Blackstar

Did you find them by subscribing and searching in a newspaper archives site, or you came across them somewhere on the internet? (I'm asking because I'm curious if someone else found them in the newspaper archives and posted them on the internet somewhere) https://www.mygnrforum.com/topic/217670-gnr-womens-discussion-part-2/?do=findComment&comment=4385599

Yes, it's likely that this is her motivation to an extent (although not necessarily her own idea) as the case seems to be part of a campaign against sexual abuse in the music industry. The creators of the Look Away documentary and her attorneys (who seem to be partisan lawyers and not the ambulance chasing type) are probably working together, and maybe she was approached for the documentary and then convinced about the lawsuit (that it was for a good cause and she would get some money, which she probably wants and needs). I don't think, though, that it was certain (to them) that Axl would fight it. Maybe they counted on the fact that he had settled in the cases he had in the 90s and also that he's a private person who doesn't like publicity, so they thought he'd be quick to settle and pay in order to make the publicity go away. I'm not saying that's the case, but it's another potential explanation.

Yes, there is evidence about the kidnapping and other things, but I don't know if the newspaper clippings have been shared. I've had them for a while but haven't shared them on a public forum (except mentioning that they confirm the kidnapping) because, even though it's public information since it's in a newspaper, I've felt that they concern private matters.

Yes, the context of the story was real, so it wasn't a false memories that came from regression therapy, However, that doesn't necessarily mean that the "core event" of child rape also happened (that's something that is hard to have evidence for anyway). For example, Axl could have known the context from other sources (like from his mother after confronting her when he first started therapy), and then the memory of the rape was inserted there with the regression therapy. (Yes, Axl' sister was born before the divorce, so it is certain that L. Stephen Bailey wasn't her biological father. Officially William Rose was her biological father, too, but whether she and Axl are in reality half or full siblings is unknown - and not our business, really).

I don't think the last two SMKC albums were rushed because of GN'R or that their quality had to do with that. For LTD Slash had most of 2018 and almost all of 2019 "free" from GN'R to record, release it and tour it, that is a full album-tour cycle. And 4 was written and recorded during Covid, so whatever problems with it would have to do with the restrictions because of that. And regardless of that, he's always been able to do a zillion different things simultaneously.

Why would he leave since he would still be able to do both? He also seemed quite happy on the last GN'R tour (and the band was a lot more tighter, too). He said it was his favourite tour since 2016.

Yes, it's a typo.

Well, you fail at trying. Try harder and ask your questions in a more respectful manner to those involved and those you're talking to. Anyway, if you just read this, no further explanation is needed. https://www.a-4-d.com/t4995-13-july-november-1991-use-your-illusions-are-out-so-is-izzy#19582

To me this is the best Slash collaboration since even before his first solo album

I think Slash probably just enjoyed playing the UYI deep cuts at the GN'R shows, so he decided to play more deep cuts with SMKC.

In March 2016, Kat gave this interview: https://www.pretty-attitude.com/blogs/news/112778949-meet-rock-photographer-kat-benzova And Fernando commented on it on HTGTH:

Bad Apples was really good I wouldn't be surprised if Duff plays Shotgun Blues on his solo tour. In one of his recent interviews he said that he loves it but GN'R never plays it

It raises the question, though, that if she mixes Axl with someone else in that part of her story, maybe she has other parts of it mixed up, too (even in regards to the "main" story), because there other things she got wrong in her book, the hotel and its location, for example (even though, judging from her other stories, she seemed to know New York very well). She's also a woman who has met many people and had many encounters, especially in that time frame.

Axl's lawyer: https://www.danyaperrylaw.com/team/dperry https://www.vera.org/people/e-danya-perry

The main dispute in this is that of copyright infringement and she may have a case on it, at least in parts regarding the pictures she took after her last written contract expired. The sexual harassment accusation is just the cherry on top and an additional argument to back her copyright case. That would be probably more difficult and will depend more on evidence like emails than on what band members will say.

