Axl Sued For Sexual Assault

[cineater]

3 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Because lying that someone has had sex with someone is hardly damaging. Lies about rape, on the other hand... There is simply no reason why he would care about someone saying he has sex with them, he probably can't remember half of the groupies he has had anyway. 

 

Hardly damaging?  It's got you thinking he has a reputation and had sex with every groupie who came his way.  And her thinking she could go to a party and prey on him for sex.  And years later it's coming out like this, in graphic detail, being discussed in public and people taking sides.

I get why famous people don't have the time or desire to deal with every lie out there about them.  But I've read enough of their books to tell you the lies hurt them.  Made them fearful, had trust issues and assaulted their self esteem.

[Ratam]

2 hours ago, Blackstar said:

Axl's lawyer:

https://www.danyaperrylaw.com/team/dperry

https://www.vera.org/people/e-danya-perry

Is an strategic move has an woman lawyer.

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, cineater said:

Hardly damaging?  It's got you thinking he has a reputation and had sex with every groupie who came his way.  

Which is also hardly damaging for a rock star. It is almost expected. 

If he was to try to legally shoot down all false accounts of people having had sex with him, yet leave the true accounts alone, it would just make him appear loco. 

 

Edited February 24 by SoulMonster

[Scream of the Butterfly]

5 hours ago, meadsoap said:

He also pointed to the Howard Stern interview, where she completely fabricated statements Axl had made during the interview. Very big misstep by Sheila. Any jury could look at that and see she has a history of lying about easily verifiable things in order to "embellish" her story. If she lied about that then what else could she lie about?

Since there's no evidence of what allegedly happened between them privately, then the entire case rests on making people believe she is credible and her motives are pure. 

It wouldn't make sense to lie about what he said on the radio, because as you said it's easily verifiable. More likely, she just got two memories mixed up or something. People remember things incorrectly all the time even when nobody is deliberately lying. I think her apparent false memory hurts her credibility a little bit, but not to a point where I would conclude that the more memorable event in the story also never happened. After all, she's not suing him for what he said on the radio, but for sexually assaulting her.

[Blackstar]

27 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

It wouldn't make sense to lie about what he said on the radio, because as you said it's easily verifiable. More likely, she just got two memories mixed up or something. People remember things incorrectly all the time even when nobody is deliberately lying. I think her apparent false memory hurts her credibility a little bit, but not to a point where I would conclude that the more memorable event in the story also never happened. After all, she's not suing him for what he said on the radio, but for sexually assaulting her.

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.

[BluegrassBlues]

48 minutes ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

It wouldn't make sense to lie about what he said on the radio, because as you said it's easily verifiable. More likely, she just got two memories mixed up or something. People remember things incorrectly all the time even when nobody is deliberately lying. I think her apparent false memory hurts her credibility a little bit, but not to a point where I would conclude that the more memorable event in the story also never happened. After all, she's not suing him for what he said on the radio, but for sexually assaulting her.

I would agree with that, but she has also mixed up, whether intentionally or not, other important details that is so crucial to her case. She was dishonest over something as harmless as her age when it supposedly happened, wasn't able to name one of the biggest hotels in New York it happened at despite knowing the area well, named a medication that wasn't even being prescribed at the time as being in his bathroom just to name a few things. As for the interview part, I'd give her a pass on that, but to my knowledge, Axl has never bragged about any Penthouse or Playboy models or anything like that ever. If she was getting another interview of his mixed up that would be understandable, but I don't think he's ever said anything about having wild times with any kind of adult entertainer like that. All that added up doesn't give her much credibility for her case. I don't doubt she has been abused in the industry she's in, it unfortunately happens every single day, and I do have empathy for her, I'm just not so sure anything happened her, or if it has, she has not helped her case any with these discrepancies 

[Scream of the Butterfly]

7 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

Because lying that someone has had sex with someone is hardly damaging. Lies about rape, on the other hand... There is simply no reason why he would care about someone saying he has sex with them, he probably can't remember half of the groupies he has had anyway. 

 

Even if Sheila herself didn't use the word "rape", a lot of people recognized that was what she was describing even in 2016. Read the comments to the Daily Mail interview:

'He raped her then. Because that's what she's describing. No need to euphemize rape with "had sex with her."' (This comment has 332 upvotes, 31 downvotes.)

'Re: Axl Rose: Dear Daily Mail, Usually they call that scenario "rape", not "had sex".' (180 upvotes, 14 downvotes)

'I get tired of hearing about people who think saying "Sorry" after they have done something awful, makes it ok...' (286 upvotes, 30 downvotes)

'I'll never think of Axl Rose the same again.' (186 upvotes, 73 downvotes)

And so on. I think it's safe to say that the story did hurt his reputation and wasn't interpreted as a mere account of consensual sex by many/most readers. Also, Little Michelle has been accusing him of rape with that very word for years and he hasn't taken legal action against her either.

 

[Scream of the Butterfly]

1 hour ago, Blackstar said:

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.

