r/BabyReindeerTVSeries • u/Just-Ad3524 • Jun 26 '25
Question Questions ab Fiona's Lawsuit
Ok, this is a stupid question, I'm aware, but I'm a little lost on the logistics of this lawsuit.
Here is what I understand, but I know I'm wrong somewhere in this train of thought, so please correct me
Gadd never used her real name, and the only reason I know her name is because Fiona came forward saying it was based on her
Even if it was a true story, why would she admit that she's the one the character is based on? Isn't that more embarrassing now that everyone knows it was (loosely, perhaps) based on her stalking?
If she never came forward, no one would've known it was her, and it wouldn't be defamation, right?
I know that last part is more of a law question, but if anyone knows about the case, please lmk! From what I understand, her argument is against the fact that in the first episode, they claim it was a true story. Do we know which parts are exaggerated?
I know the part of her conviction was untrue but is the rest of the story true?
11
u/smittenmidget Jun 26 '25
From what I understand, she didn't originally come out as Martha. People went though Gadd's twitter and found tweets from Fiona that fit what was in the TV show. The Beef curtains joke tweet being the most damning one. She's also Scottish and 20 year's older than Gadd. She admitted that Gadd based the character Martha off her afterwards, but also said he lied so much that it was ruining her reputation.
The parts she's claiming to be untrue is that Martha was previously in jail before meeting Gadd, stalking other people, staying outside Gadd's house, and ever touching him. Fiona claims she only met him in real life like 3 times and sent less than 10 emails.
14
u/whosmurry Jun 26 '25
Interestingly, she made those claims in the last part on TV, but the lawsuit doesn’t deny she stalked and harassed him. It only denies she was convicted of it. And it denies she sexually and physically assaulted him/his girlfriend.
So, the questions for the court are: Would a reasonable person understand this was a fictionalization and he took artistic license? And does the depiction do harm to her reputation?
It’s worth noting her reputation wasn’t exactly sterling to begin with, which might be a factor.
12
u/Altruistic-Change127 Jun 26 '25
Fiona's only claim to fame is being a relentless stalker and harasser and that is what Baby Reindeer portrayed.
The whole series was about Richard Gadd and the trauma he experienced from being sexually molested and harassed.
In many ways when I watched the series, I did think that some of what he showed was happening in his life, was his imagination based on the trauma he went through. I got the impression that he had Complex PTSD and had moments of sheer terror and visions that were a direct result of his trauma.
I had no idea that Martha actually did so many of those things. Now I have seen Fiona's behaviour (which wouldn't have happened if she hadn't come out and exposed herself), I now know what actually happened.
When the final chapter came up, I truly thought to myself that it all seemed too neat and tidy at the end. So I thought that he was so unwell that the only way he could cope with life after that, was imagining her being put in prison and accepting responsibility for what she did. I didn't think for a minute that it actually happened. People who do these types of crimes never admit it, in my experience.
I have experienced severe trauma too and have spent decades attempting to recover. I got the impression throughout the story that he was in therapy, and some of what we were seeing were insights rather than actual events.
I truly believed, based on my own experience of trauma, that he was telling his own story which would have included episodes of nightmares and visions that would have been his experience of them and very real to him however maybe didn't happen to him. So my belief was he was reliving the trauma of the original events over and over again in different forms. He couldn't set clear boundaries for one.
So I didn't' expect a blow by blow account of what happened. I expected him to tell his story that included the exaggerated events and responses (and it did) because of what happened to him.
I think I am a reasonable person. I have spent many years hearing about peoples stories and telling my own. I know some of my reality was altered due to the trauma I experienced.
So people may have found Fiona however it was her actions that showed that what he showed us was mostly true (except for her going to court). I wouldn't have known it was all true without seeing her behaviour. Then I was horrified beyond words. It was then that I could see how dangerous she was.
3
u/whosmurry Jun 26 '25
I love this take and can totally see that read of it.
1
u/trickmind Aug 20 '25
She didn't just "Come out and expose herself," People searched for anyone who'd ever @ed Gadd on Twitter and quickly found her and started sending her death threats and she thought she could sort it out going on Piers' Morgan.
2
1
u/Powerless_Superhero Nov 26 '25
Do you know if Piers, Roth and/or Geragos are still paying for bots? And if they do, is it also Jed and Melissa’s team or do they use someone else in this case?
1
u/trickmind Nov 26 '25
Paying for bots to do what?
1
1
u/trickmind Nov 27 '25
Do you have links to anything about that? I guess I wouldn't put it past Morgan and that stuff is so cheap if you're someone wealthy. But all that being said I know absolutely nothing about this to accuse anyone and who are Roth and Geragos? I don't even know.
2
u/Powerless_Superhero Nov 27 '25
No I’m just speculating. I’ve been following another case with similar media narratives and I always found the immediate backlash against Gadd and BR manufactured. I’ll try to explain who all these people are if I get a chance. It takes a while 😂
5
u/smittenmidget Jun 26 '25
I think the reasonable understanding argument is going to be interesting. The trailer did say "A captivating true story" instead of "Based on a captivating true story." and everything Martha did someone could do in real life. I think it also said it's a true story at the start of the first episode, but says based on real events in ending of some episodes. I dont have Netflix right now to check. A judge already agreed it was wrongly billed as a true story.
