@@Nickname006 "money hungry." That's what's wrong with that- So which backstabbing friend are you babe? Go back to the upper east side where you belong snob.
@@Nickname006 Anna wasn't convicted yet and still innocent in the eyes of the law. I'm surprised they didn't bring into question how Rachel's actions, the article and the book deal, hindered a fair trial.
She was portrayed as being a bit gullible and definitely manipulated by Anna. I don't think she was made to look particularly bad. I don't see her grounds for a lawsuit.
She wrote a book - she can’t sue Netflix. That won’t work. “Falsified events” -yes that’s called a movie BASED on a true story - not an actual true story. Just ask Ted Mosby from How I Met Your Mother.
So you'd be cool if you were intentionally misrepresented on a giant platform causing harm to your lifelong personal and professional prospects? Good to know you're crazy.
@@CreatureCargaux whoa, I didn’t know all that. The only thing I saw on this story was a “documentary” awhile back and it left me thinking she had all her credit cards racked up and she never saw any of that money back from Anna. So what’s the truth?
The scenes in Morocco when she was getting increasingly desperate and scared actually made me feel bad for her. The part where she lost me was when it turned out that the credit card debt was already excused, she had a book deal for a lot of money and was standing to make even more money if it was brought to television. Like, you're already out of debt, and made a lot of money, with probably more to come. What more do you want?! And in terms of defamation, she had already written an article about it so people already knew her name. Plus, she wrote about Anna before Anna was even convicted, so at that point still considered innocent in the eyes of the law. She could have been sued for that I think? Quit while you're ahead sugar, cause you're ruining your own reputation now.
Same here. She totally lost me on her actions even after the stress of Morocco. You are still making money of off Anna. Yeah Anna's not a good person but Rachel's just as opportunistic
Just because Rachel got her money back does not excuse what Anna did to her. I’m sure it was very traumatizing for her to be stuck in a foreign country with no way out. It’s not just about the money it’s the principle of the matter. Anna can’t just get away with it. Good for Rachel for standing up for herself.
Anna conned her out of more than what she makes in a year. Whether she’s convicted or not, Rachel is not allowed to talk about that? Also how her revealing herself is relevant in Netflix’s defamatory portrayal? They made fabricated events to present her in a bad light and used her real name in a portrayal that is not based on truth. Whether she was known before that is irrelevant. She’s also allowed to make money out of the experience she’s been through and share her story as she doesn’t owe Anna anything. People being upset that a victim talked about what they’ve been through before the person putting them through that is formally convicted is just wild. By the way Anna was never found guilty of stealing from Rachel. Did she do it though? Absolutely.
My question is why change everyone else's name (obviously Annas is her real name) except hers? Its almost like they went out of their way to villainize her and didn't even change her name like they did everyone else
I've read her book and seen interviews of her, I don't believe the series is that different from her own story. I mean you can't sue people for not liking you or agreeing with your perception of yourself.
Try listening to it watching the movie ‼️🥴 the real person the movie is about didn’t have a voice like that so I’m confused as to why she did it’s not her normal voice
Jesse, When Rachael Williams broke her side of the story, I think to People Magazine, she acted in print exactly like she acted in the movie! That was my personal opinion before I knew anything about Anna! Once again I'm wondering if Rachael is trying to further gain financially because she really isn't a shining star in this story. I think she expected a bigger payout, but wasn't given anything! She needs to put on her big girl hat and move on! There are NO heroes in this story!
Yes, this is how one grasps a tenuous claim to fame and worries about damage done to a harmed ego. That, and repercussions of selfish decisions and cowardice that cash checks you can’t cash. It hit close to the bone - and that’s evident. It’s a bad look, better forgotten if she can’t embrace it to build upon. Let her talents and skills take her further or put it to rest with her own actions and virtue... but, be a martyr to it?? C’mon! Grow up! It seems that scandal portrays - or caricatures(??) aspects of her, more closely than she’s accepted. She can look in the mirror, accept the flaws that have been exposed, the truth that dispels exaggerations, then she can compel us to relate to whomever she is. If she can’t do it...? So... which image does she want to chase, now? The It Girl who gets it all, without a conscience or the virtuous, intelligent and skillful woman exploited by a... narcissistic child? The slut or the virgin - it’s so tired, but true, a dusty, misogynistic question. You can’t have both - at least not without being 3D and humanizing yourself by showing some vulnerability and truth.
