Blackstar

Not all drugs have the same effect or arel all "recreational". It also depends on the combination and the quantity.

He doesn't remember everything. For example, the first full band interview in Music Connection in 1986 (where Slash said Axl was 'the Ayatollah") and the letter Axl sent in response seem to have been erased from his memory and he's confusing it with a later interview in which the "Ayatollah" bit wasn't said (he's also confusing who said it - he remembers it was Izzy, but it was Slash). I don't think he can necessarily remember something that happened one night and the people involved (who he saw only that one night), especially if he was under the influence of such a cocktail of substances.

She doesn't seem to have a strong case (from a legal standpoint), but since hard evidence ("beyond reasonable doubt") is not required in civil cases, if it goes to a jury trial a lot will depend on the general impression the jury gets. I assume that her lawyers will rely a lot on Axl's past record - and the lawsuit seems to focus on it - as a way to counter the lack of evidence in her own story. The court cases of Erin and Stephanie probably can't be used, however there is the People Magazine article and other press coverage. Then there is the "Little Michelle" story, which has many holes, but may be used just to add to the whole picture. So the jury might think that, despite the lack of evidence and the inconsistencies with previous accounts like the book, since there have been other cases and claims in the past, Axl probably did this, too. So I think that her lawyers count on the strong possibility that Axl's side won't want to risk going to a jury trial for this reason, and so they'll manage to get a good settlement.

Numerous times, especially if we count the times he was sued as part of GN'R, and definitely way more times than he sued. As far as we know, Axl was sued by: - His neighbour in 1991 - Alongside GN'R by people and companies related to the St. Louis riot (at least 6 different lawsuits) - Stephanie in 1994 (though he sued her first) - Erin in 1994 - Robert John in 2003 - Three times by Slash and Duff (in 2004, 2005 and 2007) - An art gallery in 2006 (for not fully paying for a painting he had agreed to buy) - A security guard in 2007 (for allegedly kicking him during a 2006 show) - A car company in 2010 (for returning a damaged car) - Azoff in 2010 - Pitman in 2016 - And in 2023 by Sheila Kennedy and (alongside GN'R) by the woman who claims she was hit by his mic. GN'R (the original band or the Axl/Slash/Duff partnership or NuGnR) has been sued by: - Vicky Hamilton in 1987 - Twice by Chris Weber (in 1989 and 1998) for publishing rights - An MTV photographer in 1990 (for being pushed and hit by Axl's brother Stuart, who he thought was his bodyguard, at the MTV Awards) - Steven in 1991 - Gilby in 1995 - A Spanish concert promoter in 1995 (for cancelling a show in Spain in 1992) - Someone who claimed he had written Don't Cry in 2000 (ridiculous lawsuit) - Cleopatra Records in 2005 (for trying to stop the release of Hollywood Rose songs) - A German composer in 2009 (for plagiarizing the intro to Riad on CD) - And in 2023 by Kat. I'm sure there were many more, e.g. for the Montreal riot, the no-show in Philadelphia, cancelled shows, etc.

I reckon her lawyers looked for the Stern interview she was talking about in her book and didn't find anything. But instead they found the phone interview and even though it wasn't related to what she said, they set the timeline based on it (and I guess because Axl mentioned that he was there with Riki Rachtman and Riki's presence matched her story).

New interview with Duff promoting his album. Talks about the possibility of a solo tour (says that he needs some time off after GN'R's extensive touring): https://www.spin.com/2023/11/duff-mckagan-lighthouse-interview/

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cz_5sunPSbF/ (I suppose everyone knows the band L7)

More likely "I don't remember anything, but maybe I did meet her and it did happen".

At all three shows she was absent Axl included her in the band introductions - at the last one (and last one of the tour) he prompted the crowd to cheer harder for her.

Frank spent Thanksgiving with Del James' family: https://www.instagram.com/p/C0A0sg0LZff/

Yeah, but Fall To Pieces was in 1996. Axl mentioned it separately from Slash's "mean" riffs that were presumably from sessions that took place in 1994.

