Baby Reindeer: Lawyer Analyses If Netflix Can Be Sued By Fiona Harvey 

😂😂😂😂

Not really. She’s admitting contacting him but not to the extent he claims.

Its enough that people realise who the real person is...

Pretty good point there

True… there could be another slightly odd,chubby, Scottish bird out there who’s just watching and laughing at all this. 😂

You dont have to watch the show to know the story of the show

she could have easily given her phones and social media to investigators to prove that she did not send those messages, but she still hasn't...

@@Crimson11100He also hasn’t provided receipts of the messages. That’s a double edged sword.

She has a photographic memory, but didn't do as well or can't remember her marks from law school? Having a photographic memory is so rare only a very very small percentage of the population in the entire world has that gift..She would remember everything she's ever read ,including grades...She acts like the character Martha who seems delusional and believes her own lies... I'm sure Richard knowing that making up outrageous claims would hold him liable and doubt he would've been so careless as to say she committed such extreme acts of harassment and I'm sure along with people around at the time along with a "paper trail" of voicemails, emails... She just said oh, he forged them... I personally don't believe her , just by going by the responses she gave during this interview, which I'm sure paid her a lot to give.I don't think she's being honest . What a situation for Gad now.. He himself has been through enough with her..

No she didnt say it wasn't her but that it was'nt true.

I can

100%. Their legal team has to be very experienced with this sort of thing, and I'm sure they have a highly vetted and refined process by now for protecting themselves.

@@ChromeDrone. you would assume so , the proof will be in the pudding as they say.

In the end credits, it says that 'This program is based on true events however, certain characters, names, incidents, locations and dialogue have been fictionalised for dramatic purposes

Remember the Cleopatra documentary??? Did Netflix do the homework there? Netflix is selling entertainment, they are the ones to ones to push the truth, it does not mean she js 100% innocent but I think the truth has been pushed here

She sent 18 in fact no... 16 . Only 6 emails actually in fact only q 1letter and actually I didn't speakto anyone about the show... But all my friends and family.. But I've not seen it

Lots of people are saying this, did any of you even watch the interview? She literally said she sent the letter to the theatre!

@@sonyamcintyre6692 no she did not ha ha, I take it you are her friend "she's going to hurt herself" Worlds to harsh for me to care

Na she did

@ND-lu6dv watch the bloody interview! She said she sent the letter to the theatre! those were the words that came out her mouth! Where did I say I believe a damn word she said? I didn't! Her interview was a car crash, maybe don't jump the gun 🤣🙈

I don’t think piers did a good job with it tho.

YES!

He didn't say 20k - he meant literally 20 emails, as she stated in the interview

Except Gadd ran to her house UNINVITED and initiated having with her! I don't see he can then claim he was 'stalked,'

@@thesupergreenjudyFalse. The show alleges 40k worth of emails. Not 20. She has said that to try & minimise her involvement & discredit his claims.

⁠@@A-ze4vh the person you replied to is talking about this man in the video we are commenting on saying “if it weren’t 40,000 emails but 20” it would be different.

Thats the thing- if she was just crazy i woud feel sorry for her. But she 100% knows what she's doing.

You don't know if its true yet. Wait for facts before making accusations. She might be slightly weird but a lot of people have personality quirks and that doesn't make one a criminal stalker.

@@oh_k8if someone said I was a stalker, but didn’t mention me by name.. I def wouldn’t come out of the wood work screaming “I am her! But I didn’t do that”. That’s crazy to begin with.

He got onher property and peeped through her window AND went uninvited to her house to have sex with her. How does that make her the stalker?

@@mikehunt7360 The media already outed her before she gave an interview stating she believed the character was about her. Denying it wouldn't have kept her unknown.

Then why didn’t they know she wasn’t jailed doh

If there are emails as mentioned or actually went to jail that should be easy to prove.

@@Pollyferganstien Richard added that in as an ending intentionally. He said that ill people need help not jail time.