Yes that she is the innocent victim who was exploited. Anna Sorokin is a sociopath and a thief con artist. Netflix is evil like most cooperations and had ulterior motives in victim blaming and celebrating a sociopath and con artist. I suspected this all along and now I know it for sure.
Now I'm super annoyed by this woman. How many disclaimers were on that show? Multiple times an episode so frivolous. She is just attention seeking at this point.
Except she wasn’t even portrayed as a backstabbing friend- she was portrayed as a naïve friend who let Anna use her corporate Visa card to pay for a fancy hotel and then was increasingly desperate to get paid back because her job depended on it. I really don’t think they even portrayed her badly 🤷🏻♀️
I've read her book and seen interviews of her. At one point she was everywhere. I don't believe the series is that different from her own story. I mean you can't sue people for not liking you or agreeing with your perception of yourself.
Hopefully the judge tosses it out after 5 minutes. Once the jury sees that disclaimer, the whole foundation of this frivolous suit is crumbled. Any excuse to file suit. Just a cheap attempt at easy money with a quick settlement. I hope Netflix throws an entire firm at this and fights it to the end - then countersue for attorney's fees. None of this would have any effect on her were she not the one seeking media attention on a constant basis and attaching her image and name to a series which has already been forgotten.
@@Nickname006 I can see problems with at least two of the 4 things that must be proven to be awarded damages. 1- Her character must be proven to be presented as factual. I promise you there is legal documentation that the characters are portrayed as fictional based on actual people. 2- She has to prove that she lost income, future income, or opportunities for income as a result of the film.
@@theresamaher3893 She went public when she wrote that article about this case. They probably considered her a public figure because of that. With that said ALL of them were named in the lest episode, even with real pictures of them. None of them were kept anonymous.
I know nothing about this TV show, but unless it's marked as a documentary I don't see a case here. Works of fiction about real life are always dramatized for entertainment purposes. So long as they are not advertised as presenting fact, I don't think there's a claim to be had.
It wasn’t a documentary.. was it ? Like The Crown fictional drama - these things are fiction & for entertainment. Maybe sue the fools that take these fictions seriously! 🤷🏼♀️
It is not a documentary! I don’t know any of the details, just from headlines then searching videos here. My guess is that the ‘reputation damage’ is social media chatter. I can’t imagine a professional not understanding what dramatized means. I’m sure their are people who will take fictional drama as reality, but you get that with conspiracy theories too. So, idk either.
I hadn't even heard of the show but based on the fact I just looked at her insta and the comments are limited on her post, it shows she knows she's disliked and it gets to her.
Unpopular opinion but Raquel did nothing wrong. Anna did care what was going to happen to Raquel, so what if Raquel turned from being the victim into being the victor? What Anna did wasn’t right and they gaslight Raquel as F.
@@DawzeyJ I've read her book and seen interviews of her. At one point she was everywhere. I don't believe the series is that different from her own story. I mean you can't sue people for not liking you or agreeing with your perception of yourself.
I guess I didn't watch the same series. My perception of the character portrayed was that she was victim placed in dire straits due to the behavior of Sorokin. At no time did I construe the Netflix character to be any of the things alleged in the lawsuit. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
How do they expect to win this case when thru the entire show every episode repeated that this show is true except for everything else that was completely made up.
As someone who was screwed over by my employers causing me to go broke, I would definitely write a book and profit off of it if I'm not too lazy to write.
Neff said it best… in many quotes during this series. One being that she is always prepared on picking up the bill in any situation. Second, being she was always there for the free training sessions, massages, hair, countless fancy dinners & trips etc. Unfortunately, RW was only around for the money & freebies. Lastly, she’s an opportunist & set Anna up to be arrested & played her victim role for financial gain. love neff & she was right on & so refreshing to see Anna to have such a good friend through all of this. Every girl needs a Neff!
