(Los Angeles) The defamation suit from the woman who inspired the series’ violent stalker Baby Reindeer was deemed valid by a California court, which rejected the dropping of proceedings requested by Netflix.
This globally successful soap opera features Scottish actor Richard Gadd, who plays himself, that of a bartender in a London pub harassed by Martha, a woman twenty years older than him.
The comedian first made a show out of it, which he presented as “based on a true story”.
But the Netflix series is advertised as “a true story,” which makes it potentially defamatory, according to a decision handed down Friday by a Los Angeles judge.
“The very first episode unequivocally states that ‘this is a true story,’ inviting audiences to accept the allegations [montrées à l’écran] as facts,” said the magistrate.
The complainant, Fiona Harvey, had emerged from anonymity after being quickly identified by fans as the real Martha. She says she received death threats, suffered from depression and demanded several million dollars in compensation from Netflix.
Unlike the events linked to the series, Mme Harvey points out that she never sexually assaulted the comedian by grabbing him by the testicles, nor did she smash a glass bottle over his head before trying to gouge out his eyes.
She also points out that she has never been convicted of harassing a police officer, unlike Martha, who is a repeat offender with five years in prison under her belt.
Netflix argued that the events described were “substantially true” and viewers would understand for themselves that there was an element of fiction, since it is a series.
The platform reminded that Mme Harvey was investigated for harassment, touched Mr Gadd’s buttocks and shoved him.
“There is a major difference between harassment and being convicted of harassment by a court,” said the judge. Likewise, there are big differences between inappropriate touching and sexual assault, as well as between shoving someone and gouging out someone’s eyes. »
The events described “may reach the level” of slander and the complaint is therefore valid, according to the magistrate.
The presentation adopted by Netflix “suggests a disregard” for the facts, he adds.
According to him, the streaming platform “made no effort to verify the accuracy of these statements and representations, or to take other measures to conceal the identity” of Mme Harvey.
Contacted by AFP, Netflix said it was ready for a legal battle in California.
“We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this matter and defend Richard Gadd’s right to tell his story,” the company said.