When R. Kelly’s racketeering trial begins in New York next month, federal prosecutors said in a court filing on Saturday, three anonymous alleged victims are expected to provide or be the subject of “sensitive and personal testimony concerning illegal sexual abuse, sexual contact and other acts” committed by the singer. Prosecutors argued that these Jane Doe witnesses should be allowed to testify under pseudonyms or only their first names in order to shield their identities. They also requested that references in open court to these alleged victims be limited to their first names or pseudonyms, and that the court prevent public disclosure of their addresses, places of employment, and family members’ names.
Kelly has been charged with racketeering and related acts, including sexual exploitation of a child, kidnapping, and the transportation of minors and others for the purpose of engaging in illegal sexual activity. He has denied all the charges. Prosecutors wrote in the filing that Jane Doe #2 in the case is expected to testify that an associate of Kelly’s met her around 1999 in Chicago when she was 16 years old, and that Kelly later filmed himself having sex with her. The memo said that Jane Doe #3 is expected to testify that she met Kelly in 2003 while she was in her early 20s and working at a radio station as an intern. Kelly invited her to Chicago to interview him, where she was allegedly locked in a room without sustenance for approximately three days. According to prosecutors, she woke up at one point with Kelly in the room and without her underwear, and understood that Kelly had sexually abused her while she was unconscious. The filing said that Jane Doe #5 met Kelly in about 2015 in Florida when she was 17 years old, and that Kelly filmed himself having sex with her. Prosecutors said that she contracted a sexually transmitted disease as a result, and that she was also coerced to engage in sexual activity with many other women and a man.
“The limited protections requested by the government for the Victim-Witnesses’ personal identifiers are reasonable, necessary and appropriate,” prosecutors said, “to protect their safety and well-being, avoid harassment of the Victim-Witnesses by the press and others, and prevent undue embarrassment and other adverse consequences, such as retaliation by the defendant’s supporters, need for relocation, or loss of employment.” Citing extensive news coverage and social media interest to date, they argued that potential scrutiny toward the alleged victims will only increase during Kelly’s trial. Prosecutors said that such attention has included attempts to identify the Jane Does named in his indictment and other potential witnesses.
“Requiring victims of sex crimes to provide their names in public could chill their willingness to testify, for fear of having their personal histories publicized, and the embarrassment and humiliation that such publicity could cause them as they rebuild their lives,” the filing said. “In addition, a ruling requiring the Victim-Witnesses to disclose their full identities publicly could cause other victims—including minor victims—to avoid seeking help from law enforcement because of fear that coming forward could subject them to further harassment and embarrassment, as well as retaliation by a defendant’s supporters.”
— A Messy Vaccinated Wedding Season Has Arrived
— How Harry and Meghan Decided On the Name Lilibet Diana
— Black Joy Comes to Shakespeare in the Park
— Even More Kanye West and Irina Shayk Details Emerge
— The Bennifer Story Really Does Have Everything
— Ahead of the Diana Tribute, Harry and William Are Still Working On Their Relationship
— Tommy Dorfman on Rewriting Queer Narratives and the Smell of Good Sweat
— From the Archive: A Spin on the Top DJs in the World
— Sign up for the “Royal Watch” newsletter to receive all the chatter from Kensington Palace and beyond.