Her attorney appears to be from the UK where loser pays keeps frivolous suits like this out of the courts. Unfortunately the US courts will never have loser pays.
They should have used a different name … but how the lawyer will prove that the real Rachel is not a freeloading, upstanding person? What reputation RW had before?
Rachel is pathetic. She is the one who put her name with the case by writing an article at her job about her side of the story. Now she doesn't wanna be recognized with this case?? If you ask me, she's acting how she was portrayed in the show. I hope netflix gets justice
Omg Rachel needs to stop with writing her books and suing. She’s such an attention seeker. I am sure she has a secret talent that she can benefit off of vs. this
I despised the character of Rachel in the series. She was intolerable. I remember watching the interview with the real Rachel and thinking she seemed nothing like that character. I wondered how she (the real Rachel) would view the way she was portrayed. I would be angry with he Netflix series portrayal too if I were her.
Not sure she’s a victim any longer. Lots of people have been betrayed by friends. I got deported when the man who I thought was my best friend bailed on me 3 days before we filed for my new visa with him as my sponsor, after over a year of planning and a move of my whole life and my dog to a new country. My life savings, the home I had come to know, all my friends, my whole life… gone. I never got A THING as a result of this except extreme loss. And yes, even if I got my money and home back, the betrayal would always hurt. But this girl has made the money back by selling the story, and every other video I see about Anna is an interview with Rachel. If she didn’t want attention, don’t sell the story. Cause not all attention is positive.
Racheal just keeps giving me a reason that she is a privileged (Karen) opportunist. All I deduce is she wants to be pitied for her misguided actions, trust, and lack of logic.
Todd put it best in the Netflix series. "If this is the worst thing that's ever happened to you, we should all be so lucky". A-fuckin-men. Idk if he really said anything like that but I really hope he did.
This story motivated me to invent a character to steal money from millionaires like Buffett or Musk and then just pretend that I'm mentally ill and not paying back.
Vindication for Racheal is to admit that she made misguided decisions and used her company credit card fraud entry. Take her Loss and learn from it. She just keeps trying to cover her egregious behavior with deflection to others, in my opinion.
So this girl isn’t a money chasing clout chasing no one who wants to make it off her associations with other people? She didn’t cry victim for going on an expensive trip ? She didn’t volunteer her Amex card? I’m confused.
All of this just confirms, for me, that everything portrayed about Racheal is true. Her character was not that important, or interesting, until the fact she gave her cards to be held to support Anna. That was her foolish choice. I could never imagine allowing that to happen. She can’t be mad at the truth, confirmed by her on other interviews. She wanted to be with Anna so bad, she tried to lock in her connection by making the gesture. She did turn in her friend. The whining portrayed on the show is how I saw her in interviews. To say she was accused of “every imaginable sin” is a great exaggeration. Did she offer her credit card to cover for a friend? She said she did. Did she help the police arrest her friend? Yes. Did she lose her job? No. Did she make money off of her experience with Anna? Yes. Her actions are fact. She told her story in the book, so comments about her betrayal of her friend and her gullible actions are not the fault of Netflix or Anna. She made the choices that created her involvement. The more I hear her talk and about her denial about her responsibility the more she buried herself. This lawsuit is the sane crying act portrayed in the show. So it’s her defaming her ow character, IMO. Someone close to her needs to tell her to stop. Oh. But someone tried to stop her before placing that card down. To me, she is exercising “privileged” by blaming everyone for her actions. She keeps taking the spotlight off Anna’s wrongdoing. I don’t see her as pathetic because of Netflix. It’s because she ignorantly used her cards for the sake of being accepted as friend.
They stated in writing in every episode that this story is true and then there are times it's totally made up. So I think Netflix has it covered I would hope. They are a massive company they have lawyers. When I watched it I felt bad for Rachel actually. I didn't think they portrayed her badly. That was awful what was done to her and Anna acted like it was no big deal.
it was very polite to ask the attorney what is his interpretation of the netflix disclaimer --- because THERE IS ZERO need for interpretation LOL, it says it clear and simple : “This whole story is completely true. Except for all the parts that are totally made up.” ...was this lawsuit even entertained....?
