A federal judge is refusing to dismiss a civil lawsuit accusing electronic producer Bassnectar of sexually abusing three underage girls, sending the long-running case to a jury trial.
In a ruling on Thursday (December 6), Judge Aleta Trauger dismissed some aspects of the case, but said the overall lawsuit against the DJ (whose real name is Lorin Ashton) will be decided by a jury of his peers. A trial is currently scheduled for February.
Bassnectar's lawyers had made several arguments as to why the case should be dropped, including that he did not know how old the accusers were and that they had lied about their ages. But on her order, Judge Trauger was unwavering.
Ruling on plaintiff Jenna Houston's claims, the judge noted that she was “only sixteen” when they met and that Ashton was “obviously in a position to watch her personally,” meaning a jury could find he had “carelessly ignored the fact that Houston was a minor during the first thirteen months of their sexual relationship.”
The judge cited deposition testimony from Ashton — in which he agreed Houston “doesn't look like she's 19” in an old photo she allegedly emailed him, but later also said she looked “like 19, 20, 21.” when they were recorded. met
“A jury must resolve the question of whether Ashton willfully ignored obvious facts by which he should have known that Houston was still a minor when they met,” the judge wrote. “A reasonable jury could believe—based on the photographs of Houston taken on or about the time she became aware of Ashton and Ashton's confused testimony when confronted with such photographs—that no reasonable person would believe she was eighteen years or older”.
Thursday's order came more than three years after the three women — Rachel Ramsbottom, Alexis Bowling and Huston — filed a lawsuit, accusing Ashton of using his “power and influence to groom and ultimately sexually victimize underage girls ».
The lawsuit, which accuses Ashton of sex trafficking, child pornography and negligence, alleges the star invited minors to his shows, brought them to hotel rooms and provided “large sums of cash and other items of value” in exchange for sex.
In her ruling Thursday, Judge Trauger rejected some elements of those claims. It ruled that Ramsbottom had specifically failed to prove she received payments after she turned 18 – meaning she could not charge him with sex trafficking after that point. And he rejected claims the DJ had used “force, fraud or coercion” on any of his alleged victims.
“The psychological force she claims he exerted on her is nothing more than a desire to please a famous man whom she clearly admired and whose approval she sought,” the judge wrote of Bowling's accusations.
Ditto for Houston: “The behavior she identifies as coercive — behavior that allegedly manipulated her into loving and trusting him, that made her afraid to do anything that would make her lose his love — does not qualify. “, the judge wrote. “Sadness is not simply the form of harm envisioned by the Sex Trafficking Act.”
However, the ruling still leaves Ashton facing most of the lawsuit's allegations, including allegations that he sex-trafficked them as minors by paying them in exchange for sex. DJ's lawyers strongly deny that anything given to the women was payment, but the judge said the jury could see otherwise.
“There is a genuine question of fact as to whether the 'travel money', free concert tickets, and free airline tickets Houston received from Ashton were causally related to Houston's alleged enticement by Ashton to have sex with him and to provide her with the means to travel to see. him again while she was underage to have sex,” the judge wrote.
In a statement to Bulletin board on Friday, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, M. Stuart Ryansaid: “Our clients are very pleased that the Court agreed with us that this case should be tried by a jury. Rachel, Alexis and Jenna are looking forward to their day in court, another step in their journey to justice in this case.”
Ashton's representatives did not immediately return requests for comment Friday.
MODERNIZE: This story was updated at 2:03 p.m. EST on Dec. 6 with a statement from counsel for the plaintiffs.