Regardless, they should’ve done far more to protect her identity. She’s clearly a very sick woman + they cashed in on her. People with personality disorders WILL respond … terribly/trigger another cycle. Her behaviour + perception of reality is completely normal for someone as ill as her. They could’ve and should’ve adapted her character + taken some other measures so she couldn’t be tracked down in 5mins. It wouldn’t have impacted the storyline if done well. I feel sorry for her. She needs help. I hope she at least gets some money out of it… Or someone in the Psychiatric world reaches out and offers her help or inpatient program free of charge… and goes public educating the public of her illness. I have a friend who ran one of the only programs in Australia for people with personality disorders (6mths of full time, Mon-Fri, group therapy + practical life skills)… what those people go through (and the impact they have on those around them) if left untreated is really sad. There’s apparently only a few types of therapy styles that can help them… their illness is very difficult to treat (most interventions are ineffective/a lot of therapists won’t see them). I find that really sad/can’t imagine what it must be like. Sure she creates hell for those around her… but she doesn’t deserve not to have her identity protected.

@@Pollyferganstien it's common knowledge that every single movie/show that's based on a true story has fictionalized parts and is heavily dramatized to make it more entertaining. Richard Gadd has spoken on the fictional aspects of the show well before Fiona ever came forward about anything, and he very explicitly stated that the real Martha never went to jail and that the ending was entirely fictional for the sake of drama and conclusion.

I heard that too. "Hyper-bowl"

​@@annknows802The championship game of Hyper Ball is the Hyper-Bowl.

I think she means hyperbole, look it up. She clearly has only ever seen it written down, not heard how it is actually spoken.

Hyperbole! X

@@avrilmitchellgriffiths7307 When I was younger I pronounced it Hyper Bowley for fun 😀

She did an interview with Neil Sears from Daily Mail a couple days before the Piers Morgan interview and harassed him within 10 minutes of ending that interview. Several threatening voicemails and texts. Contradicted herself between the 2 interviews. She told Neil that her boyfriend died, then in the Piers interview, talked about him.

Look up Fiona Muir. Her full name is Fiona Muir-Harvey, but she normally goes by Muir. I think she thought she was being clever by just using Harvey on Piers. If you look up Fiona Muir, you'll find an article from 1997 about her stalking someone. She's crazy.

@@Jasonxknot Ya, I looked into it and read the articles. That poor family, even trying to get social services involved making fake accusations of child abuse. Insane for sure!

Nah. She just wants the attention

@@vexnaexBoth, I’d say. It’s also a way to continue to punish him for rejecting her.

She will not sue. She knows he has all the emails and texts. His family and friends would testify.

Imagine if u were fiona, she should sue because its defamation

@@bcoull290 I honestly don't know the legal ins and outs but I think the concern isn't lack of proof (I think likely there's plenty of it) but whether he didn't sufficiently disguise her identity. She IS on a press tour now and clearly living for it, but people inclined to do so had also already figured out who she was.

Getting old already

I think you made the best comment I read.

Unfortunately that's not how the law works - 1) Netflix said at the outset that "This IS a true story" and only mentioned about the dramatization in the credits that nobody watches 2) The public is really quite stupid, they will take the whole thing at face value which they did and some decided to harass her at her own home because the film makers included information that made her easily identifiable (Her twitter posts at verbatim) 3) Netflix did not specify WHICH parts were dramatized (eg that she went to prison, that it was 40k emails instead of 18 or 20 odd emails as she claimed which wouldn't make for a good story, would it?) - Only a court case could verify her and his claims properly 4) It doesn't mean she is innocent and not a stalker but if any of these claims are exaggerated to the point that it would cause public outcry, yes it is a problem and defamatory - especially if it, ironically, leads to her being stalked 5) Even if the entire story is correct to the T, Netflix must follow due diligence in protecting her identify which they hopelessly failed at (even though Gadd thinks otherwise - but it took the public all of 5 minutes to find her)

​@thesupergreenjudy It doesnt matter where they put the disclaimer. All that matters is they put somewhere where everyone can read it. Some people watch credits, others dont. You cant prove in court that no one watches the credits, but you can prove the disclaimer was in the show and available to everyone who watched it. This lady was lying through her teeth on Piers. Court records arent available to the public in the UK like they are in the United States, so you cant look up if she has criminal records. But, if you look up her real name, you'll find news articles on her stalking history, going back to 1997. Her name is Fiona Muir-Harvey. She normally goes by Fiona Muir, but chose Harvey for Piers Morgan. Look up Fiona Muir and you'll find the articles. What she did in 1997 sounds very similar to what's portrayed in the show.