Jesus this Rachel chick is delusional. She got her money back from AMEX and milked this story and got her cash. So omg she used anna so many times and keeps riding on her name and getting money. She's terrible and her portrayal wad absolutely correct
Rachel proved her own critics right by filing this lawsuit. She’s just mad because the world now knows she’s not a victim and as a result she’ll never be able to profit off of her relationship with Anna again.
I know absolutely nothing about this, sounds like such a ridiculous lawsuit, but won't it be pointless? Pretty sure it's the reason shows and movies typically always say BASED ON A TRUE STORY. Based being the key word here.
Or Anna was a rotten person to EVERYONE because she's a fraud and stole from numerous "friends" and companies...but boo hoo, Rachel didn't lick her boots enough for you lol
![SAFEPLANET - ดาวเคราะห์ [ THE PLANET ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4X1XL3I_k3c/mqdefault.jpg)
“This whole story is completely true. Except for all the parts that are totally made up.” - Inventing Anna
So is this the same money hungry friend who signed a 300,000$ book deal about Anna just before the trial began?
What is wrong with that?
@@Nickname006 "money hungry." That's what's wrong with that-
So which backstabbing friend are you babe? Go back to the upper east side where you belong snob.
@@Nickname006 Are you her PR person?
I hope she gives you a cut!! 👍👍
I don ‘t blame Rachel
@@Nickname006 Anna wasn't convicted yet and still innocent in the eyes of the law. I'm surprised they didn't bring into question how Rachel's actions, the article and the book deal, hindered a fair trial.
She was portrayed as being a bit gullible and definitely manipulated by Anna. I don't think she was made to look particularly bad.
I don't see her grounds for a lawsuit.
She’s worthless trying to get rich off other people.
She wrote a book - she can’t sue Netflix. That won’t work.
“Falsified events” -yes that’s called a movie BASED on a true story - not an actual true story. Just ask Ted Mosby from How I Met Your Mother.
"True story." - Barney Stinson
“This whole story is completely true. Except for all the parts that are totally made up.” - Inventing Anna
@@babycakes4206 ha ha ha, lol 😂
defamation is real tho
@@Immortal_BPyou are right "billions and billions of stars..."
This lawsuit confirms that Netflix portrayed Rachael Williams correctly....she's an opportunist focused on financial gain.
@@realessayog6947 Yup....just like your comment. It can totally be twisted. 😁👍
So you'd be cool if you were intentionally misrepresented on a giant platform causing harm to your lifelong personal and professional prospects? Good to know you're crazy.
So there's no merit to her case?
@@CreatureCargaux whoa, I didn’t know all that. The only thing I saw on this story was a “documentary” awhile back and it left me thinking she had all her credit cards racked up and she never saw any of that money back from Anna. So what’s the truth?
Wow, you are a horrible person. Imagine yourself in the same situation.
The scenes in Morocco when she was getting increasingly desperate and scared actually made me feel bad for her. The part where she lost me was when it turned out that the credit card debt was already excused, she had a book deal for a lot of money and was standing to make even more money if it was brought to television. Like, you're already out of debt, and made a lot of money, with probably more to come. What more do you want?! And in terms of defamation, she had already written an article about it so people already knew her name. Plus, she wrote about Anna before Anna was even convicted, so at that point still considered innocent in the eyes of the law. She could have been sued for that I think? Quit while you're ahead sugar, cause you're ruining your own reputation now.
Same here. She totally lost me on her actions even after the stress of Morocco. You are still making money of off Anna. Yeah Anna's not a good person but Rachel's just as opportunistic
Just because Rachel got her money back does not excuse what Anna did to her. I’m sure it was very traumatizing for her to be stuck in a foreign country with no way out. It’s not just about the money it’s the principle of the matter. Anna can’t just get away with it. Good for Rachel for standing up for herself.
