Netflix Admits Real-Life Martha From ‘Baby Reindeer’ Was Not Convicted of Stalking Richard Gadd
The real-life inspiration behind Baby Reindeer‘s Martha was never convicted of stalking Richard Gadd as depicted in the show, but subject to a court order, a letter from Netflix to the U.K. government has confirmed.
Scotswoman Fiona Harvey was soon uncovered by fans of the smash hit show – which chronicles Gadd‘s years being harassed and stalked by a woman he once pitied while serving her at a pub – on social media, where she had been found to have sent Gadd thousands of tweets, dating back years. “I have no doubt that the character of ‘Martha’ in Baby Reindeer was intended to be a portrayal of me,” Harvey later said in a statement obtained by The Hollywood Reporter via her lawyer.
More from The Hollywood Reporter
'Squid Game' to End With Season 3, Post-Christmas Return Set at Netflix
The 'Cobra Kai' Bosses Want to Give Mr. Miyagi His Prequel Story
“The problem for Richard Gadd and now for Netflix is that Baby Reindeer is not a true story at all. I am not a ‘convicted stalker.’ I have never been charged with any crime. … Nobody ever approached me for any comment on the accuracy of Baby Reindeer or the very serious and damaging allegation that I am a convicted criminal, with a serious criminal record, who has spent time in prison. Nobody ever asked for my permission to present me in this way or to use my image at all.”
Now, Harvey’s argument has been vindicated. Those who closely followed the Emmy-nominated show and the subsequent fallout will be aware of its huge success on the streamer – accruing 56.6 million views within 26 days of its April 11 release. But with its popularity came an onslaught of “abuse” and “death threats” directed at Harvey, her attorney Richard Roth told THR in June.
In the show, Martha, who had already served a four-and-a-half-year jail term for a previous stalking conviction in Baby Reindeer, is eventually jailed for nine months. “This is a true story,” says a title card in the very first episode.
Harvey is suing Netflix for an enormous $170 million over defamation and privacy violations, but in the weeks after Baby Reindeer‘s release, Netflix execs doubled down after criticisms were brought forward that series bosses had not done enough to disguise Harvey’s identity. During a U.K. Parliament hearing focused on British film and television projects in May, Netflix policy chief Benjamin King told lawmakers that the show was a “true story of the horrific abuse” suffered by Gadd “at the hands of a convicted stalker.”
John Nicolson, a former MP who was a member of the Culture, Media, and Sport Select Committee before its disbandment after the U.K. election, soon wrote to Netflix and demanded evidence to support King’s claim, saying that journalists had been “unable to find a record of the conviction to which you referred.”
The letter, seen by THR, is addressed to Dame Caroline Dinenage, the Committee Chair, from King. On May 23 this year, he wrote: “In response to a question about the characters portrayed in that series, I said that: ‘It’s an extraordinary true story … of the horrific abuse that the writer and protagonist Richard Gadd suffered at the hands of a convicted stalker.'”
“I wanted to clarify our understanding that the person on whom the show is based – who we have at no point sought to identify – was subject to a court order rather than a conviction. The writer of Baby Reindeer endured serious harassment over many months (as it now seems has been the case for many others), which had a significant impact on his wellbeing.”
Gadd said he was prepared to testify for Netflix in the streamer’s lawsuit. The actor was not named as a defendant in the suit but backed getting the legal action dismissed in a declaration filed on Monday.
He notes in the 21-page declaration that Baby Reindeer is about “my personal struggles with my sexual identity and experiences with sexual abuse, harassment.” But, he adds the critical part, “the series is a dramatic work. It is not a documentary or an attempt at realism. While the series is based on my life and real-life events and is, at its core, emotionally true, it is not a beat-by-beat recounting of the events and emotions I experienced as they transpired. It is fictionalized and is not intended to portray actual facts.”
The document also says that Gadd “obtained a First Instance Harassment Warning against Harvey” from U.K. police in 2016, but the filing provides no evidence of a conviction.
In his first interview since the lawsuit was filed, Richard Roth, Harvey’s New York-based attorney, told THR that he looks forward to “cross-examining” Gadd and Netflix on the claims made in the show. “I do believe that Netflix should be ashamed of itself,” Roth said. “There’s only one truth, but when Netflix says this is a true story, that’s rubbish. This isn’t a true story. And I think if Netflix is going to say this is a true story, then they have an obligation to make it a true story.”
A Netflix spokesperson said to THR: “The letter was sent to the DCMS Select Committee on 23 May, well before any legal case was filed, and has been publicly available since. It does not impact our legal position.”
On Wednesday, Roth said Netflix’s letter to the DCMS Committee showed “reprehensible conduct”.
“It is nothing short of remarkable that Netflix would send a formal letter to Parliament informing it that Baby Reindeer was based on Fiona Harvey and yet Gadd would state, in a sworn affidavit under oath submitted by Netflix to the United States Court that, ‘I did not write the Series as a representation of actual facts about any real person, including Fiona Harvey,'” Roth said. “In the end, it appears that either Netflix submitted a false letter to Parliament or a false declaration to a US District Court.”
In Netflix’s motion to strike, attorneys from Latham & Watkins attorneys representing the streamer said “Harvey’s defamation claim fails because she does not allege a provably false statement of fact was made about her… None of the alleged statements can form a legal basis for defamation. In fact, Harvey is incapable of showing reputational harm. Her reputation was already tarnished by past news stories detailing her previous harassment and stalking of public figures. And as a public figure herself, she must allege actual malice.”
Best of The Hollywood Reporter
