completely ignore the expert. This needs to be tested in court.
Was thinking same.. too many pretend lawyers about or know-it-alls 😂
@@simonsaysrewind I've been attacked for pointing this out. But I've seen more experts coming out of the shadows here casting doubt on his telling of the story, including a psychologist and a lawyer. It's so pathetic that people take the side of a character that's based on a real person written by that person. Sorry had to edit this to fix my typo. A good example is JFK by Oliver Stone. It's based on true story but also utter bollocks.
💯 correct OP. Not a great deal of critical thinking I’ve noticed too! Quite a few people getting the massively embelllished and criminally convicted character mixed up with the real and unconvicted person to whose detriment it has allegedly been. Of course she’s going to recognise her own personal story even if it has been massively added to in the fiction.
@@marcdraco2189I’m genuinely concerned about his ability to remember so much about her from 10 years ago, for Jessica to get it so spot on. And that he knows exactly what she looks like now. And that he made a series that made millions hate her, and included in that series a way of easily tracing her. I don’t think she’s the current problem.
When she lies she closes her eyes.....
She lies when open her mouth
when you use ellipsis in this manner my armpit farts.
I noticed this too, also she closed her eyes for longer, it almost felt she was also trying to keep her anger in check 😮
She might be lying about certain things but if anything is untrue she has a case
@@sarahmitchell8385 Roll out more Google neuroscientists. Jesus. People blink more rapidly under stress and we close our eyes to shut down some of the parts of our brain that process vision. This allows more brainpower to be diverted to recall, and yes lying but which is which and how much isn't clear from just looking at someone. I saw a guy accused of murdering his own child once because of the way he performed on television (badly). He was, as you might have guessed by now, totally innocent of any wrongdoing but that didn't stop all the fucking "armchair neuroscientists/psychologists and detectives from jamming the police hotline with "tips".
You could also argue that by making up stuff about her in show wasnt just artistic license but an effort to hide her true identity. She outed herself, yet will also claim its not her. Good luck with your case if shes the main witness, she contradicted herself so many times it was hard to keep up.
People tracked her down by contacting her on Facebook and finding her Twitter
@@TheGoorru yep and she could have denied it and claimed the writers used her tweets etc to develop the character. Its odd she seems angry that the story wasnt 100% accurate as well as denying the things that were. Its this odd thinking that two opposites can be right at the same, which comes across in the interview, is what is most striking about her thought processes.
@@harryhill8543💯, he didn't reveal her identity .....she did
You should be a Lawyer - all the lies they told about person was designed to hide their identity
Did you actually listen to what the lawyer said? Doesn't matter if she said "it's me" - she was already outed by the Internet before she opened up.
I feel sorry for her, hope she hasnt made a mistake exposing herself like this.
Even if she sues and wins, Netflix would have to pay few million. Meanwhile they made much more on the show. It’s a risk worth taking
Gadd also admitted to keeping her in his life and "using" her. It would be interesting to see his communication to her.
For a short period of time, in the beginning, before it became sinister, while he was mentally unwell
@@mariannehavisham8323The show depics him pursuing her after she backed off and slept with her. They were both mentally unwell
@@GG_11_11that wasn’t real it was an obvious dream sequence
The victim is sometimes a willing enabler
@GG_11_11 he never sleeps with her in the show. She sexually assaults him -different thing. It shows him panicking when she backs off, not pursuing her
Her moaning while Pierce is asking her questions or making a point, is really off putting ( Piers 😂)
Who's Pierce?
