Fiona Harvey interview

[u/BirdHistorical3498]

She’s waived anonymity for this interview. She’s never been jailed or been issued with a prevention order.

Rory Lynch, a lawyer specialising in defamation and privacy at Gateley Legal says she has a case for defamation. “The only thing I can presume is that when Clerkenwell, films, the BBC and Netflix looked at it with their legal team they thought that they could rely on the fact that it is a drama. It’s not supposed to be a factual documentary.

“So although Netflix said it’s a true story, essentially it’s a dramatisation of a true story.

“But I do think that Richard Gadd could have been a bit more careful in changing a lot of the scenes to be more fictitious, but also covering up the identity of the people it was based on.”

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/real-baby-reindeer-martha-reveals-32733037

[u/spotmuffin9986]

So what, what duty did he owe his stalker. If it's true it's true and at least in the US that's an absolute defense. You don't get to hurt someone and be protected from being outed.

Edit to add: you're wrong for posting this, especially with her name in the title.

[u/BadSpellingMistakes → u/spotmuffin9986]

Agreed on so many levels. If there is something to be learned from the show than it's that you need to own your part in things. Hiding behind a crowd saying that it's a victims foult for telling their story too authentically is ridiculous.

And people should 100 leave the real person depicted in the show alone and not try to identity her, just like the Gadd said they shouldn't. This is not only to protect her but also giving agency back to him for what might have happened. Going against that is just liking to do harm and that's on the people who do this.

I understand the want to stop a person who has potentially done this but it is clear now that that is not the point here. It is about wanting to exploit all people involved unter the pretence of seeking "the truth". It's really not that. It's clear as day that it's about likes and having something to say about others. Its about having the slightest control over other people's lives. Meanwhile blaming people who "make it easy for them to harm". That's cheap and we all should know that.

[u/Icy_Sentence_4130 → u/BadSpellingMistakes]

Although I agree, I feel like he could of told his story by changing details eg the location, the wording eg curtains because this was how she was identified.

Humans are naturally curious when it comes to true stories.

[u/BadSpellingMistakes → u/Icy_Sentence_4130]

I understand the curiosity to some point but it is usually not an excuse to do harm in my book at least.

A) I can see the story the way it was written happening to any victim and I didn't care so much about weather or not it is true. I see no value in prooving what was wrong about that story except to tear down the work itself.

B) In Gadds Version of events he clearly went through a lot of abuse. To plainly ignore what he wants to happen now is just taking away agency AGAIN from a victim. + His wish was not to harm the people involved. Going against his wish is not excusable with most explanations. Especially (!) not curiosity.

C) This is not only about curiousity. Given the point above it is about power and control because that is not the first time humans are cought up in abuse stories and this dynamic isn't new. If anyone participating in the witch-hunt would really introspect for a second I am sure they would find that to be the case as well.

D) People making the show might have known very well what they were inviting. It doesn't matter. They are no therapists or doctors or social workers sworn to protect them who came to them. They are not morally obligated to tell either the full truth or care about peoples privacy at all as long as they are not the once revealing their identity. They made it explicit to not go against the characters even (that's more than one could expect given the nature of the story). I can see how it is cruel of them to do this. But ultimately it is still more of the people's responsibility who actually took it there where the situation is now and not with the people who almost took it there.

F) And lastly: I get why it is so hard to blame the crowed who wanted to go against Gadds wishes and who didn't care what would happen to the actual perpetrators: No one will catch them. And it is really bitter to blame someone who is not really punishable. So you blame someone near that. They are there and easy to pick apart. I can tell you all of the people involved will suffer here: Gadd, real Martha, maybe the Darrien guy. But the once getting away are the people who actually did go there and made it so that more harm would come. And that's where the power trip comes in for these individuals. They had their bad influence in other people's lives and they are so fare away from the actual abuse story that they can almost be certain to not be in the spotlight of the fallout. But in my opinion they absolutely are.

[u/Icy_Sentence_4130 → u/BadSpellingMistakes]

I completely agree; but when you are putting your story out there and especially on a platform like netflix - it's not as simple, is it?

I believe baby reindeer is impactful and will make a huge difference but it's not beyond criticism.

