Baby Reindeer Defamation Lawsuit: What You Should Know

The lawsuit against Netflix is ​​based on the alleged inspiration of Baby reindeer is picking up speed.

Fiona Harveywho claims the popular miniseries was based on her, sued the streamer for defamation in June. She is seeking at least $170 million in damages for the “brutal lies” that were allegedly spread about her.

“The lies that the defendants told about Harvey to over 50 million people worldwide include that Harvey is a twice-convicted stalker who was sentenced to five years in prison and that Harvey sexually assaulted Gadd,” court papers say that are available from diversity. “The defendants told these lies and never stopped because it was a better story than the truth and better stories made money.”

Netflix has denied Harvey’s allegations regarding Baby Reindeer, which was created by Star Richard Gadd.

“We intend to vigorously defend this matter and protect Richard Gadd’s right to tell his story,” the streaming platform said in a statement to British broadcaster Sky News in June.

Keep scrolling for a full breakdown Baby reindeer Defamation lawsuit:

What is “Baby Reindeer” about?

The thriller, which premiered in April, tells the story of an aspiring comedian named Donny (Gadd) who deals with a stalker named Martha, played by Jessica Gunning.

The show is based on Gadd’s autobiographical one-man show of the same name, in which he discusses his past experiences with alleged stalking and sexual abuse. Gadd described the series as a fictional retelling based on his life. However, Baby reindeer opens with a title card that says, “This is a true story.”

While Gadd never revealed the identity of the person he based Martha on, he has spoken out against fans who have tried to uncover the characters’ actual identities.

“Please don’t speculate about who the real people might be,” he wrote on his Instagram Story in May. “That’s not the point of our show.”

Following the series’ success, Harvey claimed to be the “real Martha” and threatened to sue.

What did Fiona Harvey claim in her lawsuit?

In June, Harvey filed a lawsuit against Netflix in California. In the documents, she claimed that the streamer told “brutal lies” about her on the show.

“Among the lies that the defendants told about Harvey to over 50 million people worldwide were that Harvey was a twice-convicted stalker who was sentenced to five years in prison and that Harvey sexually abused Gadd,” the lawsuit says . “The defendants told these lies and never stopped because it was a better story than the truth and better stories made money.”

The filing added that Harvey’s life was “ruined” because of the show’s lies and “utterly reckless misconduct.”

What does Fiona Harvey want in the lawsuit?

Harvey is seeking at least $50 million for actual damages, at least $50 million in compensatory damages for “mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life and loss of business,” and at least $50 million for all profits Baby reindeer” and at least $20 million in punitive damages.

What did Netflix say about the lawsuit?

Although Netflix has not issued a statement on the lawsuit, the company told CNN that it stands by its original statement defending Gadd.

Will the lawsuit go to court?

In September, a judge denied Netflix’s request to dismiss the lawsuit, meaning the case was deemed potentially defamatory and could go to trial. Accordingly USA todayThe streaming service argued that the statements about Harvey were “substantially true.” However, the judge disagreed, saying there were significant differences between the series and real events.

“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 shoving and gouging another person in the eyes,” the judge said. “While Plaintiff’s alleged actions are reprehensible, Defendant’s statements are of a more serious magnitude and could have a different effect on a viewer’s psyche.”

Netflix argued that viewers understand the series’ dramatic elements for storytelling purposes. The judge responded that the use of the “true story” title card invited the audience to “believe the show’s statements as facts.”