Anna conned her out of more than what she makes in a year. Whether she’s convicted or not, Rachel is not allowed to talk about that? Also how her revealing herself is relevant in Netflix’s defamatory portrayal? They made fabricated events to present her in a bad light and used her real name in a portrayal that is not based on truth. Whether she was known before that is irrelevant.
She’s also allowed to make money out of the experience she’s been through and share her story as she doesn’t owe Anna anything. People being upset that a victim talked about what they’ve been through before the person putting them through that is formally convicted is just wild. By the way Anna was never found guilty of stealing from Rachel. Did she do it though? Absolutely.
How much will the disclaimer protect Netflix?
"This story is true, except for the parts that are totally made up"
I didn’t see her as portrayed negatively ….nor anybody I know..I don’t understand this lawsuits
Gee she's not money hungry at all! I think Netflix had it pretty close to right!
well to be fair thats a catch 22, if she doesnt sue its basically true but if she does sue then its also true... lol
But Netflix issued a disclaimer that the story is true except the part that was made up so I am confused about the lawsuit.
My question is why change everyone else's name (obviously Annas is her real name) except hers? Its almost like they went out of their way to villainize her and didn't even change her name like they did everyone else
@@mastatema Probably because she didn that Vanity Fair article and was considered being a public figure in regards to the story.
These comments are exactly why she’s suing for defamation
I've read her book and seen interviews of her, I don't believe the series is that different from her own story. I mean you can't sue people for not liking you or agreeing with your perception of yourself.
@@missJolie85remember Anna was not guilty for anything against Rachel!
No one cared about her, she defamed herself basically by suing
I wasn’t prepared for that voice
Try listening to it watching the movie ‼️🥴 the real person the movie is about didn’t have a voice like that so I’m confused as to why she did it’s not her normal voice
She is angry that she didn’t get enough money. If she thinks they should not use her name then why did she use Anna’s real name.
Girl thought Netflix was filming her biography...
@@angelsadventure4996 😆
Jesse, When Rachael Williams broke her side of the story, I think to People Magazine, she acted in print exactly like she acted in the movie! That was my personal opinion before I knew anything about Anna! Once again I'm wondering if Rachael is trying to further gain financially because she really isn't a shining star in this story. I think she expected a bigger payout, but wasn't given anything! She needs to put on her big girl hat and move on! There are NO heroes in this story!
Yes, this is how one grasps a tenuous claim to fame and worries about damage done to a harmed ego. That, and repercussions of selfish decisions and cowardice that cash checks you can’t cash. It hit close to the bone - and that’s evident.
It’s a bad look, better forgotten if she can’t embrace it to build upon. Let her talents and skills take her further or put it to rest with her own actions and virtue... but, be a martyr to it?? C’mon! Grow up!
It seems that scandal portrays - or caricatures(??) aspects of her, more closely than she’s accepted. She can look in the mirror, accept the flaws that have been exposed, the truth that dispels exaggerations, then she can compel us to relate to whomever she is. If she can’t do it...? So... which image does she want to chase, now? The It Girl who gets it all, without a conscience or the virtuous, intelligent and skillful woman exploited by a... narcissistic child?
The slut or the virgin - it’s so tired, but true, a dusty, misogynistic question. You can’t have both - at least not without being 3D and humanizing yourself by showing some vulnerability and truth.
@@-Reagan Thank you for your very eloquent reply!
With this lawsuit, Rachel has succeeded in confirming what so many suspected.
Yes that she is the innocent victim who was exploited. Anna Sorokin is a sociopath and a thief con artist. Netflix is evil like most cooperations and had ulterior motives in victim blaming and celebrating a sociopath and con artist. I suspected this all along and now I know it for sure.
Now I'm super annoyed by this woman. How many disclaimers were on that show? Multiple times an episode so frivolous. She is just attention seeking at this point.
Except she wasn’t even portrayed as a backstabbing friend- she was portrayed as a naïve friend who let Anna use her corporate Visa card to pay for a fancy hotel and then was increasingly desperate to get paid back because her job depended on it. I really don’t think they even portrayed her badly 🤷🏻♀️
Shit’s gonna get dismissed so fast
Literally proving their point lmao
Exactly!
