Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler has been slammed by lawyers not involved in his sexual assault case due to his "insane" reasoning in court.
Tyler has since defended himself in the lawsuit filed by Julia Holcomb Misley, a woman who he reportedly assaulted sexually when she was only 16. He told the Los Angeles County Superior Court in his lengthy defense that he had immunity in the case since he became her legal guardian at that time.
Following his filing, several attorneys reviewed his defense and called out the singer for his unbelievable response.
Steven Tyler's Defense in Sexual Assault Case Branded "Insane"
In an exclusive interview with Rolling Stone, several attorneys who are not working in the sexual assault case shared their thoughts about Tyler's defense.
The founding attorney of Crumiller PC, Susan Crumiller, said that she immediately thought that the immunity response provided by the Aerosmith singer was "f**king insane."
"There is no such thing as immunity to a caregiver or guardian for sex abuse. I don't have the words to describe how crazy it is," she said.
READ ALSO: Lotus Drummer Chuck Morris, Son's Dead Bodies Recovered 24 Days After Going Missing - What Happened?
Los Angeles attorney Dave Ring also said the immunity claim was baffling, but he noted that Tyler's defensive response is common during the early part of a civil lawsuit to establish the case. Crumiller acknowledged it, but she still highlighted how "particularly egregious" Tyler's response was.
With that, she believes Misley could win if she files a motion to dismiss such defenses.
Crumiller mentioned the original complaint: sexual battery, assault, and emotional distress. While the "I Don't Want To Miss a Thing" hitmaker could argue his aforesaid immunity in the intentional emotional distress claim, she noted that there is no immunity - in reality - in any of those cases.
Steve Tyler Has No Authority To Block Consent by Being a Guardian
On the other hand, discrimination and sexual misconduct specialist attorney Katherine Atkinson also expressed how "mystified" she was by Tyler's defense. She referenced California's Civil Code which states that consent cannot be considered a defense especially when the person who committed the sexual battery is "an adult who is in a position of authority over the minor."
Tyler infamously "admitted" in his autobiography that he knew Misley was 16 when he met her.
"That's basically trafficking a minor across state lines to have sex with her. There's a little gray area, but bottom line, he's going to have a difficult time arguing this is consensual, if anything, in a place where the age of consent is 18," Ring went on.
Misley's representative, Jeff Anderson, already slammed Tyler and accused him of offering a gaslighting response when he used his legal guardianship to avoid prosecution for sex crimes.
