Following a long period of silence from producer The Gaslamp Killer - following the allegations of rape which surfaced back in October of 2017 - the artist has recently issued a statement which goes into detail about why he is breaking his seven-month silence, why he chose to sue his accusers for defamation of character and why he believes he is innocent.
You can read The Gaslamp Killer’s full statement by going here.
In response to this recent declaration, one of the artist's accusers, Chelsea Tadros, has shared her lawyer Erica Kim’s response to GLK’s statement via Twitter.
You can read the full statement below:
"William Bensussen’s latest statement does exactly what he claims he wants to avoid. He seeks trial by media and attempts to exonerate himself by grossly distorting the facts of this case."
"First, Chelsea Tadros has never claimed that she was physically immobilized due to being drugged. In fact, her flashes of recollection—which jump in time and location—clearly establish that she was standing during many moments of the night. Importantly, some of the most terrifying aspects of her experience were the blank gaps in her memory and the confusion of not knowing why or how she found herself standing in completely foreign places. Ms. Tadros has only stated that when Mr. Bensussen was sexually assaulting her, she was “so scared” and frozen with fear that she could not speak or move. Mr. Bensussen’s statement not only flagrantly and knowingly mischaracterizes her drugged condition, but in doing so, suggests that Ms. Tadros must have consented because she was able to move around. These are the type of deeply problematic and troubling arguments that Mr. Bensussen has repeatedly asserted throughout this litigation to claim that Ms. Tadros must have consented to him sexually assaulting her. Let it be known, loud and clear, that a victim need not be physically immobilized and/or unconscious to be raped."
"Second, Judge Joanne O’Donnell did not find inconsistencies in Ms. Tadros’ statement. Rather, the Court merely found, unsurprisingly, that Ms. Tadros’ account and Mr. Bensussen’s account conflicted with each other. In doing so, the Court made no determination of whose evidence was more credible or who was telling the truth. On this basis, the Court decided to let the case proceed so that a jury could determine who to believe."
"Third, Mr. Bensussen refers to statements made by his retained toxicology “expert,” Okorie Okorocha, but conveniently fails to mention that the Court threw out Mr. Okorocha’s statement in its entirety. Importantly, Mr. Bensussen’s “expert” has never evaluated, interviewed, or even met Ms. Tadros."
"Fourth, Mr. Bensussen relies on the statement of his former roommate, Peter Rosen, who admitted in his declaration that he was in his own room the entire time Ms. Tadros and Ms. Medina were in Mr. Bensussen’s residence. Mr. Rosen cannot credibly opine, from the confines of his room, on whether Ms. Tadros was in any condition to consent. That Mr. Rosen allegedly saw, from the window of his room, Ms. Tadros and Ms. Medina enter and exit the residence “in their own power” does not establish consent."
"Fifth, Mr. Bensussen relies on the statement of Christopher Salguero, who has been accused of sexual misconduct himself. Mr. Salguero’s (@christoph.night) photographer pseudonym “Christopher Edward Knight” appeared on Shit Model Management’s blacklist of individuals to avoid in the fashion industry for reportedly subjecting models to sexually inappropriate behavior. Further, actual screenshots of the referenced conversation between Mr. Salguero and Ms. Medina directly contradict Mr. Bensussen’s dubious characterization of the conversation, which omits Ms. Medina replying to Mr. Salguero’s message three days later and informing him that she did not want to even think about the night in question."
"Sixth, Mr. Bensussen falsely claims that Ms. Medina has not confirmed Ms. Tadros’ claims. Ms. Medina prevailed on her Anti-Slapp Motion, wherein she stated that Mr. Bensussen raped her.Ms. Tadros is prepared and willing to have a court of law affirm her truth. We support Mr. Bensussen’s invitation to look at the facts and public record objectively, including the sworn statements of Ms. Tadros and her witnesses, as well as documents that dismantle the credibility of his “expert witness.” The record will speak for itself. Years before the #METOO movement ever gained traction, Ms. Tadros privately confided in a handful of people about the sexual assault, and her story has never changed. And before this lawsuit was ever filed, Ms. Tadros sought weekly therapy for the sexual assault and was diagnosed with PTSD. Ms. Tadros’ trauma is real. The night terrors, depression, flashbacks, and severe anxiety that followed her is real. She had nothing to gain from coming forward about her sexual assault but peace of mind from speaking the truth. Mr. Bensussen cannot unilaterally declare that the sexual encounter was consensual, and his repeated attempts to do so are not only reprehensible, but also underscore his fundamental misunderstanding of consent.”
Chelsea also issued her own statement via Twitter, starting off with the statement “GLK can sue me until i’m fucking bankrupt. I refuse to be intimated by him and his attorneys.” Read Chelsea Tadros’ personal statement below.
GLK can sue me until i’m fucking bankrupt. i refuse to be intimated by him and his attorneys pic.twitter.com/QfZ6cYpv75— chelsea (@chelseaelaynne) May 17, 2018