I've read her book and seen interviews of her. At one point she was everywhere. I don't believe the series is that different from her own story. I mean you can't sue people for not liking you or agreeing with your perception of yourself.
Doesn’t a show disclose that events are embellished for dramatic purpose?
That part!!
So who is the scammer and opportunistic? That’s right Rachel
Rachel wanted a rich friend who she can use, but she got scammed, poor her.
this girl is smarter than anna. she has made even more money than her from this whole ordeal.
Hopefully the judge tosses it out after 5 minutes.
Once the jury sees that disclaimer, the whole foundation of this frivolous suit is crumbled.
Any excuse to file suit.
Just a cheap attempt at easy money with a quick settlement.
I hope Netflix throws an entire firm at this and fights it to the end - then countersue for attorney's fees.
None of this would have any effect on her were she not the one seeking media attention on a constant basis and attaching her image and name to a series which has already been forgotten.
Her lawyer is taking her money knowing good and well she has absolutely no case.
Why doesn't she have a case?
@@Nickname006 I can see problems with at least two of the 4 things that must be proven to be awarded damages.
1- Her character must be proven to be presented as factual. I promise you there is legal documentation that the characters are portrayed as fictional based on actual people.
2- She has to prove that she lost income, future income, or opportunities for income as a result of the film.
Then Netflix shouldn't have used her name, like they did with other characters in the series.
@@theresamaher3893 She went public when she wrote that article about this case. They probably considered her a public figure because of that. With that said ALL of them were named in the lest episode, even with real pictures of them. None of them were kept anonymous.
Oh, well, she wrote a book. I'm sure it was 100% factual 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
She must really be struggling 😬
I know nothing about this TV show, but unless it's marked as a documentary I don't see a case here. Works of fiction about real life are always dramatized for entertainment purposes. So long as they are not advertised as presenting fact, I don't think there's a claim to be had.
How could Rachael be a close friend, hanger on to Anna and be the person the lawyer is trying portray?
It wasn’t a documentary.. was it ? Like The Crown fictional drama - these things are fiction & for entertainment. Maybe sue the fools that take these fictions seriously! 🤷🏼♀️
It is not a documentary! I don’t know any of the details, just from headlines then searching videos here. My guess is that the ‘reputation damage’ is social media chatter. I can’t imagine a professional not understanding what dramatized means. I’m sure their are people who will take fictional drama as reality, but you get that with conspiracy theories too. So, idk either.
At the beginning of every episode of the show it says “all of this is true, except the parts that are made up”….where is their case lol
It's a story on Netflix, not a news article.
I hadn't even heard of the show but based on the fact I just looked at her insta and the comments are limited on her post, it shows she knows she's disliked and it gets to her.
She is, as many similar people are, exactly like this. Just after more money
The real Rachel is very much like the actresses portrayal. The fact that both her parents were psychologists is insane
Low-key she seems like the kind of girl that would sue them for whatever she could.
just milking it as BEST as she can at this point.
Interviewer: " what is your lawsuit about ?"
Lawyer:" i choose not to speculate" ...uh what ?
13:00 min. Interviewer Asked Rachel’s attorney: What were the damages? And he is sketchy.. 😂
She probably hoping Netflix will just settle with her to make it go away.
This is ridiculous.
Unpopular opinion but Raquel did nothing wrong. Anna did care what was going to happen to Raquel, so what if Raquel turned from being the victim into being the victor? What Anna did wasn’t right and they gaslight Raquel as F.
"defamation" "cancelled" "freedom" "dystopia" the 4 words that describe modern times in perfect detail.
humanity is doomed
AH testified under oath also, didn’t mean she was telling the truth.
Everybody is after financial gain, I watched the show and just saw a person gets scared out of her money just like Anna did to the big companies
This law suit is ridicules to me
It doesn’t feel nice to be ridiculed
@@DawzeyJ I've read her book and seen interviews of her. At one point she was everywhere. I don't believe the series is that different from her own story. I mean you can't sue people for not liking you or agreeing with your perception of yourself.
Oh.
............please she was Anna's party bff.....
