The prosecution in R. Kelly’s Brooklyn federal court trial rested Monday morning, bringing these proceedings closer to a conclusion as they enter the sixth week. Kelly faces one racketeering count, and eight Mann Act counts. The Mann Act counts relate to Kelly’s alleged shuttling of victims across state lines for illicit sex acts.
Prosecutors have described Kelly as a “predator, a man who for decades used his fame, his popularity, and a network of people at his disposal to target, groom, and exploit girls, boys, and young women for his own sexual gratification.” They contend that this abuse was not just a series of horrendous incidents, but rather, carried out as an orchestrated criminal enterprise — hence the racketeering charge.
They used specific allegations of sexual misconduct — from luring minors to psychological torment that kept them under his control — to make their racketeering case. They have contended that Kelly and his clique had a “common purpose of achieving the objectives of the Enterprise” to support his music and personal brand while enticing victims into unlawful sexual activity.
Federal prosecutors called 45 witnesses to make their case. Eleven of these witnesses were Kelly’s accusers; their allegations included sexual abuse and misconduct, with some accusing him of both.
Eight of these witnesses were former employees. Several described how Kelly used his employees to meet girls and women, shuttle them around, and allegedly keep them in a state of isolation. And several described misgivings about Kelly’s treatment of his girlfriends, and their suspicion of misconduct.
Their final witness, psychologist Dawn Hughes, testified Friday afternoon and Monday morning, to explain that victims of domestic and sexual violence may remain with and return to their abusers — and that going back doesn’t negate victimhood. Hughes’s testimony was meant to address the potential “why did they stay if they didn’t want to?” question, which jurors may wonder.
Witnesses preceding Hughes last week reiterated what prior ones said, testifying to Kelly’s dramatic highs and lows, describing him as an awful employer and an angry person. Prior to Hughes’s testimony, one of Kelly’s former assistants, Cheryl Mack, said that he threatened her so she would support him in a lawsuit filed by an accuser, warning: “Generally, in these situations, people come up missing.”
Aliciette Mayweather, also a former Kelly assistant, testified last week. Mayweather’s testimony revealed that she expressed concern about one of his girlfriends, Jane, in a text to another employee. “When she gets to Florida, she should run and never come back,” the message said. “Something is really strange as to the treatment of the little one…” (Aliciette Mayweather’s twin sister, Suzette Mayweather, also worked as Kelly’s assistant. During Suzette’s testimony several weeks ago, she described him as “like a brother,” but admitted thinking that Jane “looked young” to her.)
Diana Copeland, who had also worked as an assistant for Kelly, also took the stand last week. Copeland’s name came up repeatedly throughout the trial, with witnesses saying that she coordinated travel for Kelly’s female guests–and kept an eye on them. She testified that Kelly’s girlfriends did not freely roam his homes. Copeland said she was “fined” — that is, her pay was withheld — when she couldn’t find a “really rare puppy” Kelly had demanded.
Another witness last week, Angela, testified that Kelly abused her when she was 14 or 15 years old — and that she saw him sexually abuse Aaliyah on a tour bus when the now-deceased singer was 13 or 14. “I saw Robert and Aaliyah in a sexual situation. It appeared that he had his head in between her legs and was giving her oral sex,” Angela testified of the alleged incident, which she said took place in 1992 or 1993.
Alex, the second male accuser to publicly make allegations against Kelly, took the stand as well. Alex claimed to have met Kelly in 2007, when he was 16. Alex’s friend at the time, Louis, introduced him to Kelly. (Louis was the first man to come forward publicly with sexual misconduct allegations against Kelly; he claims this abuse started at age 17.) Alex, who said he had his first sexual encounter with Kelly at age 20, claimed he was pressured into unwanted sexual activity.
The prosecution also played recordings on Wednesday, but they were presented only to jurors and parties in the case. Neither the media nor the public watching Kelly’s trial in a viewing room could see or hear any of it. A court document filed Tuesday revealed that prosecutors planned on presenting recordings that “show the defendant physically and verbally abusing and threatening females.” But it remains unknown what exactly jurors heard or saw. Kelly didn’t use his headphones while these recordings were presented, which would have allowed him to hear them.
A woman from one of these recordings, called “Jane Doe #20” in court filings, was going to take the stand, but prosecutors changed their mind because of her emotional state. They said that “after the government played the audio recording for Jane Doe #20 and Jane Doe #20 traveled to New York to prepare for her testimony, she started to have panic attacks and appeared to have an emotional breakdown. For the sake of her mental health, the government advised Jane Doe #20 that it would not call her as a witness at the trial.”
The conclusion of prosecutors’ case did not have the jaw-dropping power of their first few weeks. It’s unclear how jurors reacted to witnesses and evidence that corroborated what many, many other witnesses had already said, since the press is relegated to a viewing room, where proceedings are displayed on two 52-inch TV screens.
The only thing that’s really visible on these screens are Kelly’s profile, and two of his lawyers’ profiles. Everyone else’s head and face are the size of quarters. (Vulture measured.) The only glimpse of jurors is when the camera catches them shuffling into the courtroom. Jurors could have seemed riveted or convinced, or bored, by this week’s proceedings. The tail-end of prosecutors’ case could have proved pivotal for them, or it could have been damaging. The jurors, who are now about about enter their sixth week of testimony, might be exhausted at this point. A juror might have dozed off at some juncture, which happens even in the highest profile trials. There is no sense of how any of this will land.
Another key unknown factor is how the jury interpreted Copeland’s cross-examination. Kelly’s lead lawyer, Devereaux Cannick, asked Copeland whether doors at Kelly’s home could lock from the outside — an important question, considering how some accusers said they felt compelled to stay. “No, they did not,” Copeland said. The defense also tried to use Copeland’s cross-examination to undermine claims that Kelly ran a criminal enterprise. Copeland, who quit her job and returned many times, said she did so “because I felt like he did not have trustworthy people around him. Robert did not have control over his bank accounts. He didn’t even know his own social security number. He had no control over that, he had no idea where his royalties were going. That was a huge problem.”
The R&B singer’s defense is now beginning its case. They plan on possibly having at least six witnesses. Kelly’s defense could take several days.
More From This Series
"bitter" - Google News
September 20, 2021 at 10:56PM
https://ift.tt/3nOTxue
R. Kelly’s Sex-Crimes Trial Nears Its Bitter End - Vulture
"bitter" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3bZFysT
https://ift.tt/2KSpWvj
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "R. Kelly’s Sex-Crimes Trial Nears Its Bitter End - Vulture"
Post a Comment