Blackstar

Yeah, but then how did the songs leak with their correct titles? Whoever had them and whoever leaked them knew what was what. Yes, I believe because they had talked to the person who spoke to and bought the songs from Bird before Rick did

Maybe. But I believe that there are people who know the hoarders and talk to them, and at least they would know (like they knew what was in the Village discs before they leaked and before Rick got them). But this time, nobody knew about the song that was really on the phone recording.

This seems very unlikely to me. Slash and Duff most likely added their parts some time between 2019-2021. If the two tracks had been out there and traded etc. since then, there surely would have been word on the street that the phone recording was not The General. Moreover, if the leaks are from that time, it means that they're not the final mixes, because the final mixes seem to have been done this past spring or summer (when Axl and Slash went to that studio to listen to them). So if the leak turns out to be the final mix, probably someone who had access to the final mixes (not necessarily through the vinyl pressing) gave/sold them to someone else to leak them when the delay was announced. And either the original source (more likely) or the leaker messed with the quality of the mp3. If the leak is not the final mix, my theory is that it didn't come from the hoarding circles (for the reasons I mentioned) but the source is someone from "inside" (e.g. someone who worked with them at that time) who gave the songs to someone to leak them.

Well they approved the mix and master, and sent it for pressing. But the pressing turned out to be bad. So they scrapped it and sent the same mix and master to be pressed again. Regardless, all that doesn't have anything to do with whether the leak was the final mix or not.

They were clearly talking about the quality of the vinyl, hence the pressing. The mix is another thing.

We'll have to wait to see if what leaked was the final mix. If it was the final mix, the leak could have been from someone who had access to either the original vinyl pressing (which would mean that the original pressing had both songs) or to another source (e.g. recorded it from a studio soundboard, which would mean that the two songs were at least mixed at the same time). If it wasn't the final mix, it could have been from someone who had access to the songs at an earlier stage (like a former co-worker?). In this case, the question will be why the person chose to leak both songs together.

Drama will probably be over when they tour again.

That doesn't mean that Axl wrote the songs while under the influence. By all accounts, although he would use various substances, he was never addicted to them (in Slash's words: "he was never strung out") with the exception, as per Marc Canter, a brief heroin period in 1986. And even in the case of addicts, some people can be "functional addicts" and be creative. But there also have been examples of artists whose creativity and mind were blocked or destroyed by drug use, especially when there was an underlying mental illness, like Syd Barrett and Brian Wilson. But I think you're conflating two different things here. Writing songs while under the influence is a different situation and mindset from remembering what you did on one of many partying nights under the influence of a cocktail of substances.

There were written contracts, but most of the time she worked without a contract. Her lawsuit says that she doesn't claim ownership of the photos she took while under contract (excerpts from the written contracts signed in 2010, 2016 ad 2021 are quoted in GN'R's lawsuit, according to which GN'R would have full ownership of the photos, including copyright). The long "uncontracted" periods were in between written contracts, which likely weakens her case - it's safe to assume that GN'R will claim that since she signed a contract in 2021 which was identical to the one she had signed in 2016, it means that she accepted to work under the same terms during 2017-2020 (when there was no written contract).

It hasn't changed.

I don't interpret the "I was okay with it" as consent or that that particular sexual activity was what she wanted. She describes being scared and crying. She was "okay with it" afterwards: it wasn't the kind of sex she consented to, but she settled for it because she wanted Axl. Then they had more sex and then he apologized to her. Now in the documentary it's a bit different: she said Axl apologized to her for physically hurting her and became gentle with her before any sexual activity occurred. So in this version, although she can still claim that she didn't consent and was just terrified as a result of the physical violence, it's more hazy.

In the book the physical assault is part of the sexual assault: she's pulled by the hair and dragged into the bedroom to be sexually assaulted. Someone is not get dragged violently to have consensual sex. The two are interrelated. And then the sexual assault is followed by consensual sex. Anyway, all this is just in theory, because it's highly unlikely that Riki Racthman will confirm her story. He either won't testify at all (more likely) or, if he testifies, he'll say he doesn't remember or he'll support Axl.

It's probability: if her allegation about the physical assault that preceded the sexual assault is confirmed, that gives more credence to her allegation about the sexual assault.

I'm not an expert either, but I guess it depends on whether the physical assault is directly connected to the sexual assault, and in this case it is.

Her legal team seems to be very good and reputable, and specializes in this kind of cases: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McAllister_Olivarius

According to her account, Riki Racthman witnessed at least the beginning of the physical assault (and did nothing), so if he supports her story he can confirm at least that part. He probably won't testify at all though. The jurisdiction of the court is in New York and I think he would have to be there or in close distance for the subpoena to be served. But he doesn't live there, so unless he visits NY and is located or wants to testify, he doesn't have to.

I think that guy was actually a security guy. Looks like it could be John Reese (who later became their tour manager), but I'm not sure if he was working with them already in 1988 (he was definitely working with them in '89).

He wasn't his bodyguard, but Jeff Kravitz, the photographer, thought he was.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B8PslPKJTiH/ https://www.a-4-d.com/t3603-1990-09-06-the-dispatch-photographer-sues-rock-band

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/