R. Kelly’s old attorney who managed to get him acquitted in 2008 of Child Rape and Child porn charges is saying he’s absolutely guilty.
Ed Genson was R. Kelly’s prominent lawyer in the 2008 case where R. Kelly (who married a 15 year old when he was 28) was acquitted of child porn charges.
Genson headed the defense team, and the case was dragged out for 6 years.
Genson is now finally speaking out, he has cancer. He said in the paneled study of his Deerfield home, which Neil Steinberg headed:
“I have bile duct cancer. Terminal cancer.”
The doctors gave him 90 days to live, but that was 1 year ago.
“That was a year and a half ago. They don’t know what they’re doing.”
Ed Genson feels with the blessing he’s going through, he needs to set the record straight, and feels it’s his duty to do so. He said:
“I’ve been a lawyer 54 years, Ninety-nine percent criminal cases. I’ve represented entertainers, represented people connected to organized crime, represented professional criminals. I’ve represented guilty people, I represent innocent people.”
He continued to say:
“When I represented Kelly in Florida, they set the bond at a $1 million. We paid the bondsman $100,000. He was out on bond on the Florida case for three days and they made $100,000. Because he had to fly back to Chicago because they were going to arrest him here.”
He was then asked about R. Kelly, and whether or not he was guilty, he told Neil Steinberg of the Chicago Sun Times:
“He was guilty as hell! I don’t think he’s done anything inappropriate for years. I’ll tell you a secret: I had him go to a doctor to get shots, libido-killing shots. That’s why he didn’t get arrested for anything else.”
Neil Steinberg said:
I wondered if this statement might violate attorney/client privilege. But 1) Genson volunteered the information; 2) Kelly is no longer his client; and 3) attorney/client privilege doesn’t hold if a client is engaged in ongoing criminality or is perjuring himself. Both might be the case if Kelly is indeed found guilty.
Genson was then asked,
Is Kelly tampering with the jury by going on TV?
“He is. I’m trying to figure out why he did it. I don’t know whether his lawyer is an idiot. He might be.”