I guess Slash may have used some of them in his solo/other projects, yes.

There was no internet then, but still GN'R were everywhere (MTV, magazine covers etc.).

Another thing that I find to be a bit strange in her account is that she didn't know who Axl was. Of course it's not impossible that she didn't know and that she wasn't familiar with that kind of music, however in her book there are a couple of pictures of her with members of some lesser hair bands of the time (I think one was Danger Danger) and she was dressed like a "metal chick" in them (edit: one picture was in her book and two pictures were in her - now deleted - instagram account). It's kind of odd that she knew those bands but didn't know who Axl was, although GN'R were everywhere at the time. Also Axl's mental issues were well known then - lithium was specifically mentioned in the RS article that was published in November 1988.

I understand that (although I can separate the art from the artist). What I don't understand though is why this may lead you to delete their music. Unless you don't know much about the history of the band.

I hate Trump but I'm not fond of The Democrats either. However, there's a similar law of "temporary retroactivity" in California, although so far it's only for victims that were minors. Steven Tyler has been sued by Julia Holcomb with this law in California. The New York law was also initially only for minors (and the justification that was presented was that it would give the opportunity to victims of cases like The Catholic Church scandals or Prince Andrew to get justice). Then it was expanded (with another law) to cover adult victims, too. I'm not sure about other states as I haven't looked into it.

And Jimmy Iovine (what a coincidence!): https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/jimmy-iovine-sexual-abuse-allegation-1234893851/ And Steven Tyler (second lawsuit by a different woman) three weeks ago: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/steven-tyler-sexual-assault-second-woman-lawsuit-1234868124/ All filed in New York.

It's a different attorney now, so maybe Axl told both his attorneys the same thing (e.g. "never heard about her before"), so his current lawyer put it in the statement as that Axl hadn't heard about it "prior to today". Or maybe the other attorney that responded to Sky News had already a "blanket" statement/response for any allegations of this sort (the response said "either Sheila Kennedy or anyone else").

The decision of a woman to take the opportunity this law gave her (or take advantage of it) has nothing to do with a potential "anti-Trump" agenda behind the law or with Axl's political views (I'm sure he expressed anti-Trump sentiments because that's what he really believed and not because he complied to an "agenda". As for management getting the affairs settled beforehand, there's a chance that Axl really has no recollection of this incident if it happened as SK has described it regarding the circumstances (Axl being under the influence of a cocktail of medication, cocaine and alcohol). What could they have done, pay hush money to any woman coming forward with allegations about stuff that happened 35 years ago?

Okay, I looked into the video and couldn't find any comments from Axl's lawyers regarding Sheila Kennedy. Only after the Sheila Kennedy section it mentioned the Erin and Stephanie lawsuits (without naming them) saying that Axl denied the accusations then. And in the end of the documentary it said that Axl and Steven Tyler were reached out for comment but they declined to make any statements.

Thanks. The video of the docu is on youtube and has been posted a couple of times in this thread, so I'll look into it.

Early or later settlement depends on the evidence and, regarding the trial, on whether the parties can handle the publicity that it generates. It won't be front page story for ever. It'll likely last a couple of days now, though in the case of a trial the attention would be much bigger. Unless someone is confident that they'll win in a jury trial, which is rare in these cases; even if there's little or no evidence, it's very risky to go to trial in a civil case like this.

I don't remember that. Do you have a link? The litter box story was really fabricated, made up by the Metal Sludge guy (I'm forgetting his name).

Or just someone who used to be a great singer and frontman (and can still be the latter), wrote some great songs and some not so great ones, has been very unprolific, had mental issues and did some really bad and fucked up things in the past.

It's not necessarily about sexual abuse. More likely about his rough childhood and the physical abuse from his stepfather. Besides, no one knows or understands (or cares) what the song is about except us.