JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Thursday, August 21, 2025

R. Kelly convicted on many counts, acquitted of trial fixing

by

1071 days ago
20220914
FILE - Musician R. Kelly, center, leaves the Daley Center after a hearing in his child support case on May 8, 2019, in Chicago. Closing arguments are scheduled Monday, Sept. 12, 2022 for R. Kelly and two co-defendants in the R&B singer’s trial on federal charges of trial-fixing, child pornography and enticing minors for sex, with jury deliberations to follow. (AP Photo/Matt Marton, File)

FILE - Musician R. Kelly, center, leaves the Daley Center after a hearing in his child support case on May 8, 2019, in Chicago. Closing arguments are scheduled Monday, Sept. 12, 2022 for R. Kelly and two co-defendants in the R&B singer’s trial on federal charges of trial-fixing, child pornography and enticing minors for sex, with jury deliberations to follow. (AP Photo/Matt Marton, File)

CHICA­GO (AP) — A fed­er­al ju­ry on Wednes­day con­vict­ed R. Kel­ly of sev­er­al child pornog­ra­phy and sex abuse charges in his home­town of Chica­go, de­liv­er­ing an­oth­er le­gal blow to a singer who used to be one of the biggest R&B stars in the world.

Kel­ly, 55, was found guilty on three counts of child pornog­ra­phy and three counts of child en­tice­ment.

But the ju­ry ac­quit­ted him on a fourth pornog­ra­phy count as well as a con­spir­a­cy to ob­struct jus­tice charge ac­cus­ing him fix­ing his state child pornog­ra­phy tri­al in 2008. He was found not guilty on all three counts of con­spir­ing to re­ceive child pornog­ra­phy and for two fur­ther en­tice­ment charges.

His two co-de­fen­dants were found not guilty on all charges.

Ju­rors, who de­lib­er­at­ed for 11 hours over two days, wrote sev­er­al ques­tions to the judge on Wednes­day, at least one in­di­cat­ing the pan­elists were grap­pling with some of the case’s le­gal com­plex­i­ties.

One asked if they had to find Kel­ly both en­ticed and co­erced mi­nors, or that he ei­ther en­ticed or co­erced them. Over ob­jec­tions from Kel­ly’s lawyer, the judge said they on­ly need to find one.

At tri­al, pros­e­cu­tors sought to paint a pic­ture of Kel­ly as a mas­ter ma­nip­u­la­tor who used his fame and wealth to reel in star-stuck fans, some of them mi­nors, to sex­u­al­ly abuse then dis­card them.

Kel­ly, born Robert Sylvester Kel­ly, was des­per­ate to re­cov­er child porno­graph­ic videos he made and lugged around in a gym bag, wit­ness­es said. They said he of­fered up to $1 mil­lion to re­cov­er miss­ing videos be­fore his 2008 tri­al, know­ing they would land him in le­gal per­il. The con­spir­a­cy to hide his abuse ran from 2000 to 2020, pros­e­cu­tors said.

Kel­ly as­so­ciates Der­rel Mc­David and Mil­ton Brown were co-de­fen­dants at the Chica­go tri­al. Ju­rors ac­quit­ted Mc­David, a long­time Kel­ly busi­ness man­ag­er, who was ac­cused of con­spir­ing with Kel­ly to rig the 2008 tri­al. Brown, a Kel­ly as­so­ciate for years, was ac­quit­ted of re­ceiv­ing child pornog­ra­phy.

Kel­ly has al­ready been con­vict­ed of rack­e­teer­ing and sex traf­fick­ing in New York and sen­tenced to 30 years in prison.

In Chica­go, a con­vic­tion of just one count of child pornog­ra­phy car­ries a manda­to­ry min­i­mum sen­tence of 10 years, while re­ceipt of child pornog­ra­phy car­ries a manda­to­ry min­i­mum of five years. Judges can or­der that de­fen­dants sen­tenced ear­li­er in sep­a­rate cas­es serve their new sen­tence si­mul­ta­ne­ous­ly with or on­ly af­ter the first term is ful­ly served. Fed­er­al in­mates must serve at least 85% of their sen­tences.

Dur­ing clos­ing ar­gu­ments Tues­day, Kel­ly at­tor­ney Jen­nifer Bon­jean likened the gov­ern­ment’s tes­ti­mo­ny and ev­i­dence to a cock­roach and its case to a bowl of soup.

If a cock­roach falls in­to soup, she said, “you don’t just pull out the cock­roach and eat the rest of the soup. You throw out the whole soup,” said told ju­rors.

“There are just too many cock­roach­es,” she said of the pros­e­cu­tion’s case.

The three de­fen­dants called on­ly a hand­ful of wit­ness­es over four days. Co-de­fen­dant Mc­David, who was on the stand for three days, may have dam­aged Kel­ly’s hopes for ac­quit­tal by say­ing that he now doubts Kel­ly was truth­ful when he de­nied abus­ing any­one af­ter hear­ing the su­per­star’s ac­cusers tes­ti­fy.

