Statement on “The Lost Girls”

By Evelyn McDonnell

The story of Kim Fowley sexually abusing a young, intoxicated woman in a hotel room after a Runaways show is grim and horrifying. I would like to say it has knocked many readers into a stunned silence – but in these days, it instead seems to have ignited a firestorm. I personally need more time with the story to say all that I want to say. But I know that the Internet waits for no one (and is woefully unavailable where I am currently living!), so here are some of my current thoughts.

For one, the story is not entirely new. Cherie Currie spoke about it in Victory Tischler-Blue’s 2004 movie Edgeplay; the Runaways singer also wrote about it in detail in her 2011 memoir Neon Angel. I discuss it at length in my 2013 book Queens of Noise: The Real Story of the Runaways. What has been publicly reported for the first time is that the woman in question was Jackie Fuchs, aka Jackie Fox, the Runaways’ bassist at that time. For the first time in almost 40 years, Jackie spoke about the experience at length, to a Huffington Post reporter, in a long, brutal story that quotes several corroborating witnesses and reports other instances of Fowley abuse.

On New Year’s Eve 1975 Jackie Fox had an experience that damaged her psyche and changed her life. Her perception of what happened to her is hers and hers alone; it can not be taken from her, and she has now shared it with the world. I am glad she was able to speak out about this. I hope the revelations in “The Lost Girls” will help her heal and move on, and that it will inspire other women to come to terms with their own experiences. Jackie is a genius – literally – and a beautiful and talented woman. What happened to her is unconscionable.

However, I have issues with the story’s sometimes sensationalist tone, the reporter’s methods, and some of the response to it online – particularly the way other women tangential to this story (including Joan Jett and myself) are also being targeted and blamed, by men. Excuse my professorial tone (occupational hazard), but here are some takeaways for me:

Journalism lesson #1: The dead can not sue. You can say anything about someone if they are dead. The living, on the other hand: Be precise and have backup. These were the words said to me by the lawyer for Da Capo books, in fact, as he was vetting Queens of Noise. We were going through my chapter about Kim Fowley with a finetooth comb, as in 2013, Kim was very much alive. He died in January 2015, almost 40 years after the incident in question – six months before Jackie’s revelations.

Journalism lesson #2: Do not out rape victims. I knew that Jackie might have been the victim; I had been told that on deep background. I also suspected that Kim’s aggressive and vulgar behavior toward women might have crossed the line between offense and assault on other occasions. I repeatedly asked almost everyone I interviewed – including Runaways members Fox, Currie, lyricist Kari Krome, Joan Jett, and Blue — if they knew if Kim had ever crossed that line, with anyone. Almost everyone said no, perhaps because Lesson #1 applies to civilians too, and Kim was usually lawyered up. Currie and Krome both discussed with me what Cherie in her book calls “The Sex Education Class” (because, she writes, that’s what Kim said he was giving the onlookers). But to me, Jackie explicitly dismissed Cherie’s recounting of the incident, and told me that she was not at any event like it. I interviewed her a couple times for several hours, and tried in various gentle ways to get her to speak about this, but apparently she was not ready. That is fine. That is her right as a victim of abuse. Fox needed to tell her story herself, and now she has. However, with her denial – as well as Kim’s denial of the incident, and of having sex with any of the Runaways, ever – I could not report what was at that point hearsay and confidential. Lesson #3: Don’t betray promises of confidentiality.

With Kim dead and Jackie speaking, many people are now talking about what happened that New Year’s Eve. One key figure has not publicly spoken: Rock’n’roll Hall of Famer Joan Jett. In “The Lost Girls,” several people who witnessed the incident say Joan was there. Jackie says that in fact, Joan watched. Jett told me while writing Queens that she had absolutely no memory of the incident as described in Neon Angel; her spokesperson told the HP the same thing. Joan is taking some heat online for not speaking out about this. While I would certainly like to hear from her, attacking her as somehow complicit because she hasn’t released a statement is unfair. Jackie herself did not speak about this until now. Joan was also 16, perhaps stoned, possibly traumatized. She is not the villain here.