@@ThatCoalSoul hahaha you’re right Piers
Sounds like Netflix is about to get sued…
It doesn't make sense. If she didn't do anything portrayed on the show, what makes her think that the show was based on her interactions with Gadd? If people harassed her accusing her of being real life Martha, she should have just said "you're wrong, it certainly wasn't based on me". Instead she appeared live and made an interview CONFIRMING that she is real life Martha. Nowhere in the show it's mentioned that Fiona Harvey has anything to do with the story. As far as I'm aware, she can't even prove she's real life Martha. She's exposing herself at her own will and wants to blame Gadd and the series for it. I seriously doubt she's gonna win any case against Gadd and Netflix. It may turn out even worse for her if actual proof of the things she supposedly did appear in court. If the judgement is open to the public, it's gonna be embarrassing
See for all we know she could be telling the truth! I’ll tell you why 41,000 emails for a year is around 112 emails a day, that is a lot of emails for one day. He was so obsessed for his career that he did go to the extremes of going back to that producer’s house knowing what he was doing to him. This could be a desperate claim to fame. Who knows 🤷♀️
Some were only one liner emails
@@ruthgraham1142 yes that’s true. And she did harass the Daily Mail journalist with over 50 calls in a couple of hours. I think she isn’t well. But as Piers said she can sue them if they claim she went to jail and it’s not true. I think there could be a bit of fabrication on his side too
@@aprilodonnell2830 I think they can claim it’s a true story with some fabrication. She honestly did herself no favours with the interview 🤦♀️
@@aprilodonnell2830 I barely have time to work, house, cook , how the hell do you keep up these campaigns
@@ruthgraham1142 well if the sexual assault at the canal is fabricated then she certainly can sue them. I know she did herself no favours as at first she said she only met him 2 to 3 times then it was 5 to 6 times at the end of the interview. I honestly think she isn’t well. But I do think Netflix has jumped on the bandwagon here too. He also was desperate for fame and kept going back to that producer whom he knew was a groomer and abuser. So that shows flaws in his character too where he was desperate to get fame. Is that was has been the driving force for this. The truth will come out in the end
Now we need Richard Gadd himself to come forward with the name of his alledged rapist so that we can get that sick predator in jail so that no-one else is drugged and sexually assaulted him. That's a huge issue that I have not yet heard anyone address. How dare Richard Gadd NOT identify and charge the monster that supposedly did that evil thing to him?
Ya, I don't know how this is getting glossed over. Sure, her behaviour, stalking and sexual assault of him in the canal is huge. She's outted herself on our own accord. The rapist though is walking free under the protection of Gadd who won't come forward on who he is which is a crime. I agree that he deserves to be in jail.
No pun intended but...He's not going after him because in some sick way he must have liked being assaulted and drugged by that man...!!!!! because what that man did to him in the movie is obviously wayyyy worse....than what the lady did....drugged and s a'd???? And he went back to that man's house to visit him after all he did to him??? Why?????? Now that's Crazy!!!!!!
No, how fucking dare YOU tell someone how to deal with their trauma. If he doesn’t want to reveal his abuser, that’s his right.
@@royaldivadeja6341Wow… so, the victim liked what happened to them? Shaming a victim for not naming their attacker as if Richard is the first person who has dealt with this. Millions of assault victims haven’t named their abusers. It’s so easy to judge, but they have their reasons.. and it’s not always an easy thing.
@@TamESQ Nobody is telling anyone how to deal with their trauma. Don't know where you pulled that out of anything that has been said here. If he doesn't want to say who it is, fine, but people can comment that he should if they feel that way. A rapist like that shouldn't be walking free. We're allowed to say that.
If ANY of it is NOT true then she definitely has a case, especially as she was so easy to find. I doubt if it will get to court. I'm pretty sure there will be an out of court settlement.
He already back peddled by saying it is 100% emotionally true
totally contradicted herself
rubbish
It amazes me how cruel society is. How would you want to destroy a human without any proof. And if it’s true, it has to be settled in court.
I feel the rapist in the drama is the bad guy
I don’t agree with the majority of people trying to destroy her as well. It is because no one knows the truth. Yet, these people mindlessly label someone as such without any considerations. I just thought, if you see her as such, and you were that inconsiderate, what do you think of yourself then? Little with no considerations.
What cruelty? All of them will end up few million richer at the end. The only victims are people watching this pseudo drama instead having a life
@@joeanna1100 And even the rapist was never so much as charged. What if he had all of that up?
💯 Glad other people can see her side like I can. It’s very odd.
Tit for tat. Don’t play stalking games without preparing to lose. She is not the victim here.
Not the point.
Absolutely. I'm not sure why people are defending her. Regardless of what has caused her to act like she does, what she does is criminal, dangerous and seriously damaging. She has caused serious harm. If she was a male doing what she did, we would not be here. There is evidence of her stalking previously and her behaving in the ways portrayed in this series. I think Netflix would welcome their day in court.
We don't even know what the truth is yet. You just watched a film and decided you have all the facts which is ridiculous.
She does not deserve to be bullied today for something she did 20 years ago. And I highly doubt they were all true.
@@humanbeing7624he protected her identity by altering details and changing her name. He owes he nothing more. She is the one who went public and is saying she is the real life woman who the character portrays. SHE did that.
