Thinking he was helping himself in his criminal case alleging sexual abuse allegations, R Kelly “freaks out” in front of the camera. It was quite a bizarre interview. We break it down on Law & Crime Network with Rachel Stockman and a mental health expert who offers some insight into R Kelly. What are your thoughts about all of this. Is he being framed? Or, is he a serious threat to young women?

#RKelly #truecrime #sexualassault

#RKelly flips out during interview. We break it down!

March 14th, 2019

Robert Bianchi: Today on for the record.

R Kelly: I didn’t do this stuff! This is not me, I’m fighting for f***en life! Y’all killing me with this s**t.

Robert Bianchi: R Kelly explodes proclaiming his innocence in his first interview since his arrest.

Gayle King: Andrea Kelly, your ex-wife, Katie Jones, Lisa Van Allen, Lizzette Martinez, Jaronda Pase, Faith Rodgers, Asante McGee, you’re saying everything they said in that documentary about you is not true?

R Kelly: They are lying on me.

Robert Bianchi: We examine all angles of Kelly’s interview and the criminal case against him, starting now.

R Kelly: This is not about Music! I’m trying to have a relationship with my kids and I can’t do it.

Robert Bianchi: Yikes, so that was a performance, it was a break down, it was whatever you want to call it but we will discuss it with an awesome panel, a singer, songwriter R. Kelly, now I never heard of this guy, I’m not going to lie to you up until a couple of weeks ago. But now I’ve done some research on him, he’s a producer, a songwriter, he was a former professional basketball player, in 2012 he had sold over thirty million albums. I know that’s pretty good, he’s gotten three Grammy’s, do you remember the song, I believe I can fly. But he also has had a tremendous amount of difficulties in the criminal justice system, up to and including, acquittal on a child porn charge in 2008, and multiple numerous allegations of sexual assault with underage girls. Well, there was a documentary done and like so many times in the media, that documentary opened up what we like to call Pandora’s box. And what we now have is R. Kelly charged with ten counts of aggravated criminal sexual assault out of Chicago, for having sex with people under the age of seventeen years of age, which is the age of consent. And it’s just weird stuff, it’s abusive, it’s being held in captivity, it’s being emotionally and physically brutal to these people and you just saw a little clip there, of what we saw in an interview that happened today with Gayle King on CBS. Look guys, you know no one does this better than our friends at Mediaite. You’ve got with us today Aidan McLaughlin. Aiden, I know you’ve been following this and you’ve got some serious information about this seriously distorted individual in this seriously distorted interview, this is where law, the media, and crime meets. Aidan, what’s going on here?

Aidan McLaughlin: Right, so we’ve got to remember last month R. Kelly got indicted on these ten counts and he’s facing three to seven years for each count. So, he’s facing up to seventy years in prison and amongst that backdrop he sits down with Gayle King for an interview that aired on CBS news this morning. And I want you to watch, he gets quite emotional in the interview, he has an outburst, you can call it a meltdown. I want you to watch how he responds to Gayle King repeatedly questioning him about these allegations.

R Kelly: Quit playing, I didn’t do this stuff. This is not me! I’m fighting for f***en life! Y’all killing me with this s**t. I’ve been here thirty years in my career, thirty years, you’re killing me man! This is not about music! I’m trying to have a relationship with my kids and I can’t do it. You just don’t want to believe the truth. You don’t want to believe it.

Gayle King: At this point, we briefly pause the interview to give Kelly a moment, his publicist helped calm him down.

R Kelly: I hope this camera keeps going, this is not true. That doesn’t even make sense. Why would I hold all these women?

Aidan McLaughlin: So, Gayle King has been getting plaudits for how she handled that interview, she remained pretty stoic throughout and still managed to ask R Kelly some tough questions despite his outburst. And his reports that he denied all the allegations in the interview, despite her questioning.

