Axl Sued For Sexual Assault

[JoJo Bonetto]

2 hours ago, DeNfr said:

yeah I think he remember almost everything unless he was too stoned to. Axl has an amazing memory, he memorizes hundred of funny jokes, can talk about events none of the other guys can remember, plus he apparently keeps a journal(s) where he notes everything. 

maybe you remember that time where he was on the phone with Izzy and he began to tell him "yeah but at that precise date you told about..." Izzy was like "huh?" when listening to Axl turning pages of his journal...

so yeah I think this kind of thing, he can remember very well, with whom, when, and what happened. 

I think he remembers everything now and maybe from 1991/2 onwards but in 1989? I think that is doubtful. He was not quite as settled back then. He got there, but I don't think he was there yet. Also as someone who had a misspent youth, I can confirm that drugs and booze affect the ability to remember. 

[BangoSkank]

2 hours ago, gnfnr2k said:

The defense will have it easy.

The defense has two different examples of this women saying her hooking up with Axl was consensual back in the day.  Once in a video and another in her book. Now she is changing her story.  She is going to have to explain why she claimed it was consensual back then and not now. it sounds like buyers remorse now, and its even shadier that she is filing right before the statute of limitations runs out. It looks like a money grab

I have to be honest, I have only skimmed the accusations because they were so troubling and I was inclined to believe something happened, given Axl's history. But if there are two records of her claiming it was consensual prior to this, one in a book she wrote herself, that throws a wrench in the whole thing.

[DoMw94]

1 hour ago, WhazUp said:

I do find something odd about the fact she says she merely hearing GNR songs can effect her so she avoids places where they might be played..... yet went out of her way on two different occasions to publically discuss her meetup with Axl voluntarily and happily.  Not to mention the widly different tone of those past accounts compared to now

Combine that with the fact that the statue in NT is about to expire, idk something seems strange about it all.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out

 

Reminds me of the Nirvana baby a bit. He was proud of it for years, cashed in on it, got a Nirvana tattoo, then all of a sudden he was suing the band.

Feels the same here – being with Axl was beneficial to her, until it wasn't

[JoJo Bonetto]

5 hours ago, BangoSkank said:

Yeah, but unfortunately the legal and PR advice given around this stuff is always deny, lay low, and it will pass, and that usually ends up being right.

I think that as much as people want to hear from Axl, his no talking/keep talking to a minimum policy is smart. It is the right way to deal with it for the timebeing given the world we live in now compared to say.... 1989.

Edited November 24, 2023 by JoJo Bonetto

[evilfacelessturtle]

17 hours ago, DoMw94 said:

She was sick. She's a human being, humans get sick. Nothing strange about it

To be clear, I don't think there is any conspiracy behind her absence. However, Slash claimed he had pneumonia back in 2001 when in reality, he nearly died from cardiomyopathy as a result of drinking so heavily. It's not uncommon for artists to claim they're sick to avoid admitting more serious or personal issues. But that's absolutely their right, IMO. They still deserve privacy.

10 hours ago, Blackstar said:

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

"The axe forgets, but the tree remembers"

[Gibson87]

18 hours ago, JoJo Bonetto said:

Assuming that whatever he does/does not have going on is some kind of mood or personality disorder (and it might not be), that would be a triggering cocktail in most people with an underlying condition in those categories and in my case, it is highly unlikely that I would remember any of it the next day, either.

As someone with Borderline Personality Disorder, I think Axl at the time met the criteria for borderline. There's 9 diagnostic criteria but you only have to meet 5 to be diagnosed. I believe Axl met these 5 criteria back in the day-

Impulsive behavior (reckless driving, risky sexual behaviour, substance misuse, binge eating)

Intense and sudden mood swings lasting from a few hours to a few days,

Inappropriate and intense anger

Efforts to avoided real or imagined abandonment

A pattern of intense/unstable relationships with family, friends and loved ones.

I'm not a psychologist but I would not be surprised in the slightest if he received a BPD diagnosis at some point in the 80s/90s. BPD is also very common in adults who suffered verbal, physical or sexual abuse in their childhood.

[Blackstar]

3 hours ago, Georgina Arriaga said:

@Blackstarhow many times Axl has been sued in his life? For any reason

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.

