Late last year, Aerosmith's Steven Tyler was named as a defendant in a lawsuit related to the alleged sexual assault of a minor. The vocalist is now seeking dismissal on the grounds that the claimant allegedly issued her consent at the time.
The ongoing case, currently held at Torrance Superior Court, explores a three-year relationship between the Aerosmith frontman and a girl who he reportedly met when she was 16 years of age in 1973. Details in the paperwork also match the events explored in Tyler’s memoir, in which he recalls almost taking a “teen bride”. He wrote, “With my bad self being 26 and she barely old enough to drive and sexy as hell, I just fell madly in love with her”.
The plaintiff came forward after the State of California temporarily lifted the statute of limitations, stating that her life was “shattered” following the publication of Tyler’s book, which she claims described the “abusive” courtship as "a romantic, loving relationship" without her knowledge.
In the claimant’s suit filed on December 27, 2022, she alleges that the pair were able to live together and engage in a sexual relationship after Tyler had convinced her mother to grant him legal guardianship. It also described how she was allegedly pressured into an abortion by the singer after falling pregnant in 1975, despite being Catholic.
She argues that the singer “did not meaningfully follow through on [guardianship] promises and instead continued to travel with, assault and provide alcohol and drugs”, adding that the relationship only ended after she “made a conscious decision to leave and escape the music and drug-addled world, seeking to be free from the sexualized culture created by Tyler and the industry.”
As per CBS’ reporting, in Tyler's new filing his attorneys argue that he should be granted immunity, based on alleged given consent on her part and also having been her legal guardian at the time. They describe his actions as “legitimate, justified and in good-faith”, and add that the plaintiff had not "sustained any injury or loss by reason of any act or omission on the part of (Tyler)", so is therefore not entitled to any damages.
The case continues.