@@Jasonxknot Well we may have to agree to disagree (by the way, I am not claiming she is an innocent victim but the law is still the law) - a court may indeed find that Netflix should have made it clearer - especially as they started it off on the premise that it is a true story just to backtrack later in the credits. Words matter. Now, even if the story was correct to the T, Netflix may still be liable if she can prove that they haven't done their due diligence in protecting her identity (quoting tweets at verbatim which can be found on Google within 5 minutes is a big red flag). And even if it was all correct, that doesn't change the fact that the harassment of her by the public is a crime of which the driving motivator was that Netflix show. If she has a good lawyer (Even a No win - No Fee lawyer) , she could probably win

100% agree, i was goinf to say the same.

Also for someone who claims to be so bright. She doesn't even put her social media on private. And sounds obsessive about Richard and the ex staff of The Hawley Arms and not in a good way.

Absolutely. Its part of her very clearly portrayed behaviour. What about the whole programme suggested otherwise? People obviously missed the whole thing about her being a crazed stalker???!!! A dangerous crazed stalker. Of course shes here. Where was Piers duty of care to her victims?

Yeah I agree. She is going to be crazy now for us all. Mark my words

Well no the daily mail contacted her saying they know its her

People tracked her down by contacting her on Facebook and finding her Twitter

@@TheGoorru yep and she could have denied it and claimed the writers used her tweets etc to develop the character. Its odd she seems angry that the story wasnt 100% accurate as well as denying the things that were. Its this odd thinking that two opposites can be right at the same, which comes across in the interview, is what is most striking about her thought processes.

​@@harryhill8543💯, he didn't reveal her identity .....she did

You should be a Lawyer - all the lies they told about person was designed to hide their identity

Did you actually listen to what the lawyer said? Doesn't matter if she said "it's me" - she was already outed by the Internet before she opened up.

Who's Pierce?

@@ThatCoalSoul hahaha you’re right Piers

It tracks with the way the show portrayed her. Mispelling simple words, correctly spelling more difficult words. Hyper bowl...

Yes

Lol hyper bowl. That's right she came top of her class, can't remember her grades or what degree she has... yet has a photographic memory. She is pure evil making sure she has little attacks of Richard Gadd during the Piers interview - he is the victim. She's loving the attention.

​@@mymai5859she said she wasn't top of the class but got good grades..couldn't remember what.

Yes and no. I'm dyslexic and misspell words constantly, and mispronunciation is part of that.

So, you can’t be fans of people

These little asides she said to Piers were a little unsettling .

@@kristinefletcherwode4640maybe she might want to actually research and watch the show then if she is claiming it’s about her and it’s all false.

@@gabrielleandrew542 Narcissism is all about control - and that was one of many, many little examples of her attempting to assert control of the conversation.

She lies when open her mouth

when you use ellipsis in this manner my armpit farts.

I noticed this too, also she closed her eyes for longer, it almost felt she was also trying to keep her anger in check 😮

She might be lying about certain things but if anything is untrue she has a case

@@sarahmitchell8385 Roll out more Google neuroscientists. Jesus. People blink more rapidly under stress and we close our eyes to shut down some of the parts of our brain that process vision. This allows more brainpower to be diverted to recall, and yes lying but which is which and how much isn't clear from just looking at someone. I saw a guy accused of murdering his own child once because of the way he performed on television (badly). He was, as you might have guessed by now, totally innocent of any wrongdoing but that didn't stop all the fucking "armchair neuroscientists/psychologists and detectives from jamming the police hotline with "tips".

