To think that everything Fiona Harvey said in her Piers Morgan interview was a lie? [Edit by MNHQ]

Also for those saying her mispronunciation of hyperbole was evidence of low intelligence, it really isn't. Most mispronunciations occur because the person is an autodidact and haven't been fed the information. They have learned the word through reading it. This in no way means they are less intelligent

Very true, and poor spelling could be dyslexia.

@SunnyUpland yes. FH has probably now received more hateful messages, tweets, posts etc than she ever sent Gadd. This. Is the reason a crime should be a crime in law whoever the "victim" and whoever the "perpetrator". None of this is excusing what she has done- it sounds like she generally causes distress wherever she goes. But we don't generally apply "an eye for an eye" justice within our society...and yet here we are applying that justice to someone who has never (as far as we can tell) been investigated and tried by the judicial system....only via netflix and social media. It's pretty terrifying.

@SunnyUpland strangely, the comment has now gone.

I did take a screenshot of it, but seems ghoulish to post it.

The comment was from a young girl from Glasgow. I'm assuming a relative but don't know.

@SunnyUpland yes, the flowers one is fake.

The real one has what looks like a passport photo or similar, of her when she is much younger, slightly side profile.

He’s said this… I think they shouldn’t have had the ‘this is a true story’ message when he’s now gone on to say it’s mostly/emotionally true - it would be more factual to have said ‘based on true events’ or ‘some scenes have been dramatised’?

Although Baby Reindeer is mostly true, Gadd admitted he did amp up the tension and suspense for the sake of the show. “The feeling you get most of all when you’re getting harassed is relentless tediousness and frustration," he said. "I didn’t want the audience to feel that.

https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/baby-reindeer-true-story-netflix

Early in the first episode, a message across the screen reads, “This is a true story.” And it is.
“It’s all emotionally 100 percent true,” Gadd, who was the real-life victim of the stalking, said in a recent interview with Variety. “It’s all borrowed from instances that happened to me and real people that I met.” True with the caveat that “for both legal and artistic reasons,” as he put it, details had to be changed. “You can’t just copy somebody else’s life and name and put it onto television,” he said. “We were very aware that some characters in it are vulnerable people,” he added, “so you don’t want to make their lives more difficult.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/arts/television/baby-reindeer-true-story.html#:~:text=Yes%252C%2520It%2520Is%2520Based%2520on%2520His%2520Real%2520Experiences&text=And%2520it%2520is.,real%2520people%2520that%2520I%2520met.%E2%80%9D

And that hasn’t aged well given all that’s happened since, incredibly naive.

I disagree. But the reality is if it was a man, PM wouldn't be interested because it's so common place for men to be unhinged predators. The interest is only because she is female. There was a male sexual predator in the story and he is nowhere to be seen.

No honestly I don't. I think the one I initially thought was real is actually fake. It has flowers on the profile pic. I would be interested to see the real profile. I am fascinated by all of this.

I'm fascinated by all of this. Does it make me a ghoul or part of a braying hanging crowd? No, it makes me a normal human. We're interested in behaviour and especially peculiar behaviour. I was also fascinated by the Archie Battersbie and Nicola Bulley cases too. What I didn't do was go sleuthing on the internet or round the protagonists' houses. But I'm also fascinated by the people who do. Layers and layers of human behaviours which of course we're interested in.

I would be mighty impressed if Fiona Harvey stepped up to say she was an actress. But I think someone's would have said 'I saw her in Othello in Swansea last summer' by now.

It's also interesting from a mental health perspective. Who has a duty of care to Fiona if she is a vulnerable adult - Netflix, her own friends/ family, all of us? What about the people sending her death threats? Do we only care about people with MH issues that we deem to also be 'nice'. "Don't like her/ she's evil/ dangerous, so she deserves all she gets". Hmmm.

If the woman wrote a play and a tv programme about it claiming it was a true story then admitted that they had made some of it up, then I'm pretty sure people would at least be wondering what was truth and what was fiction. No one on this thread has doubted that Gadd has experienced trauma at the hands of "Martha". But we are asking questions about what her "crimes were" and pointing out the hypocrisy of her vilification when an apparent violent rapist is being allowed to live in anonymity by the comedy community.

@SunnyUpland I'm assuming you know the real profile, so just go and look at it. You'll see the comment on the latest post.

Why?

The huge issue is with this. The men in the scenario have made a lot of money. A rapist is protected at all costs.

