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

[Eshmee]

Having watched her interview this evening, everything about her screamed 'liar'. Her language, her demeanor, her body language. I just wonder what other think?

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.

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.

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.

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.

I'm aware.

This one is her.

The fake ones have comments enabled.

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

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.

Why?

@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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.

@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.

@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. 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.

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.

I find the statements very odd about only the men made money. She is a perpetrator and should in no way profit from her behaviour, regardless of whether some of the tv series was exaggerated.

She's an alleged perpetrator according to him (should be easy to prove - why didn’t he take her to court? We know the prison sentence is a lie). Why has he chosen to create plays/ a Netflix show instead?

He is now no better than her - he may not be stalking her, but he is now the cause of the same type of behaviour towards her.

Me saying this does not change how I feel about stalkers. It is possible to have strong feelings one way and also see nuance in other situations.

Two wrongs don’t make a right, no matter how bad the first wrong is.

What about the rapist?

For those saying imagine if the roles were reversed, and it was a man doing the stalking:

A female comedian gets harassed by a man; the man sends her multiple messages, including threatening increasingly threatening one, he turns up at her work, makes her feel scared and intimidated

She makes a live comedy show about it, which runs for a long time and gets critical acclaim. Then Netflix/a production company approach her about it and it becomes a TV series.

The female comedian writes a tv series, claiming the following are true:

• The stalker assaulted the female comedians boyfriend.
• the stalker had a previous conviction for a violent crime (assaulting an ex-lover’s elderly mother)
• the stalker served four years in prison for this
• the stalker received a custodial sentence for their actions forwards the female comedian
• It is incredibly easy to find identity of stalker

I imagine in this scenario, the female comedian would be receiving a fuck load of abuse. Especially if, like RD, she was attractive. And times that by two again for playing herself in the series.

Exactly

I'm sure the series Fargo said it was a true story,I wondered at the time how they got away with saying that.

Well obviously she shouldn’t receive money for it 🤷‍♀️ No one’s saying she should.

The point is that lots of people have profited from this, and they wouldn’t have made nearly as much money if they’d kept to the facts.

Exactky this. If you dont stay on for the 4th year you get an Ordinary Degree, no classification, rather than an Honours Degree, 2:1, 2:2 etc. Or at least that was the case when I was at Edinburgh uni.

When I was there a few did this and were consideerd to have 'dropped out' in third year, even though they did get an Ordinary Degree. One got pregnant and left to have the baby and a couple left due to stress/mental health issues. I wonder if that was the case here. I'd have thought it would have been difficult to ever practice Law without the full Honours degree?

I felt a bit sprry for her on this part. She was answering honestly and truthfully and PM was bullying her for a grade, when he didnt understand what an Ordinary Degree is (or was).