Netflix and Baby Reindeer’s Richard Gadd have suffered a blow when it comes to Fiona Harvey’s $170 million lawsuit against the streaming giant. A judge has ruled that Harvey, who claims to be the inspiration behind the character of Martha, can go ahead with her defamation lawsuit.
A US judge noted that the show shouldn’t have been labelled as a “true story”, as Netflix “made no effort” to mask who the character of Martha was based on or fact-check Gadd’s version of events.
Harvey has alleged the show has misconstrued events, saying Baby Reindeer falsely infers she ended up getting prison time for stalking Gadd, as well as physically and sexually assaulting him.
US district judge Gary Klausner said in his ruling that by including the line: “This is a true story” at the beginning of each episode, it invited “the audience to accept the statements as fact”. Seeing as viewers believed the series to be true, they “concluded” that Harvey had done all of the depicted acts in the show, in real life, such as stalking a police officer and spending five years in prison for stalking.
While he described Harvey’s “purported actions” towards Gadd as “reprehensible”, he stated that Martha’s behaviour in Baby Reindeer was “worse” than what Harvey has been accused of in real life.
“There is a major difference between stalking and being convicted of stalking in a court of law,” he said. “Likewise, there are major differences between inappropriate touching and sexual assault, as well as between shoving and gouging another’s eyes. While plaintiff’s purported actions are reprehensible, defendants’ statements are of a worse degree and could produce a different effect in the mind of a viewer.”
Back in June, sources told Sunday Times that Gadd apparently “expressed concerns” about including the “true story” line at the start of each episode. According to the publication, this line “was a request from Netflix”.
Klausner referenced this Sunday Times article in his ruling. “This suggests a reckless disregard of whether statements in the series were false, and thus, actual malice,” he said.
“[Netflix] should have known the statements and portrayal of plaintiff through Martha were false, and that viewers would discover her identity and harass her based on these false statements and portrayals,” he added.
“Yet, defendants made no effort to investigate the accuracy of these statements and portrayals, or take further measures to hide her identity.”
Fiona Harvey’s lawsuit is set to go to trial on May 6, 2025.
Lead image: Getty & X @piersmorgan