She clearly has a disorder. He never said who she was. If she's not a stalker, why does she say it's her?
And why she would not watch it? I want to know excactly what is going on?
@@katjaxxx7353 Yes, why would she sue over something she's never seen?
It only took literally minutes for people to do a little sleuthing and were able to identify her as Martha. Part of her having a personality disorder is - she does not think she has or is the problem. It is a good example of how people have been using these diagnoses - like a personality disorder - rather loosely - when in fact they are fairly rare . Chances are this lady has a full on disorder. It does not take a whole lot of conversation to get the overwhelming sense that something is not right there.
Omg. Come on! 🙄 She sent him nothing? I highly doubt it. He has a right to speak about his experience and trauma. He didn't make himself out to be a prince or totally free of responsibility. He admitted to a lot of shame and serious trauma. He didn't paint himself as an angel. Actually, he didn't paint her as a total villain either. They were careful to humanize her. They made sure we understood she was also a victim and broken.. I don't think he had any nefarious intentions. It took a lot of courage to show all of his trauma. AND She wouldn't be getting as much harassment if she privatized her social media and stopped yelling from the hilltops, " im Martha,look at me, im the main character."if this is all a fabricator, why are a lot of her harrasing tweets and posts still up.
Right. First, she says nothing, then, it's "a handful!" RIGHT, lady. I don't believe a word she says.
I agree so much
How could he have been on benefits if he worked in the pub? One minute she didn’t send a letter, then she sent a letter. She had 4/6 phones, who has that many?!
Can you not work up to 16 hours and claim.
@@davidmoore2308 it wasn’t a dig at Richard, it was a sarcastic remark towards Fiona criticising Richard.
@davidmoore2308 that's for people with children, and people with disabilities, I believe. If he didn't have any dependants and was able to work, he would have been expected to work full-time, I would think.
She is digging him up for working on the side 😮
Even IF everything is a true story, and the woman did serve her punishment, who gives Netflix the right to disturb the mentally sensitive person all over again by exposing her to harassment from people she never met or did anything wrong to? They did not even try to protect her identity and that is so obvious.
Why is she coming forward at all? It just seems to make her look guilty if anything
Her reputation obviously. She’s being dragged through the mud on a platform that doesn’t give her a fair opportunity. If he’s taken her to court that would have been a different situation
Money.
Money and attention as she's a narcissist.
There's no reason for all this did she / didn't she nonsense. In the show she even went to court. That and the emails etc are all things that can be easily proved or disproved. If she didn't do the things they claimed she did, she has a case and would likely win it. It's not a crime to tweet someone, email them and send texts. But there's a big difference between normal interaction and harassment and again, it can be easily proved. Someone needs to just do the research and settle it.
Since "Fargo" starting with "This is a true story" and it is not, tons of movies say "This is a true story".
Was going to say this. No one battered an eye lid when Fargo did it but now it’s a problem 🙄 and let’s not even talk about the abuser because that’s not important 🤦🏻♂️ I hope Gadd counter sues.
@WillOnWheels well, Fargo is an absolute fake story. There's no one that's going to sue them.
If u watch return of the living dead from the 80s that’s says it based on true story lol
LOVE FARGO❤❤❤❤❤😂😂😂😂😂😂
In Fargo it was a joke. Here it is a huge mistake.
I wish everyone would go after the Darrien person with the same energy. If Martha is real then Darrien is also real and out there.
Excuse me but didn't she out herself - SHE MAY NOT BE THE MARTHA - Richard Gadd hasn't said it was her. She has inserted herself into the story.
People found her on internet because of the tweets we see in the show have been found on Fiona's twitter account.
People worked out it was her,she came forward to have her say. It will be interesting to see how this goes, I'm not saying she hasn't done anything but has it all been exaggerated?! Richard is hardly Mr sane himself.
True to the character portrayed in the show, she’s come forward doing interviews wanting the attention. She starts saying she didn’t send anything, then she didn’t send that many, then she says "even if that was true…" 🤨
I think the difference between “this is a true story” and “this is based on a true story” is something that could be sued. We know without relying on Fiona that her having a previous stalking prison sentence and her having one from stalking Gadd is not true. Gadd said he disguised the character so much they wouldn’t recognise themselves, they’re both fat Scottish women claiming to be lawyers, there was no care in disguising the superficial details, what he changed were the more serious allegations. It’s likely she sent thousands of emails but she wasn’t a the threat he made out.
