Can Kansas City duo shed light on alleged threesome tape?

| | Comments (21) | TrackBacks (0)

This trial has already seen its fair share of dramatic witnesses fly in from out of state.

Now two Kansas City men who have not been called as witnesses have promised to arrive in Chicago Thursday with what they say will be devastating revelations about Kelly and his child porn case.

Keith Murrell and Charles Freeman's names were brought up in court for the first time Monday.

Lisa Van Allen - the Atlanta woman who says she had a videotaped threesome with Kelly and the alleged victim in this case - said Murrell was paid $20,000 by Kelly's business manager Derrel McDavid to return a tape of that threesome. If that second sex tape exists, it has never been seen by authorities.

Also Monday, Kelly's attorney, Sam Adam Sr., alleged Murrell and Freeman had teamed up to fake the tape at the center of the case. Van Allen's former boyfriend, Damon Pryor, would testify Van Allen told him that Murrell and Freeman planned to extort money from Kelly with the faked tape, Adam said.

Both Murrell and Freeman have been talking with reporters behind the scenes since Van Allen announced Murrell's cell phone number in court Monday afternoon.

Both deny faking the tape at the center of the case. Both refuse to say whether they have seen the alleged second tape of the alleged threesome Van Allen testified about. Both also refuse to say whether they have - or know of - any remaining copies of that alleged second tape. And both say they will reveal all when they arrive in Chicago on Thursday.

"The truth lies in Kansas!," Freeman said Tuesday night in a telephone interview. Murrell, also speaking via phone, added, "Everything will come out when we get to Chicago. It will be big news."

Murrell, who has not been as talkative as Freeman, added that he was upset "that my name has been brought into this. I'm going to straighten it out."

Freeman, who was referred to as "Chuck" by Adam in court Monday, has had a previous run-in with Kelly in the courts, records show. He sued Kelly in 2002, alleging Kelly had not fully paid him for recovering a stolen video tape.

According to that lawsuit, a private investigator called Jack Palladino employed by Kelly offered Freeman $100,000, plus up to $40,000 in expenses to recover the tape. Freeman recovered the tape and took a lie detector test, but Kelly paid him only $65,000, the lawsuit alleges.

Speaking Tuesday night, Freeman said that the tape referred to in the lawsuit was the same one at the center of R. Kelly's trial. He recovered it from "someone in Atlanta," he said, refusing to say whether that person was Van Allen. Kelly settled the suit, he added.

Freeman said that he had met Kelly in 1991 when Kelly was on tour with his group, "Public Announcement." He went on to handle the merchandising for Kelly's "12 Play" album, he said, adding that he managed a band called "Talent" that Kelly signed to his label. Murrell was a member of "Talent," he said.

Freeman said he met Van Allen in Florida in 2000, while visiting Kelly in a recording studio. "There were difficulties with the group (Talent) and I had to go down there and fix it," he said.

He said he considered Van Allen "a friend" who had done "nothing to hurt" him while testifying Monday.

"She got on the stand and did what she had to," he said.

Freeman denied faking the tape at the center of the trial. "Kelly paid me to recover a tape, so why would I be trying to extort him?," he said. "I never was involved in a scam to con money out of R. Kelly."

He described Kelly as "a hell of a producer and singer, with some issues.”

“There’s more to this case than R. Kelly,” he added.

"We're gonna have a press conference Thursday when we get here and everyone will see."

Murrell and Freeman's attorney, James Scott, said Tuesday that prosecutors had been in touch with both men. Scott said he would join Murrell and Freeman in Chicago on Thursday.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Can Kansas City duo shed light on alleged threesome tape?.

TrackBack URL for this entry:


If there is one thing ive learned in regards to rkelly, wealth does not equal wisdom.

Why are all these people just now coming forward?

These people are gonna come here and tell the media a bunch of foolishness, just cause they know the media will believe anything at this point.

