Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
In Touch Weekly
R. Kelly Prison Officer Tells Judge There is No Privacy Behind Bars in Lawsuit Over Leaked Emails
By Ryan Naumann,
6 hours ago
KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI/AFP via Getty Images
The prison officer being sued by R. Kelly over the alleged leak of the singer’s emails and phone logs to a blogger fired back in court, In Touch can exclusively report.
According to court documents obtained by In Touch, the prison officer denied all allegations of wrongdoing in the federal lawsuit brought by the disgraced singer.
In the response, the officer, who worked at the Metropolitan Correctional Center, said they denied the claim they obtained Kelly’s confidential records and sold them to blogger Tasha K.
Further, she argued that Kelly, 57, was “not in a place where” he should except privacy. The officer said Kelly did not suffer any actual harm. She also argued that her conduct was not outrageous or intentional.
The officer denied that Kelly suffered emotional distress and she said she did not access computers without or in excess of authorization.
Chicago Police Department via Getty Images
The retired prison guard’s lawyer demanded all claims be dismissed and Kelly be awarded nothing from his complaint.
Kelly was arrested in July 2019 in Chicago. He was then hit with a separate criminal case in New York. He was found guilty in both cases. Kelly was sentenced to 20 years in the case out of Illinois and 30 years in the case in New York.
In his suit, Kelly claimed prison employees used the internal prison system to assess his emails along with his visitor and phone logs. Kelly said he believed the information was sold to Tasha K, who then published the information on her social media platforms. Tasha K denied she had anything to do with illegal activity.
Kelly’s lawyer said that Tasha K, “rallied her massive following to harass [Kelly] with the use of the stolen information and created chaos in [Kelly’s] personal life, even using the information to influence witnesses in [Kelly’s] criminal prosecution. On information and belief, the stolen information was shared with and used by prosecutors from United States Attorney’s Office as a tool to influence witnesses against [Kelly].”
“The Defendant United States of America breached its duty of care to [Kelly] when it allowed countless BOP officers to access [Kelly’s] confidential information without any legal basis to do so. The Defendant Unites States of America knew that [one of the employees] and [the other prison workers] routinely accessed [Kelly’s] private information from its systems and divulged private information to third parties for monetary gain, clout, or simple harassment,” the suit claimed.
Kelly claimed at least 60 prison officers accessed his confidential files on the prison system.
Scott Olson/Getty Images
The government denied the accusations that it breached its duty of care to the entertainer while he’s locked up. A lawyer for the government admitted that there was an Inspector General investigation into the unauthorized access of Kelly’s information.
The government said the officer that Kelly accused in his complaint was the subject of an investigation, but no charges were ever brought.
The government’s response also admitted that information was provided to Tasha K that was accessed from the internal prison system. However, the lawyer argued for all claims to be dismissed against the government. “The United States is not subject to institutional liability stemming from allegedly widespread negligent practices or policies,” the response argued.
Kelly is no longer locked up at Chicago’s Metropolitan Correctional Center. The singer was moved to a facility in North Carolina last year. He is scheduled for release in 2045.
Get updates delivered to you daily. Free and customizable.
It’s essential to note our commitment to transparency:
Our Terms of Use acknowledge that our services may not always be error-free, and our Community Standards emphasize our discretion in enforcing policies. As a platform hosting over 100,000 pieces of content published daily, we cannot pre-vet content, but we strive to foster a dynamic environment for free expression and robust discourse through safety guardrails of human and AI moderation.
Comments / 0