It’s a TV show: they can call it true, or based on true and lie all the way. It’s Licentia Poetica
Exactly - stating inspired by real events at the start and then say if they’d used a skinny blonde who was French or German or something, and he met her in Paris where *she* was the one working in the bar, that would have made it a lot less obvious. Also maybe not starring in it himself…I thought that was weird!
@@vacanlientI’m not sure they can rely on that here!
The thing for me is that the actress not only looked, sounded and acted like her, but also typed like the supposed tweets of hers from 2014. I’ve seen a lot of people saying she outed herself, when clearly she didn’t I was well aware of who Fiona was within about 10 minutes of finishing the show and I’ve not made a single attempt to look for who any of them are, but for the actress to have nailed so much about this woman without ever seeing or meeting her at all is either sublime acting, highly coincidental, or gadd has made an obvious attempt to portray this woman, in which case she has a right to completely defend herself. The onus is now on gadd to provide receipts or unfortunately in my opinion he’s going to be seen as the exaggerator here. I think it’s pretty sickening that most people watched this show and are more angered by the character who stalks gadd and clearly has mental illnesses over the man who LITERALLY drugged and Gr@ped him. Why were people bothered by who ‘Martha’ is and people aren’t as hell bent on finding ‘darrien’ to me, one needs medicating the other needs arresting and it’s blatantly obvious which one. Court of public opinion strikes again.
Completely agree, some salient points there. I couldn't get my head around that he reported a mentally ill woman to the police (which appears to be a lie) and not a potentially career advancing rapist.
@@cwells5576 100% he seems like he knew exactly what he was doing. Interested to see if the actor looks or sounds ANYTHING like the rapist, like was he trying to actually conceal his identity or did he get it as close as possible for both?
@@jordanbrooks4834 Oh I bet the actual rapist looks nothing like the actor. Why hasn't he been reported to the police, he's allowing this man to carry on his assaults on someone else. If it's even true!
@@cwells5576tbf we don’t even know if the male abuser is real or not. Gadd has already said that Martha did not attack the gf as they didn’t meet. What else is made up?
@@cwells5576People online have said who he is.
Very strange that the issues are about the harassment. Why is there no out cry about the identity of the man who Gad depicts to have groomed, dagged him, and raped him numerous times. Why is no one concerned that he is still out there and how strange Gard went back to him at the end of the show. The sexual assault and abuse needs to be a concern for all.....
Well, Netflix also called a 80% fiction sprinkled with 20% of facts, like "Cleopatra - African Queen" - a "documentary". Egypt sued them. What happened to that suit thus far escaped my radar (or nobody talks about it).
Yeah true what happened to that? 🤔
Egypt sued? What did Cleopatra have to do with modern Egypt?
Probably settled out of court to save face like they will with this
@@vacanlient Well, some countries cherish their history and don't like to see it distorted by foreigners with an agenda.
Isn’t Egypt in Africa?
Imagine being stalked and not having the right to write a book or create a series like this because the stalker might try and sue? If I have to live it I reserve the right to do what I want after that.
Well IF Fiona does indeed go ahead with her threats to sue then she will need to build her case supporting her claims.. She denied any harassment and any past run ins with the law so IF she is telling the truth then there will be no evidence off the harassment etc... Otherwise it will add to her embarrassment if all the evidence indeed proves the validity of the show!
She is changing the story every time she opens her mouth...she didn't write, she wrote one mail, a handfull. The fact that she was already involved in smilar stories tells more than enought.
I think she has a good case and I think she's going to win
Let’s say when she first meets this bartender and he recognizes this woman’s need to have love and kindness shown to her. But he exploits that. He is picturing this Netflix show in the end.
She made his life a living hell and not just his life.
If his story is true, the trauma this woman caused him would be unimaginable. If it is true, it would have taken great courage for Gadd to relive it all. Fiona had no need to do an interview with Piers Morgan. She could easily have removed herself from social media ... long ago. She comes across as more Martha than "Martha".😢
People were calling her house and how long would it be before they turn up at her home? She had no choice but to address it before it got worse. No matter what she does or say, she has been judged as a violent stalker. How would you cope with the whole word against you?
If you cannot see the clear contractions between the two interviews (that I’ve seen) that she makes then you are not informed, watch the interviews in full as she Denys one thing to admit it later. She is on a money grab and it’s that simple, the worst part is, she knows the laws and danced around it like a pro. She is a living nightmare, I met a person like her once, she terrified me and I’m a big guy.
