R. Kelly is seeking to have his convictions for possession of child pornography and inducing minors to have sex overturned by the United States Supreme Court. He claims that his alleged actions, which date back to the mid to late 1990s, should be dismissed due to the statute of limitations.
The situation escalated in 2020 when R. Kelly was charged with possessing child pornography and engaging in sexual acts with underage girls. Kelly’s defense argues that the statute of limitations had expired by the time the charges were brought.
Prosecutors, however, referenced the 2003 PROTECT Act, which eliminates the statute of limitations for child sex crimes. Jennifer Bonjean, Kelly’s attorney, argues that this law should not apply to Kelly’s case because his alleged conduct occurred before the law was enacted.
The PROTECT Act indefinitely extends the statute of limitations for crimes committed after its passage in 2003. Bonjean’s argument focuses on the fact that Congress did not include a provision to apply the law retroactively to actions committed before 2003. Therefore, she contends that the law should not affect Kelly’s charges.
In 2020, Kelly was convicted on six counts, including three for child pornography and three for inducement. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison and ordered to pay substantial damages to his alleged victims.
The Supreme Court will decide in the upcoming months whether to hear Kelly’s appeal. This decision will determine if his convictions will be upheld or if the case will be reconsidered based on the statute of limitations argument.