It doesn't matter about all the political bull****. R.Kelly is as guilty as sin itself. Lock him up and throw away the key!!!! the sick son of a *****

Why does the cooments need to be approved?? Anything anyone has to say about rkelly should be allowed to be heard. He should expect to hear alot of sarcastic remarks because he is a pervert period . So, whom ever is criticing the comment PUT A SOCKIN IT!!!!!!!!!

@GOTGWOP you are Yul Brown

You use that same name on your myspace page.

We all know you and your over used woman lisa were after his wealth.

Then after you couldnt get it you had her make up that ridiculous story.

Why are you so interested in R Kelly. Is it his money that you can't get your hands on.

Remember you are a convicted felon so you are not too smart yourself.

Now run along and change that name on your myspace page now.

And get a real job then maybe you can get your own money.

BTW everybody knows about that so called highline investment scheme company that you are running in Georgia.

After reading the above story, there is a chance that (Brown/Van Allen)offered her testimony against R Kelly for a lighter sintence. This is not uncommon during police interviews. Most folks are scared and will sale you out, to save thier backsides. Now I must admit I believe R Kelly did it.

I think the R Kelly case is a very sad depiction of when we allow our children to run free and fall under the influence of so called roll models who turn out to be very sick people. If the parents were more engaged with their children a pediphile like R Kelly can't touch them.

I think that we all need to look at the facts that are surrounding this case. Everyone has their opinion about whether or not he did it, but who really has the facts. They say that is not him on the video, they say it is. First there is no mole, now it comes and goes in the video. Then there are all of the so called witnesses. Why wait until now to come forward? I am by no means pardoning wha/if he did. However the way that things are shaping up, makes his defense look better and all points to extortion.

I had the unfortunate oportunity to view the R Kelly video last night. I must admit it does look like R kelly urinating on that girl. He has to go away for a while and get help. I hear the DOC has sex offender programs for people like him. I hope he can face himself and go into the program when he gets there.

What's sad is that none of you know what really happened. Let me give you a quickie. sparkle got a record deal. Sparkle was released for spilling details of her contract to 2 other future artists. She was rehired. She was then fired for lying and misrepresentation of funds. She, her brother and her then man tried to extort money. Her family spoke on her behalf and she was given her deal back with no-promo. She became a DIVA and demanded to work with her man on her next project. She then became a no-show. The record label, not Kelly fired her for the final time. Years later after the bomb of album 2, she tried to come back to Kells, he passed on the offer, but wished her well. She was approached by someone in the business that if she told her if she helped to ruin Kells, she would get cash (she had spent all of hers on her man) and a new deal. They were only supposed to extort money with a threat but it got out of hand. Now she has to carry this out to the end because she was paid. She made a deal with the devil and she was afraid to back out of it because she fears for her life (yep its that serious). She has admitted several times prior to the trial to being sorry and that she only did this for the money. The court room act last week was an act for the public and the public bought it. Stop looking at what you believe to be a real tape and ask who was sleeping with whom, that worked for a major broadcast company that helped put with all of this together. the reason this is so hard for people to believe is because they do not realize that the party behind this is not the common man. They have money and won't rest until Kells is ruined (by any means necessary and no matter who they have to use)

The people defending R Kelly have to look at his track record. if he was bold enough to marry Aaliya an under age child .at the time she was 15. He must have know her age be cause he record with her and being a minor she colud not enter into a recording contract with out parental consent .to marry a child and leave a paper trail court doucments why not video? if I am wrong please correct me

Why are R. Kelly's "supporters" so hung up on the fact that all these people want to extort money from him but refuse to acknowledge the pattern of pedophilia that always seems to creep to his front door? R. Kelly is not the only celebrity with money, people!!!! Denzel Washington never settled MULTIPLE suits (if ANY) of this nature. Will Smith seems to stay out of trouble and he has more money than both, probably. Oh, but wait......they also don't have videotapes of themselves engaging in sexual acts with minors either.

