Blackstar

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.

To the defendant, too, though But seriously, I'm sure her lawyers found that interview of Stern calling Axl and that's how they assumed the time it happened and mentioned that Axl was there to help Riki Rachtman get a job on MTV (because Axl mentioned in the interview that he was in NY with Riki for that reason). She didn't remember when it happened and she had mentioned another reason why Riki was there.

Riki Rachtman was at the GN'R show in Charlotte about 3 months ago

Yes.

I guess her lawyers looked for that Stern show and didn't find anything and that's why nothing about it is mentioned in the lawsuit. The date mentioned in the lawsuit though matches with the date Axl did his first interview with Stern on the phone (Stern called him in his hotel). Actually the full audio of that interview was published recently, but there was nothing about a "penthouse pet" and the other things she said in the Daily Mail and in her book.

I guess since Riki Rachtman is mentioned in the lawsuit, he will be subpoenaed, so a lot will depend on what he testifies (I doubt he'll confirm her allegations, though). They'll also rely on the other cases involving Axl that are mentioned in the lawsuit.

Her lawyers specialize in this kind of cases: https://mcolaw.com/