Artist News Legal

Evan Rachel Wood hits back at claim she “manipulated” Marilyn Manson accuser

By | Published on Wednesday 1 March 2023

Marilyn Manson

Evan Rachel Wood has hit back at claims by Ashley Morgan Smithline that she “manipulated” her into making allegations of sexual assault against Marilyn Manson, as she continues to try to get the musician’s defamation case against her dismissed. The judge overseeing that case subsequently ruled that Smithline’s statements could not be used as evidence.

This is the latest development in Manson’s defamation lawsuit against his former partner Wood. He sued her and her girlfriend Illma Gore a year ago, ahead of the premiere of a documentary in which Wood made her own claims of abuse against Manson.

Smithline recanted claims she had previously made against Manson in a sworn statement presented by his lawyers to the New York court over seeing the defamation case last week. She said that her 2021 lawsuit – which was dismissed earlier this year after Smithline missed a deadline to appoint new legal representation – was filed as a result of Wood and others pressuring her to do so.

However, in her new filing, reports Rolling Stone, Wood says that Smithline contacted her about her experiences with Manson in 2019, presenting screengrabs of Instagram DMs and text messages to support this.

Wood also provides voicemails from June last year left for a friend by Smithline, in which she says that she believes that Manson’s lawyer Howard King will attempt to get her to withdraw her claims.

“Don’t repeat this to anyone”, she says in the message. “I swear to God, don’t say this to anyone … but I did get a private message on my cellular telephone from Marilyn Manson’s lawyer saying, ‘I was wondering if we could just talk’. The only reason he’d be calling me is that he thinks I’m the weak link and he might want to settle with me to turn on the other girls and say that it was all a ruse”.

In her filing, Wood says: “The real pressure Smithline faced was not to make allegations against plaintiff – it was to retract them. Smithline’s [new] declaration is therefore wholly unreliable”.

She adds that it’s suspicious that Smithline was never deposed before making her sworn statement, saying that “the reason is obvious” – that being that if her lawyers “had the opportunity to question Smithline, the actual truth would come out”.

Giving a statement to Rolling Stone, Smithline says of the new filing: “Evan’s full of shit. That’s my comment. She’s saying anything she can to discredit me”.

In a hearing on Tuesday, the judge overseeing the defamation case – Teresa A Beaudet – ruled that Smithline’s statement could not be submitted as evidence at this stage in proceedings.

According to Rolling Stone, the judge also asked why Manson’s legal team had not previously asked to depose Smithline. The musician’s attorney responded: “We did ask to seek a number of depositions back at the time … and your honour denied those requests for those depositions. Even if we had requested Smithline’s deposition at the time, it wouldn’t have made a difference”.

“We don’t know that”, replied Beaudet. “But you didn’t do it so we are where we are. Even with that, there really is no explanation as to why this [declaration] is bubbling up at this time”.

This ruling means that Beaudet will not consider Smithline’s statement when deciding whether or not to dismiss the case, following a hearing on 11 Apr. However, it does not stop Manson’s lawyers from re-submitting it if the case goes to trial.

Smithline’s was one of four sexual assault lawsuits launched against Manson after Wood went public with her own allegations about their time together. Another, filed by actor Esmé Bianco, was settled in January. There are still two more working their way through the system, one from an unnamed woman, and another filed by Manson’s former assistant Ashley Walters.

Manson is also subject to a criminal investigation, with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department submitting a “partial” report on that investigation to the LA District Attorney’s Office last year. However, prosecutors said at the time that they would need more before they could consider possible criminal charges.

Update 1 Mar: Included information on later ruling disallowing Smithline’s statement to be used as evidence.



READ MORE ABOUT: | |