@@Nat_Ash_A SHE SAYS that is what has happened. Is there any proof of what she is saying? She "outed" herself very quickly, it seems.
It sounds like Fiona has a credible potential claim for liabel here, and if I were her Lawyer, I'd be recommending a settlement as a % of the revenue generated by the series, and we'd be looking at a 7 figure sum.
It’s a TV show. It doesn’t have to be factual.
@@vacanlient if it claims to be a true story then it should be, otherwise they open themselves up to a liabel case
@@jonnyrocket3659 again it’s a TV show. They can say it is true story and invent everything from the scratch.
This should all be easy enough to prove. Also, what about speaking to the witnesses, like the people who worked with Gadd, his parents, and the police where he filed harassment complaints? Poor woman, she's obviously got much bigger issues than this.
Why poor woman? He's the real victim here. Would you say the same if it was a man stalking a woman?
@@MG20024, when I said 'issues', I was referring to her mental state. Even if I hadn't been being ironic in my use of the term 'poor woman', I still have compassion for people who are clearly mentally unwell. I didn't suggest that it excused her behaviour.
Netflix "I don't care what they say: Cleopatra was black" is for sure telling the truth about everything, yeah... I can smell the money even from my country.😂
Well , where is the GIRLFRIEND? Was she attacked? Was “Martha” charged but not convicted? Why didn’t Netflix say “based on a true story”? Where is the digital footprint of 40K texts or emails? Is this story a compilation of real life events involving multiple experiences? The two of these characters have “issues” and that’s pretty obvious. What exactly can you believe when the guy admits to being drugged out of his head? Crazy behavior or not, this woman has a legal right to defend herself.
The way I see it. Richard hasn't made himself out to be 100% innocent, in fact, in the series , hes made himself look like an idiot, he encouraged her, he kept contact with her , and apparently slept with her. Fiona, however, has made herself out to be whiter than white, very innocent, yet has told numerous lies in the interview, or shall we say, .contradictory slip ups.. Richard, by admitting his mistakes comes across , far more believable than someone who denies everything and implies they've done no wrong.
The sex was fantasy.
If he went to the Police, wouldn't they have them all on the evidence file?
Oh bloody hell WATCH THE SHOW THE POLICE IGNORED HIM RE PEAT ED LY.
@@ThatCoalSoulthe show depicts her in court & being given a jail sentence ...that would have been as a result of a police prosecution
Gadd says he didn’t prosecute…
DO RESEARCH my god.
@@ThatCoalSoulthey still have records of it, i don’t think he went to the police imo. I believe he left it irl.
Richard Gadd said the real Martha would not recognise herself, so it feels so odd that she would be so similar.
I don't think she's actually all that similar. Her personality comes off pretty different from Martha's (aside from the delusions, not really a unique trait), and it's also not an identifying feature to be Scottish. As for her build, from the few pictures you can find of her online in the past, it looked like she used to be quite a bit lighter - I think they just picked Jessica Gunning because she's phenomenal. However, it IS weird that they used word-for-word tweets that you can apparently still find online.
I watched the interview, he's right she refuses to see herself in that actress playing her
@@pathfinder6993 oh, of course. I never thought of it as refusing to see it, more that she would be unable to (due to physical differences).
I get people like the show but I don’t understand why people immediately take the side of the show and want to publicly shame this person. They don’t know Gadd, they don’t know Fiona, they don’t know the facts, they weren’t there, they don’t have access to any emails, there’s no evidence of her going to prison……yet they believe the show like it’s gospel and are going for the jugular with this woman. Death threats? This is madness. What’s the deal?
💯
We only have her word for it that there have been death threats. As far as I know she's not shown any receipts to that effect.
@@STORMDAME True. We can also say the same about him though. For starters, there’s no evidence she was ever convicted.
@@mysticjen379 Absolutely.
@@STORMDAME Cheers. It’s all a bit mad isn’t it!
It would also be great for the punters and bar staff to be interviewed on their perspectives of what they saw and heard. That would bring light to the situation. As long as they aren't bribed by netflix or this richard gadd of course.
Pierce Morgan mentioned that she has already bombarded the daily mail by calling them over 50 times. let’s just say it’s starting up all over again and hopefully she’ll leave alone. Sadly, I think she’s gonna go after Pierce Morgan now and of course Neil of the daily mail. She has nothing else to do.
