On June 24, U.S. District Judge Martha M. Pacold delivered a resounding “no” to the R&B singer’s most recent request for bond, expressing concern that he remains a danger to the public and a potential flight risk even as his legal team pushes for a fair trial.
The 57-year-old artist, formerly celebrated for chart-topping hits, is now doing a hard time: a 20-year prison sentence for child pornography and enticement convictions in Illinois. Nearly all of that time will be served at the same time as a 30-year federal racketeering sentence from a New York case, making it highly unlikely that he will be released anytime soon.
But R. Kelly is not backing down. His legal team is ramping up its demand for a new trial, alleging in explosive arguments that his rights were violated in a manner so egregious that it corrupted his conviction. They allege that prosecutors and prison officials broke the rules larcenously, taking his legal mail, intimidating witnesses, and even putting together a scheme to have him killed behind bars. One of the most sensational accounts contends a hitman who was an Aryan Brotherhood gang member had been enlisted to snuff him but changed his mind.
The defense also says a key witness was coerced into changing her testimony and that Kelly was denied access to life-saving medical care, two reasons that warrant a new trial but also his release on bond, they argue.
“Kelly has not put forward an argument of any evidence, much less clear and convincing evidence to rebut that court’s prior finding or to show that circumstances have changed,” Pacold wrote in her decision, effectively echoing the risks he has posed to at least one judge hasn’t gone away.
Kelly’s lawyers had been hoping to fall back on a legal gray area—invoking the court’s unique but still present power to grant bond after conviction. But even if Kelly cleared that high legal bar, Pacold pointed out that his related New York sentence would continue to keep him behind bars.
And that is not the only voice expressing concern. The judge cited a finding by Judge Harry Leinenweber, who presided over Kelly’s trial in Illinois and decided that releasing him would threaten the community. For all the brash claims in his new motion, Kelly has not yet offered any firm new evidence to challenge those earlier assessments.
The court has yet to decide whether Kelly will receive a new trial. But the bond decision is abundantly clear: He will not be fighting that fight from the outside. In other words, despite the door to a new trial being ever so slightly ajar, the path to freedom, for the time being at least, is still firmly closed.
0 Comments