In her clos­ing re­but­tal, pros­e­cu­tor Jean­nice Ap­pen­teng cit­ed tes­ti­mo­ny that Kel­ly’s in­ner cir­cle in­creas­ing­ly fo­cused on do­ing what Kel­ly want­ed as his fame boomed in the mid-1990s.

“And ladies and gen­tle­men, what R. Kel­ly want­ed was to have sex with young girls,” she said.

Four Kel­ly ac­cusers tes­ti­fied, all re­ferred to by pseu­do­nyms or their first names: Jane, Nia, Pauline and Tra­cy. Some cried when de­scrib­ing the abuse but oth­er­wise spoke calm­ly and with con­fi­dence. A fifth ac­cuser, Brit­tany, did not tes­ti­fy.

Sit­ting near­by in a suit and face mask, Kel­ly of­ten avert­ed his eyes and looked down as his ac­cusers spoke.

Some dozen die-hard Kel­ly fans reg­u­lar­ly at­tend­ed the tri­al. On at least one oc­ca­sion dur­ing a break, sev­er­al made hand signs of a heart at Kel­ly. He smiled back.

Jane, 37, was the gov­ern­ment’s star wit­ness and piv­otal to the fix­ing charge, which ac­cused Kel­ly of us­ing threats and pay­offs to get her to lie to a grand ju­ry be­fore his 2008 tri­al and to en­sure she and her par­ents wouldn’t tes­ti­fy.

A sin­gle video, which state pros­e­cu­tors said was Kel­ly abus­ing a girl of around 14, was the fo­cal point of that tri­al.

On the wit­ness stand for two days at the end of Au­gust, Jane paused, tugged at a neck­lace and dabbed her eyes with a tis­sue when she said pub­licly for the first time that the girl in the video was her aged 14 and that the man was Kel­ly, who would have been around 30.

Some ju­rors in the 2008 tri­al said they had to ac­quit Kel­ly be­cause the girl in the video didn’t tes­ti­fy. At the fed­er­al tri­al in Chica­go, Jane said she lied to a state grand ju­ry in 2002 when she said it was not her in the video, say­ing part of her rea­son for ly­ing was that she cared for Kel­ly and didn’t want to get him in­to trou­ble.

Jane told ju­rors she was 15 when they first had in­ter­course. Asked how many times they had sex be­fore she turned 18, she an­swered qui­et­ly: “Un­count­able times. … Hun­dreds.”

Jane, who be­longed to a teenage singing group, first met Kel­ly in the late 1990s when she was in ju­nior high school. She had vis­it­ed Kel­ly’s Chica­go record­ing stu­dio with her aunt, a pro­fes­sion­al singer. Soon af­ter that meet­ing, Jane told her par­ents Kel­ly was go­ing to be her god­fa­ther.

Jane tes­ti­fied that when her par­ents con­front­ed Kel­ly in the ear­ly 2000s he dropped to his knees and begged them for for­give­ness. She said she im­plored her par­ents not to take ac­tion against Kel­ly be­cause she loved him.

De­fense at­tor­neys sug­gest­ed a de­sire for mon­ey and fame drove some gov­ern­ment wit­ness­es to ac­cuse Kel­ly, and they ac­cused sev­er­al peo­ple of try­ing to black­mail him. They al­so sug­gest­ed that at least one of his ac­cusers was 17 — the age of con­sent in Illi­nois — when Kel­ly be­gan purs­ing her for sex.

Bon­jean im­plored ju­rors not to ac­cept the pros­e­cu­tion’s por­tray­al of her client as “a mon­ster,” say­ing Kel­ly was forced to re­ly on oth­ers be­cause of in­tel­lec­tu­al chal­lenges, and that he was some­times led astray.

“Mr. Kel­ly can al­so be a vic­tim,” she said in her open­ing state­ment.

Pros­e­cu­tors played ju­rors ex­cerpts from three videos that Jane said fea­tured her. Court of­fi­cials set up opaque screens around the ju­rors so jour­nal­ists and spec­ta­tors couldn’t see the videos or the ju­rors’ re­ac­tions.

But the sound was au­di­ble. In one video, the girl is heard re­peat­ed­ly call­ing the man “dad­dy.” At one point she asks: “Dad­dy, do you still love me?” The man gives her sex­u­al­ly ex­plic­it in­struc­tions.

Pros­e­cu­tors have said Kel­ly shot the video that was al­so ev­i­dence in the 2008 tri­al in a log cab­in-themed room at his North Side Chica­go home around 1998.

An­oth­er ac­cuser, Pauline, said Jane in­tro­duced her to Kel­ly when they were 14-year-old mid­dle school class­mates in 1998. At Kel­ly’s Chica­go home lat­er that year, Pauline de­scribed her shock when she said she first walked in on Kel­ly and a naked Jane. She said Kel­ly told her that every­one has se­crets. “This is our se­cret,” she tes­ti­fied he said.

Pauline told ju­rors she still cares for Kel­ly. But, as a 37-year-old mom, she said she now has a dif­fer­ent per­spec­tive.

“If some­body did some­thing to my kids,” she said, “I’m killing ’em. Pe­ri­od.”

Source: As­so­ci­at­ed Press


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored