Judge Allows Former Assistant’s Sexual Assault Lawsuit Against Marilyn Manson to Move Forward

A Los Angeles judge has rejected Marilyn Manson’s latest attempt to dismiss a sexual assault lawsuit filed by his former assistant, allowing the long-running case to continue as both sides prepare for further litigation.

The ruling, issued Friday in Los Angeles County Superior Court, marks another legal setback for the musician, whose real name is Brian Warner. Judge Steve Cochran declined to strike or narrow claims brought by the former assistant, Ashley Walters, finding that her allegations are sufficient to proceed under California law.

The dispute centers on California Assembly Bill 250, legislation that created a two-year lookback window allowing some older sexual assault claims to be filed or revived even if they would otherwise fall outside the standard statute of limitations. Warner’s legal team argued that Walters’ allegations did not meet the law’s requirements and therefore should not be allowed to move forward.

During Friday’s hearing, attorney Alexa Foley, representing Warner, contended that Walters had failed to adequately demonstrate that she was physically restrained during the alleged assault, a key issue in determining whether the claims qualify for revival under the statute. Foley argued that Walters’ own description of the encounter showed she was able to move away during parts of the alleged incident and therefore could not satisfy the legal standard required under AB 250.

Judge Cochran was unconvinced, emphasizing that the case remains in its early stages and that it would be inappropriate to make such a narrowly focused determination before the parties have had a full opportunity to gather evidence. The judge said the allegations, as currently pleaded, were sufficient to survive dismissal and warranted further examination through the discovery process.

“What’s being alleged, as alleged, would ring that bell,” Cochran said from the bench, indicating that the claims fit within the scope of conduct contemplated by the statute. He suggested that arguments over the precise legal characterization of the alleged conduct would be better addressed later in the litigation rather than at the pleading stage.

The lawsuit stems from allegations Walters first raised in 2021. According to court filings, she claims that the rockstar invited her to his West Hollywood home studio in 2010 after contacting her about her photography work and discussing potential creative collaboration. Walters alleges that during the visit, Warner sexually assaulted her after becoming increasingly aggressive. She claims she was effectively stranded at the property because her vehicle was locked in an adjacent parking lot overnight, preventing her from easily leaving the area.

In her most recent amended complaint, Walters alleges that Warner pushed her onto a bed, restrained her arms, and attempted to kiss her before moving behind her, biting her ear, and forcing her hand into his underwear. Warner has denied the allegations.

Walters later accepted a position working as Warner’s assistant, claiming she believed professional opportunities would result from the relationship and that no further inappropriate conduct occurred during a subsequent meeting. Once employed, she alleges she was subjected to a pattern of physical, emotional, and psychological abuse. Her lawsuit includes accusations that Warner threw objects at her, physically intimidated her, and engaged in erratic behavior during alleged drug-fueled outbursts.

The complaint also contains allegations involving other individuals in Warner’s orbit. Walters claims she witnessed Warner engage in abusive behavior toward former fiancée Evan Rachel Wood and other romantic partners. Those allegations remain disputed, and Warner has repeatedly denied accusations of abuse made by Walters and several other women.

Friday’s ruling also preserved claims involving Warner’s company, Marilyn Manson Records. Although Judge Cochran noted that those allegations may face additional legal scrutiny later because Walters did not begin working for Warner until after the alleged assault occurred, he concluded there was enough factual basis for the claims to remain part of the case for now.

Outside the courtroom, both sides interpreted the ruling differently. Warner attorney Howard King characterized the decision as procedural rather than substantive, suggesting the judge had effectively invited a future motion for summary judgment after additional evidence is developed. Walters’ legal team, meanwhile, described the outcome as an important step forward and praised their client for continuing to pursue the case.

A judge initially dismissed Walters’ lawsuit in 2022 as untimely, but an appellate court later revived the matter, allowing her to argue that trauma-related memory suppression delayed her filing. Although Judge Cochran later found she had not established that theory, the passage of AB 250 created a separate legal avenue for the claims to proceed, prompting him earlier this year to reverse a previous dismissal and reinstate the lawsuit.

The case now moves into its next phase, with the parties scheduled to return to court for a case management conference in August. As discovery continues, the court will be asked to determine whether Walters’ claims ultimately satisfy the requirements of California’s revived sexual assault statute and whether sufficient evidence exists to support her allegations at trial.

The filing remains one of several legal matters connected to Warner that emerged after multiple women publicly accused the musician of abuse beginning in 2021. While some cases have been resolved through settlement agreements, others have been dismissed or withdrawn. Warner has consistently denied allegations of sexual assault and abuse and has maintained that the claims against him are false.