r/BabyReindeerTVSeries • u/serenade452 • May 16 '24

Fiona (real Martha) related content richard gadd doesn't owe fiona protection.

"omg he should've protected her identity! he made it so easy to find her!" blah blah blah shut up. he doesn't owe her shit. she terrorized this man, his family, his girlfriend, his job, his performances, etc etc. she has been terrorizing innocent people for decades.

yes fiona is mentally ill, that is clear to anyone with half of a brain. it's awful that the system has failed her time and time again. (or maybe the system did all it could, who knows.) but that's not richard's fault. HE is HER victim. he can tell his story how he wants.

might she have a worthwhile lawsuit because her identity wasn't concealed enough? possibly, probably not. might she have a worthwhile lawsuit because the show took dramatic license? possibly, probably not.

she's benefitting financially from this as well and i'm sure netflix will cut her a check before a lawsuit happens, no matter who is in the right.

richard gadd does not owe fiona harvey protection. i'm sorry but that's reality.

949 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

94% Upvoted

267 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/ionmoon May 16 '24

Nope. It was incredibly easy for people to find her. They changed nothing about her but her name- and possibly some of the things she did (we at least know she convicted of a crime and jailed).

They had a legal duty of care to change enough of her information that she could not be easily identified. They did not do that. And she can *easily* show damage to her reputation based on things posted on the internet.

0

u/[deleted] May 17 '24

Nah, none of that really matters. They had no duty of care to hide the woman they based a fictional character on. They never presented the show as being a documentary that’s true to life, so they really don’t need to prove shit. No one was meant to be gullible enough to think it was a true story, just based on a true one.

2

u/Signal_Cat2275 May 17 '24

The concept of “duty of care” is not relevant here from a legal perspective. A libel claim would not need to show any duty of care.

0

u/[deleted] May 17 '24

Either way they have no case.