A judge ruled Friday that the Netflix show “Baby Reindeer” did not live up to its claim as a “true story,” allowing the real “Martha” to pursue her defamation lawsuit.

The woman, Fiona Harvey, claimed that the series, created by Richard Gadd, falsely implied that she had sexually assaulted Gadd and gouged out his eyes, and that she had been sent to prison for stalking.

Netflix filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit in July. In his defense, Gadd revealed that Harvey had stalked him for years while he worked in a London pub, sometimes pinching his bottom and sending him thousands of disturbing emails and voicemail messages. He eventually reported her to the police and received a “harassment warning” – although she was neither prosecuted nor sent to prison.

In his ruling Friday, Judge Gary Klausner noted that the series begins with the line “This is a true story,” inviting the viewer to take what follows as fact. But he noted that Martha’s behavior on the show is significantly worse than what Harvey is accused of in real life.

“There is a big difference between stalking and a criminal conviction for stalking,” the judge wrote. “Similarly, there are major differences between inappropriate touching and sexual assault, and between shoving and gouging another person in the eyes.” While the plaintiff’s alleged actions are reprehensible, the defendant’s statements are of a more serious magnitude and could have a different impact on the viewer Produce an effect.”

Harvey was never named on the show, although online detectives were able to quickly identify her using digital breadcrumbs.

Gadd was an aspiring comedian when he worked at the Hawley Arms Pub and said the Netflix series was based on his experiences there. But he has also said that the show and the stage play on which it was based were both fictionalizations and were not intended as a “beat retelling” of events.

The Sunday Times reported in June that Gadd had reservations about including the line “It’s a true story,” but it was included at Netflix’s request. The judge noted this article in his ruling, arguing that it could show “actual malice” – that is, that Netflix knew the series was fictionalized but consciously chose to portray it differently.

Klausner dismissed Harvey’s claims of negligence, violation of her publicity rights and punitive damages. However, the judge allowed her to file a charge of intentional infliction of emotional distress, which applies to “extreme and outrageous” false statements.

“It appears that a reasonable viewer could interpret the statements about Martha as referring to the plaintiff,” the judge wrote. “The series states that the plaintiff is a convicted criminal who sexually and violently assaulted Gadd. These statements can lead to extreme and outrageous behavior.”