Was thinking same.. too many pretend lawyers about or know-it-alls 😂

@@simonsaysrewind I've been attacked for pointing this out. But I've seen more experts coming out of the shadows here casting doubt on his telling of the story, including a psychologist and a lawyer. It's so pathetic that people take the side of a character that's based on a real person written by that person. Sorry had to edit this to fix my typo. A good example is JFK by Oliver Stone. It's based on true story but also utter bollocks.

💯 correct OP. Not a great deal of critical thinking I’ve noticed too! Quite a few people getting the massively embelllished and criminally convicted character mixed up with the real and unconvicted person to whose detriment it has allegedly been. Of course she’s going to recognise her own personal story even if it has been massively added to in the fiction.

@@marcdraco2189I’m genuinely concerned about his ability to remember so much about her from 10 years ago, for Jessica to get it so spot on. And that he knows exactly what she looks like now. And that he made a series that made millions hate her, and included in that series a way of easily tracing her. I don’t think she’s the current problem.

For a short period of time, in the beginning, before it became sinister, while he was mentally unwell

​@@mariannehavisham8323The show depics him pursuing her after she backed off and slept with her. They were both mentally unwell

@@GG_11_11that wasn’t real it was an obvious dream sequence

The victim is sometimes a willing enabler

@GG_11_11 he never sleeps with her in the show. She sexually assaults him -different thing. It shows him panicking when she backs off, not pursuing her

How would there be a case when she went on Piers Morgan and said that what was depicted wasn't her. No case.

@@LogicalVelocity killjoy

listen I don't care about either side in that trial, but I've gotta tell you, calling her "Amber Turd" makes you sound like a child.

@@timeiswhat please elaborate? Giving her any semblance of respect by calling her Amber Heard seems redundant seeing the way she has behaved for the majority of her life. I can call her whatever I want and you sound more of a child by being upset by my terminology :(

Some were only one liner emails

@@ruthgraham1142 yes that’s true. And she did harass the Daily Mail journalist with over 50 calls in a couple of hours. I think she isn’t well. But as Piers said she can sue them if they claim she went to jail and it’s not true. I think there could be a bit of fabrication on his side too

@@aprilodonnell2830 I think they can claim it’s a true story with some fabrication. She honestly did herself no favours with the interview 🤦‍♀️

@@aprilodonnell2830 I barely have time to work, house, cook , how the hell do you keep up these campaigns

@@ruthgraham1142 well if the sexual assault at the canal is fabricated then she certainly can sue them. I know she did herself no favours as at first she said she only met him 2 to 3 times then it was 5 to 6 times at the end of the interview. I honestly think she isn’t well. But I do think Netflix has jumped on the bandwagon here too. He also was desperate for fame and kept going back to that producer whom he knew was a groomer and abuser. So that shows flaws in his character too where he was desperate to get fame. Is that was has been the driving force for this. The truth will come out in the end

I feel the rapist in the drama is the bad guy

I don’t agree with the majority of people trying to destroy her as well. It is because no one knows the truth. Yet, these people mindlessly label someone as such without any considerations. I just thought, if you see her as such, and you were that inconsiderate, what do you think of yourself then? Little with no considerations.

What cruelty? All of them will end up few million richer at the end. The only victims are people watching this pseudo drama instead having a life

@@joeanna1100 And even the rapist was never so much as charged. What if he had all of that up?

💯 Glad other people can see her side like I can. It’s very odd.

It does almost seem like something an abusive ex partner would do to someone, I must admit. I don’t think he is entirely innocent.

@@mysticjen379 No nor does he attempt to portray himself as being entirely innocent - that part comes through loud and clear.

@@pjpredhomme7699 I think you and many people are being far too generous with him. Nevertheless, hopefully the truth will come out and we’ll know for certain.

The one thing I don't get is why she went on Piers Morgan Uncensored. Surely employing a solicitor/lawyer to deal with it and make a statement on her behalf would have been more sensible. This interview didn't help her cause.