I suppose Axl's potential answer to that would be that there have been so many false or inaccurate stories about him in the press through the years due to his celebrity status that he couldn't take legal action against each and every one of them. He could also say that he didn't know about her book and the interview she did to promote it. His lawyer, though, responded to the more recent interview she did (in the documentary) saying that her story is totally fictional. Also what Axl says is that he doesn't remember meeting her (so he says that he might have met her but denies having sex with her in the way she has described in her accounts).

Well, I'm sure they all (Axl included) would just say that they didn't witness anything regarding the sexual harassment.

Another update: Kat's attorney filed an opposition to GN'R/Gundam's motion to dismiss parts of her lawsuit. GN'R/Gundam responded to Kat's dismiss motion by filing an amended complaint (lawsuit) and as a result Kat's motion to dismiss GN'R/Gundam's lawsuit was denied by the court as "moot". It looks like both parties' motions have been denied, but it could be a typo, because GN'R/Gundam replied to Kat's opposition yesterday. (Edit to update: GN'R's motion has indeed been denied as well - the judge has probably lost his patience with the motions and wants the case to move on). Yesterday both parties submitted a joint summary of the case and a proposed schedule (required by the court) for the next stages of the case, according to which the "discovery" stage (pre-trial depositions from witnesses and retrieval of documents) is estimated to last about a year (until February) and the jury trial (if there is one) to take place in May 2025. The main witnesses both parties have agreed to are Kat, Fernando, Bernie Githuly (the business manager in GN'R entities), and unidentified agents and employees. Kat wants the members of GN'R to testify, too. It is also stated in the document that the parties have not discussed a settlement. The document can be found here: https://www.a-4-d.com/t8097-katarina-benzova-sues-fernando-and-gn-r-for-copyright-infringement#34767

When she told the story before (her book, the Daily Mail interview promoting her book, and the Look Away documentary) she didn't talk about rape or sexual assault (at least not explicitly). That is mentioned in the preface of Axl's answer.

The answer also doesn't admit the jurisdiction of the NY state court, so I'm pretty sure the primary residence issue is for the purpose of transferring the case to another court (the NY federal court). I think that will probably happen in the next days and then the case will continue in the other court. From the answer it also looks like that as soon at it gets to the other court Axl's lawyers will try to have it dismissed on legal grounds. He has said he likes spending time in Las Vegas, so maybe he has property there, too.

If there's evidence supporting the allegations, the most likely outcome is settlement out of court, so it's highly unlikely it goes to trial either way (if there's evidence debunking the allegations or there are legal holes in the lawsuit, the case will be dismissed). And It's a civil case - hence very different than a case where there would be criminal charges - so the unlikely scenario it went to trial wouldn't necessarily depend on the evidence (it would rather suggest that there wasn't enough evidence one way or the other).

It looks the lawsuit has been withdrawn and dismissed (most likely, based on the article, there has been some sort of settlement).

Steven Tyler likewise transferred the NY lawsuit against him from NY state court to NY federal court and then filed a motion to dismiss the case based on certain legal grounds, and the court granted the motion, so the lawsuit is now dismissed (unless Jeanne Bellino, the woman who sued him, files an amended complaint that can stand legally): https://ksenam.com/ixp/295/p/steven-tyler-sexual-assault-dismissed/

I think the residence thing might be a legal manoeuvre. This lawsuit has been filed in NY state court. Defendants in lawsuits have the option to transfer a lawsuit from state to federal court (in the same area the state court is in) if certain criteria are met, and from what I've seen in other cases, most defendants prefer to do that, I guess because federal courts are considered, for various reasons, a better venue to litigate at . One of the criteria is that the two parties are citizens/residents of different states. In Axl's case, both he and Sheila Kennedy live in California, so that doesn't apply. But I wonder if Axl will present a citizenship/residence in a different state (I guess he has property in other states which he pays taxes for) so that he'll be able to transfer the case to a federal court.

I assume it was taken in 1989, because of Axl's hair and also because in another picture from the same batch, his mother looks the same as in the recently shared photo in front of the BMW.