The fact is, almost no one said anything about what happened in that room for years – including most of the witnesses now coming forward. The witnesses who recalled the incident to me, in varying forms and details, admitted they never spoke about it with the victim afterwards, never offered her support, and were embarrassed for her – and perhaps ashamed of themselves. Perhaps, some of them thought she was having fun – Jackie admits she was “frozen” and neither fought nor spoke. At least one sworn witness account, from Rick Cole, says that Jackie seemed to be a “willing participant” but may have been intoxicated. After all, weird scenes inside hotel rooms were commonplace in 1970s rock’n’roll. Girls younger than Jackie regularly offered themselves to rock stars. Quaalude and Mandrax use was rampant; the drugs loosened libidos. There were a lot of drugs and alcohol in that room. There was not the same consciousness about date rape that there is in 2015. Fox says in “The Lost Girls” that the current discourse about rape culture and Bill Cosby helped her find her voice. But others may have interpreted her silence at the moment and during the 40 years since as complicity. We now know it wasn’t. She was not willing and was intoxicated. She was 16.

This is one of the important reveals of Jackie’s story: While numerous books and movies have celebrated groupies as free-spirited nymphs, Fox makes it clear that not all women in similar situations were enjoying themselves. And of course, she was a musician, not a courtesan. Stoned on Quaaludes she says she was fed, she was largely unconscious. In fact, much of the event is reconstructed from others’ memories by reporter Jason Cherkis. (Jackie herself has written in the past about how faulty and divergent memories of the night in question are.) Cherie seems to have been the only person who told Kim to stop. Then she left the room, as did others who were disgusted. Not everyone saw the same thing (Currie’s account in Neon Angel differs from the one in HP, for instance). No one knew how Jackie felt about it. They didn’t ask. She didn’t tell them.

What she felt was ashamed. “I carried this sense of shame and of thinking it was somehow my fault for decades,” she told the HP. “I stuck it in a box in the attic and walled it in.”

Lesson #4: Don’t lie to your sources. Cherkis deserves credit for getting Jackie and others to tell her story. However, I take serious issue with the way he has positioned himself as the oracle savior of the Runaways, and specifically attacked me as an apologist for Fowley. He repeatedly cites my book without ever naming me as the author. He never called me for a comment. He did call me a few months ago saying he wanted to write something about the Runaways in conjunction with Joan’s induction into the Rock’n’Roll Hall of Fame. I knew that Jackie sometimes blogged for the HP; I also knew that she was looking for a reporter to talk to about something, she wouldn’t tell me what, exactly. I asked Jason if he had talked with Jackie. He said no. I suggested he do so. Jason has now said online that he was already in contact with Jackie when he called me. Cherkis also asked me for a source’s phone number. Lesson #5: Don’t give out sources’ private information. I suggested he could find it himself, which he apparently did. Although I did not know him at all, I attempted to help him as a colleague. In return, he exploited my research in his article and has repeatedly attacked me online. The irony of this male bullying in the context of this story has not been lost on me, or on many other journalists who have rallied to support me. Cherkis’s unprofessionalism in my brief encounter with him casts a shadow over “The Lost Girls.” I wonder who else he misled.

Cherkis’s account also gives short shrift to Currie’s efforts to bring this story to the public. Cherie deserves better.

I wrote a book about the Runaways. It was not a book about any one member, or manager, or incident. It was a Rashomon story with multiple conflicting points of views. I interviewed more than 70 subjects, some multiple times. I perused numerous documents, recordings, and videos. I told many stories that had never been told before, and there were some stories that were not ready to be told. I did not apologize for Kim; I never have. I also did not give him the narrative power over the Runaways history that Cherkis has now reinscribed. I purposely wrote something more complex than a victim story; doing so involved trying to understand why many people – including Jett, Blue, and guitarist Lita Ford – praised Kim Fowley, while others savaged him. I told both points of view. Kim was not happy with what he called the feminist tone of my book. He certainly did not see me as his apologist.