She's a classic narcissist.
@@MG20024 I wouldn’t poke that bear 🐻 we haven’t seen the last of her. If she gets cast on a really show, she’ll have a new set of victims
Omg what trolls leave her alone, she didn’t go to jail she didn’t want to be in the spot light
So why has she been constantly mentioning Gadd and a woman who previously mentioned her stalking her. On her public social media, if she doesn't wan't to be in the spotlight ?
If she did not go to jail then Netflix shouldn’t claim it as based on a true story. I think it is between them and the individual would know that it is her that he is trying to make out as a villain. She would know and she has the personal right to sue them if majority of it was a lie. Unless, he comes out and disclose who it is and he fully denies that it wasn’t this person. If it is true that it is her and he fabricated the stories against her just to be “famous” or any other vendetta he got, THEN HE IS TO BLAME and most likely a PSYCHOPATH. If in case, this person is on the right side, I’m not going to be surprised. If not, then good. A psychopath loves to play the victim then scapegoat it to the actual victim, I have experienced this myself. They know the power of gaining people’s sympathy and the power of SOCIAL MEDIA. It is an actual attempt of the real villain to ostracize and isolate the real victim. In switching the roles, the fastest way- social media, it’s like “toxic shame” passing it onto you, the fastest way to destroy someone. I am only sharing the POSSIBILITY but if all his stories are true then he gained my admiration because I liked his artistic expression of an abstract pain of a life.
@@funhold565This is my thinking too. What he’s doing strikes me as almost like something a resentful, abusive ex partner would do. You’ll know what I mean by that, I think, given what you say about your own experiences.
If she didn't go to court then jail, then the whole story has been embellished to represent something that on the whole is extremely boring. If the story reflected the reality that she wasn't prosecuted then there really was no basis for a series in the first place as I am sure there are many more credible stalking experiences that have occurred to people with a tangible, credible outcome that would be worth making a series out of. More worrying is the fact that they have outed a 'stalker ', when in fact the real story should have been Gadd being raped, returning for more, his struggle with his sexuality and the eventual prosecution of his rapist. I find it all quite bizarre and lacking in any real credibility. I fear there are lies on both fronts. Pure sensationalism to make a few quid. This story was more fantastical than Forrest Gump.
All this 'interview' has achieved is to convince everybody that, this woman, is indeed, 'Martha'...
really? have you polled everyone that watched? youre as bad the the rest of the people who assume they know the facts..id say she isnt totally telling the truth but the extreme of it has been exaggerated and i believe if she can produce her side of emails etc...she would win
@@judithwilber2540 I don't argue with strangers on the internet. That would just be weird
No she can’t sue because she said multiple times in her interview “it couldn’t have been me”. That and she contradicts everything she says. And she was never named!
She is not a good speaker, I think what she was trying to say that the character in the series does such outlandish things that it could not possibly be me, but they use her personna to create this outlandish character. Fiona is neurodivergent and slightly autictic, as far as I can see. Her speech patterns match to high functioning autistic individuals.
At this point, the detective force is at jeopardy 😂 These online sleuths are really really good..
All Gadd and Netflix had to do was print the disclaimer that it was based on a true story but some characters and dialogue has been fictionalised for dramatic purposes. For whatever reason, they didnt, so the burden of proof will be on them if she takes it to court. He better have 41000 emails, he better have witnesses that she stood for days outside his house and witnesses to his girlfriends attack. Its entirely possible he based Martha on Fionas unusual personality without it being 100% factual and that is when it becomes libelous. We dont know but she could be a very successful lawyer, quirky or not and people pointing the finger at HER being Wartha will have been extremely damaging. She isnt playing the system at all if Gadd has no proof that A stalker did the things he said they did. And in choosing an actress that looks and sounds like Fiona HE made Fiona recognisable to the public. If he has all the proof, she will never be able to pay the court costs and damages they would be so high, and as a lawyer she will know that
Netflix should be held accountable. However, when companies say it’s a true story, they should be mandated by law to give credits to that person. If you hide it, you got crazy people who will claim rights for a small amount. Then the companies get away with wrong doing.
You know they have a disclaimer in the credits that state some things in the show were changed or dramatized, right? And gadd admits this openly. They didn't say, "Everything is 100% accurate and correct exactly as it says in the show," So it's really no different than saying "based on a true story" it's just sneaker but not against the law.
