Page 18 | Baby Reindeer creator is provoking his stalker

jengachampion · 2024-04-26T09:02:41+00:00

SPOILERS AHEAD I’ll preface this by saying I had a male stalker for 7 years. I moved, changed jobs, and deleted all social media in that time. I’m also a survivor of SA, as well as assault after being spiked, similar to RG in the show. It completely baffles me that he would completely replicate his stalker down to physical likeness, occupation, accent, exact correspondences and references like hanging curtains. He is clearly not too worried about people finding the real person, as well as her potentially contacting him again. If it were me telling my story, I would change all identifying details of both of us, because I would NEVER want to go through it again. RG telling his story this way is hugely weird to me and really speaks to the theme of mutual obsession he hints at in the show.

Garlicnaan · 26/04/2024 23:29

jengachampion · 26/04/2024 19:00

That is definitely strange to me because as I said I was stalked for years. I know we do weird things when traumatised. I just don't see WHY he felt the need to leave everything exactly as it happened - all you have to do is google the hanging curtains tweet and it's right there. Plus the fact that he clearly feels safe enough to do this when I would run a mile from anything that presented a risk of it happening again. And the aspect of saying one thing in interviews and doing another feels manipulative and that there's more to the story.

I have been reading replies and people do have interesting takes on it. Want to say I'm not coming from a confrontational place or trying to railroad anyone into seeing it a particular way.

Show quote history

I don't see how keeping her character similar makes it more likely for her to stalk him again.

She's going to know the stalker is based on her, regardless!

Goldenbear · 26/04/2024 23:29

worrieddaughter97 · 26/04/2024 23:09

She was shown pleading guilty, which leads one to assume she was convicted

Show quote history

But it isn’t a documentary, it is a drama so is this categorical?

BodyKeepingScore · 26/04/2024 23:29

JojoSeawitchHasBeenABadBadGirl · 26/04/2024 23:21

Netflix/Gadd could be sued for defamation if she didn't commit any assaults perhaps or for inciting hate crimes against her? Not sure.

For all those thinking it's a hoax/Black Mirror situation/publicity stunt...
You have her tweets to Gadd himself, including mention of a Jimmy.
You have her name in connection with hassling First Minister for Scotland (now dead but she was not his favourite constituent). His name had same initials as Gadd's character (DD).
You have her other surname in connection with hassling a previous employer who either fired her or she resigned from, depending on who tells it. That employer was a lawyer herself, her law firm, was married to an MP (Jimmy) and had to take out a restraining order eventually because social services turned up after her stalker employee allegedly reported her and her husband for physically abusing their son with dyspraxia.
These reports go back 22/24 years so must be true unless The Free Library by Farlex is deemed unreliable - Sunday Mail (Glasgow) journalist checks out.

But neither the First Minister nor the MP/Lawyer nor Gadd took her to court. The latter two took out restraining orders possibly but no prosecution therefore no court records or jail time afaik.
She denied one published allegation and stated she'd contact her lawyer.
If there was enough evidence for Gadd to get a restraining order (over three years, if reports are to be believed, 41,071 emails , 350 hours worth of voicemails, 744 tweets, 46 Facebook messages and 106 pages of letters) that ought to suffice as proof of stalking.
Where it gets stickier are the two physical assaults depicted in the pub - especially if these were invented or happened but were never reported at the time.
It depends upon whether "Based on a true story" as a disclaimer/caveat has any legal footing.

No. There's no case for defamation here. Despite what you've listed.

SuperTeddd · 26/04/2024 23:32

Lalor · 26/04/2024 23:29

No... It doesn't mean she was either. That's my point. It's all conjecture because some of its true, some of it isn't and it's a really fucking dangerous subject for Netflix to fuck around with because it leaves it all open to interpretation as this thread is a shining example of

Show quote history

Why do you think “it is a really dangerous subject for Netflix to fuck around with”?

Which subject? Rape or stalking? Or should Netflix stay well away from them both?

What, specifically is “dangerous”?

You could actually argue that they have kept the characters SO close to the originals that it stops speculation about the wrong people…

Lalor · 26/04/2024 23:35

SuperTeddd · 26/04/2024 23:32

Why do you think “it is a really dangerous subject for Netflix to fuck around with”?

Which subject? Rape or stalking? Or should Netflix stay well away from them both?

What, specifically is “dangerous”?

