Artist News Business News Legal

Pussycat Dolls sue Daily Mail over “prostitution ring” claims

By | Published on Tuesday 22 May 2018

Kaya Jones

The Pussycat Dolls are suing the Daily Mail over two articles it published last year based on the allegations of a former member of the outfit, Kaya Jones.

Jones initially¬†made a series of allegations against the Pussycat Dolls operation¬†and its founder Robin Antin on Twitter, declaring: “I wasn’t in a girl group – I was in a prostitution ring”.

She continued: “‘How bad was it?’ people ask. Bad enough that I walked away from my dreams, bandmates and a $13 million record deal”. Calling Antin “the den mother from hell”, she alleged that being a “team player” in Pussycat land meant you had to “sleep with whoever they say”.

At the time Antin called the allegations “disgusting, ridiculous lies”, while a statement from The Pussycat Dolls themselves denied the claims and added: “if Kaya experienced something we are unaware of then we fully encourage her to get the help she needs and are here to support her”.

The defamation lawsuit objects to a Daily Mail article based on the tweets and another that included an interview with Jones. The litigation argues that Jones was never a full member of The Pussycat Dolls, and is still disgruntled about that fact, motivating her outburst last year. The Mail, it then argues, should have known to fact-check allegations made by such a biased source.

The Pussycat Dolls and Antin are represented in the legal action by Richard Busch, the lawyer forever associated with the ‘Blurred Lines’ song-theft case, where he successfully represented the Marvin Gaye family.

Commenting on the new lawsuit, he told reporters: “It’s clear Ms Jones was an unreliable and biased source simply looking for her fifteen minutes of fame, and the Daily Mail could have taken their pick of dozens of sources to contact to see if there was an inkling of truth to the statements, but did not do so”.

Showing at least some knowledge of the Daily Mail’s online business model, the lawyer goes on: “Instead, for pure sensationalism and to grab salacious headlines to sell their product, and without considering what it meant for The Pussycat Dolls, their business or their reputation, the Daily Mail published these defamatory statements with a reckless disregard for the truth. Daily Mail’s conduct was malicious and it should be held responsible for the enormous damage The Pussycat Dolls and Robin have suffered as a direct result”.