A top KC barrister has claimed that he is in talks to take on the woman claiming to be the real-life Martha from Baby Reindeer’s case against Netflix.

Speaking on Piers Morgan Uncensored, defence barrister Chris Daw KC claimed that he had been in touch with the individual, who The Mirror has chosen not to name or photograph, with a view to taking the case forward. It comes as on Thursday, 9 May, the woman claiming to be the real-life Martha from Netflix series Baby Reindeer sat down with Piers, 59, for an interview that aired on the former Good Morning Britain anchor’s YouTube channel.

The individual insists that she is the inspiration behind stalker Martha in the Netflix show Baby Reindeer. The dramatisation tells the story of writer and comedian Richard Gadd ’s experience of being stalked by a woman, whose character is named Martha in the show. In Gadd’s

seven part drama series, the character Martha is a terrifying stalker who winds up with a nine-month jail sentence for a campaign of harassment against the comic after meeting him in a Camden pub.

During the interview with Piers, the woman claimed several things were untrue about the Netflix show – including that Gadd had never offered her a free cup of tea, and she never messaged him as much as the character in the drama is portrayed as doing. The Netflix show is

marketed as a ‘true story’. However, in the interview, she told Piers: “It’s completely untrue. Very, very defamatory to me, very career-damaging. And I wanted to rebut that completely on this show. I’m not a stalker. I’ve not been to jail, I’ve not got injunctions. And this is just complete nonsense.”

A top KC barrister has claimed that he is in talks to take on the woman claiming to be the real-life Martha from Baby Reindeer’s case against Netflix ( 

Image:

Netflix)

Piers has now spoke to top KC barrister Chris following Thursday’s interview, where Chris said: “If this show had been presented as a work of fiction or semi-fiction, and if that had been made crystal clear as a disclaimer at the beginning of the show, and at the end credits, I think

people would kind of understand that there is artistic licence in that process. But I looked myself today at the Netflix press release for the show and I think it described it as a ‘true story’ at least five times. And in fact, at one point, it describes the source material for the show as being ‘real life’.

“So, throughout Netflix’s marketing of this show, and in the presentation of the show online, on the Netflix platform, it’s presented as being true. There is no caveat to that… The problem with that, is that if the person involved is readily identifiable, as here, as [retracted name] clearly is, then that person has a legitimate grievance.”

Chris added he has already spoken to the individual claiming to be the real-life Martha, saying: “And I’ve spoken to her today, as you say, and she rightly feels extremely aggrieved about what’s happened to her and her reputation.” Talking about whether it would be easy to establish if

the woman was telling the truth during Piers’ interview, Chris said: “There’s the Disclosure and Barring Service which issues certificates, criminal records checks, as they’re more commonly known. Anyone can apply for their own Disclosure and Barring Service certificate, and that will reflect whether someone’s been convicted in court.

“Then of course, there are court records, if it’s suggested that this is a true element of the story and that she did appear in a criminal court, was convicted and was sentenced, that’s a matter of public record… So it’s either true or it’s untrue. Therein lies the problem for Netflix.”

Speaking on Piers Morgan Uncensored, defence barrister Chris Daw KC claimed that he had been in touch with the individual ( 

Image:

@PiersMorganUncensored/YouTube)

Talking about a plan of action going forward, Chris claimed: “I’m in discussions now with a law firm in London, with a view to taking the case forward… I’m not going to discuss the terms of engagement. All I can tell you is this Piers… Netflix have chosen to make vast money, huge amounts of money from promoting this programme as being ‘a true story’.

“And they have done so without telling the public whether in fact – now that [retracted name] has challenged them on that key detail, of her being a quote unquote ‘convicted stalker’ who was sent to prison repeatedly and multiple times sent to prison – is the allegation made within the programme, before and after Richard Gadd…

“She was supposedly previously convicted and imprisoned and then pleaded guilty and imprisoned again, according to the programme. Netflix have not come out and said one way or the other, whether they are standing by the allegation, that she’s a convicted stalker with a

criminal record who’s been to prison, or not. If it turns out, as a result of our inquiries into her criminal record background, that she has no criminal record, Netflix will have a legal case to answer.” The Mirror has contacted Netflix for comment.