 

 

Edited November 24, 2023 by Blackstar

[evilfacelessturtle]

4 hours ago, BluegrassBlues said:

 A lot of people are saying that the impromptu phone interview with Stern is the interview she was talking about, but none of it matches what she said. Axl was in his hotel still asleep when that one happened, but she said she woke up alone and Axl was gone to visit Stern in studio. Does anyone have any more information about that, if she was saying that is the interview she meant? Or are people just saying that on her behalf? Because if that is what she said, it completely messes up her timeline. I'm not trying to poke holes into everything she said, I'm just trying to understand. I know Axl's lawyer was a PR answer only, I don't believe he never met her, maybe he truly does not remember what happened, but I don't believe they never hooked up or whatever 

It's possible that she slept through the phone interview, and he left before she woke up to go somewhere else.

Regardless, inconsistencies in a story that happened 30+ years ago is not proof it's a lie. Anybody suggesting that is just grasping at straws.

Edited November 24, 2023 by evilfacelessturtle

[BluegrassBlues]

8 minutes ago, evilfacelessturtle said:

It's possible that she slept through the phone interview, and he left before she woke up to go somewhere else.

Regardless, inconsistencies in a story that happened 30+ years ago is not proof it's a lie. Anybody suggesting that is just grasping at straws.

I'm not trying to grasp at straws, I am just trying to look at this from the point of view that a jury would. Even if something happened thirty plus years ago, if your accusing someone of something as horrible as rape you better have your facts straight. My issue with this interview is if this is even the one she is mentioning, he never mentions a PentHouse Pet or anything else she said he did. And she made it a point to say that he was gone for a sitdown interview in studio that never happened, and he was gone when she left. She said she went back to the hotel to grab a belt she left, and he was still gone and she heard the interview later. That just does not add up. I understand misremembering things, but again if you want to take something to court you have to have your factual evidence to back it up 

[Avillart]

4 hours ago, BluegrassBlues said:

A lot of people are saying that the impromptu phone interview with Stern is the interview she was talking about, but none of it matches what she said. Axl was in his hotel still asleep when that one happened, but she said she woke up alone and Axl was gone to visit Stern in studio. Does anyone have any more information about that, if she was saying that is the interview she meant? Or are people just saying that on her behalf? Because if that is what she said, it completely messes up her timeline. I'm not trying to poke holes into everything she said, I'm just trying to understand. I know Axl's lawyer was a PR answer only, I don't believe he never met her, maybe he truly does not remember what happened, but I don't believe they never hooked up or whatever 

 

Axl or Riki may have told her that Axl was going to go on Howard Stern the next day, without going into detail that it was just to be a phone interview and she may have just assumed that he was going to go on the show in the studio. That's something that naturally happens when people talk - they assume things that they don't know. So I can easily see that. 

She definitely meant that interview as it was in February when her story took place and Axl also told Howard about Riki and being in NYC for him. So it adds up on the timeline. 

 

6 minutes ago, evilfacelessturtle said:

It's possible that she slept through the phone interview, and he left before she woke up to go somewhere else.

Regardless, inconsistencies in a story that happened 30+ years ago is not proof it's a lie. Anybody suggesting that is just grasping at straws.

 

Yeah from what I understood, they had mutliple rooms on that floor (as they had and have at most hotels) and he probably went to sleep in one of the other rooms after they had sex (if it happened). So when she woke up alone she naturally assumed he was gone (to Howards radio studio). 

 

[BluegrassBlues]

1 minute ago, Avillart said:

 

Axl or Riki may have told her that Axl was going to go on Howard Stern the next day, without going into detail that it was just to be a phone interview and she may have just assumed that he was going to go on the show in the studio. That's something that naturally happens when people talk - they assume things that they don't know. So I can easily see that. 

She definitely meant that interview as it was in February when her story took place and Axl also told Howard about Riki and being in NYC for him. So it adds up on the timeline. 

 

 

Yeah from what I understood, they had mutliple rooms on that floor (as they had and have at most hotels) and he probably went to sleep in one of the other rooms after they had sex (if it happened). So when she woke up alone she naturally assumed he was gone (to Howards radio studio). 