If her case actually has merit, then more power to her. She already has money?, that's nobody's business.
I guess I didn't watch the same series. My perception of the character portrayed was that she was victim placed in dire straits due to the behavior of Sorokin. At no time did I construe the Netflix character to be any of the things alleged in the lawsuit. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
Yeah ..she won't win!..but she'll make this show really successful..EVERYONE will watch it NOW!❤🙄
How do they expect to win this case when thru the entire show every episode repeated that this show is true except for everything else that was completely made up.
Netflix obviously didnt seek legal advice.
Unfortunately it's all about the ratings and the money 💰 🤑 💸. That's what makes the world go round.
It'd be cool if South Park did an episode with her appearing lmao "PARODY ACT"
As someone who was screwed over by my employers causing me to go broke, I would definitely write a book and profit off of it if I'm not too lazy to write.
Neff said it best… in many quotes during this series. One being that she is always prepared on picking up the bill in any situation. Second, being she was always there for the free training sessions, massages, hair, countless fancy dinners & trips etc.
Unfortunately, RW was only around for the money & freebies. Lastly, she’s an opportunist & set Anna up to be arrested & played her victim role for financial gain.
love neff & she was right on & so refreshing to see Anna to have such a good friend through all of this. Every girl needs a Neff!
F… this! If you’re a part of this story, this is what will happen! Suck it up.
It should be sued for the WOKE crap …other than that it’s a good show
Her attorney appears to be from the UK where loser pays keeps frivolous suits like this out of the courts. Unfortunately the US courts will never have loser pays.
I triggered myself I thought this was about anorexia
Is the Royal family also allowed to sue Netflix because The Crown is not entirely true?
Based on everything I read about Anna , I absolutely would sue Netflix, just like I would sue them over the Cleopatra fake documentary.
Did she sign off (give permission) to allow the airing of the “show”?
She still needs money to pay back the company credit card
also I as a viewer, did NOT think Rachel was made a villain AT ALL
Imagine what Jack Gleeson could have sued HBO for his portrayal as Joffrey 😂😂
Whatever happened this young lady got paid 10 times over she made money off of it
They should have used a different name … but how the lawyer will prove that the real Rachel is not a freeloading, upstanding person? What reputation RW had before?
Friends break up just like couples . I ended one because of 8 years of borrowing, l finally woke up.
Rachel is pathetic. She is the one who put her name with the case by writing an article at her job about her side of the story. Now she doesn't wanna be recognized with this case?? If you ask me, she's acting how she was portrayed in the show. I hope netflix gets justice
Was a defender of Rachel Williams but this is just absurd
Same I was with her when she wrote the book
How is it absurd? Imagine yourself in the same situation.
Omg Rachel needs to stop with writing her books and suing. She’s such an attention seeker. I am sure she has a secret talent that she can benefit off of vs. this
She should really just stop it and move on wow
You gotta call a spade a spade.
I despised the character of Rachel in the series. She was intolerable. I remember watching the interview with the real Rachel and thinking she seemed nothing like that character. I wondered how she (the real Rachel) would view the way she was portrayed. I would be angry with he Netflix series portrayal too if I were her.
Not sure she’s a victim any longer. Lots of people have been betrayed by friends. I got deported when the man who I thought was my best friend bailed on me 3 days before we filed for my new visa with him as my sponsor, after over a year of planning and a move of my whole life and my dog to a new country. My life savings, the home I had come to know, all my friends, my whole life… gone. I never got A THING as a result of this except extreme loss. And yes, even if I got my money and home back, the betrayal would always hurt.
But this girl has made the money back by selling the story, and every other video I see about Anna is an interview with Rachel. If she didn’t want attention, don’t sell the story. Cause not all attention is positive.
The “NO” killed me 😂
Tell Kanye West that, with all his horrible posts about Pete Davidson, he said it was "art"
There are guidelines for common decency in the comments but it fails miserably.
If Jerry West didn’t sue HBO then this isn’t gonna get anywhere close.
Racheal just keeps giving me a reason that she is a privileged (Karen) opportunist. All I deduce is she wants to be pitied for her misguided actions, trust, and lack of logic.
