Bassnectar applied for sexual abuse lawsuit filed against him three years ago only to be dismissed, according to court documents obtained by The rolling stone.

Lawyers for the DJ, whose real name is Lorin Ashton, filed the motion earlier this week, saying the three women who sued him lied about their ages to “deceive” Ashton, making l to believe they are at least 18 years old. The motion also argued that discovery in the case also confirmed that their relationships with Ashton were consensual.

“To the contrary, the record demonstrates that the pursuit of a sexual relationship between the parties was instigated by plaintiffs, each of whom was always free to continue or terminate it,” the suit states. “Ultimately, the plaintiffs did just that when they decided to pursue other romantic relationships. Plaintiffs simply cannot prove that they were coerced or felt they had no choice but to engage in sexual intercourse with the defendant.”

Alexis Bowling and Rachel Ramsbottom first sued Ashton in April 2021, with Jenna Houston joining as the third claimant a month later. In the original complaint, Bowling and Ramsbottom alleged that Ashton “solicited underage girls through various means,” including through social media and fan club programs. They alleged that he offered tickets to his shows and had unprotected sex with them. They also claimed he had them take sexually explicit photos and possessed child pornography. Houston shared similar allegations in an amended complaint a month later.

Regarding the child pornography allegations, Ashton’s motion stated that “Ramsbottom and Bowling rely solely on memory for their claims.” It also argued: “They have no corroborating evidence, admissible or otherwise, that they transmitted such images to the defendant or that he received them, and there is documentary evidence of the lies they told him about their age”.

In documents filed in October, an attorney for the plaintiffs wrote that Ashton has “an inability to truthfully recount the facts and evidence presented during discovery because his summary judgment motion is filled with easily rebuttable falsehoods.” The attorney wrote that Ashton’s deposition suggested he knew the plaintiffs were under 18.

Neither Ashton nor attorneys for the plaintiffs immediately responded to a request for comment.