The Judas Priest Suicide Trial

In the early 1980s, a wave of moral panic swept across the United States, with Christian fundamentalists convinced that Satan was infiltrating popular culture, manifesting through various channels, including rock and heavy metal music.

In the early 1980s, Christian fundamentalists became convinced that Satan was working through rock and heavy metal music.

There was a segment of the American population, predominantly Christian fundamentalists, who propagated the belief that rock and roll—and eventually heavy metal—were the preferred conduits for the Devil’s messages. They argued that some bands used satanic imagery, or simply appeared odd and outlandish, which they interpreted as clues to the musicians’ allegiance to satanism. These groups targeted bands that they believed were lacing their music with subliminal messages intended to corrupt and enslave the youth.

Some bands capitalized on the Christian right's accusations, leaning into the satanic imagery to boost sales.

Ozzy Osbourne, the frontman of Black Sabbath and a solo artist characterized by his dark and dramatic flair, was sued on the grounds that his song "Suicide Solution" had incited a tragic incident where a son took his own life. However, the lawsuit was dismissed due to the protection of free speech as afforded by the First Amendment.

Similarly, the infamous Judas Priest trial revolved around a suicide pact between two boys, Raymond Belknap and James Vance, who were die-hard fans of the band. After Belknap's death and Vance's grave injuries, the band was accused of hiding subliminal messages in their music that led to the boys' actions. However, Judas Pries ...

The discussion of subliminal messaging and backmasking in music stems largely from fears that arose during the satanic panic and controversies such as the Judas Priest trial.

Backmasking, or intentionally recording hidden messages that play when the music is reversed, was a key concern for the Christian right.

The Christian right became concerned that rock music contained anti-Christian and pro-Satanic messages through backmasking—hidden messages that are revealed when music is played backward. They posited that while inaudible when played forward, the brain could still subconsciously register these messages. Chuck Bryant highlights that the practice of backmasking and the detection of such messages played a significant role in the trial.

Proponents of the backmasking theory claimed these hidden messages could unconsciously influence listeners, even if they couldn't consciously hear them.

In the Judas Priest trial, the band was accused of including subliminal messages in their music, specifically through backmasking. Rob Halford, lead singer of Judas Priest, confirmed past use of backmasking, and the plaintiffs' lawyers argued that this pointed to potential hidden content influencing behavior. They claimed that phrases like "do it," supposedly found in the song "Better By You, Better Than Me," could be interpreted as a push toward suicide.

Experts presented questionable "scientific" evidence to support the idea that subliminal messages could manipulate behavior, including leading listeners to suicide.

The plaintiffs called upon advisor Wilson Key and clinical psychologist Howard Shevrin, who suggested that the brain might interpret sub ...

The Judas Priest trial of 1986 became a watershed moment in legal and cultural history, testing the boundaries of artistic expression and the law’s interpretation of free speech and its influence.

In 1986, the parents of two teenagers who died by suicide sued Judas Priest, claiming the band's music contained backmasked messages that drove the boys to take their lives.

The trial centered on accusations that Judas Priest inserted harmful subliminal messages in their music. Following a tragedy involving Raymond Belknap and James Vance, claims were made that the band's music mesmerized them into believing that the answer to life was death. The song "Better By You, Better Than Me" was scrutinized for containing alleged messages prompting suicide.

The trial took on broader significance as a test case for whether music lyrics could be legally liable for influencing harmful behavior.

Attorneys led by Ken McKenna filed a product liability lawsuit against Judas Priest and CBS Records, which focused not just on the specific case but also on the broader legal implications for music lyrics affecting listener behavior.

The judge allowed the case to proceed, ruling that subliminal messages were not protected by free speech and could be considered an invasion of privacy.

Judge Jerry Carr Whitehead in Washoe County decided there was enough possibility in the plaintiff's claims to warrant a full trial. He ruled that while subliminal messages might not be protected by free speech, the case depended on whether Judas Priest intentionally included such messages in their songs.

Judas Priest ultimately prevailed in the case, with the judge concluding the band did not intentionally include subliminal messages to harm listeners. Despite Rob Halford of Judas Priest's admission that backmasked lyrics existed in their music for a cool effect, the defense successfully argued that what were perceived as the words "do it" were merely random sounds.

The Judas Priest trial set an important legal precedent, reinforcing musicians' First Amendment rights and debunking the notion of music as a direct catalyst for suicide.

The trial was part of an introspective period in American history, where the nation grappled with moral concerns and the limits of free speech. The judgement implicitly reinforced the protection of musician ...

The debate over music censorship in the 1980s arose out of concern for explicit content in rock music, which culminated in the creation of parental advisory labels—a paradigm shift influenced by radical episodes and legislation attempts.

The Judas Priest trial was part of a larger push by the PMRC (Parents Music Resource Center) to censor explicit and "occult" content in rock music.

The Judas Priest trial, while not directly discussed here, was emblematic of a broader cultural and legislative push led by the PMRC toward censoring content that was considered explicit or occult in nature. California Bill AB 3741, for instance, aimed to implement warning labels on records with backward masking, a practice ostensibly connected with satanic messages, after a Trinity Broadcast Network show raised public concern, leading to legislative reactions. Additionally, the formation of the PMRC in 1985 called for warning labels on music for various reasons, including references to profanity, violence, drugs, alcohol, and the occult.

This effort led to the creation of parental advisory labels, which some saw as a necessary guideline for parents but others criticized as censorship.

The PMRC's activism resulted in the widely recognized parental advisory explicit lyrics warning stickers on albums. This system aimed to simplify decision-making for parents who were concerned about the content in their children's music but were not keen to conduct direct monitoring or vetting. However, this solution spurred an ongoing debate regarding its nature, with some criticizing it as a form of censorship, while others viewed it as a helpful tool for parents.

While the PMRC's campaign was ultimately unsuccessful in banning certain music, it did succeed in stigmatizing and reducing the commercial success of targeted artists.

Throughout these censorial pursuits, artists like John Denver and Frank Zappa stood firm against the encroaching censorship during the famous 1985 hearings, highlighting the opposition from the music industry. Moreover, the dismissal of the Ozzy Osbourne case, which established that music lyrics are protected as free speech, represented a key victory for artistic expression over censorship. Although the PMRC's campaign did not l ...