Lead: New court filings obtained by Rolling Stone show singer Elly Jackson (La Roux) corroborating a model’s allegation that Kanye West choked and sexually gagged her during a 2010 music-video shoot. Jennifer An, a 2009 America’s Next Top Model finalist, sued West in November 2024 under New York City’s Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act. The latest filings attach Instagram messages, witness statements and investigator reports that An’s attorneys say support her account. West’s team has sought dismissal, arguing the conduct was part of protected artistic expression.
Key Takeaways
- Incident reported: The alleged event occurred on a La Roux video shoot in September 2010 during a remix for “In for the Kill,” according to court papers.
- Plaintiff and filing: Jennifer An filed a civil suit in November 2024 under the NYC Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act alleging sexual assault and gender-motivated conduct.
- New evidence: An’s lawyers submitted five exhibits in January 2025 that include Instagram messages from Elly Jackson and signed witness statements.
- La Roux’s message: Jackson told An she “could never forget” the episode and called it “horrific,” according to screenshots attached to the filing.
- On-set witness: Makeup artist Liz Martins signed a statement saying she saw West push his fingers into An’s mouth and recall him telling the model to “suck on them.”
- Defense motion: In January, West’s attorneys moved to dismiss, arguing his conduct occurred during expressive artistic production and merits First Amendment protections.
- Other litigation: West is simultaneously facing a separate civil trial tied to a $57 million Malibu property worker claim and a 2024 sexual-assault suit by former assistant Lauren Pisciotta; he denies those allegations.
Background
The claim centers on a 2010 shoot for a remix of La Roux’s single “In for the Kill,” when Jennifer An was hired as a background performer. At the time, West was a high-profile artist whose on-set behavior had periodically drawn attention; power imbalances on such productions can complicate immediate intervention. An’s complaint says what was billed as a performance turned into a humiliating and degrading episode when West allegedly singled her out and departed from any scripted action. The legal vehicle for the suit is New York City’s Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act, a law that allows civil claims where conduct is alleged to have been motivated by gender or to have exhibited gender-based hostility.
Industry eyewitnesses and contemporaneous communications carry particular weight in late-breaking civil cases, because memories fade and physical evidence may be limited. La Roux (Elly Jackson) was not a party to the suit but appears in exhibits after An sought corroboration from the singer in 2024. The filings now submitted by An’s attorneys include both Jackson’s messages and signed accounts from on-set personnel, an investigative firm’s outreach to crew members, and affirmations from others who were nearby. West’s legal team argues the actions occurred as part of an artistic production, raising a free-speech defense that courts will have to weigh against the asserted facts.
Main Event
According to the complaint, An expected a standard background role on the shoot in September 2010 but was singled out after West told crew to “give me the Asian girl,” language the complaint characterizes as racially targeted direction. The suit alleges West then grabbed An, choked her with both hands, smeared her makeup and forced several fingers into her mouth in a manner the filing describes as emulating forced oral sex. Court papers quote the plaintiff saying she was humiliated and left crying after the encounter.
Witness statements attached to the new filing provide additional detail. Makeup artist Liz Martins states she saw West “forcefully put his fingers down [An’s] mouth and told her to, ‘Suck on them.'” Another on-set witness, Michelle An, describes seeing West lean over the plaintiff and move his thumb across the outside of her mouth, though she says she could not clearly see fingers inside the mouth from her position. The exhibits also include messages from Jackson in 2024 in which she confirms she remembers the episode and asked that footage not be released or shown to An’s family.
After the alleged encounter, the complaint says people on set were stunned and hesitant to intervene because of West’s influence. An’s attorneys contend the combination of contemporaneous messages, signed witness statements and accounts obtained by private investigators together establish a factual record that should survive early dismissal and be tested at trial. West’s lawyers counter that the acts were performed in the context of producing art and should be shielded by expressive-activity protections.