You could actually argue that they have kept the characters SO close to the originals that it stops speculation about the wrong people…

Edited

Show quote history

Saying something is both true ('emotionally true' to use gadds words) and 'a fictionalised account'. Some people here believed it was all true and you can completely see why. And we aren't told which bits are true and which are fictional. There are 2 previous posts from other people who explained it wonderfully earlier on the thread, if you're genuinely interested :)

SuperTeddd · 26/04/2024 23:36

Lalor · 26/04/2024 23:35

Saying something is both true ('emotionally true' to use gadds words) and 'a fictionalised account'. Some people here believed it was all true and you can completely see why. And we aren't told which bits are true and which are fictional. There are 2 previous posts from other people who explained it wonderfully earlier on the thread, if you're genuinely interested :)

Edited

Show quote history

Do you feel the same way about the Crown?

JojoSeawitchHasBeenABadBadGirl · 26/04/2024 23:37

worrieddaughter97 · 26/04/2024 23:23

There is literally no legal case.

You're gagging for a male victim to be torn down because you hate men.

Show quote history

What the actual?
I love men.
I liked the show very much indeed.
I am merely pointing out that:
The person portrayed in the show (which I loved) was not heavily disguised at all but does have previous (also alluded to in the show thinly disguised).
That doesn't mean they actually spent time in jail, which some on both threads seem to think.
As to the law, I doubt that either aggrieved individual have the money to go up against Netflix. The stalker has mentioned Gadd having a legal team but I'll take that with a pinch of salt.
What duty of care is owed, if any at all, to protecting the people involved I have no idea. I'm not a lawyer.
I don't think someone with her history would or could consider suing for defamation personally - however, she is portrayed as extremely violent.
She is also currently allegedly receiving death threats.
If you think neither of those present any legal case, I bow to your superior knowledge.
Peace and Love
Jojo

Lalor · 26/04/2024 23:38

SuperTeddd · 26/04/2024 23:36

Do you feel the same way about the Crown?

Show quote history

Yes, absolutely. It's stupid and dangerous to call something both true... And not true/fictionalised. When you're dealing with real people, you need clarity something is fictional or clarity it's a documentary and all true. Not these blurred lines

swg1 · 26/04/2024 23:38

Goldenbear · 26/04/2024 23:22

Is this all statistically backed up or is this your belief? I’ve noticed quite a lot of absolutes on this thread so tape victims are like this, tape victims are vulnerable, they are disbelieving , they are convinced they have done something…:

Show quote history

It's part of police training (I am not police but I was in a position to attend the training) for victim handling.

Goldenbear · 26/04/2024 23:41

swg1 · 26/04/2024 23:38

It's part of police training (I am not police but I was in a position to attend the training) for victim handling.

Show quote history

Oh I see, it must be exemplary training then!

SuperTeddd · 26/04/2024 23:41

JojoSeawitchHasBeenABadBadGirl · 26/04/2024 23:37

What the actual?
I love men.
I liked the show very much indeed.
I am merely pointing out that:
The person portrayed in the show (which I loved) was not heavily disguised at all but does have previous (also alluded to in the show thinly disguised).
That doesn't mean they actually spent time in jail, which some on both threads seem to think.
As to the law, I doubt that either aggrieved individual have the money to go up against Netflix. The stalker has mentioned Gadd having a legal team but I'll take that with a pinch of salt.
What duty of care is owed, if any at all, to protecting the people involved I have no idea. I'm not a lawyer.
I don't think someone with her history would or could consider suing for defamation personally - however, she is portrayed as extremely violent.
She is also currently allegedly receiving death threats.
If you think neither of those present any legal case, I bow to your superior knowledge.
Peace and Love
Jojo

Show quote history

Still no legal case.

“Duty of care” is getting thrown around willy nilly on these threads, along with “defamation” and “inciting hatred”.

Goldenbear · 26/04/2024 23:45

SuperTeddd · 26/04/2024 23:36

Do you feel the same way about the Crown?

Show quote history

No offence to the comedian in this drama but events that happened in the royal family have been well covered over the years as they are in the public eye, we know facts about the royal family which we don’t with this drama.

grinandslothit · 26/04/2024 23:47

anyone else find the title of the show baby reindeer creepy?

Appparently she is being harrassed and sent death threats.

Surely Netflix and the author knew this would happen.

swg1 · 26/04/2024 23:49

Goldenbear · 26/04/2024 23:41

Oh I see, it must be exemplary training then!