@@midnightnavigator Yes they say that to say so they take away a persons rights to the products. It’s one thing to say this is what we want to do. However, when you cause harm purposely trying to get a freebie then you deserve high authorities to take over and create additional laws especially to prevent further harm when one is mentally ill. They like to exploit mentally ill because people don’t believe what’s happening to them. That BS and it needs to stop.
That media lawyer must get paid by the word. Why use 100 words when you make a point. Use thousands instead.
But what about the person who raped him? Isn’t that much worse than what Fiona\Martha done? That person should be in prison!
She has a case, Gadd has admitted the prison term for previous stalking is made up.
It’s a TV show, he can invent whatever he wants
@@vacanlient not when it is depicted in the credits as a true story.
@@dav147The end credits say it’s been dramatised apparently.
Why didn't Gad just say it was based on a true story instead of all true.
He probably should have written in the All persons fictitious disclaimer. "Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental". I think even biopics (despite being "true" stories) have this clause just to avoid any legal strife if they dont get the story exactly right (as there are always oversights or different first hand memory of a story that can be warped a bit).
@@parmaunited Yes. Exactly! Seems so strange that he didn't do that.
@@snookoed I just had a look through the credits of Baby Reindeer. It does however say "This program is based on real events: however certain characters, names, incidents locations and dialogue have been fictionalized for dramatic purposes." Maybe that is enough (although the wording doesnt sound as strong as the all persons fictitious statement). Plus it contradicts the "this is a true story" sentence.
@parmaunited omg thank you! So many people miss this and it drives me nuts.
I smell a sequel…..
Mr. Gadd did this as a play at least 4-years ago, check with Google, there are reviews, so he has had plenty of time to hone his writing and screenplay; where was she during all this time?
It would be good to have their devices analysed to get the real facts of this case. That's one way to find out if the show is false and based on lies. I feel she doesn't come across like the character in the show. She's qwerky for sure but she doesn't seem to be unwell or obsessed to a heightened degree like the character. She did say in the piers Morgan interview though initially that she didn't think she sent him any emails. Then goes on to change that to estimate a total of around 18. So that answer did change and made me question her. Overall though I actually believe her when she says the show is fiction. He doesn't exactly depict himself in a great light so I wouldn't be surprised if its all made up. He himself came across as unstable as the character and using the woman to make himself feel better. Anyway its a very fascinating yet disturbing case either way. I would watch a trial if it was televised.
Doesn't seem unwell?
There's proof she has a pattern of stalking and admits to having multiple phones she uses for different people.... she's exactly as he portrayed her IMO she's vague about when or if she's really going to sue probably because she knows she will lose.
Also the defence might request that Laura Walker who alleges that she was a victim , previously of Fiona Harvey / Muir. Might testify against her.
If she is exactly as portrayed then she is an aggressive violent woman. That is very different from saying she is a liar. If she didn't attack anyone she has been defamed
Hold stalkers accountable. Stalking is a CRIME!!! Stalkers lie because they know full well what they are doing is WRONG!! They are hoping the public is both sympathetic and gullible.
This is fantastic. If not true she will rake it in from Netflix 😂
Yeah, yeah, yeah, now try and wrap your mind around this one. what if it was a man doing the stalking?
he'd be in jail!
@@bc8463would he?
yeah but it's not so it's irrelevant
It is different though
In fairness mate, we’ve seen no evidence there was ever a stalker of any gender, gadd has told a story as a true story, but she has denied it completely, I don’t really understand how people are taking sides so easily
Fiona did not need to identify herself! She could also have removed herself from social media.
Her Tweets about hanging the curtains are still up on her Twitter.
What about the declaration at the end: "This program is based on real events; however certain characters, names, incidents, locations and dialogue have been fictionalized for dramatic purposes." Almost nobody seems to take that into account?
Even if she was guilty of some of it, if she hasn’t been convicted in a court of law and the public wouldn’t otherwise have been able to find out anything about her I think Gadd and Netflix still had some sort of responsibility towards her. I also find it creepy that in the show he follows her home after they first meet, and peers through her window - something she vehemently denies happened. Surely she would say that it did happen, if she were truly obsessed with him? He’d better be able to solidly back up his claims because he sounds like the obsessed one! I know most people are against her, but I’m trying to see both sides here. The transparency of the show in regard to her identity, and in the absence of any conviction or proof, is going to be a real problem for Gadd.
