'Baby Reindeer': Judge Allows Defamation Suit Against Netflix Over Show

CNN
—

A Scottish woman accused of stalking “Baby Reindeer” creator and star Richard Gadd may file her defamation lawsuit against Netflix after a federal judge in California refused to dismiss all claims.

In a ruling released Friday, Judge R. Gary Klausner wrote that while Fiona Harvey's “alleged actions were reprehensible,” the differences in the way they were portrayed on the show had “a different effect on a viewer's psyche.” could cause”.

Also Judge Klausner wrote that while Fiona Harvey's “alleged actions were reprehensible,” the differences in the way they were portrayed on the show could “produce a different effect on a viewer's psyche” and therefore on the rights of the accused .

CNN has reached out to Gadd and Netflix for comment.

In a statement to CNN in June, a Netflix spokesperson said: “We intend to vigorously defend this matter and stand by Richard Gadd's right to tell his story.”

In the Emmy Award-winning Netflix miniseries, Gadd tells the supposed “true story” of being stalked by a woman who bombards him with more than 40,000 emails and hundreds of hours of voicemails.

After its debut in April, the series topped most-watched lists worldwide, generating headlines and speculation about the characters and who inspired them. Harvey, who was quickly tracked down by online sleuths who dubbed her the “real Martha Scott,” filed suit in June in the district court of the Central District of California, seeking a jury trial and a total of $170 million in damages.

Gadd previously told British newspaper The Guardian that the story was “emotionally very true… But we wanted it to exist in the realm of art and protect the people it's based on.”

However, his repeated pleas for viewers to stop searching for the true identities of the characters in his story went unheard.

In the lawsuit, Harvey alleges “several material differences” between her and the character Martha, who stalked Gadd's character Donny Dunn. Specifically, Harvey says viewers concluded that she was also “a twice-convicted criminal who spent five years in prison for stalking,” “stalked a police officer,” “sexually assaulted Gadd in an alley,” “Gadd had violently attacked… had outdone his husband”. eyes with their thumbs,” and “persecuted Gadd by waiting outside his house for up to 16 hours a day, every day.”

In his decision, Judge Klaussner addresses Netflix Arguing that these examples are “substantially true,” a commonly used defamation defense that asserts that the overall content of a statement is true. The streaming company argued that while Harvey was not a twice-convicted criminal, “she could have been convicted and sentenced to five years in prison” and that she was “handy” with (Gadd), pinching him and touching various parts of his body including his “butt” without consent.”

Klausner disagreed with Netflix's argument, writing, “There is a big difference between stalking and being convicted of stalking in court.” Likewise, there are big differences between inappropriate touching and sexual assault, and between pushing and gouging another person in the eyes. “

Klausner also believed that Harvey could potentially exhibit “actual malice” if Netflix knowingly presented fictional events as fact. As possible evidence of this, he pointed to Sunday Times reporting, citing television industry sources, that Gadd reportedly had concerns about portraying “Baby Reindeer” as entirely true, and that the stage play from which the show was adapted presented itself as “based on a true story.”

While the judge allowed the defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims, the judge dismissed Harvey's negligence, gross negligence and publicity claims, as well as her request for punitive damages.