Analysis & Implications
Legally, the case tests the boundary between violent misconduct and conduct claimed as artistic expression. Courts typically examine context, intent, and the availability of consent or reasonable consent evidence; a First Amendment defense is not absolute where the underlying acts constitute torts or crimes. If a judge finds the factual record sufficiently detailed, the litigation will proceed to discovery, where depositions, preserved communications and any existing video or photo material become decisive.
The presence of corroborating witness statements and a prominent third-party figure (La Roux) who acknowledges memory of the incident strengthens An’s position at the pleading stage. Conversely, the defense’s free-speech argument could narrow admissible claims if the court views the challenged actions as inseparable from protected performance. The outcome could influence how courts treat similar on-set misconduct claims, especially where defendants assert artistic purpose as a shield.
Beyond the courtroom, the filings may affect reputational and commercial consequences for those involved. Even without criminal charges, civil findings or settlements can prompt industry distancing, contractual reviews, and changes in hiring practices. For survivors and advocacy groups, the case underscores continuing debate over workplace safety in creative industries and the role of bystanders when alleged abuse involves powerful figures.
| Date/Item | Event |
|---|---|
| September 2010 | Alleged choking and gagging incident on La Roux video shoot |
| November 2024 | Jennifer An files civil suit under NYC Gender Motivated Violence Protection Act |
| January 2025 | Defendant moves to dismiss; plaintiff files five exhibits with messages and witness statements |
The table above places the disputed incident and resulting litigation in sequence. While dates and titles of documents are taken from the complaint and related court filings, the evidentiary value of each item will be tested through discovery. Industry observers note that contemporaneous written communications and multiple independent witness statements typically increase a claim’s likelihood of surviving an early dismissal motion.
Reactions & Quotes
After An reached out in 2024, the court exhibits show an exchange with La Roux’s verified Instagram account in which Jackson expresses memory of the set incident. That communication is presented by An’s team as contemporaneous corroboration rather than later commentary.
“I could never forget that, it was horrific,”
Elly Jackson (La Roux), Instagram messages — court exhibit
The filing frames Jackson’s messages as confirmation she asked the footage not be released and declined to publicize An’s account earlier out of respect and concern for threats to her career. An’s lawyers say that exchange counters the defense theory that the conduct should be dismissed on expressive-activity grounds.
Plaintiff counsel summarized the legal posture in a filing and to the press, emphasizing the quantity of supporting material submitted. The core argument from An’s side is that corroborating communications and witness testimony make the allegations more than conclusory assertions and justify full judicial review.
“We disagree with [West’s] contention that the alleged sexual assault of Ms. An was protected artistic expression,”
Jesse S. Weinstein, counsel for plaintiff — filing/statement
Makeup artist Liz Martins’ signed statement is one of the most specific witness accounts in the exhibits and is presented by the plaintiff as direct observation of nonconsensual conduct. The statement’s graphic detail is cited to illustrate why some crew members felt unable to intervene on set.
“[He] told her to, ‘Suck on them.'”
Liz Martins, signed statement — court exhibit
Unconfirmed
- No public video or widely distributed footage of the alleged September 2010 incident has been produced or verified in court filings available to the public.
- Specifics about alleged threats West reportedly made to La Roux, including timeline and wording beyond what Jackson described, remain based on Jackson’s account and are not independently corroborated in the public record.
- Some crew members identified by a private investigator reportedly recalled the act, but full witness lists and their sworn testimony have not yet been introduced in open court.
Bottom Line
The new exhibits amplify Jennifer An’s civil claim by adding contemporaneous-seeming communications and multiple witness statements that, together, aim to move the case past an early dismissal and into full evidentiary review. Whether the court will accept the plaintiff’s characterization of the material as sufficient to proceed remains a legal question that hinges on how judges balance claimed artistic context against allegations of assault.
If the case continues, discovery will determine what corroborating documentation or testimony exists, and that evidence will shape the likelihood of trial or settlement. Regardless of outcome, the filings highlight persistent challenges in addressing alleged on-set abuse when powerful figures are involved and when defenses assert artistic purpose.
Sources
- Rolling Stone — news/press: original reporting and court-document summary