Scream of the Butterfly

I didn't get the impression he was joking.

I'm not 100% Axl is single. There's that video clip where he's heard referring to Beta as his wife. Either way, it's not far-fetched to speculate that his sexual (mis)conduct and preferences contributed to some of his past relationships failing and that he could be single in part because of that.

Care to share it? I assumed you were referring to the same quote because you said it happened while he was driving.

There's a different version?

That's not exactly what he said. He didn't say anything about memory flashes. It was merely a thought that crossed his mind. This is the exact quote: "I suspected it about two years ago, because all of a sudden the thought crossed my mind. When it crossed my mind I had to stop the car and I just broke down crying. Such an outpouring had never come out of me."

In one of the interviews, Axl said, "With the help of regression therapy I uncovered that my real dad, not my stepdad, sexually abused me." I wonder if what he meant was that he had previously thought that it was his stepdad who sexually abused him (before uncovering that it was actually his real dad). Or did he just emphasize that it wasn't his stepdad because he didn't want the reader to be confused about which dad he was talking about?

proof of such service shall be filed with the clerk of the court designated in the summons within twenty days of either such affixing or mailing, whichever is effected later; service shall be complete ten days after such filing, To be clear, "proof of such service" in this context refers to the affidavit of service with the server's signature. Axl doesn't need to sign anything to prove that he's been served.

This is the method of service that was used in Axl's case: https://nycourts.gov/Courthelp/goingtocourt/serviceConspicuous.shtml Service by mail and acknowledgement of receipt (Blackstar's link) is a different method and not the one that was used in Axl's case.

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/dont-bother-avoiding-process-servers/

It says that a signed acknowledgement "shall constitute proof of service" but I don't see where it says that it's the only possible proof of service or that a person who refuses to sign is considered not to have been served. If that were the case, then anybody who doesn't want to deal with a lawsuit could easily avoid it by just refusing to sign the documents, which would be absurd.

To my knowledge, it isn't necessary.

If I understood correctly, there was uncertainty about Fernando's whereabouts and address because supposedly he had moved.

That might be true, but I imagine Axl is wealthy enough to not have to worry about it as much. Three visits to his door and a mailed letter would normally be considered sufficient even if there was no answer at the door. Has anybody seen these ads? If he ignores it and fails to respond, there could be a default judgement, but I think there would be less publicity than if he chooses to actively participate.

I suppose one option for Axl is to just ignore the lawsuit and not even acknowledge that he's been served. The judge would then probably eventually rule in Sheila's favor, but Axl might prefer that outcome to having to show up in court.

Maybe money is her idea of justice or the closest equivalent to it that she can realistically hope to achieve. I don't know where you got the idea that a real victim would not want money, but it obviously isn't true. It's perfectly normal and appropriate for victims to request compensation and in modern society that usually means money.

Can't you just listen to the two songs back to back as a single song if that's how you prefer it? I don't understand the disappointment that it's a separate song when there is such an obvious solution to it.

I wouldn't be so certain about that. Just because he has made some vague comments and evidently isn't happy about the lawsuit doesn't necessarily mean that he isn't going to back up her story (or some part of it) under oath if it ever comes to that. He could have said, "I was there. This never happened." but so far he has said no such thing. I think what he hasn't said is at least as telling as the things he has said so far.

I wasn't certain whether I even wanted to watch this (based on your post in the other thread), but curiosity got the better of me, and it wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. The lawyer did a good job in offering a balanced view on things despite being a GNR fan. I don't think he even indicated whether he personally believes the accusations unless I missed it. What was not a balanced view was the excerpt from Doug Goldstein's memoir. He says that if there had been abuse he would have noticed something because supposedly he knows the signs of abuse. Then he goes on to recall all these incidents that I think anyone of sound mind would recognise as signs of abuse, but Doug is just blind to what is right in front of his eyes. Not to mention the repeated "Don't poke the bear." Maybe Axl belongs to a zoo then.

Speaking of lawsuits, I was wondering what happened with the trademark lawsuit GNR filed against Texas Guns And Roses about a year ago. Turns out the case has been dismissed. https://archive.completemusicupdate.com/article/guns-n-roses-trademark-lawsuit-against-texas-seller-of-guns-and-roses-dismissed/

I don't spend much money on GNR. When I have spent money, they have usually delivered, so I don't feel foolish about it. The only thing that felt like a bit of a scam was the Nightrain club.

Since this question is brought up a lot in the thread and elsewhere, here's one article about the reasons many sexual assault victims wait years or even decades to come forward. Among other things it says, "the researchers find that 60.4 percent of women, on average, did not recognize their experience as rape even though it fit the definition". https://journalistsresource.org/health/sexual-assault-report-why-research/

Sheila's outfit is the same as well so almost certainly the same night.

The same woman is seen with Sheila in the other picture. Plus, I don't think they would use a picture of some random fan who didn't agree to have their picture used in this context. That would be rather insensitive. Maybe someone can tell from Axl's appearance whether it was taken in 1989.

Do you feel the same way when it comes to other serious crime such as murder? Should the person just get away with it if enough time has passed?

That's Sheila's friend Suzy, I believe. What does that have to do with what I said? I disagree, btw. Obviously it would be better not to wait 30 years, but I don't think there should be any statute of limitations when it comes to sexual assault.