Baby Reindeer #4

1 Sort by date Sort by reaction score 2
I think it's clear that Martha, and the story beats and themes, are based on/taken from his real life experience with FH. But I think given what we know about FH and her truly hateful nature, Martha is definitely an original creation. I feel like he's worked to give the character some sympathetic moments and quite deep vulnerability and pathos, and I see none of those sentiments in either this document or the conduct of FH herself. I would be very interested to know if he sees FH as a victim in the same way he clearly sees Martha as one.
 
After reading his account, like others have said I’m surprised he created a character so similar to her. Please don’t think I am victim blaming as I’m not, her behaviour is beyond abhorrent but to say he didn’t expect it to be such a success, I find it such an odd phrase…. He sold it to Netflix!!! He did a good enough job of hiding who the rapist was so could he not have made Martha a skinny blonde or a six foot Phil Mitchell look alike. Would it have been as much as a success though if Harvey had’t been identified?
 
I think he has enough plausible deniability that Martha is an original character. There's nothing new under the sun and writers are of course always going to take inspiration from real life experience. It makes me really angry that she's been able to take legal proceedings this far given the abuse, hatred and misery she has spread for seemingly decades
 
Fascinating reading. I think there is still the question of Netflix putting up the words “this is a true story” - and perhaps Martha could’ve been a different body type for further clarity.

he’s proved she stalked him, yes. Has he proved Martha wasn’t her in a court of law, that’s the challenge.

I suspect he will win, but he didn’t address enough that Martha isn’t Fiona.? I’m not a lawyer but it’s interesting.
 
BingoFlamingo said:
Fascinating reading. I think there is still the question of Netflix putting up the words “this is a true story” - and perhaps Martha could’ve been a different body type for further clarity.

he’s proved she stalked him, yes. Has he proved Martha wasn’t her in a court of law, that’s the challenge.

I suspect he will win, but he didn’t address enough that Martha isn’t Fiona.? I’m not a lawyer but it’s interesting.
Click to expand...
Fiona denied that she was Martha in the Piers Morgan interview.......they need to show that as evidence.......
 
BingoFlamingo said:
Fascinating reading. I think there is still the question of Netflix putting up the words “this is a true story” - and perhaps Martha could’ve been a different body type for further clarity.

he’s proved she stalked him, yes. Has he proved Martha wasn’t her in a court of law, that’s the challenge.

I suspect he will win, but he didn’t address enough that Martha isn’t Fiona.? I’m not a lawyer but it’s interesting.
Click to expand...
I think (and I might be mistaken) that she filed defamation. He is explaining that 1. martha is not her but based on his experience with FH 2. Shows that she had no good character to defame in the first place (what many pointed out before is actually a thing - if you known as a stalker, you cant claim you were defamed by being portrayed as one) 3. He indicated she was not all that identifiable aster all as she outed herself (just as I suspected) after few other people were wrongly identified as her. So she is only obviously an inspiration for Martha only once you know her/ of her.
 
Feather fans said:
I think (and I might be mistaken) that she filed defamation. He is explaining that 1. martha is not her but based on his experience with FH 2. Shows that she had no good character to defame in the first place (what many pointed out before is actually a thing - if you known as a stalker, you cant claim you were defamed by being portrayed as one) 3. He indicated she was not all that identifiable aster all as she outed herself (just as I suspected) after few other people were wrongly identified as her. So she is only obviously an inspiration for Martha only once you know her/ of her.
Click to expand...
.....she has to prove loss of earnings/income for her defamation suit to succeed
 
Hello everyone!
I'm new on this thread, but have been following another one for a few years now.
I heard that some court docs had dropped, from a fellow tattler on another thread, so raced over to have a look 👀
I'm gonna speed read the other threads.
Just wanted to say hi 👋🏼 and am looking forward to seeing how this plays out...not well (for her) is my guess 😉
---
Phil Anne Throw Pee said:
I've seen her in other stuff and this is her natural size. Fantastic actress and very pretty but I don't think she wore a fat suit.
Click to expand...
She is a great actress and played Martha so well, it was a chilling performance 👏🏻
---
killtheold said:
Richard Gadd has responded to FH’s lawsuit against Netflix - the court document is very interesting! https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/25020581/gadd-declaration-harvey-lawsuit.pdf
Click to expand...
This is what I came here to read! Thanks for posting it 🩷
---
wiglay said:
This is what they’ve filed in America. It’s a hilarious read albeit horribly jarring in its Americanisations and hyperbole.

Click to expand...
Oh jeez, she's not gonna do very well with these lawyers 🤦🏼‍♀️
She's scared to go out, yet was happy to appear on Piers; so which one is it?
Even if certain parts where "dramatised" most "based on a true story are"; the simple fact is that she is in fact a stalker, he has various evidence that effect. I'm sure he'll turn over to the courts if required, I mean the police already have it, based on his court declaration.
Netflix would have done their diligence on this before producing the show, they're not stupid, and this probably isn't the first time someone had tried to sue them.
She clearly has MH issues, but this is no excuse for stalking someone, even if she's declared by a professional as mentally insane. Yet, she's managed to get "law degrees" I use that term loosely, as she can't even remember what she scored, even though she has a photographic memory 🥴
The series showed she is a stalker, so does all the evidence he has.
The legal team at Netflix must have laughed their heads off when they saw her court document! They bang on about where Netflix are based, size of the office etc etc, odd to put that in a court document, but I've think they've done it to show they have the money to pay the stupid amount she trying to sue for.
I'm sure she said on the PM interview it wasn't about the money, yet tries to sue for 150m, so again...which one is it 🤔
Just my two pence worth 🫠🩷
 
Last edited:
I see she’s back on Facebook
---
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7738.jpeg
    IMG_7738.jpeg
    46.5 KB · Views: 2
Ubu1uk said:
She is still there with that 1466 she just removed all comments on legal advice but looks like she has decided to speak again.
Click to expand...
Can you link her page or tell me how to find the account ?
---
judgejohndeed said:
She just posted yesterday that she's fed up being gagged when she's the only one telling the truth. I'm guessing the American firm have dropped her upon seeing Gadd's evidence
Click to expand...
Was that her account then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top