Jackie Fox has now revealed just how much the Runaways had to overcome to try to achieve their rock’n’roll dream. The experience of listening to their music will never be the same, but now, when we hear them sing, “We’re the queens of noise,” we have a deeper understanding of the depths of that ironic moniker.


Filed under Queens of Noise, Uncategorized

32 responses to “Statement on “The Lost Girls”

  1. Kevin Walsh

    Presumably the reference to New Years Eve 2015 in paragraph 3 was a typo, and should have referred to the initial incident in the 1970s?


  2. Jenn

    Wow this is a great response and may help some of us wrap our brains around this. Thank you


  3. melissa

    Jackie does state that she tried to talk with kim a couple of times before he died. Trauma is a tricky thing….maybe once he died it was easier for her to tell her story. Sort of feels like blaming the victim to me when people have to speak to how a victim should have done this ir that. Kim stated that “in his mind he never made love to a runaway and a runaway never made love to him”…..i dont see that as a denial but yet a lawyered up way of using words…in his mind….his mind may have been distorted so should we all take that statement and just say it didn’t happen? Also making love and having sex with someone who is unconscious is two totally different things.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Reblogged this on imblogrio and commented:
    Just a sad situation all around. I hope the victims find some peace this long after the terribly brutal trauma this caused.


    • So that means that she can’t talk about it now? Typical patriarchal response.


    • Renee

      No one wants to admit to doing a bad thing, or to being a part of a thing that feels so bad and uncomfortable to discuss. I can imagine that both of those sentiments are amplified when the people involved are famous and everything is publicized. It is not your place to judge Jackie or put the “facts” together. She is not on trial. The emotional trauma that comes from experiencing such a thing is complex and lasts forever. I speak from personal experience, as a touring female rock musician. Hopefully a greater collective willingness for us to listen will arise out of victims continuing to come forward, a place where victims feel like they can speak without risking being slandered for telling the painful truth, and for peace to be something that is possible.


  5. Pingback: 'The magnitude of Kim Fowley’s monstrosity' –

  6. Pingback: The Runaways' Cherie Currie Responds to Jackie Fox Rape Allegations Against Kim Fowley | Music News & Events

  7. Pingback: The Runaways' Cherie Currie Responds to Jackie Fox Rape Allegation Against Kim Fowley | News - Suburban Apologist

  8. Pingback: The Runaways’ Cherie Currie Responds to Jackie Fox Rape Allegation Against Kim Fowley

  9. Pingback: The Runaways' Cherie Currie Responds to Jackie Fox Rape Allegation Against Kim Fowley | Music News & Events

  10. Jen

    Since this is being retweeted outside of ur normal blog, you might want to put your name as author on the top. Great article and insight. Seems that everyone was damaged in some way by this incident.


  11. Haj

    A great response! I enjoyed your book immensely and recommended it highly in my blog about the Runaways a while back:
    Jackie’s story is sad, shocking and disturbing, especially to all of us long-time fans and she does deserve our understanding and support in these trying times.


  12. swampscottsoxfan

    “However, I have issues with the story’s sometimes sensationalist tone, the reporter’s methods, and some of the response to it online – particularly the way other women tangential to this story (including Joan Jett and myself) are also being targeted and blamed, by men.”

    I’m glad to read this quote. I have a real problem with a couple of the ways this story has been framed in the Media, and this is one of them. To me the focus of the story should’ve been “Hey guys, can we all stop this post-death canonization of Kim Fowley? Dude was a creep and did bad things”. Instead it’s turned into band infighting and throwing people under the bus, which I think is unfortunately due in part to Jackie’s comment about wanting the focus to be on the Bystander Effect, not what Fowley actually did. It’s effectively side-eye shade throwing.

    Kim Fowley was many things – a musical auteur, a svengali, a consummate self-promoter. He was also a weird, creepy dude‡ and now we know an even uglier side to him. That should even the score.

