Richard Alexander “Buster” Murdaugh, the son of imprisoned South Carolina attorney Alex Murdaugh, has filed a defamation lawsuit against Netflix, accusing the streaming giant of “reckless indifference to the truth” when it linked him to the 2015 death of his schoolfriend Stephen Smith in a documentary.
The 28-year-old son of Alex Murdaugh, who was convicted in 2022 of murdering his wife, Maggie, and youngest son, Paul, seeks actual and punitive damages from Netflix and other companies connected to documentaries examining the murders for damaging his reputation “irreparably” and causing “mental anguish”.
The claim – filed in Hampton county, South Carolina, names Netflix’s Murdaugh Murders: A Southern Scandal, Warner Bros Discovery’s Murdaugh Murders: Deadly Dynasty and its subsidiary HBO Max production Low Country: The Murdaugh Dynasty, as well as newspaper conglomerate Gannett and a local newspaper, the Hampton County Guardian, in the defamation claim.
Murdaugh claims that the works wrongly implicate him in connection with Smith’s death. The claim notes that he has never been contacted by law enforcement in the matter. No one has been criminally charged in connection with Smith’s death.
Some of the documentaries claim that Buster Murdaugh killed Smith with a baseball bat, which Buster has denied. The Netflix production dramatized a young man with red hair similar to Buster Murdaugh carrying a bat.
“The false statements have been published to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of viewers who watched the show, including viewers in South Carolina, and the defamatory statements continue to be republished as of the filing of this action across a broad array of streaming platforms and channels,” the claim said.
Smith, 19, was found dead in the middle of a road near the Murdaugh’s country home in July 2015. Initial reports said he’d been struck by a vehicle, but the pattern of his injuries raised doubts. Smith’s body has since been exhumed and a grand jury investigation initiated.
The defamation claims comes on the heels of a $170m suit against Netflix by Fiona Harvey, a woman who claims to be real-life Martha in the company’s hit Baby Reindeer series.
In a lawsuit filed earlier this month in California, Harvey accused Netflix of defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, gross negligence and violations of her right of publicity. Her lawyers are claiming the series is the “biggest lie in television history” ever told.
Harvey has publicly identified herself as the inspiration behind the series but denied being a stalker, as well as claims that she sent the series’ writer and star, Richard Gadd, 41,000 emails, hundreds of voice messages and 106 letters.
The claim states: “The lies that 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. Defendants told these lies, and never stopped, because it was a better story than the truth, and better stories made money.”
Harvey is seeking at least $50m for actual damages, at least $50m in compensatory damages for “mental anguish, loss of enjoyment and loss of business”, at least $50m for “all profits from Baby Reindeer” and $20m for punitive damages.
A spokesperson for Netflix, which billed the series as a true story, said: “We intend to defend this matter vigorously and to stand by Richard Gadd’s right to tell his story.”
Lawyers representing Harvey have said Gadd will be asked to give evidence during the action.
At a conference entitled New Narratives for Documentaries: The Blur Between Reality & Fiction convened at the Monte-Carlo TV festival this week, Steve Anderson, a British film producer, told the panel that Baby Reindeer “feels like one of those moments where the envelope has just been pushed too much”.
Anderson was asked by Deadline about the impact of the series on the industry.
“I think it’s a seminal moment”, he added. “Baby Reindeer will have to concentrate everybody’s mind, but hopefully won’t kill off the drama documentary”.
Producer Tom Jennings told the outlet that entertainment companies were under pressure to produce entertainment that could be marketed as “a true story, based on actual facts”.
“They want that label at the top,” he said. “I suggested once: ‘Most of what you’re about to see is 100% true.’ They didn’t like it, they wanted: ‘This is a true story.’”
