An enquiry into how screenwriter and historical subject intersect in the authorship of the contemporary biopic raises important ethical questions. Can the essence of a biographical subject, like boxer Randolph Turpin, be revealed at this intersection, or will the process of making a narrative fiction result in the construction, and sale, of a lie, or something else entirely, with its own validity as narrative re-presentation? In Ethics in Screenwriting, Steven Maras proposes engaging with such questions through a cross-fertilisation of screenwriting practice and an applied media ethics (Maras in Ethics in Screenwriting. Palgrave Macmillan, 2016). I argue that this is problematic due to the links between applied media ethics and journalistic notions of objective ‘truth’, evidenced in prescriptive media ethics models that conflate fiction with lying (Black and Roberts in Doing Ethics in Media: Theories and Practical Applications, Routledge, New York, 2011; Deaver in Journal of Mass Media Ethics 5:166–177, 1990). As an alternative to prescriptive media ethics models, I offer an alternative proposal, to cross-fertilise screenwriting practice with an ‘ethics of authenticity’. An ‘ethics of authenticity’ shifts the locus of ethical evaluation and decision-making to authorial performance, (re)situating the screenwriter as ‘ethical subject’ (Eakin in Living Autobiographically, Cornell University Press 2008, 78; Parker in The Ethics of Life-Writing, Cornell University Press, 2004, 53). In other words, by substituting the ethics of authenticity for media ethics in the process of writing a biopic, a significant shift is made away from a fidelity-to-fact relationship to the historical referent, and towards an inter-subjective relationship to the historical referent, governed by authorial performance. This ethical positioning offers profound storytelling possibilities for the screenwriter working in the fiction form of the biopic. One such possibility is to use narrative fiction to reshape the past to give agency to victims of injustice. This concept of ethical re-visioning has been developed by auto-ethnographers as an explicit ethical code, called ‘writing to right’ (Denzin in Handbook of Autoethnography, Routledge, 2015). I demonstrate the application of ‘writing to right’ in the final scenes of my Randolph Turpin biopic, My Brother, My Killer, where I frame a real letter (fact) within a re-visioned scenario (fiction) so that Randolph's real-life tormentors can be fictionally held to account (see Fig. 3.2).