Baby Reindeer #4

1 Sort by date Sort by reaction score 2
What Piers did was not really like a real cross examination at all. He kept touching upon things she’d lied about then basically just moving on, apart from odd things that don’t really matter at all for her case such as her degree classification. In a real cross they are going to go for her, especially American attorneys. It would be very easy to do anyway IMO as she’s a prolific liar, she lied several times in that interview. Catch her in one lie with a soft ‘friend’ approach and keep pushing and she would unravel, I’d bet. Also, I imagine all her facebook posts will come up somehow and she will have likely made some hateful comment about some demographic on the jury…juries are inherently risky, we don’t know how or why they reach decisions so you don’t want to put someone like her in front of one tbh, it will be wild if it goes to trial.

Not sure if allowed to link here but if anyone takes a look at the Reddit sub for this show there’s a link to some posts by someone who has blogged about their experience with her, it seems like she may well have either a criminal conviction and/or a history with psychiatric services which all changes things somewhat.

AlexTwist said:
I find it odd they're showing the similarities between them by using a photo of her taken after the series dropped.
Click to expand...
Also weird given she was so offended by being compared to Jess, saying Jess is much bigger/uglier than her
 
Likkleone said:
I hope she receives NOTHING, not a penny. I personally feel this is just an extension of her stalking - to make his life hell and destroy any happiness.

She’s said some disgusting things about him on her Facebook, you’re telling me he can’t counter sue for very CLEAR defamation, using his correct name etc?!

She really needs to get some mental health support.
Click to expand...
This is what bothers me! These Lawyers, the likes of Morgan looking to boost their own profile, on the back of furthering victims distress! They have given Harvey a platform to continue her abuse! I hope she stalks Morgan! And the lawyers! And even the sick fucks setting up the ‘Fiona Harvey Support Group’ shite!!! What the duck is wrong with people?
I really hope she makes Morgan’s life absolute HELL! The greedy egotistical twit deserves nothing less!!! He keeps banging on that she should sue Netflix. He gave her a new bone to chew…clearly the woman is barking. She needs sectioning not given media attention, a platform and a bleeping fan base!
These arseholes have FUELED her delusions!
---
judgejohndeed said:
What Piers did was not really like a real cross examination at all. He kept touching upon things she’d lied about then basically just moving on, apart from odd things that don’t really matter at all for her case such as her degree classification.
Click to expand...
I think Piers displayed that he is in fact a TERRIBLE interviewer, with banal leading questions. The interview with Laura Wray pointed this out more. The ‘has it made you cry?’ WTF??? It caused her distress. Why do you need to try to paint a picture of her ‘weeping on the floor’…absolute moron! He’s catering for people who need to be ‘spoon fed’.
 
Last edited:
oogling said:
This is what bothers me! These Lawyers, the likes of Morgan looking to boost their own profile, on the back of furthering victims distress! They have given Harvey a platform to continue her abuse! I hope she stalks Morgan! And the lawyers! And even the sick fucks setting up the ‘Fiona Harvey Support Group’ shite!!! What the duck is wrong with people?
I really hope she makes Morgan’s life absolute HELL! The greedy egotistical twit deserves nothing less!!! He keeps banging on that she should sue Netflix. He gave her a new bone to chew…clearly the woman is barking. She needs sectioning not given media attention, a platform and a bleeping fan base!
These arseholes have FUELED her delusions!
---

I think Piers displayed that he is in fact a TERRIBLE interviewer, with banal leading questions. The interview with Laura Wray pointed this out more. The ‘has it made you cry?’ WTF??? It caused her distress. Why do you need to try to paint a picture of her ‘weeping on the floor’…absolute moron! He’s catering for people who need to be ‘spoon fed’.
Click to expand...
Piers is very selective when it comes to how he cross examines his guests. He's quite capable of taking someone down if he wants to and pulling apart their statements. He did go easy on her but I suspect that was because she's not a politician or activist just a member of the public who wouldn't be used to facing a grilling. He gave her a platform so it would have been rude for him to pick apart everything she said (which he could have done). It wouldn't have looked good on him if he'd savaged her inconsistencies.
 