I suppose anything is possible, although I don't think being mistaken about the identity of your rapist is anywhere in the same ballpark with being mistaken about what he said on the radio or other details. The radio thing could be a dream she had and 30 years later thought happened for real. Lots of possibilities. (And, no, I don't think that means that she may have as well dreamt up her entire encounter with Axl.)

58 minutes ago, BluegrassBlues said:

I would agree with that, but she has also mixed up, whether intentionally or not, other important details that is so crucial to her case. She was dishonest over something as harmless as her age when it supposedly happened, wasn't able to name one of the biggest hotels in New York it happened at despite knowing the area well, named a medication that wasn't even being prescribed at the time as being in his bathroom just to name a few things. As for the interview part, I'd give her a pass on that, but to my knowledge, Axl has never bragged about any Penthouse or Playboy models or anything like that ever. If she was getting another interview of his mixed up that would be understandable, but I don't think he's ever said anything about having wild times with any kind of adult entertainer like that. All that added up doesn't give her much credibility for her case. I don't doubt she has been abused in the industry she's in, it unfortunately happens every single day, and I do have empathy for her, I'm just not so sure anything happened her, or if it has, she has not helped her case any with these discrepancies 

I don't think she's being deliberately dishonest about any of these things, but I do think that her mistakes create an impression that her memories are in a disorganized state (althought I think she's been trying to sort them out for the lawsuit.)

[Free Bird]

The story came up first when, in 2016?

When the reunion happened and it became public that Axl’s gonna front ACDC? Firts time anybody has heard of him in decades outside of the fanbase. 
 

It didn’t effect his career then and it won’t now. That woman isn’t very reliable at all.

[SoulMonster]

7 hours ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

Even if Sheila herself didn't use the word "rape", a lot of people recognized that was what she was describing even in 2016.

I think this comment on yours should have gone with this post of mine: "Because lying that someone has had sex with someone is hardly damaging. Lies about rape, on the other hand..."

 

[Draguns]

9 hours ago, Scream of the Butterfly said:

Even if Sheila herself didn't use the word "rape", a lot of people recognized that was what she was describing even in 2016. Read the comments to the Daily Mail interview:

'He raped her then. Because that's what she's describing. No need to euphemize rape with "had sex with her."' (This comment has 332 upvotes, 31 downvotes.)

'Re: Axl Rose: Dear Daily Mail, Usually they call that scenario "rape", not "had sex".' (180 upvotes, 14 downvotes)

'I get tired of hearing about people who think saying "Sorry" after they have done something awful, makes it ok...' (286 upvotes, 30 downvotes)

'I'll never think of Axl Rose the same again.' (186 upvotes, 73 downvotes)

And so on. I think it's safe to say that the story did hurt his reputation and wasn't interpreted as a mere account of consensual sex by many/most readers. Also, Little Michelle has been accusing him of rape with that very word for years and he hasn't taken legal action against her either.

 

This story never affected Axl in 2016. The big stories at that time were the GNR reunion and Axl being the lead singer for AC/DC. Even my employer, Bloomberg LP, wrote articles about the reunion and Axl fronting AC/DC  at the time.

I never even heard about this story until this lawsuit and I work for a news company.  

[Draguns]

In my opinion, this case will probably get dismissed. There's a legal precedent with Steven Tyler's case. 

[MaskingApathy]

On 2/22/2024 at 5:20 PM, Karice said:

Emmitt Till was just a plain tragic thing. He apparently said something like,"You're pretty!" And the Woman said he raped her or something. This also happened in 1955 when Whites had a LOT of power and Blacks didn't really have any real power yet. Especially not a young 14 year old boy.  Poor Emmitt didn't deserve to be abducted, tortured, and lynched. 😫 Sad thing is, he could have still been alive today, at 82. 😫

Before she died, that woman admitted that she made the accusations up. He never did any of that.

[Karice]

17 minutes ago, MaskingApathy said:

Before she died, that woman admitted that she made the accusations up. He never did any of that.

I didn't know she died. I thought she was still alive to this day, just in her late 90's like Ann Blyth is. 💡 It's so tragic that she LIED and got an innocent 14 year old boy Murdered. 😡🤬

[JoJo Bonetto]

I find this case interesting, although depressing. I knew about it due to the Look Away documentary and it has already been proven that Axl knew about it at that point too, as he denied the allegations made via a lawyer at the time. I always interpreted the Look Away documentary retelling of events as rape because consent is murky when the sex follows violence. That said, I don't find Sheila’s story persuasive and there is something "off" about it that I have never been able to identify. I support the idea that historic allegations should be able to be made but I do side eye the timing on this one, too.

I think saying Sheila is only doing it because she wants a payday is over simplifying something complicated. I wonder why anyone would actually choose to raise a lawsuit against Axl Rose. It was never really going to go another way. He has too much money and influence to not retaliate and in my view, that makes it not worth it. That's the only thing that makes me wonder if something did happen between them. In terms of risk vs reward, the risks would have been too high for me and would have outweighed any reward, no matter how desperate for a payout I was (for whatever reason). The only other reason I can think of for bringing this lawsuit is that she may want to rebrand herself as an "activist" and the reward may actually be what comes later, even if the lawsuit fails.