 

And I can absolutely totally see that, but it still does not account for what she claimed was said was not. I don't know, maybe I am taking this very personally as a survivor of assault myself and just need to take a step back from all this. When things don't add up I do begin to side eye what is being said, and I can't help but feel its very suspicious with the timing of her book (right when the band was big in headlines again for one of the biggest reunions in rock history) and then files it 34 years later right when that Act is about to expire, that just does not sit right with me. I am not saying she is lying at all, but I'm also not saying she is telling the complete truth either imo 

[DeNfr]

1 hour ago, JoJo Bonetto said:

I think he remembers everything now and maybe from 1991/2 onwards but in 1989? I think that is doubtful. He was not quite as settled back then. He got there, but I don't think he was there yet. Also as someone who had a misspent youth, I can confirm that drugs and booze affect the ability to remember. 

it doesn't affect your ability to keep a journal

[JoJo Bonetto]

Just now, DeNfr said:

it doesn't affect your ability to keep a journal

A lot of things can affect your ability to keep a journal, including that.

[DeNfr]

1 minute ago, JoJo Bonetto said:

A lot of things can affect your ability to keep a journal, including that.

no, for the simple fact that drugs and booze have no permanent effects except physical addiction, but the psychotropic effects are limited in time (thx god), so you can, for example, take speedballs the morning, and write your goddamn entry journal at night (or the opposite...)

[Blackstar]

3 hours ago, Kittiara said:

It's a tricky one, this, in my humble opinion. If the alleged actions took place, he grabbed her by the hair, dragged her across the floor until she bled, and basically overpowered her. That's not what you expect from a hook-up. If you're into the rougher side of things, you tend to discuss what you're going to do, make sure everyone's on board, and set limits and safe words before going ahead. That is especially important when you don't know the other, and there's no established trust, nor knowledge of what the other likes and can cope with. As such a discussion does not appear to have taken place and Axl allegedly just went ahead and did that without clear consent his actions would, arguably, class as assault. It doesn't matter that she wanted sex - it's the way that he went about it that makes it problematic. Unless one-night-stands in the 80s were very different from now, you wouldn't expect to be injured and overpowered by your date.

But I don't think the case will go anywhere. If it ever went to a jury, all the defense would need to do is read excerpts from her memoirs, and show clips from the documentary, and it's pretty certain that the case will go Axl's way. Which makes me wonder why she's going ahead with this - she must know that her previous accounts undermine her case. There may be evidence that we do not know about. But there's no point speculating about that.

 

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.

[JoJo Bonetto]

Just now, DeNfr said:

no, for the simple fact that drugs and booze have no permanent effects except physical addiction, but the psychotropic effects are limited in time (thx god), so you can, for example, take speedballs the morning, and write your goddamn entry journal at night (or the opposite...)

Yes but it is about being in the right headspace, not whether you can physically write in a journal. A lot of things can affect whether you are in the right headspace, including drink and drugs, or whatever made you decide to take them in the first place.

[colonizedmind]

Hasn't she already contradicted herself as recently as 3 years ago when she said it was "consensual" amongst many other things that were quite positive towards Axl?

[Blackstar]

3 hours ago, DeNfr said:

yeah I think he remember almost everything unless he was too stoned to. Axl has an amazing memory, he memorizes hundred of funny jokes, can talk about events none of the other guys can remember, plus he apparently keeps a journal(s) where he notes everything. 

maybe you remember that time where he was on the phone with Izzy and he began to tell him "yeah but at that precise date you told about..." Izzy was like "huh?" when listening to Axl turning pages of his journal...

so yeah I think this kind of thing, he can remember very well, with whom, when, and what happened. 

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.

[DeNfr]

Just now, JoJo Bonetto said:

Yes but it is about being in the right headspace, not whether you can physically write in a journal. A lot of things can affect whether you are in the right headspace, including drink and drugs, or whatever made you decide to take them in the first place.

drugs and booze *helps* you write in fact, most genius of poetry and literature were ones of the most drug addicts and alcoholics in history, and talking about headspace, these Rimbaud, De Quincey, Baudelaire or Dostoyevsky weren't the most at peace with themselves...