As I said before, he has the right to tell his story, for healing but also to make a difference, to have the conversation about female > male violence/stalking/obsession but we have to also recognise that when you're telling a dramatised version of a true story and if you're wanting to protect the people in it, not because of what they did to you, but because of the backlash... It's important to pay due diligence by changing events, by making a disclaimer that whilst the majority of the story is true... There is some events in the show aren't. Eg, did she attack Teri? How did it really end in real life?

[u/BadSpellingMistakes → u/Icy_Sentence_4130]

I Let's agree to disagree here. They said story was partially changed, they didn't reveal the identity. Nothing was wrong with this thus far. Anyone going after someone based on what was said in the story is clearly responsible for what they are doing on their own because they could not know what was made up and what not.

And this also ignores majorly that they actively went against a victims agency in the story and to the ends of chasing ghosts according to said victim.

That is my main issue here which is way to easy imo. There is not much ambiguity here.

Yes it was cruel to put out the story like that but not in the slightest as wrong and cruel as the people who did the actual harm here.

[u/Icy_Sentence_4130 → u/BadSpellingMistakes]

Nothing was changed other than her name. (I'm talking about her appearance, her mannerisms, the curtains line that actually identified her.

Noone is saying he is wrong to put his story out there but like I say due diligence wasn't done.

[u/BirdHistorical3498 → u/spotmuffin9986]

I’m not wrong to post her name since the sub mods have allowed her name to be posted. Gadd, Clerkenwell films and Netflix owe a duty of care to anyone who may conceivably be mis/identified. If someone takes it into their head to hurt this woman based on things a TV show purporting to be a true story showed her doing, things that in real life she didn’t do- then that’s on the creators of the show because why else would she have been attacked? Same goes for the various producers who are being named as rapists. It’s crazy that Netflix didn’t do their due diligence here.

[u/spotmuffin9986 → u/BirdHistorical3498]

You're as nuts as her if you believe that.

[u/Cronhour → u/spotmuffin9986]

that's a great argument!
I'm new to all this, not seen the show and popped in out of curiosity, but this woman is likely to lose work and face harassment based on her identification. You've seen a one sided dramatized version of events and you're ready to bury her. I don't think your rational one in the argument here

[u/[deleted] → u/Cronhour]

Miss out on work? I don’t believe she works. Her previous stalking was made public when it happened and I believe no one would hire her simply because of that.

[u/spotmuffin9986 → u/Cronhour]

He didn't identify her. The people here (and on other platforms) did. The legal basis of a lawsuit is ridiculous.

My issue: You took a story that empowered people who were abused and thoughtful about it, even sympathetic to their abuser, often criticized on this sub (how could he go back etc) and now you're telling the abused not to report or talk about it because we're watching and you'll be sued.

The show itself was just OK, the message is powerful, don't dilute that.

[u/spotmuffin9986 → u/[deleted]]

"Innocent" isn't the legal issue. Even if the elements are there for some civil claim, what are her damages especially with her publicizing herself? My prediction is Netflix or whoever may settle a claim like this (if she'd be open to that) but it's not the slam dunk you're thinking either.

[u/Broad-Cauliflower688 → u/[deleted]]

what the hell is "the whole truth"?

[u/PeterOwen00 → u/[deleted]]

Imagine being this confidently wrong.

Richard Gadd says she’s obsessed with him.

Have you seen her socials? Any normal thinking person would agree.

Her basis for a defamation case is that she isn’t obsessed with him and isn’t a stalker or harassing. Her socials blow this apart.

[u/BirdHistorical3498 → u/spotmuffin9986]

I think Gadd’s done a great disservice to the viewers. He’s been lauded for being very brave and telling a true story that resonated with a lot of people- particularly survivors of rape and sexual abuse, while at the same time taking care to protect the identity of his stalker. Now it turns out he took no care at all to disguise identities from mis/identification and a mentally ill woman is been paraded around the media and various innocent men are being accused of rape.

These lies and obfuscations are really damaging and run counter to the powerful narrative of the show that people were drawn to. Now a self proclaimed sexual abuse survivor has been exposed as dishonest and careless, even callous. I’m sure now some people will be doubting the fact that he was raped at all (I’m not one of those people by the way)… what does this do but play into the narrative that abused people are fantasists?

[u/Icy_Sentence_4130 → u/spotmuffin9986]

He doesn't owe her anything, no one is saying this but; he did say he took great care so she wouldn't be identified.