Robert Bianchi: Now Aidan, I would imagine that when a lawyer or a publicist is bringing their client on in order to deny the allegations of being verbally abusive, violent, and that these women were scared, coerced into taking drugs and alcohol, and having sex illicitly that this probably isn’t the best image you want to present in a controlled environment where the world is watching. Would you agree with that?

Aidan McLaughlin: Totally, I mean I don’t know what the PR move is here ,unless he’s trying to play to a certain audience, I guess his supporters maybe. And it’s funny you mention that actually, he did an interview with the Huffington post back in 2014, and he was questioned about all these allegations in it, he had a similar kind of meltdown, where he also commented on the looks and appearance of the interviewer who was female. So, he’s done this before and has had a similar kind of reaction, it’s unclear who he’s trying to make his case to but I don’t certainly think it helps him.

Robert Bianchi: Well listen our viewers on Law and Crime Network they love true crime, were actually, we follow this through and through, and I understand we may have one more little snippet of a clip of him presumably, trying to help himself out.

Gayle King: But I’m not talking about the one case in which you were acquitted, I’m talking about the other cases where women have come forward and said R. Kelly had sex with me when I was under the age of eighteen. R. Kelly was abusive to me, emotionally and physically and verbally. R. Kelly took me into a black room where unspeakable things happened. This is what they’re saying about you now, these aren’t old rumors.

R Kelly: It’s not true, whether they’re old rumors new rumors.

Gayle King: Why would they say this about you?

R Kelly: How stupid would it be of R Kelly, with all I’ve been through with my way, way past, to hold somebody, let alone four, five, six, fifty you said. How stupid would I be to do that? That’s stupid guys. Is this camera on me? That’s stupid, use your common sense, forget the blogs, forget how you feel about me. Hate me if you want to, love me if you want but just use your common sense, how stupid would it be for me, with my crazy past and what I’ve been through. . Oh, right now I just think I’m going to be a monster and hold girls against their will, chain them up in my basement, and don’t let them eat, and don’t let them out, unless they need some shoes down the street from Mayanko, Stop it.

Robert Bianchi: Well, I got Imran Ansari with me, but a very, very, very, special guest, the great, the stupendous, does everything here at the Law and Crime Network, Rachel Stockman. Rachel you had to be here, I mean what do you think of this?

Rachel Stockman: When I saw that interview, I guess I shouldn’t be in shock but I was in a bit of shock with how he handled himself. First off, I’m sure his Defense Attorney adamantly opposed him going on National TV. Second off, if he was going to do it, I’m sure any PR consultant would tell him to stay under control, to answer the questions politely, and like, did the exact opposite of that.

Robert Bianchi: Yeah it reminds me of what we say, or what I’ve said so many times as a Prosecutor, when I was cross examining a defendant who’s lost their mind and the judge’s clearing the jury out to the jury room in summation I sat there and said, if he’s acting like that here with you, with his life on the line, you can only imagine what he’s like in a dark room in his house with liquor and drugs. What do you think?

Imran Ansari: Exactly, I mean R. Kelly’s attorney must have been in the wings, just happening-

Rachel Stockman: Gerald Griggs, he’s a guest here sometimes, I can only imagine he was having a meltdown as thins was going on.

Robert Bianchi: No, but to that point, I mean, this is like the Durst thing, you know, the guy’s mic’d up and goes into the bathroom maybe confesses to a crime. First of all, I would never allow a client, I guess if a client absolutely insists, it has to happen but don’t you get the big hook, as the lawyer and just literally grab the guy and say, you are leaving. You’re not going to re compose yourself, you’re not going to go back on again, because every time he went back on, he flipped out again, right.

Imran Ansari: Right, I would have loved to just shut that down and say, you know, no more but it was sort of, you’re already in too deep, he’s on camera, you know they’re going to use this on television, and its R. Kelly. Listen it’s not his first tangle with the law, he’s had these lawsuits, he’s faced Prosecution, he got acquitted. So, you know, it’s I mean listen it’s crazy.