NOnamegiven is in denial. Kells as you call him is a very sick man who needs to be dealt with. Don't care who had a deal with who! He's sick.

This is to the no nmae given person above. Please proof read your writing, and use spell check before clicking on submit. You didn't even spell Aaliyah's name right. So now I'm correcting you for the mistake you have made.

Ernest above, will you be called next to testify?? Is it because u were in the group Talent(about the time all the BS started to circulate.) along with Murrell and Hatcher, and is that why you know so much insight??

To Ernest: You want your 15 minutes of fame, so to make a sorry attempt to spill the beans on Sparkle to make yourself feel important. Well, it's not working. A real man would never do such a 'girlie' thing. All those words mean nothing. That's still Kelly on the tape raping a child. Your idol is a sick monster and will have all the sex he can handle in the big house! Everyone is talking about his little money. There are stars with much more money than Kelly that don't go around stealing the childhood of children. Those girls will most-likely not become normal adults because of what he has done to them. Not everyone can be bought with his dirty dollars. Some of us have morals unlike the tacky parents of the child that sold their childs body for money. At least there are laws to stop that ghetto garbage from doing this to dozens of other young girls!

The last six comments I love yall. Some people dont want to face the fact that the man is sick and has been sick for a long time.I am hopefull that they will throw the book at this dude. His hangers on and yes people are as sick as he is. Child molestation is wrong and I dont care there is no justification for it.It is no secret that Mr Kelly likes little girls and he will not get help because he will always have the support and the money of people who are so obsessed with him and his life that they will not see the truth he is ill and he will pay for his child molestation problem.

We can all sit here and play judge and jury but there is only 1 God and only he and R.Kelly knows the truth. On judgement day he will stand accountable for his sins ALONG WITH ALL OF US. Get your life prepared for judgement day. Robert Kelly will have to deal with all the wrong he has done in his life and if he repent God is a forgiving God. Who are we too judge.

The private eye is just confirming that there is some incriminating evidence out there that Yul and Lisa want to be paid for. In my opinion he is helping the prosecutors by saying that there is something else out there and or they wanted to be paid to keep what they know quiet. The fact of the matter is that R Kelly, in an act of tremendous stupidity recorded himself and his young girlfriends having sex and let these videos get out of his possesion. Dumb, dumb and kind of sick.

JOYCE, you are on it ma! I wonder if that was Yule? I have never seen the video and don't want to. Do I think R Kelly is guilty? My gut say's yes. However, if I were on the jury, I don't think I could convict based on the prosecution’s case. Its one thing to blog about all of this but it's another when you have a man’s life in your hands. Just to play devil’s advocate, the prosecution had family members say "yes it’s her." You had family members for the defense saying "no it’s not her." I would need the girl herself to say "yes it’s me" or her parent’s to say “yes, that is our child.” Where are the girl’s parents anyway? The prosecution lends "the person in the video has a mole and R Kelly has a mole." The defense expert testified "that is not a mole that is a distortion of the video." Witnesses for the prosecution are shady and not credible (no disrespect to the witnesses; just stating a fact). Now, on the flip, the defense did not present the girl in question and R Kelly did not take the stand; that can be viewed as a pro or a con depending on who you ask. My point is that there was no smoking gun like I thought the prosecution had so the outcome should be very interesting. For most, people feel he is guilty but I’m worried that the evidence did not support it; at least beyond a reasonable doubt and I think he may be acquitted or there will be a mistrial. Thoughts on the verdict?

to EB { nmae} you should proof read

Leave a comment

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

R. Kelly on trial

The story of the allegations against R. Kelly started here in the Sun-Times. Almost six years later, it's now finally reached a trial.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Kim Janssen published on June 3, 2008 9:12 PM.

Van Allen "Happy" With Her Testimony: Fiance was the previous entry in this blog.

Judge: DeRogatis will not have to testify, after all. is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.