[justynius]

12 minutes ago, evilfacelessturtle said:

Regardless, inconsistencies in a story that happened 30+ years ago is not proof it's a lie. Anybody suggesting that is just grasping at straws.

The problem with that line of thinking is the defense doesn't even really need to prove it is a lie, they just need to show the plaintiff has failed the burden of proving it's *true* - otherwise, anyone can just make up baseless accusations about anyone else. Her published words do more to contradict the allegations than support, and demonstrate a history of trying to turn this into a payday. By her own admission, the other people were outside the room when the supposed 'assault' occurred, so anything they can offer (if they get involved at all) is speculative at best. There's obviously no DNA or police report. Her verbal recollection is the beginning and end of proof for this lawsuit, and when inconsistencies emerge then even that becomes erroneous testimony. 

[DeNfr]

4 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

I don't think he can necessarily remember something that happened one night 

he can't remember because nothing happened (said his lawyer) 

[JoJo Bonetto]

7 minutes ago, DeNfr said:

drugs and booze *helps* you write in fact, most genius of poetry and literature were ones of the most drug addicts and alcoholics in history, and talking about headspace, these Rimbaud, De Quincey, Baudelaire or Dostoyevsky weren't the most at peace with themselves...

Not always. I write and have had a novel longlisted. I know a fair bit of which I speak and you can't adopt a one size fits all approach to creativity.

[meadsoap]

20 minutes ago, Blackstar said:

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.

People said the same about Kevin Spacey's reputation, and he was found not liable and not guilty in every trial that he went though, in both criminal and civil courts. Jury members aren't dumb and can tell the difference between a person's reputation and the actual facts of the case. And even in the incidents that the jury does make a bad call, then a lot of times it's thrown out after an appeal. 

This lady's story is so full of holes, you could watch a movie through it. I don't think Axl has much to lose taking this to trial, unless he just wants to get things over quickly with as little media attention as possible.

Edited November 24, 2023 by meadsoap

[Blackstar]

12 minutes ago, DeNfr said:

drugs and booze *helps* you write in fact, most genius of poetry and literature were ones of the most drug addicts and alcoholics in history, and talking about headspace, these Rimbaud, De Quincey, Baudelaire or Dostoyevsky weren't the most at peace with themselves...

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

Edited November 24, 2023 by Blackstar

[Avillart]

7 minutes ago, BluegrassBlues said:

And I can absolutely totally see that, but it still does not account for what she claimed was said was not. I don't know, maybe I am taking this very personally as a survivor of assault myself and just need to take a step back from all this. When things don't add up I do begin to side eye what is being said, and I can't help but feel its very suspicious with the timing of her book (right when the band was big in headlines again for one of the biggest reunions in rock history) and then files it 34 years later right when that Act is about to expire, that just does not sit right with me. I am not saying she is lying at all, but I'm also not saying she is telling the complete truth either imo 

 Oh no, I totally get it. And I'm not defending her at all. I'm with you on the inconsistencies and I have pointed them out in my posts on this thread. I come from a family of lawyers and still see things through this filter - just looking at the facts and the exact words that somebody uses. And I already had an issue with her saying the hotel "could've been the Pierre". What kind of wording is that - it either was the Pierre or it wasn't. 

I also doubt her belt story. It may have happened, yes but I find it highly unlikely that a hotel would just let her go up to a room that is not booked in her name (to retrieve the belt) But okay, we don't know how exactly she got the belt back. Maybe hotel staff got it for her. But my intuition tells me that she only added the belt episode to make her story more "detailed" and credible.  

Watching the documentary, what was missing to me in her telling the story was the emotion. The distress that she claims she's still feeling. It's good to watch the whole documentary and see how the other women tell their stories. They are absolutely credible as they get emotional (without streaming tears or other exaggeration) and you can see how they walk through their ordeals again. In that Sheila's case it was like she was telling someone else's story, like it was a script. It's hard to describe here but when you watch it for yourself you might see what I mean. I'm also an abuse survivor and no matter how much "work" I did, I still get emotional and even physically sick when remembering things again. 

And yes, that she comes back with her story each time Axl has just made a successful comeback I also pointed out. I even posted that part from the lawsuit preliminary statement. She came back in 2016 and again now that he has a commercially successful tour behind him and is in the spotlight again.