Robert Bianchi: Well, okay, well you know listen they’re actually, he actually uses the defense that I was found not guilty so therefore you’re giving me double jeopardy, was what he was using, but no, that’s what we call in the law, 404B evidence. In other words, consistent stories, a common plan, a common scheme, with multiple people that could be used to be able to prove the allegations that are brought against him right now. So, I don’t know, do you think that the defense will, I think the Prosecutions are going to actually use this potentially as exhibit one or two in his trial.

Imran Ansari: Right, and you know, you’re talking about prior bad acts as you know here in New York it’s Manalo [?] evidence and the Prosecution is going to be wanting to use the prior bad acts.

Robert Bianchi: Yeah, you know, I’d like to know if either, Rachel, maybe has some audio problems or not but at a minimum you can get really close so we can hear. I think it’s really important, you know, as a woman, we can have different points of view and perspectives on things but from what I understand on the limited facts of this case, many of the women throughout the years were saying that they were afraid of his outbursts, his explosiveness. And to be honest with you, as a guy, I think that I think the parse of the sex is out, yeah, you know fortunately we’re still having some problems. But let me just ask really quick, do you think that would really affect women jurors more than it would male jurors?

Rachel Stockman: I think it is, you know, when you’re looking to select this jury if and when this goes to trial, you’re going to be really careful about what kind of juror you want, you’re going to think about the gender dynamic, and you’re going to be keeping all those things into consideration.

Robert Bianchi: Boy oh boy, what I would like to talk about that gender dynamic issues, I was contemplating this case for a trial against a guy like that. Guys we got to go to break. Stay tuned because we still got more on R Kelly, believe it or not. All right welcome back to Law and Crime Network. We’re not only doing law, we’re not only doing R. Kelly, we played musical chairs. We do it all, we have Rachel Stockman right now to my immediate left and we also have a new special guest Doctor Carole Lieberman from Beverly Hills, I was just out their Doctor. You are a forensic psychiatrist, a legal analyst, and expert witness of film and print frame, and I love two things about your biography, when we’re talking about R. Kelly. You are called the doctor Freud of modern times, as I understand, that’s a pretty amazing distinction. I should be giving you a call afterwards, maybe you can help me out. We also have, you wrote a book called, Bad Boys, why we love them, how we live with them, and When to leave them. So, Doctor, before we get to that, really descriptive title of a book that may play very well into what’s going on here. You clearly have those qualifications. So, I want to play you a short clip for you to listen to and come back to you on the other end.

Gayle King: One case in which you were acquitted, I’m talking about the other cases where women have come forward and said, R. Kelly had sex with me when I was under the age of eighteen, R. Kelly was abusive to me emotionally and physically and verbally, R. Kelly took me to black room where unspeakable things happened, this is what they’re saying about you, these aren’t old rumors.

R Kelly: Not true, not true, whether they’re old rumors, new rumors.

Gayle King: Why would they say this about you?

R Kelly: It’s not true. How stupid would it be of R Kelly, with all I’ve been through with my way, way past, to hold somebody, let alone four, five, six, fifty you said. How stupid would I be to do that? That’s stupid guys. Is this camera on me? That’s stupid, use your common sense, forget the blogs, forget how you feel about me. Hate me if you want to, love me if you want but just use your common sense, how stupid would it be for me, with my crazy past and what I’ve been through. . Oh, right now I just think I’m going to be a monster and hold girls against their will, chain them up in my basement, and don’t let them eat, and don’t let them out, unless they need some shoes down the street from Mayankle Stop it.

Robert Bianchi: Yeah well you know I don’t know, that’s a difference that many people go up to including Bill Cosby, how stupid would I be, I call it arrogance. Doctor, you may call it something else because what is interesting to me, is the question that was asked by Gayle king was about the violence and the fear, and there he is acting out the way he is. What do you see from a forensic point of view?