@@PM-vd2fs You could say the same about him though, couldn’t you. Why did he make it so public? Why didn’t he go to therapy? I think it he was going to put that out there (and play himself which I thought was strange) do little to hide her identity at least from herself if no one else, then she had the right of reply.

Her reputation obviously. She’s being dragged through the mud on a platform that doesn’t give her a fair opportunity. If he’s taken her to court that would have been a different situation

Money.

Money and attention as she's a narcissist.

rubbish

Not the point.

Absolutely. I'm not sure why people are defending her. Regardless of what has caused her to act like she does, what she does is criminal, dangerous and seriously damaging. She has caused serious harm. If she was a male doing what she did, we would not be here. There is evidence of her stalking previously and her behaving in the ways portrayed in this series. I think Netflix would welcome their day in court.

We don't even know what the truth is yet. You just watched a film and decided you have all the facts which is ridiculous.

She does not deserve to be bullied today for something she did 20 years ago. And I highly doubt they were all true.

@@humanbeing7624he protected her identity by altering details and changing her name. He owes he nothing more. She is the one who went public and is saying she is the real life woman who the character portrays. SHE did that.

Ya, I don't know how this is getting glossed over. Sure, her behaviour, stalking and sexual assault of him in the canal is huge. She's outted herself on our own accord. The rapist though is walking free under the protection of Gadd who won't come forward on who he is which is a crime. I agree that he deserves to be in jail.

No pun intended but...He's not going after him because in some sick way he must have liked being assaulted and drugged by that man...!!!!! because what that man did to him in the movie is obviously wayyyy worse....than what the lady did....drugged and s a'd???? And he went back to that man's house to visit him after all he did to him??? Why?????? Now that's Crazy!!!!!!

No, how fucking dare YOU tell someone how to deal with their trauma. If he doesn’t want to reveal his abuser, that’s his right.

@@royaldivadeja6341Wow… so, the victim liked what happened to them? Shaming a victim for not naming their attacker as if Richard is the first person who has dealt with this. Millions of assault victims haven’t named their abusers. It’s so easy to judge, but they have their reasons.. and it’s not always an easy thing.

@@TamESQ Nobody is telling anyone how to deal with their trauma. Don't know where you pulled that out of anything that has been said here. If he doesn't want to say who it is, fine, but people can comment that he should if they feel that way. A rapist like that shouldn't be walking free. We're allowed to say that.

Can you not work up to 16 hours and claim.

@@davidmoore2308 it wasn’t a dig at Richard, it was a sarcastic remark towards Fiona criticising Richard.

​@davidmoore2308 that's for people with children, and people with disabilities, I believe. If he didn't have any dependants and was able to work, he would have been expected to work full-time, I would think.

She is digging him up for working on the side 😮

Oh bloody hell WATCH THE SHOW THE POLICE IGNORED HIM RE PEAT ED LY.

​@@ThatCoalSoulthe show depicts her in court & being given a jail sentence ...that would have been as a result of a police prosecution

Gadd says he didn’t prosecute…

DO RESEARCH my god.

@@ThatCoalSoulthey still have records of it, i don’t think he went to the police imo. I believe he left it irl.

It’s a TV show: they can call it true, or based on true and lie all the way. It’s Licentia Poetica

Exactly - stating inspired by real events at the start and then say if they’d used a skinny blonde who was French or German or something, and he met her in Paris where *she* was the one working in the bar, that would have made it a lot less obvious. Also maybe not starring in it himself…I thought that was weird!

@@vacanlientI’m not sure they can rely on that here!

And why she would not watch it? I want to know excactly what is going on?

@@katjaxxx7353 Yes, why would she sue over something she's never seen?

It only took literally minutes for people to do a little sleuthing and were able to identify her as Martha. Part of her having a personality disorder is - she does not think she has or is the problem. It is a good example of how people have been using these diagnoses - like a personality disorder - rather loosely - when in fact they are fairly rare . Chances are this lady has a full on disorder. It does not take a whole lot of conversation to get the overwhelming sense that something is not right there.

No it’s apparently not.