I am interested to see what comes next.

[Blackstar]

10 hours ago, JoJo Bonetto said:

I think saying Sheila is only doing it because she wants a payday is over simplifying something complicated. I wonder why anyone would actually choose to raise a lawsuit against Axl Rose. It was never really going to go another way. He has too much money and influence to not retaliate and in my view, that makes it not worth it. That's the only thing that makes me wonder if something did happen between them. In terms of risk vs reward, the risks would have been too high for me and would have outweighed any reward, no matter how desperate for a payout I was (for whatever reason). The only other reason I can think of for bringing this lawsuit is that she may want to rebrand herself as an "activist" and the reward may actually be what comes later, even if the lawsuit fails.

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.

Edited February 26 by Blackstar

[volxluvr]

The latest is: Kennedy's attorneys want to question Axl. 

Edited February 27 by volxluvr
Link not work

[Blackstar]

14 minutes ago, volxluvr said:

Kennedy's  lawyers want to question Axl. 

https://photos.google.com/photo/AF1QipOjfU4iSEBLvxRN41QfP-oOuUdRwivLTlUP7lOV

The link doesn't work.

Edit:  Nevermind, found it:

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=vOnFjpNxmpbX6ul8dYYFzg==&system=prod

It's a notice for deposition on April 26 (meanwhile, though, the case may have been transferred to another court).

Edited February 27 by Blackstar

[Blackstar]

Her lawyers have requested for the case to be assigned to a judge who will preside over a preliminary conference (unlike federal courts, in NY state courts the cases are not assigned to a judge right away)

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=NUGaOUkecc0IvSYy1gbDrA==&system=prod

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/fbem/DocumentDisplayServlet?documentId=O63WD_PLUS_RYA1uYzk_PLUS_uLwl6DA==&system=prod

This is likely for preventing Axl from moving the case to another court (the deadline to do so expires 30 days after defendant has received the complaint, and they're saying it was served on Jan. 22 - in Axl's answer though it is claimed that it has not been served properly).

Edited February 28 by Blackstar

[invisible_rose]

On 2/24/2024 at 3:17 AM, Scream of the Butterfly said:

Even if Sheila herself didn't use the word "rape", a lot of people recognized that was what she was describing even in 2016. Read the comments to the Daily Mail interview:

'He raped her then. Because that's what she's describing. No need to euphemize rape with "had sex with her."' (This comment has 332 upvotes, 31 downvotes.)

'Re: Axl Rose: Dear Daily Mail, Usually they call that scenario "rape", not "had sex".' (180 upvotes, 14 downvotes)

'I get tired of hearing about people who think saying "Sorry" after they have done something awful, makes it ok...' (286 upvotes, 30 downvotes)

'I'll never think of Axl Rose the same again.' (186 upvotes, 73 downvotes)

And so on. I think it's safe to say that the story did hurt his reputation and wasn't interpreted as a mere account of consensual sex by many/most readers. Also, Little Michelle has been accusing him of rape with that very word for years and he hasn't taken legal action against her either.

 

Shelia was likely told not to use the word rape, or the publishers edited it, unless she brought a legal case because it would otherwise be potentially libellous. 

[volxluvr]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KIfXSUkkTk2zUVzW6dJVcb4IwquR0ZqR/view?usp=drivesdk

According to this second affadavit of service that her own lawyers filed  the summons was affixed to his gate on Jan 26th by the process server. 

 

Edited February 28 by volxluvr

[Blackstar]

4 hours ago, volxluvr said:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KIfXSUkkTk2zUVzW6dJVcb4IwquR0ZqR/view?usp=drivesdk

According to this second affadavit of service that her own lawyers filed  the summons was affixed to his gate on Jan 26th by the process server. 

 

Yeah, the 30-day time window to move the case to federal court is still about to expire with this second affidavit, but only if it's taken as if Axl actually received the summons and complaint on that date. And since it was just affixed and no one was there to receive it (and also Axl says his primary residence is not in Malibu), he probably can say that he actually received it a couple of days before his answer was filed.

We'll see if Axl's lawyers make the move to transfer the case. Maybe they just wanted to have that option.

Edited February 28 by Blackstar

[Gnrcane]

Regardless of what Axl did or didn't do, I don't understand how these sudden changes in statutes of limitations are legal. There is a clear prohibition against ex post facto laws in the US (and I assume all state's) constitution.  If there was a 10 year (or whatever) statute of limitations when the act occurred, it isn't legal to change that and apply it retroactively.

[meadsoap]

6 hours ago, invisible_rose said:

Shelia was likely told not to use the word rape, or the publishers edited it, unless she brought a legal case because it would otherwise be potentially libellous. 

In the Look Away documentary that was released two years ago, she said  (even emphasized) that the sex was consensual. And the documentary was full of women accusing various music industry players of rape. That was the whole purpose of it being made, I'm sure the documentary makes would have loved for her to say that too. 

[Ratam]

2024 will be an shit year to Axl.