It appears some claims made in this documentary are either potentially embellished or just made up. It appears neither jail sentences happened? The attack of the trans girlfriend? With other similar things. All could easily lead to a revenge attack.

If you are going to say this is a true story and make the person you are alleging to have done these things so easy to find - that is a huge problem. She was found because he used ACTUAL tweets in the “true story.”

Therefore he/Netflix have made this person easily identifiable and then said all these things happened when it looks like some didn’t? Pretty sure that’s what libel and defamation are there for.

Imagine the precedent it sets. You can say anything about anyone even if only a part is true. Then broadcast it to billions?

Stalking is abhorrent but Netflix need to be held responsible for it. We are supposed to be living in a civilisation. That doesn’t mean mob rule and it doesn’t mean accusing people in the public eye to let people on the street throw stones.

@tiredandabitfat can you describe the profile pic on the one you believe is real?

I'm aware.

This one is her.

The fake ones have comments enabled.

Has Gadd now admitted it wasn't all a true story? That seems to be the nub of PM's argument. And Richard Osman's angle too.

It makes me laugh everyone saying she should be left alone and is clearly unwell and vulnerable.
If this was a man who had done that and was being interviewed on Piers Morgan I very much doubt the responses would be the same.

There are apparently some fake Facebook accounts out there pretending to be her. Not saying the one you saw is one, but it’s worth being aware of it.

I've just had a look at her Facebook again today.

Her latest post (from a few days ago, suggesting she has another Facebook ban) now has a comment on it.

There are never any comments, because leaving a comment isn't an option; comments are disabled. You can like and share, but not comment.

The person who has commented has her on their friends list.

This suggests to me that comments are only disabled for people not on her friends list. Friends can comment.

Yet not one single person has, until now.

I always suspected she was socially isolated, and all talk of her "professional" friends and lawyer boyfriend were fabricated.

But this suggests it goes deeper than that.

It looks like she is completely isolated, to an extreme degree. Absolutely no interaction with anyone.

I also got the impression from the Piers Morgan interview that she has no contact with her mum but didn't want to come right out and say that.

The fact that nobody on her Facebook interacts with her is very sad, but it does speak to what a dangerous person she is and how reluctant people are to engage with her.

It's not hard to see why she latches onto people who offer her the smallest shred of interaction.

I wonder if Richard Gadd’s father really was sexually abused by members of the Catholic Church, or whether that was also invented as a neat plot twist.

I imagine the reason three rapists is "safe" is that the stalking is easy to prove -he has 40,000 emails and voice mails and his friends /ex's mum would be able to confirm some events. His parents would too.
So the "sting in the tale" of the accusation is true. It may be 38,000 emails but it's generally true.
Then if that true, would this damage her reputation further amongst reasonable people if they thought she plead guilty to the crime -probably not -that part made her seem good -taken accountability for her actions.

There is unlikely to be any proof of the rape. The man may just say it's consensual if there is any evidence it was him. So identifying him is legally very different.

Well Richard dramatised the whole thing. Became the producer and starring actor. Made a fortune from Netflix and has outed her so that the internet ans tabloids can hound her. Had the role been reversed, I’m sure sympathies would be reversed.

I can think that stalking is abhorrent behaviour while still see that a perpetrator (stilll to be proven) can become a victim. He’s not squeaky clean in this and two wrongs don’t make a right.

Where’s your mention of the male rapist? He’s barely mentioned.

I think she has an infatuation with him and probably did send emails, texts, calls, letters. The bit about the multiple phones was weird.

I think a lot of the rest is exaggerated. It's becoming increasingly clear that she wasn't in jail. That makes me wonder what else isn't real.

It's hardly fair to make a documentary about someone, where they are easily identified and then embellish what they have done - and then say it's a true story. That's not right.

Especially when it's becoming clear that person isn't of sound mind.

How much money will the men have made from it?

I thought Netflix would pay a fee, and then are there royalties per view?

morgan makes money from hits for advertising?

Fiona got £250?

Richard has made lots of money from this, Piers has made money from this, Netflix has made money from this.

There are so many men profiting from a ‘true’ story which has only been a hit because key parts of it aren’t true.

The title of the show - she said she did use the nickname

The pub - she said she met him in a pub

Scottish - the English actress used a Scottish accent

For a start.

We know some of the exaggerated lies about her. What we don’t know is what’s the truth.

Definitley a trial by social media happening.