Show quote history

It was essentially underlining that actually victims aren't perfect and they will do things that really won't help them but that there are good psychological reasons they do that and these are them.

It would be much easier for any kind of case if victims only acted ever in one way and that way was the way that protected them the most and so on. But they're not and they don't.

JojoSeawitchHasBeenABadBadGirl · 26/04/2024 23:49

As I said, not a lawyer although interested in the law.
More than happy to be educated though on what constitutes defamation, what constitutes incitement, what caveat covers everything - seeing as they haven't used the line about any similarity between characters and living/dead is coincidental etc
Defence of defamation is if the things are true.
If it's emotional truth/lived experience/fictionalised but so many things are very close to the truth/taken ad verbatim, then is that not a grey area? Namely, because x is known to be true then y will also be taken as true, when it is false.

JojoSeawitchHasBeenABadBadGirl · 26/04/2024 23:52

I thought Baby Reindeer was an excellent title, as I believed it was an allusion to the lesser known Fawn Response (fight, flight, freeze and fawn).
I was quite disappointed when it turned out to be a cuddly toy.

Lilacdew · 26/04/2024 23:57

Goldenbear · 26/04/2024 23:29

But it isn’t a documentary, it is a drama so is this categorical?

Show quote history

The woman who Martha is allegedly based on has had restraining orders put on her for stalking Gadd and also for previous offences of stalking an ex-boss and her family, making appalling accusations about them abusing their child, so social services were involved. She also stalked First Minister of Scotland Donald Dewar. She has a police record.

Redpaisely · 26/04/2024 23:59

jengachampion · 26/04/2024 10:29

i totally agree with challenging the perfect victims narrative.

What I don’t agree with is using the show almost as a wink nudge communication with the stalker, encouraging people to find her and for her to react to the series. Almost like he wants more attention from her/ doesn’t want it to end.

Show quote history

Don't you think there is a bit of victim blaming going on here. If people looked for her, it's their choice, like it was her choice to stalk him. Also, many abusers have Gond through there own abuse and that does not make us sympathetic towards them so why we are so worried about this stalker? Is it because she is a woman?

Goldenbear · 27/04/2024 00:02

Lilacdew · 26/04/2024 23:57

The woman who Martha is allegedly based on has had restraining orders put on her for stalking Gadd and also for previous offences of stalking an ex-boss and her family, making appalling accusations about them abusing their child, so social services were involved. She also stalked First Minister of Scotland Donald Dewar. She has a police record.

Show quote history

Yes but no one has managed to categorically answer whether she went to prison for this, whether this part was fiction or fact?

Lalor · 27/04/2024 00:02

Goldenbear · 27/04/2024 00:02

Yes but no one has managed to categorically answer whether she went to prison for this, whether this part was fiction or fact?

Show quote history

She didn't. That is a fact

Lilacdew · 27/04/2024 00:05

Goldenbear · 27/04/2024 00:02

Yes but no one has managed to categorically answer whether she went to prison for this, whether this part was fiction or fact?

Show quote history

She didn't go to prison for stalking Gadd. That's on record all over the internet. He said he didn't want her to go to prison, so maybe he didn't press charges further after a restraining order was issued.

Goldenbear · 27/04/2024 00:05

Ok, thanks, just curious as I read an article where he said that he didn’t want her to go to prison.

JojoSeawitchHasBeenABadBadGirl · 27/04/2024 00:06

My sympathies are with the stalker's victims, especially if children were dragged into it and malicious social services calls were made. Evil.

I am not sure whether the celebrity/ies named can pursue legal action against anyone other than those naming him/abusing him/them on X. It's like Huw Edwards all over again.

If all they have to go on is a strong physical resemblance to the actor, one show worked on together and a coincidental resignation at around the same time one pitchforker was demanding they step down, that's a very sticky wicket indeed.

I also don't understand why Cotton Mouth alludes to Brass Eye, if anyone wishes to enlighten me.

DodoTired · 27/04/2024 00:08

oh my god, don’t you know how people write fiction? He could have totally taken the look, mannerism, and writing style of Martha based on a completely different person (the one who has been ‘found’) but the stalker could be someone else

Goldenbear · 27/04/2024 00:11

DodoTired · 27/04/2024 00:08

oh my god, don’t you know how people write fiction? He could have totally taken the look, mannerism, and writing style of Martha based on a completely different person (the one who has been ‘found’) but the stalker could be someone else

Is it someone else?