I don’t think they would have stated 41,000 emails, 350 voice messages, etc… if they didn’t have them. And in the show, he downloaded them and organized them and studied them. If all of that is true (which I think it is) she doesn’t have a case and she made everything worse on herself.
You are a bit naive - filmmakers will do anything for a good story. Someone just didn't do their homework.
yes. Unless there is physical evidence... Seems Gaad needed to dramatize ...not ok to drag a woman for your big break
stalkers neverstop.they just find another victim. there has to be other people shes done this to.
I think she likely DOES have a case (I am not saying she is innocent, all I am saying that even if she did all that, she still has protection from the law) - A wee breakdown: 1) Netflix said at the outset that "This IS a true story" and only mentioned about the dramatization in the credits that nobody watches and that could cause legal issues 2) The public is really quite stupid, they will take the whole thing at face value which they eventually did and some decided to harass her at her own home because the film makers included information that made her easily identifiable (Her twitter posts were shown verbatim) 3) Netflix did not specify WHICH parts were dramatized (eg that she went to prison, that it was 40k emails when instead it may have been 18 or 20 odd emails as she claimed but that wouldn't make for a good story, would it?) - Only a court case could verify her and his claims properly 4) It doesn't mean she is innocent and not a stalker but if any of these claims are exaggerated to the point that it would cause a large public outcry, yes it is a problem and defamatory - especially if it, ironically, leads to her being stalked 5) Even if the entire story is correct to the T, Netflix must follow due diligence in protecting her identity which they hopelessly failed at (even though Gadd thinks otherwise - but it took the public all of 5 minutes to find her) 6) People argue that she identified herself by going on Pierce Morgan but that's not quite true, she was already identified by the public and it doesn't take away from the fact that she may have been defamed. She inadvertently may have pushed her persona more into the spotlight but at the time of the interview she may have not been aware of the extent of the damage that had already been done so she may have thought that she's got nothing to lose by trying to set the story straight (Of course, she may have lied or may be delusional about her own actions but neither you nor I can confirm it and all the people who take apart the interview have come to some very strange conclusions by reading into what she said or didn't say or what her body language was like which isn't proof of anything, I found some of the arguments quite weak and clutching at straws to be fair) 7) Not sure about this last point but if she has never been tried in a court of law she may have a claim against him because her character was used in a film that ultimately made a profit so she may be eligible to some of that pie (Again, not 100% sure) But I agree that she may wants to settle, as she says she would have to defend herself although she could easily go "No win No fee" if she has a case
i cant wait for her to sue them....how about calling out the rapist? thats why its weird....
Gadd to me seems like the master manipulator and I don't think he has let the truth get in the way of a good story. Gadd gives me the creeps.
I chuckle that he shares a surname with Gary Glitter.
Same here
Agreed
I thought he showed vulnerability.
@@tereseday4060 by accusing a vulnerable woman of being convicted for stalking him who hasn't actually been convicted of anything? Very brave. Nothing he has portrayed has been proven true, lots of it is provably false.
Even if she was a stalker 15 years ago, she shouldnt have to go through this harassment. She's getting death threats.They are both lying. He lied and over exaggerated to make the story more interesting and she's minimizing the story to save face. What ever the case, what he has done to her now is way worse. He didnt even need to say it was based on a true person. Didn't consider her livelihood and safety one bit. He should have gone after the rap1st instead.
A male stalking a young woman wouldn't get as much sympathy.
@@nutcracker2916this!
@@nutcracker2916and let’s not forget the sexual assault in the canal too
Any proof of these threats or just immediately believe the sob story?
@AL-nv4gk any proof of these s3xual Assualts, physical attacks or Jail sentences,or did you just blindly believe everything Gadd said??
Harvey said she was Martha.... Gadd and Netflix never did. If she didn't want the attention, she would have kept her mouth shut. Gadd also said some is his story and some is from other people's experience.
Where is Darren? That is the question nobody is asking.
The fact they know there are circa 41,000 emails received shows that they have been downloaded from the server and stored already.
Agreed but in fairness we haven’t seen any screenshot of any email. Just taking Richard on his word
If she didn't make his life hell in the past,she certainly will now if he has made this up and if he was raped he needs to go to the police
@@anthonymartyn5590😂😂 totally
That’s 4.6 emails an hour, 24/7 for a whole year. Now that’s a commitment
@@waffleswhisky2203it’s possible though? If you and me sent me a comments it wouldn’t take long to reach that number plus being a crazy person 😂