The unnamed woman claimed that Dylan had sexually abused her multiple times at Manhattan’s Chelsea Hotel in April and May 1965. She said he provided her with drugs and alcohol and “exploited” his status as a musician as part of a plan to “sexually molest her.” Such allegations would typically be barred by the statute of limitations, but the case against Dylan was filed just before the closing of a one-year window under a recent New York statute that allowed past victims to sue their alleged abusers.
Rock historians and Dylan experts quickly cast doubt on the allegations, saying they seemed to be refuted by historical documentation that showed that Dylan was away from New York City for most of April and May 1965. The accuser later filed an updated version of the lawsuit, claiming the abuse instead came during “several months in the spring of 1965.”...
At a July 15 hearing, Judge Katherine Polk Failla said... “For the love of god, produce these materials.... You understand the consequences if you don’t.”...
पोस्ट्स
१५ टिप्पण्या:
She should have taken a cue from Christine Blasey Ford and been more vague about when her decades old abuse supposedly occurred.
Still, I think all right thinking liberals should refuse to listen to the music of any group or artists that ever had sex with any groupies under 18 in the 1960s or ‘70s.
"You understand the consequences if you don’t.”..."
I don't understand the consequences. Are there any consequences? What kind of jail time are we talking here?
Oh no. This will have a chilling effect on woman bringing fake allegations to extort men.
“several months in the spring of 1965.”.
and it took place at the Chelsea, or a party somewhere?
Dylan trapped her in a bedroom, and didn't let her go, until she asked?
I'll bet Beer was envolved! GOOD Thing for Dylan, that he's not a republican nominee for SCOTUS!
"I don't understand the consequences. Are there any consequences? What kind of jail time are we talking here?"
The threat was of monetary sanctions and the sanction of the judge dismissing the case with prejudice. There could be ethical sanctions against the lawyers.
I think all right thinking liberals should refuse to listen to the music of any group or artists that ever had sex with any groupies under 18 in the 1960s or ‘70s. None of that stuff really happened, it was just locker room banter.
Heywood R:
Those plaster casts were Soviet disinformation.
Based on what is publicly known, it’s hard not to agree with Dylan and his lawyers.
Another case where we should not automatically agree with the woman accuser. This me-too movement is turning out to work against the credibility of women in a series of high profile cases. Too bad for real victims.
I'm glad Dylan has won his case. There does seem to be a fair amount of hypocrisy as to how such cases are processed. Her case was about as substantial as that of Ford....Another problem: There's a reason why there's a statute of limitations. Back in the sixties and seventies, the younger girl kept running through the mind of many rock musicians, and the younger girl wasn't necessarily running away. Sex, drugs, and rock n roll. A different ethos. Underage girls. Slavery. Times change and mores and morals with them..... I think back then open homosexuality would be more of a career killer than fooling around with an underage girl. I'm all for the present zeitgeist, but, for the sake of tolerance, I'm not condemning twenty-four year old musicians who had affairs with fourteen year old girls back in the sixties and 18th century politicians who owned slaves in their era.....I don't think this exception applies to Charlie Chaplin, Roman Polanski, or Jeffrey Epstein. They weren't rock musicians. This exception only applies to rock musicians under the age of twenty five and only to misdeeds done prior to 1979. I think that's a fair way to apply the law.
Young girl get out of my mind
My love for you is way out of line
Better run girl, you're much too young girl
Somebody had to post it.
Oddly enough given William's comment, I just read a blurb saying songwriter Jerry Fuller said it was based on his own personal experience when certain “14-year-olds look like 20-year-olds”.
The citation didn't specify how much experience.
Young Girl
"Almost Famous" sort of explained the whole thing/
If you want to be Creeped Out, re-reread The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test.
I reread it 2 years ago. I'd remembered it being about Merry Pranksters having fun with acid.
There's acid in it, all right; but their daily drug of choice was speed (amphetamines), and their idea of fun was dosing young (15? 14? 13?) year old girls and having sex with them.
There's an "amusing" story about them traveling through canada with a young canadian girl (i think 14) that they keep drugged out of her mind, while they gang band her across a couple of provinces (with her grandmother and police searching for her). HILARIOUS
By the way, the merry pranksters are all in their mid to late 20's..
.......24/2 + 7 is NOT equal to 14.......
Heywood Rice said...
"I think all right thinking liberals should refuse to listen to the music of any group or artists that ever had sex with any groupies under 18 in the 1960s or ‘70s."
None of that stuff really happened, it was just locker room banter.
Did musicians in the 60's and 70's have sex with underage groupies?
yes
Does that mean every musician from the 60's - 70's is guilty?
No.
If you say "Believe all women" when it's to your political advantage, and demand due process when that's to your advantage, are you scum of the Earth who should be ignored forever more?
Yes.
So Heywood Jablome, where do you fit in here?
#MeToo #HerToo #SheProgressed suffered a catastrophic, cascading, systemic failure with cannibalization, self-abortion, and a VP who took a knee, sucked, for her progress, thereby raising the glass ceiling for women and girls, and, in the age of political congruence, men and boys, too.
"Walking in Memphis" by Marc Cohn:
"But there's a pretty little thing
Waiting for the King
Down in the Jungle Room"
Written long after Elvis's (too early) death.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा