Judge Rules Netflix’ ‘Baby Reindeer’ Was Not a ‘True Story’

A judge ruled Friday that the Netflix show “Baby Reindeer” did not live up to its billing as a “true story,” allowing the real-life “Martha” to pursue her defamation lawsuit.

The woman, Fiona Harvey, alleged that the series, created by Richard Gadd, falsely implied that she sexually assaulted Gadd and gouged his eyes, and had been sent to prison for stalking him.

Netflix filed a motion to throw out the suit in July. In his defense, Gadd revealed that Harvey had stalked him for years when he worked at a London pub, would sometimes pinch his buttocks, and had sent him thousands of disturbing emails and voicemail messages. He ultimately reported her to the police and got a “harassment warning” — though she was not criminally prosecuted or sent to jail.

In his ruling on Friday, Judge Gary Klausner noted that the series opens with the line “This is a true story,” inviting the viewer to take what follows as fact. But he found that Martha’s behavior on the show is significantly worse than what Harvey is accused of in real life.

“There is a major difference between stalking and being convicted of stalking in a court of law,” the judge wrote. “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.”

Harvey was never named on the show, though online sleuths were quickly able to identify her based on digital breadcrumbs.

Gadd was an aspiring comedian when he worked in the Hawley Arms pub, and has said the Netflix series is based on his experience there. But he has also said that show, and the stage play on which it was based, were both fictionalizations, and not meant to be a “beat-for-beat recounting” of events.

The Sunday Times reported in June that Gadd had reservations about including the line “This is a true story,” but that it was included at Netflix’ request. The judge noted that article in his ruling, arguing that it could show “actual malice” — that is, that Netflix knew the show was fictionalized, but consciously chose to represent it otherwise.

Klausner did dismiss Harvey’s claims for negligence, violation of her publicity rights, and for punitive damages. But the judge allowed her to pursue a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, which applies to “extreme and outrageous” false statements.

“It appears that a reasonable viewer could understand the statements about Martha to be about Plaintiff,” the judge wrote. “The Series states that Plaintiff is a convicted criminal who sexually and violently assaulted Gadd. These statements may rise to the level of extreme and outrageous conduct.”