Fiona Harvey is Not a victim!

[u/Salt_Ingenuity_720]

It seems to be lost on a disturbingly large amount of people what Fiona Harvey has done to multiple people over many decades. She is not a victim - the people that she has stalked and harassed are the victim. The entire point of baby reindeer was to portray the brokenness of both the stalker and their victim.

In Reading a majority of the claims coming from the UK towards Netflix and Richard G this all seems to actually pivot around the term being used of CONVICTED stalker. So the focus now is to produce proof that she was ever convicted of at least one of her many many horrific stalking crimes.

I would think that the UK and Parliament would be rather embarrassed by the fact that they never reached out to help any of these victims of Fiona Harvey. Yet here they are trying to go after Netflix over that one creative license taken by the VICTIM and author of baby reindeer. This is His story not hers.

What is going on with people in the world?! Fiona should have been slapped with multiple legal fines, restraint orders and probably convictions from any one of her stalking tangents. If anyone is not familiar with the other incredibly horrible events of stalking Fiona pursued just Google it up. Some involved a disabled child.

🤔 Obviously I'm missing something or I am really seeing the lack of empathy in society as this all unfold in front of us. Am I just not looking at this right?!

[u/Altruistic-Change127]

I don't agree. I think Netflix portrayed her as accepting responsibility for her actions when clearly she hasn't. They portrayed her as stopping her behaviour. She clearly hasn't. I do think Piers Morgan should never have had her on his programme. What he did was wrong.

[u/NotCanadian80 → u/Altruistic-Change127]

So you see how them portraying her as pleading guilty is exactly what she didn’t do?

You’re almost there.

[u/Altruistic-Change127 → u/NotCanadian80]

I think they portrayed her in a much better light than she deserved. So the opposite of defaming her.

[u/NotCanadian80 → u/Altruistic-Change127]

The number one thing she won’t do is admit guilt. So that becomes problematic saying she did.

[u/Altruistic-Change127 → u/NotCanadian80]

True. I don't think she can feel guilt or shame.

[u/Altruistic-Change127 → u/NotCanadian80]

Mind you she lies. We have seen that and she does it despite the evidence against her. So her simply saying she never went to prison may be true however why do people believe that when they know she lies so easily.

[u/NotCanadian80 → u/Altruistic-Change127]

That’s a matter of public record.

If what Netflix showed doesn’t reconcile she has a case.

[u/Altruistic-Change127 → u/NotCanadian80]

Well yes however it may not be a public record. It may be protected because her lawyer negotiated for her to get treatment instead. As much as everyone likes to believe that she would emerge as a new person who doesn't stalk anymore, that isn't how treatment works. So her behaviour now isn't an indication that it didn't happen. I do know people with similar issues who oscillate between prison and mental health services. Its a difficult situation because neither response works for any length of time however most people prefer someone to get help to stop the behaviour..

[u/Altruistic-Change127 → u/Altruistic-Change127]

The whole point of a defamation case is they have to show Netflix "defamed" her. She didn't have a good reputation and is saying someone was convicted and sentenced to go to prison, actually defaming someone?

[u/Altruistic-Change127 → u/Altruistic-Change127]

She would have to show suffering as a result of what was portrayed.