Carole Lieberman: First of all, yes, what you were saying before, that he actually is illustrating the very kinds of things that he is being accused on, his volatility, his aggressiveness, flying off the handle, and also a lot of paranoia and denial. You know he says, why would I do this with my crazy past or, you know, how with all I’ve been through in the past, and that actually it is his past that has caused him to do all of this, he does have a very twisted past. First of all, he was sexually abused by an older woman from the time he was around seven or eight to around fourteen, and that alone would make him want to control women. Here he was a little boy under this older woman’s control or sexual abuse and now he is what’s called, identifying with the aggressor. He’s identifying with the person who abused by being the aggressor in his relationship with all these women, who he is holding hostage, essentially. And then he also has some other interesting things in his childhood, he had, at around eight years old, he had his first girlfriend and you know, they hung out and had the house to each other, and so on. I mean and they were playing someplace where she got pushed into the water, and she was pushed down with the water, and ultimately died, while she was calling out his name. So, he felt helpless because he couldn’t save her and that also, that goes into abandonment. He doesn’t want women to abandon him. I believe he has a borderline personality disorder amongst other things, I mean maybe he’s, I don’t know if he’s abusing substances that would certainly explain some of this behavior. Also, he could be manic depressive which would kind of go along with his paranoia. So, there are a lot of psychiatric issues going on, also he tells us this interesting story about his mother, he was in an interview some time ago and he told a story about how when he was a boy, he and his mother would go have breakfast and I think he said at McDonalds. And they didn’t have much money and they would share coffee and pastry. And he would turn the cup around so that he would drink from the side of the Cup that had his mother’s lipstick on it, and he was in love with his mother and asked her to marry him. Now, there is, talk about Freud, according to Freud there is a phenomenon of an edible phase and the way he describes this is beyond the normal edible phase and into something rather abnormal.

Robert Bianchi: So, I just want to switch it over to Rachel for a minute, you know, being a woman and kind of getting to the question we were saying before, as a Defense lawyer would these be things that you would try to bring out during the trial, I’m not sure they would rise to any kind of level of defense, but are you sympathetic towards that Rachel, and moreover, what would you pick as a juror if you were defending him, female jurors, or male jurors?

Rachel Stockman: Listen very interesting everything the Doctors said, but I certainly don’t think it raises to a level of a defense, in this case. I think that, in terms of a perfect juror, I don’t know because you know there’s so much history there. Perhaps the male juror would be better but if this is a really tough case, given these outbursts we’re hearing from, his history, and the allegations, and the fact that two of the charges from what I understand, there’s DNA evidence linking him to what happened.

Robert Bianchi: Yeah and it reminds me of the case in Florida I think with the Kennedys many years ago when the Prosecutor picked an all-female jury that people thought that she was nuts to do that. But, I’m sorry the Defense attorney, but what they found out was of the female jurors tended to blame the victim, if you will, because she did some things that she should have known better to do, and kind of the egged him on scenario. Where the males were much more outraged because they as male conduct knew that this was something that was absolutely above and beyond what somebody should have done. So, really is a tricky question when you’re picking a jury as to what you do for a guy like this but I think when you show a clip like the clip that you’re showing there. I don’t think if you’re male or female, it’s going resonate well, I look at them seeing him in a predatory way, do you think so?

Rachel Stockman: Yeah and I do have a question for Doctor Lieberman as well, really quickly Bob, if you don’t mind if I jump in. I’m curious you know just based on what you saw in the interview and looking into his past, how you could possibly diagnose him with something without actually talking to him in person.

Carole Lieberman: Well I’m certainly not claiming that I actually examined him or evaluated him but from my years of experience and from putting his childhood together the things that I talked about, in regard to his childhood, and what that usually brings out in a person later on. As well as, his behavior in the interview, you know, there was a longer, it was a longer interview than the clips that you’ve shown so far. So, putting that together yes of course with the caveat that this is without my having met him or evaluated him for ten hours.