    ‡Disclaimer: I’ve lived in L.A. since 1976. I saw The Runaways 7 times and met Fowley once in Hollywood in the late ’70s. I clearly recall thinking, “Whoa … weird creeper dude” after that brief meeting.


    • Sarah

      I disagree that wanting to bring attention to the bystander effect is shade-throwing; in further interviews on the matter, Jackie Fuchs has pointed out that there’s really nothing she can do to change what happened 40 years ago, and further vilifying Fowley (or Jett, or Currie et al for that matter) isn’t her central aim in coming out with the story – by bringing her experience to light and focusing on the bystander effect we can possibly change the way we view and react (or don’t react) to acts of violence, both sexual and otherwise, and possibly even prevent them (without putting ourselves in the perpetrator’s line of fire). At this point, focusing on the event of 40 years ago is basically pointless, but perhaps after having more open discussions of what rape can look like, and discussions of what meaningful consent is (and isn’t), we can change the landscape of sexual violence and begin to truly stick up for each other instead of devolving into pointless spirals of “slut-shaming” and “victim blaming”. People keep asking, “Why now? What’s the point in bringing all this up 40 years later?” I believe Fuchs was genuinely inspired by the women who came forward about being victimized by Cosby, and believes that bringing all this out in the open can help change things for young women today.


  13. There is only one victim here and it’s not you. It’s Jackie. I understand you had your reasons not to include this story in your book and that’s fine. She clearly was not yet ready to go public with her story which is why I suspect she denied it on her blog back in 2000. But for you to call her account into question in order to defend yourself is reprehensible. Perhaps that was not your intention but it’s how I read your statement as did Chris Morris whose link directed me here.


    • The writer of “the Lost Girls” has publicly attacked me as a “Kim Fowley apologist,” among other things, and I am defending myself against him. I have repeatedly publicly and privately supported Jackie. Certain male writers are presenting themselves as the great defender of a fallen woman’s honor — of all women, even — while attacking the women who tried to bring this story to light while the accused was still alive. There is something deeply wrong with that.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Don Thieme

      I do not think that Dr. McDonnell is calling the account into question. This is about how Mr. Cherkis may have taken advantage of these women all over again.


  14. Pingback: Cherie Currie Responds to Jackie Fuchs | Breaking News, Latest News and Current News from Breaking news and video. Latest Current News: U.S., World, Entertainment, Health, …

  15. Pingback: The Runaways Joan Jett, Cherie Currie on Jackie Fuchs Kim Fowley Rape | Flavorwire

  16. Don Thieme

    Great piece which explains a lot of the backstory and why there are still different versions of the event in the minds of the women involved.


  17. Pingback: TUBE TALKING | So Pure and Simple

  18. Devin Miller

    This is the best piece written I have read in regards to Jackie story breaking on HP. You bring up points that normal, non-press media consumers don’t have much insight into. Lying to your sources about the piece you are writing is unethical and weakens your credibility from the start. Calling Kim Fowley wasn’t difficult, so I found that bit of information from Jackie (that she couldn’t confront him on the phone) hard to believe. She may have just been scared or intimidated, which is understandable. Kim was also very public about his movements and habits online, where he was and when. As many women that Kim had contact with in the 70s up until his death you think you would have more of a Cosby situation developing because Kim, unlike Cosby, seemed to like to be reviled in the public’s eye playing the heel. I also feel that waiting until after Kim died also hurts both the writer’s and Jackie’s credibility. Dead men can’t sue, but they can’t also defend themselves.


  19. Pingback: #Runaways Roundup | Populism

  20. I find it strange that Currie claims that “All I can say is if Joan, Sandy and I saw an unconscious girl being brutally raped in front of us, we would have hit him over the head with a chair” but apparently in Currie’s own book there is a chapter in which the band watched a teenage girl being raped by Kim and they didn’t hit Kim over the head.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s