Todd put it best in the Netflix series. "If this is the worst thing that's ever happened to you, we should all be so lucky". A-fuckin-men. Idk if he really said anything like that but I really hope he did.
This story motivated me to invent a character to steal money from millionaires like Buffett or Musk and then just pretend that I'm mentally ill and not paying back.
Vindication for Racheal is to admit that she made misguided decisions and used her company credit card fraud entry. Take her Loss and learn from it. She just keeps trying to cover her egregious behavior with deflection to others, in my opinion.
the access portraying Anna does not look at like her
So this girl isn’t a money chasing clout chasing no one who wants to make it off her associations with other people? She didn’t cry victim for going on an expensive trip ? She didn’t volunteer her Amex card? I’m confused.
Oh she's gon prove her case w/ HER OWN book & HER OWN testimony 🙄
All of this just confirms, for me, that everything portrayed about Racheal is true. Her character was not that important, or interesting, until the fact she gave her cards to be held to support Anna. That was her foolish choice. I could never imagine allowing that to happen. She can’t be mad at the truth, confirmed by her on other interviews. She wanted to be with Anna so bad, she tried to lock in her connection by making the gesture. She did turn in her friend. The whining portrayed on the show is how I saw her in interviews. To say she was accused of “every imaginable sin” is a great exaggeration. Did she offer her credit card to cover for a friend? She said she did. Did she help the police arrest her friend? Yes. Did she lose her job? No. Did she make money off of her experience with Anna? Yes. Her actions are fact. She told her story in the book, so comments about her betrayal of her friend and her gullible actions are not the fault of Netflix or Anna. She made the choices that created her involvement. The more I hear her talk and about her denial about her responsibility the more she buried herself. This lawsuit is the sane crying act portrayed in the show. So it’s her defaming her ow character, IMO. Someone close to her needs to tell her to stop. Oh. But someone tried to stop her before placing that card down. To me, she is exercising “privileged” by blaming everyone for her actions. She keeps taking the spotlight off Anna’s wrongdoing. I don’t see her as pathetic because of Netflix. It’s because she ignorantly used her cards for the sake of being accepted as friend.
They stated in writing in every episode that this story is true and then there are times it's totally made up. So I think Netflix has it covered I would hope. They are a massive company they have lawyers. When I watched it I felt bad for Rachel actually. I didn't think they portrayed her badly. That was awful what was done to her and Anna acted like it was no big deal.
Rachael is trying to get famous off of 'being a victim' after getting into something which was a result of her bad judgment.
it was very polite to ask the attorney what is his interpretation of the netflix disclaimer --- because THERE IS ZERO need for interpretation LOL, it says it clear and simple : “This whole story is completely true. Except for all the parts that are totally made up.” ...was this lawsuit even entertained....?
imagine if this goes thru. South Park is SCREWED.
I must have watched a different show. I felt sorry for her that she was taken advantage of by Anna. Seems like every one wants a piece of the pie.
Hello Netflix lady hello? 😢📞- R Williams when the series came out
I was going to ask if there was a disclaimer at the start, I watched the whole thing but didn't pay attention to any disclaimer
Jesus this Rachel chick is delusional. She got her money back from AMEX and milked this story and got her cash. So omg she used anna so many times and keeps riding on her name and getting money. She's terrible and her portrayal wad absolutely correct
Rachel proved her own critics right by filing this lawsuit. She’s just mad because the world now knows she’s not a victim and as a result she’ll never be able to profit off of her relationship with Anna again.
I know absolutely nothing about this, sounds like such a ridiculous lawsuit, but won't it be pointless? Pretty sure it's the reason shows and movies typically always say BASED ON A TRUE STORY. Based being the key word here.
Ms. Rachel was a rotten friend to Ms. Anna, her portrayal was accurate... $$$$$$$🙄
Well it’s not like Anna deserved good friends so there’s that.
Or Anna was a rotten person to EVERYONE because she's a fraud and stole from numerous "friends" and companies...but boo hoo, Rachel didn't lick her boots enough for you lol
Are you seriously defending Anna?!