Right. First, she says nothing, then, it's "a handful!" RIGHT, lady. I don't believe a word she says.

I agree so much

💯

We only have her word for it that there have been death threats. As far as I know she's not shown any receipts to that effect.

@@STORMDAME True. We can also say the same about him though. For starters, there’s no evidence she was ever convicted.

@@mysticjen379 Absolutely.

@@STORMDAME Cheers. It’s all a bit mad isn’t it!

Yeah true what happened to that? 🤔

Egypt sued? What did Cleopatra have to do with modern Egypt?

Probably settled out of court to save face like they will with this

@@vacanlient Well, some countries cherish their history and don't like to see it distorted by foreigners with an agenda.

Isn’t Egypt in Africa?

Completely agree, some salient points there. I couldn't get my head around that he reported a mentally ill woman to the police (which appears to be a lie) and not a potentially career advancing rapist.

@@cwells5576 100% he seems like he knew exactly what he was doing. Interested to see if the actor looks or sounds ANYTHING like the rapist, like was he trying to actually conceal his identity or did he get it as close as possible for both?

@@jordanbrooks4834 Oh I bet the actual rapist looks nothing like the actor. Why hasn't he been reported to the police, he's allowing this man to carry on his assaults on someone else. If it's even true!

@@cwells5576tbf we don’t even know if the male abuser is real or not. Gadd has already said that Martha did not attack the gf as they didn’t meet. What else is made up?

​@@cwells5576People online have said who he is.

She made his life a living hell and not just his life.

Why poor woman? He's the real victim here. Would you say the same if it was a man stalking a woman?

@@MG20024, when I said 'issues', I was referring to her mental state. Even if I hadn't been being ironic in my use of the term 'poor woman', I still have compassion for people who are clearly mentally unwell. I didn't suggest that it excused her behaviour.

I don't think she's actually all that similar. Her personality comes off pretty different from Martha's (aside from the delusions, not really a unique trait), and it's also not an identifying feature to be Scottish. As for her build, from the few pictures you can find of her online in the past, it looked like she used to be quite a bit lighter - I think they just picked Jessica Gunning because she's phenomenal. However, it IS weird that they used word-for-word tweets that you can apparently still find online.

I watched the interview, he's right she refuses to see herself in that actress playing her

@@pathfinder6993 oh, of course. I never thought of it as refusing to see it, more that she would be unable to (due to physical differences).

People found her on internet because of the tweets we see in the show have been found on Fiona's twitter account.

People worked out it was her,she came forward to have her say. It will be interesting to see how this goes, I'm not saying she hasn't done anything but has it all been exaggerated?! Richard is hardly Mr sane himself.

Perhaps he's just another Jesse smollet. We will eventually all find out

really? have you polled everyone that watched? youre as bad the the rest of the people who assume they know the facts..id say she isnt totally telling the truth but the extreme of it has been exaggerated and i believe if she can produce her side of emails etc...she would win

@@judithwilber2540 I don't argue with strangers on the internet. That would just be weird

It’s a TV show. It doesn’t have to be factual.

@@vacanlient if it claims to be a true story then it should be, otherwise they open themselves up to a liabel case

@@jonnyrocket3659 again it’s a TV show. They can say it is true story and invent everything from the scratch.

It’s a TV show, he can invent whatever he wants

@@vacanlient not when it is depicted in the credits as a true story.

​@@dav147The end credits say it’s been dramatised apparently.

People were calling her house and how long would it be before they turn up at her home? She had no choice but to address it before it got worse. No matter what she does or say, she has been judged as a violent stalker. How would you cope with the whole word against you?

If you cannot see the clear contractions between the two interviews (that I’ve seen) that she makes then you are not informed, watch the interviews in full as she Denys one thing to admit it later. She is on a money grab and it’s that simple, the worst part is, she knows the laws and danced around it like a pro. She is a living nightmare, I met a person like her once, she terrified me and I’m a big guy.

@@Nat_Ash_A SHE SAYS that is what has happened. Is there any proof of what she is saying? She "outed" herself very quickly, it seems.