Tabitha said:
Yes, the original blog post where she wrote about Fiona was 2021 https://heatherburns.tech/2021/08/01/on-data-immigration-life/
Click to expand...
I've been in that situation working at a place like that. Years ago I went to a local psychiatric hospital to work as a temp. Luckily I didn't have to meet any of the clients in person but they used to phone me to make appointments with the psychiatrist and demand drugs. Everyday there would be someone crying on the phone or screaming that their meds were running out.

I wonder what she was being treated for 🤔
 
Tabitha said:
Here’s the blog post about the admin worker who was stalked by Fiona 20 years ago.

That time I got stalked by the real life TV stalker woman and what it taught me about data protection – Hi, I'm Heather Burns

heatherburns.tech

Gadd portrayed her quite sympathetically, for that she is lucky.
Click to expand...
Interesting.
Ive had a thought. Maybe complete nonsense. But bearing in mind what this lawyer lady said in the interview that even now FH is unlikely to get custodial sentence for what she does and police (at least in Scotland) are not able to do anything until she gets violent, it looks like in reality very little changed in the law to protect stalking victims. Could it be that Gadd deliberately didnt go to too many lengths to hide her identity? Im not saying he is such a genius as to stir up tit expecting all of this to happen (although who knows) but could it be possible he thought "if she puts herself out there and gets discovered, so be it - at least the public will be aware and maybe other victims would come out and maybe it would even lead to - finally - some changes?
It’s just that Im wondering how very little was done to actually hide her identity. Im still thinking Netfix made sure to cover their arse legally. But the rest is a bit strange
ETA I completely believe his story
 
Last edited:
Scotch Mist said:
Piers is a bit of a bully but I don't think he went very hard on her compared to what I've seen him do with other people. I thought he was trying to be fair at least.
Click to expand...
I think he knew presenting the situation as controversial and planting the seed of doubt would create more of a discussion and lead to more interviews and more clicks for his channel and mentions etc. if he got her to crack and exposed her madness people would absolutely talk a lot about it and watch and then forget, because he would have proved Gadd was saying the truth. The focus would then shift to the series and Gadd himself. That’s why I think he made sure there is a seed of doubt
 
Last edited:
Feather fans said:
Interesting.
Ive had a thought. Maybe complete nonsense. But bearing in mind what this lawyer lady said in the interview that even now FH is unlikely to get custodial sentence for what she does and police (at least in Scotland) are not able to do anything until she gets violent, it looks like in reality very little changed in the law to protect stalking victims. Could it be that Gadd deliberately didnt go to too many lengths to hide her identity? Im not saying he is such a genius as to stir up tit expecting all of this to happen (although who knows) but could it be possible he thought "if she puts herself out there and gets discovered, so be it - at least the public will be aware and maybe other victims would come out and maybe it would even lead to - finally - some changes?
It’s just that Im wondering how very little was done to actually hide her identity. Im still thinking Netfix made sure to cover their arse legally. But the rest is a bit strange
ETA I completely believe his story
Click to expand...
It’s funny, I had that exact thought today! Talking to my wife about the lawyer interview. Saying it was a Scottish lawyer….married to an MP, she was tracked down quicker than FH! She made his life hell, she’s not really going to be punished, her victims are just so relieved to get rid of her relentless harassment as she moves on to another victim…with her track record she wouldn’t be able to resist the attention, an opportunity to get to Gadd again…this way everyone knows the woman is a fruit loop! They know to look out for her and if they’ve any sense stay out of her orbit! She also now has a taste of what harassment feels like! And she cannot help but lie and possibly do something that can finally get her sent away! Gadd knows the more wound up she gets the more vile she becomes! She’s going to drop herself in it!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top