Robert Bianchi: Okay, well you know, what I think that we’re going to do is we are going to take a look at one more clip and we’ll be back on the other end.

R Kelly: Quit playing, I didn’t do this stuff! This is not me! I’m fighting for f***en life! Y’all killing me with this s**t. I’ve been here thirty years in my career, thirty years, you’re trying to kill me, you’re killing me man! This is not about music! I’m trying to have a relationship with my kids and I can’t do it. You just don’t want to believe the truth. You don’t want to believe it.

Gayle King: At this point, we briefly pause the interview to give Kelly a moment, his publicist helped calm him down.

R Kelly: I hope this camera keeps going, this is not true. That doesn’t even make sense. Why would I hold all these women?

Robert Bianchi: Real quick Doctor, just a follow up on what Rachel was saying in addition to a clinical interview that you were doing years of experience, there would be diagnostic testing that would be done for him that is kind of typically difficult for him to linger on. Do you believe that that diagnostic testing is imperative prior to coming to an ultimate conclusion as to what is sequala is?

Carole Lieberman: No I don’t, you know, I was trained as a psychiatrist at NYU Bellevue and actually at the Freudian clinic in London and if we needed to have psychological testing for every patient before making a diagnosis, you know, we’d be bad psychiatrist but when I do my expert witness work and I testify I usually do or have done psychological testing, mainly for the jury. Not for me, not because it always comes out to what I had thought in the first place, but I do it for the jury because juries like to know that there is some kind of, so called, objective evidence of whatever it is that you’re seeing.

Robert Bianchi: Well if I’m hearing you correctly as a treating physician, which we know is clearly going to be different that an expert in court, what more would you need other than what you’ve told us now, in order to make the treating diagnosis, even though you may not need the actual objective testing that you would as a forensic expert in court. What else would you need?

Carole Lieberman: Well, you know, as the treating doctor I would be seeing him over time, you know, once or twice a week for years. And so, when you’re treating your kind of other than the fact that you might want to give him some medication to bring his rage outbursts, but other than that, you would be kind of deciding as you go along. You would be looking at him in much more depth, there wouldn’t be a reason necessarily as the treating doctor to make an immediate diagnosis that you hold on to. What he needs, well what he needed actually, for many years so he wouldn’t be in this mess is to have been in treatment, long term treatment.

Robert Bianchi: Right, Rachel, she’s bringing up this double jeopardy issue which obviously I don’t know if we need to get into the confusion of, he’s essentially I guess trying to say, in layman’s terms, I’m being accused of something that I was acquitted for, but we all know that an acquittal i.e. that you can’t prove a case of twelve jurors beyond a reasonable doubt, does not mean you didn’t do it.

Rachel Stockman: Well no, and it’s not only that these accusations that have come out and he’s now facing charges with, are completely different accusations involved different victims from the previous charges he was acquitted from. So, clearly double jeopardy does not apply to this situation, and the fact that he’s bringing this up as some kind of defense in all honesty is a bit ridiculous.

Robert Bianchi: Okay, Imran, I’m now charging you with the responsibility of being the Defense Attorney for this this gentleman here, and what is your advice to him going forward about doing any more interviews or how would you start to prepare his defense?

Imran Ansari: Okay so, first no more interviews because you’re laying down a track, track record for the Prosecution to use that at trial, if the goes to trial. And you’re making yourself just, it’s not a good look. You already don’t have a good look in the court of public opinion, don’t make it worse. So, no more press interviews as much as you like to. In terms of preparing for the Defense, well we’re going to look at each of these individuals making claims. I would hire a private investigator to go out and you know cull together some material for the Defense and go from there.

Robert Bianchi: Well, listen, you guys have been amazing guests. Doctor, thank you so much, it was a great education, we really appreciate you being on the Law and Crime Network, you gave us a lot of great insight. I can already tell from the chatters, they love what you had to say. We got a lot left, you’re welcome, and we’ll be right back after the break.