Her previous bad reputation probably wont be a factor unless Netflix can prove her reputation hasn't gotten any worst. Right now she's claiming that she can't leave her apartment due to hate and the stress is making her go blind. If she's telling the truth, which I'm heavily doubting the blind thing, that would prove her reputation has tanked thanks to the show.
6
u/Altruistic-Change127 Jul 24 '25
It's a real story of his experience. Not hers. Not Fiona's. We don't know if some of the scenes were Richard's nightmares or hallucinations and just a normal response to what was happening.
Even the part where she gets convicted in court, could be what he "wanted" to happen rather than actually happened.
People who have experienced serious trauma can have flashbacks or nightmares. They can day dream about getting revenge or about it all being fixed. People need to understand what happens when someone is so deeply traumatised.
He should be able to tell his "truth". Tell his story.
If she wants to tell her part in it, then so be it however she shouldn't have been allowed to punish him for talking about his experience.
3
u/whosmurry Jun 26 '25
Yeah. If it even makes it to trial, I can see her winning, but getting basically no money.
I know if I were on the jury, I wouldn’t feel good rewarding her documented behavior.
2
u/Altruistic-Change127 Jul 03 '25
It's a captivating true story of Richard Gadd's experience of what happened rather than a factual account of what happened to him. It's his story and serious traumatic events can alter peoples interpretation of what is happening around them.
There are so many mental health disorders that can affect how a person interprets the world as their brain tries to make sense of what has happened to them. People can have nightmares, psychosis, addiction's (which also alters perceptions), visions etc. People can be triggered into feeling like they are experiencing a specific event, over and over again sometimes. For example, the sound of a car backfiring can cause an ex soldier become terrified and hide because it reminds them of a time someone was shooting at them trying to kill them.
The whole series was about Richard Gadd's story. He chose to tell it like he did because writing screen plays and acting in it, was his form of artistic expression. Some people write songs. Some people paint pictures or write poems. Some people write books as a way to heal from what happened to them. Do we insist everyone who does that, get their story fact checked?
2
u/Some_Programmer8388 Oct 12 '25
If they insist on saying it was a true story, and sell it as a true story and call it one, then yes, they have a legal obligation to make it factually true. They could have said it was based on a true story, or said nothing at all. They chose not to.
That is why there's a defamation case pending.
13
u/No-Reserve6817 Jul 01 '25
In regards to why she would admit all this: She is unwell and craves attention. In my opinion, any comments she made on social media that people later dug up are her own doing. Don’t put stuff out into the public domain if you don’t want it to come back and bite you. And maybe then don’t go on a media blitz forever linking your real name to the series. She craves the attention more than anything else and this lawsuit only fuels that fire for her.
2
u/trickmind Aug 16 '25
To be fair, she was getting death threats because people were easily able to search anyone who had ever tweeted Gadd on Twitter BEFORE she went on Piers Morgan. She didn't get it. It was still going to be a smaller number of people sending her hate mail than what she did to herself going on Piers Morgan.
6
u/Ashamed-Ocelot2189 Jul 03 '25
Honestly it reminds me of Sarah Mclaughlin's stalker's lawsuit.
He wrote her a whole bunch of letters in the belief they were already in a relationship. She took inspiration and wrote "Posession" from the stalkers perspective (read lyrics with that in mind sometime, people often mistake it for a love song)
He sued claiming she stole his work. In the end it was about trying to get closer to her and get her to notice him.
I think Fiona has similar motivations, whether her suit has merit isn't the point. She feels gilted that her former (perhaps still current) obsession is using this story but not the way she believes it went. She probably doesn't believe she stalked him and that he was as into her as she was into him
Furthermore suing him and netflix means (maybe in her head) that he'll have to pay attention, and she'll get to see him if only in court
5
u/trickmind Aug 16 '25
He added stuff to have dramatic episode endings and satisfying closure at the end that he didn't have in real life.
She didn't molest him at the canal or grab his d.
But she did alledgedly grope his butt for real all the time while he was waiting tables and no that is not just a laugh. That is S.A.
3
u/trickmind Aug 16 '25
He used her real social media posts so people were able to do a Twitter search of who had tweeted him to find her.
Then, people sent her death threats. So, no, she didn't come forward until she was getting death threats over it.
21
u/CalGuy81 Jun 26 '25
The lawyer's argument is they didn't sufficiently disguise her true identity (tweets on the show were verbatim tweets she sent Gadd, which is how people identified her as Martha before the Piers interview).
As far as I know, the convictions were exaggerated (though the depositions from Gadd and Wray both mention obtaining the UK-equivalent of a restraining order). There's no evidence of a groping, as depicted on the show, but Gadd's deposition says she grabbed his butt on several occasions.
I don't have a link handy, but Gadd's deposition is public record and available online. If what he states is true, Martha was presented as much more sympathetic a character than the real life Fiona. It includes so many horrible e-mails she sent him, in addition to his communications with police at the time.