Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Telly addicts

Baby Reindeer’s Richard Gadd responds with evidence

39 replies

SarahL249 · 30/07/2024 16:44

21 pages and her emails submitted as court evidence:

s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25020581/gadd-declaration-harvey-lawsuit.pdf

OP posts:
Begsthequestion · 30/07/2024 19:16

AgnesX · 30/07/2024 18:46

Mistaken identity?

You do a great impression.

TwigletsAndRadishes · 30/07/2024 19:34

Polarnight · 30/07/2024 17:43

Victim blaming 🙄

If I'm honest Gadd underplayed how badly he was harrassed in the series.

Harvey sounds completely unhinged from that document.

Edited

I agree. He painted Martha much more sympathetically than he needed to. He made her seem vulnerable, most of the time. Real Life Fiona doesn't seem vulnerable at all. She's a nasty, cocky, over-confident, bullying sex pest with delusions of grandeur.

InWithPeaceOutWithStress · 30/07/2024 19:56

It’s awful that Richard Gadd has been put under such pressure and had people turn against him. I thought the series was really compelling and I support people who tell their own story about rape / stalking and so on. I hope his name is cleared, in the eye of the public, through these court cases.

BehindTheSequinsandStilettos · 30/07/2024 20:55

Interesting read.
I read the play. I saw the series. I watched it all play out on here, tattle and FB.
Gadd states three or four others were falsely identified before Fiona - I'd like to see the source for this as Fiona was identified very quickly indeed. Others were falsely identified as the rapist but Martha's "inspiration" was found and put out there astonishingly fast.
Gadd says Martha had fictional qualities. It will be interesting how that plays out. She was played by Jessica as very nuanced, vulnerable and even likeable at times.
Gadd says he's only seen parts of Piers Morgan's interview. I find that incredible.

Fiona has to prove that her character and reputation have been damaged. I am not sure that she works. Her Facebook comments one could argue had already given her a reputation. She was insulted by Jessica playing her in terms of physical likeness as she didn't see it.

Richard has said the series and characterisation has been dramatized and changed. That she was Irish in his play but Scottish in the Netflix adaptation makes no sense to me. Nor the casting. Nor the job. Nor the headlines used. They all made her very easy to identify and she was identified well before she went public.

She wasn't convicted. She didn't serve time. It does purport to be true at the start although there is a caveat in the credits iirc. But her behaviours and actions are on record and therefore he hasn't defamed her in that sense - she has denied stalking but he has the receipts. She did not go to prison though so it depends on whether the viewers believed Fiona in real life, like her fictional counterpart Martha, is an ex-convict and any impact that would have on employment or relationships.
Had she not come out publicly, would she have been forgotten or recognised once the series became yesterday's news?

SarahL249 · 30/07/2024 21:32

Looks like that is exactly what Netflix are arguing in their filing:

“Harvey's defamation claim fails because she does not allege a provably false statement of fact was made about her. None of the alleged statements can form a legal basis for defamation. In fact, Harvey is incapable of showing reputational harm. Her reputation was already tarnished by past news stories detailing her previous harassment and stalking of public figures. And as a public figure herself, she must allege actual malice. She does not even attempt to do so.”

So they’re going down the “libel proof” route eg no reputation to harm, and already had a terrible reputation due to her previous victims and the Laura Wray newspaper articles.

Full Netflix statement:

www.documentcloud.org/documents/25021532-fiona-harvey

OP posts:
BehindTheSequinsandStilettos · 30/07/2024 21:55

She does not allege a provably false statement of fact was made about her.

I thought she'd gone after them as she'd never been in prison?
If that isn't the main "insult", that and committing assault, then she's got no case.
Her lawyers surely didn't believe she'd had no contact with her victims?

BehindTheSequinsandStilettos · 30/07/2024 22:11

Have read your link now.
It will be interesting to see what happens next.
I think it will be dismissed.
And today I learned what "libel-proof" means! Grin

WalkInAStraightLine · 30/07/2024 22:27

opalescented · 30/07/2024 18:42

I believe Fargo was "a true story" and it wasnt

Ah that's what I'm thinking of - yes it's certainly not the first fictional drama to state 'this is a true story' as part of the fiction.

Definitely blurs lines when it's autobiographically based, though.

Spaniellover2 · 30/07/2024 22:45

If this document reflects reality, then his portrayal of Martha is diluted. In these documents, she is far worse than her fictionalised version.

StaunchMomma · 31/07/2024 00:09

AgnesX · 30/07/2024 17:51

Not remotely. He's brought this whole nasty mess down on his own head.

Good, if it stops that psycho from moving on to someone else.

She's unhinged.

StaunchMomma · 31/07/2024 00:11

All of this could have been avoided if Netflix had started the show with 'Based on a true story'.

Fair play to Gadd for speaking up, though. He shouldn't have to remain silent about his own experiences. She needs dealing with.

Littlepinkstarsbyradish · 31/07/2024 02:44

It seems to me that Netflix might have a case to answer that they didn't do a thorough enough job of fictionalising it to prevent this kind of identification. That's a legal issue for them and im not sure they have actually done the same level of safeguarding that the BBC or other bodies would have done.
However, that's totally separate to Richard Gadd writing a very powerful account of what happened to him. I feel terribly sorry for him, being dragged into this and having to be retraumatised again

Doglady1764 · 31/07/2024 09:19

SarahL249 · 30/07/2024 18:15

Clearly he has released this to back up Netflix’s positioning of the series as a true account of his experience.

There is so much evidence submitted to the courts here to paint a very accurate picture of the years of experience he endured at the hands of a prolific stalker. This evidence entirely mirrors the series. He’s willing to testify to everything submitted, and reiterates that they changed her name and dramatised events (as you would expect from anything that is quite clearly not.a.documentary 🙄)

In her defamation case it says she never stalked him, never emailed him, never left him voicemails. His evidence completely validates the events of the series and his right to tell his story.

Plus he literally never named her! I can’t fathom how it can be defamation, when she outed herself.

Totally agree OP. The claims from her can easily be disputed and she decided to come forward. I really believe it’s important to talk about being victims of stalking and abuse, as it can happen so easily to anyone.

Doglady1764 · 31/07/2024 09:20

Spaniellover2 · 30/07/2024 22:45

If this document reflects reality, then his portrayal of Martha is diluted. In these documents, she is far worse than her fictionalised version.

I was thinking the same thing. The extracts in the document are far worse than anything Martha did in the show.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread