BROOKLYN (CN) — Two years into the prosecution of R. Kelly, and two months out from his trial on charges that he kidnapped and coerced minors as part of a long-running sex ring, the former R&B singer’s defense team may be dramatically changing. A federal judge questioned two attorneys Thursday about their attempts to withdraw from the case, and a third for potential conflicts of interest.
Kelly, 54, is accused of sexually abusing young women and underage girls over decades, including bribing an official back when he was 27 to create a fake ID for a then-15-year-old Aaliyah so that Kelly could marry her. Aaliyah died in a plane crash seven years later.
A superseding indictment also accuses the “Trapped in the Closet” creator of not disclosing that he has herpes in two instances of alleged forced sexual contact.
At Thursday's court hearing in Brooklyn, Kelly appeared via video conference, wearing an orange jumpsuit and white cloth mask pulled below his chin. He is detained in Chicago’s Metropolitan Correctional Center, facing separate state and federal charges that include child pornography.
U.S. District Judge Ann M. Donnelly heard from Michigan-based attorney Nicole Blank Becker that it was while traveling to Kelly’s Illinois state court hearings in 2019 that she escorted two potential witnesses, Kelly’s former live-in girlfriends.
Becker maintained that she never offered either of the women legal advice, and that their main contact was when the women would text Becker to let them know they had arrived at the courthouse so that Becker could escort them inside and help them avoid the media. She also sat with the pair during court proceedings.
The women are Joycelyn Savage and Azriel Clary. The latter is identified as Jane Doe #5 in court papers, but two attorneys referred to her as “Azriel” during Thursday’s hearing.
When they were 23 and 21, respectively, in March 2019, Savage and Clary originally defended Kelly, telling Gayle King in a CBS interview that they were both in a solid relationship with the singer, and that their parents — who said Kelly had “brainwashed” his victims — were trying to scam for money.
Since then, both women have reportedly moved out of Kelly's palatial Trump Towers Chicago condo.
Now expected to testify for the government, Clary worked with the FBI on a sting operation in 2020, recording calls between herself and longtime Kelly friend Richard Arline Jr. as he offered her $500,000 in hush money. During one call, Clary told Arline she “wouldn’t go for half a million,” and that she would need $1 million and an initial transfer of funds within 24 hours to stay silent, according to Arline’s indictment.
In February, Arline pleaded guilty to trying to bribe Clary, who was anonymous in the indictment. Her identity as the sting operative was confirmed Wednesday by the Chicago Tribune.
The Tribune reported that Becker was also part of those phone calls, a detail that was not raised during Thursday’s hearing in Brooklyn. Filings from both the government and the defense attorneys on the conflict-of-interest matter remain under seal.
Becker told Judge Donnelly that she first made in-person contact with Clary and possible defense witness Savage in July of 2019, when Kelly was arraigned in Chicago.
Apart from the courthouse escorts and what Becker called text message “chit chat,” Becker said, the three had no other meetings but for one visit to a Dunkin’ Donuts and another cafe.
Donnelly indicated that she is not inclined to remove Becker from the case. “Lawyers are permitted to speak to witnesses, and so I don’t find anything untoward about that,” she said.
The judge noted that Becker was in touch with the women despite their having hired an attorney of their own, but Becker asserted that the women’s lawyer never told her not to speak with the potential witnesses.
“Not every violation of disciplinary rules requires disqualification,” Donnelly said after questioning Becker about the extent of her contact.
To this, Donnelly floated the idea of having another attorney handle Clary’s cross-examination during trial.
A court-appointed independent attorney will consult with Kelly about his representation options ahead of his trial, set to begin on August 9. Donnelly asked that the consultation happen in person, once Kelly is transferred from Chicago to Brooklyn.
The judge also indicated that, while the potential conflict is a “serious issue, and it has to be explored,” she does not intend to push back the trial date.
“I don’t anticipate this taking a large amount of time,” Donnelly said. “That does not diminish its importance.”
Donnelly briefly addressed another potential conflict surrounding Becker, who was said to have facilitated a transfer of money from Kelly to the two women.
“Never,” Becker replied when asked if that had ever happened.
Maria E. Cruz Melendez of the U.S. Attorney's Office said that the government does not have any information to dispute Becker’s assertion, but that Kelly should be advised of the potential effect of that issue on a jury.
“It may not be true,” Cruz Melendez said, but “even false, baseless or unsubstantiated claims can result in a potential conflict.”
Donnelly held off on ruling on two other Kelly attorneys’ motion to withdraw from the case.
The Chicago-based Steven A. Greenberg and Michael I. Leonard filed the vaguely worded motion on June 8, saying that they would be willing to serve as effective standby counsel.
“While we realize that this request comes close to trial — and although we are ready to proceed to trial as scheduled in August — our reasons for withdrawal are significant and it is impossible, in our belief, for us to be able to continue to properly represent Mr. Kelly under the current circumstances,” the attorneys wrote.
Leonard, of the firm LeonardMeyer, did not elaborate on his reasons for withdrawing in an interview following Thursday’s proceedings.
“Right now we’re still on the case,” he said, and if Judge Donnelly does decide to remove Becker, it’s less likely that she’ll allow the two to withdraw.
“It’s just practical, she’s got to finish one issue before she can rule on the next,” Leonard said. “I understand that, but we had hoped to have a ruling on that today.”
Kelly’s fourth remaining attorney is Thomas Farinella, who is based in New York.
Follow @NinaPullano
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