She's a classic narcissist.

@@MG20024 I wouldn’t poke that bear 🐻 we haven’t seen the last of her. If she gets cast on a really show, she’ll have a new set of victims

He probably should have written in the All persons fictitious disclaimer. "Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental". I think even biopics (despite being "true" stories) have this clause just to avoid any legal strife if they dont get the story exactly right (as there are always oversights or different first hand memory of a story that can be warped a bit).

@@parmaunited Yes. Exactly! Seems so strange that he didn't do that.

@@snookoed I just had a look through the credits of Baby Reindeer. It does however say "This program is based on real events: however certain characters, names, incidents locations and dialogue have been fictionalized for dramatic purposes." Maybe that is enough (although the wording doesnt sound as strong as the all persons fictitious statement). Plus it contradicts the "this is a true story" sentence.

​@parmaunited omg thank you! So many people miss this and it drives me nuts.

So why has she been constantly mentioning Gadd and a woman who previously mentioned her stalking her. On her public social media, if she doesn't wan't to be in the spotlight ?

If she did not go to jail then Netflix shouldn’t claim it as based on a true story. I think it is between them and the individual would know that it is her that he is trying to make out as a villain. She would know and she has the personal right to sue them if majority of it was a lie. Unless, he comes out and disclose who it is and he fully denies that it wasn’t this person. If it is true that it is her and he fabricated the stories against her just to be “famous” or any other vendetta he got, THEN HE IS TO BLAME and most likely a PSYCHOPATH. If in case, this person is on the right side, I’m not going to be surprised. If not, then good. A psychopath loves to play the victim then scapegoat it to the actual victim, I have experienced this myself. They know the power of gaining people’s sympathy and the power of SOCIAL MEDIA. It is an actual attempt of the real villain to ostracize and isolate the real victim. In switching the roles, the fastest way- social media, it’s like “toxic shame” passing it onto you, the fastest way to destroy someone. I am only sharing the POSSIBILITY but if all his stories are true then he gained my admiration because I liked his artistic expression of an abstract pain of a life.

@@funhold565This is my thinking too. What he’s doing strikes me as almost like something a resentful, abusive ex partner would do. You’ll know what I mean by that, I think, given what you say about your own experiences.

Agreed but in fairness we haven’t seen any screenshot of any email. Just taking Richard on his word

If she didn't make his life hell in the past,she certainly will now if he has made this up and if he was raped he needs to go to the police

@@anthonymartyn5590😂😂 totally

That’s 4.6 emails an hour, 24/7 for a whole year. Now that’s a commitment

@@waffleswhisky2203it’s possible though? If you and me sent me a comments it wouldn’t take long to reach that number plus being a crazy person 😂

Doesn't seem unwell?

The sex was fantasy.

Was going to say this. No one battered an eye lid when Fargo did it but now it’s a problem 🙄 and let’s not even talk about the abuser because that’s not important 🤦🏻‍♂️ I hope Gadd counter sues.

​@WillOnWheels well, Fargo is an absolute fake story. There's no one that's going to sue them.

If u watch return of the living dead from the 80s that’s says it based on true story lol

LOVE FARGO❤❤❤❤❤😂😂😂😂😂😂

In Fargo it was a joke. Here it is a huge mistake.

I really doubt that Netflix wouldn't have had their lawyers all over this before they made the deal to make it. To make these claims, they'd have to have the proof.

You know they have a disclaimer in the credits that state some things in the show were changed or dramatized, right? And gadd admits this openly. They didn't say, "Everything is 100% accurate and correct exactly as it says in the show," So it's really no different than saying "based on a true story" it's just sneaker but not against the law.

@@midnightnavigator Yes they say that to say so they take away a persons rights to the products. It’s one thing to say this is what we want to do. However, when you cause harm purposely trying to get a freebie then you deserve high authorities to take over and create additional laws especially to prevent further harm when one is mentally ill. They like to exploit mentally ill because people don’t believe what’s happening to them. That BS and it needs to stop.