As moral panic gripped America’s suburbs in the late 1980s, heavy metal found itself in an unprecedented legal crosshairs. The 1990 trial of Judas Priest became the music industry’s most surreal courtroom battle, testing whether artists could be held liable for tragic real-world consequences allegedly triggered by their recordings.
The case stemmed from a devastating December 23, 1985 incident in Reno, Nevada, where two young metalheads—James Vance and Ray Belknap—attempted suicide after consuming alcohol and listening to Judas Priest’s cover of “Better by You, Better than Me.“
The Tragedy That Started It All
Ray Belknap died instantly from his self-inflicted gunshot wound. Vance survived with critical injuries but died several years later. The families sued Judas Priest and CBS Records, claiming the song contained a subliminal “do it” command that triggered the suicide pact.
What followed was a three-week legal circus that captivated the music world and terrified record executives. The presiding judge made a crucial ruling: subliminal messages, being unconsciously perceived, don’t qualify for First Amendment protection. This decision created a legal pathway for product liability claims against musicians—assuming plaintiffs could prove their case.
Legal Precedent and Industry Impact
Despite the judge’s ruling on subliminal speech, the court ultimately found Judas Priest not liable. The scientific evidence simply couldn’t establish that subliminal messages could cause conduct as severe as suicide. As the judge noted, “The scientific research presented does not establish that subliminal stimuli can cause conduct of this magnitude.”
The financial toll was significant—Judas Priest spent $250,000 defending themselves, while CBS was ordered to cover $40,000 in plaintiffs’ costs due to procedural issues. More importantly, the case established a high legal bar for causation claims against musicians.
This verdict effectively ended the wave of similar lawsuits targeting rock artists, including cases against Ozzy Osbourne. The trial reinforced that musicians generally aren’t accountable for listeners’ interpretations of their work, safeguarding artistic expression in popular music while acknowledging the complex relationship between art and audience.
