Baby Reindeer #4
- Thread starter Hope96
- Start date
-
- Tags
- baby reindeer netflix
maggisojuicy
VIP Member
Gadd never named her. She willingly put herself forward as the inspiration for Martha by plastering it all over social media. She told Peirs Morgan that she unwittingly wrote half the show and came up with the name for it. She NEVER needed to go on a television interview and out herself lol. No-one would have even suspected her if she wasn’t putting stuff out in writing all over the internet implicating herself in the whole thing. The only person who could legitimately be sued for defamation would be Fiona herself 
I suspect this is why she has hidden her FB, maybe on the advice of her ‘legal team’
I suspect this is why she has hidden her FB, maybe on the advice of her ‘legal team’
Dollenganger
VIP Member
The irony of FH claiming that the Netflix show is misogynistic when she’s completely consumed by her own internalised misogyny. Not to mention all the other forms of bigotry that she partakes in.
evoway13
VIP Member
This!!! PLUS, she revealed her previous surname of 'Muir' - I don't think anyone knew that fact.Gadd never named her. She willingly put herself forward as the inspiration for Martha by plastering it all over social media. She told Peirs Morgan that she unwittingly wrote half the show and came up with the name for it. She NEVER needed to go on a television interview and out herself lol. No-one would have even suspected her if she wasn’t putting stuff out in writing all over the internet implicating herself in the whole thing. The only person who could legitimately be sued for defamation would be Fiona herself
I suspect this is why she has hidden her FB, maybe on the advice of her ‘legal team’
I'm also wondering if an 'interdict' in Scottish law can be classed (or mistaken for) a 'conviction'. Fiona waffled on about an interdict not being filed correctly but, it could've been filed correctly for all we know. If you don't abide by an interdict, you can get locked up as punishment.
pickledfoot
Chatty Member
I hope Netflix calls her bluff, there’s no way she hasn’t got any records
Feather fans
VIP Member
Is that something similar to restraining order?
iieee
VIP Member
Ngl I would absolutely love this to go to trial
evoway13
VIP Member
I believe so. When Laura Wray took out an interdict - Fiona miraculously left her and her family alone.
evoway13
VIP Member
It might be difficult to prove. The other guy can turn around and say it was consensual
maggisojuicy
VIP Member
I just looked it up and apparently it’s to prohibit someone from doing something so I’m assuming it was to stop her from contacting them, bit like a restraining order. She spoke so casually about it though lol.
judgejohndeed
VIP Member
You don't take a case against someone who rapes you. You report it to the police and the CPS decides if there's a realistic prospect of conviction. Rape convictions have a very low success rate. IMO, Gadd doesn't and didn't ever intend to start that process off. In broadcasting this show, he won't get a fair trial as the jury would likely have seen the show and his role in continuing to go back to the guy's house and that knowledge would play a role in their decision. That's if it ever even got in front of a jury anyway, which I doubt for the same reason
maggisojuicy
VIP Member
Well the only time there was any evidence of her being employed was those few days as a Trainee Solicitor before Laura Wray sacked her
Dollenganger
VIP Member
People are saying she can’t have any convictions because no journalist has found evidence of any. But if they did expose this sort of information, couldn’t that be contrary to the data protection act? I am not sure but this whole thing seems to run and run and I wonder what the conclusion will be.
It’s fairly obvious that FH has some kind of personality disorder. People like that don’t know when to stop.
It’s fairly obvious that FH has some kind of personality disorder. People like that don’t know when to stop.
pickledfoot
Chatty Member
Same, I’m sure there’s way more to comeNgl I would absolutely love this to go to trial
troutpout69
VIP Member
I doubt she’s worked since being sacked from the law job she got
Square Peg
Active member
I wonder that too, I resent my taxes paying for such a horrid specimen of a human being
WonkeyDonkey
Active member
I can't understand how she can be on benefits. She has no obvious health conditions (if you ignore the mh issues). She's apparently a qualified lawyer living in London where there would be plenty of jobs. My guess is she is on pip due to mh issues 
maggisojuicy
VIP Member
She had delusions of grandeur about herself and her ‘career’ so I doubt she would admit she can’t work due to mental illness. I think she said she has diabetes so might claim on that basis? She’d probably say of course she could work as a big shot, high powered lawyer but unfortunately can’t do the long hours in courtI can't understand how she can be on benefits. She has no obvious health conditions (if you ignore the mh issues). She's apparently a qualified lawyer living in London where there would be plenty of jobs. My guess is she is on pip due to mh issues
Square Peg
Active member
PIP alone wouldn’t pay for her rent, she must get housing benefit too. She also has diabetes, which doesn’t sound like she can control.I can't understand how she can be on benefits. She has no obvious health conditions (if you ignore the mh issues). She's apparently a qualified lawyer living in London where there would be plenty of jobs. My guess is she is on pip due to mh issues
---
How long before she gets pissed off with her legal team and turns on them, she’ll be back on Facebook before we know it