R.Kelly has been sued by a Kansas City private investigator who claimed he was not paid for his services during the singer's child pornography case.

The lawsuit was filed last Friday (February 27) in federal court.

Kelly is being sued by a private investigator who claims the singer stiffed him on a $300,000 bill. According to a lawsuit filed last week in Missouri federal court, Charles Freeman claims he was hired during Kelly's trial to "obtain and/or recover certain tapes that were said to incriminate" R. Kelly. Freeman said he did the job, but never got paid. He's suing for damages plus interests and costs. (TMZ)
Freeman claims an agreement was drawn together at the start of the investigation.

In the suit, Freeman claims that he entered into an agreement in 2001 with R. Kelly and manager Daryl McDavid to "act as a private investigator" and retrieve "tapes" relevant to R. Kelly's then-upcoming child-pornography trial. R. Kelly was accused of 21 counts of child pornography. The trial, which was delayed until 2008, centered on a tape that allegedly showed R. Kelly having sex with a 14-year-old girl. (Kansas City Pitch)
Freeman was an active figure in Kelly's case and was also accused of creating a staged sex tape against Kelly.

It was reported that two Kansas City men allegedly paid by R. Kelly's representatives for the return of a sex tape, would arrive in Chicago to offer more information about the tape at the center of the case. Keith Murell and Charles Freeman were accused by Kelly's reps of faking a sex tape and trying to exort money from the singer. Records show in 2002 Freeman sued Kelly for failing to pay him $140,000 for the return of a videotape. (Windy Citizen)
Kells was eventually cleared of all charges in June 2008.

It took more than six years for prosecutors to get the R&B star R. Kelly into court on charges of child pornography. It only took a few hours for a jury to declare him not guilty on all 14 counts. (New York Times)

__________________

this man disgusts me!

That's what he gets for trying to help a child molester. Hope R-Kelly gets the Karma that's coming to him.

the Rich get Richer...

Alot of times Wealthy People will wait to get sued, because they'll end up paying less, than if they had paid up front.

And alot of times they can simply use their money & resources to drag the case out to the point the plaintiff can't afford his legal fees.

Smart financial Move for R Kelly.

i HATE him...... & the lawyers that got him off

__________________

Yes! Who knew child molesters could be so savvy?! *eyeroll*

__________________

Good you don't need to be paid. How could you do the devils work and then think you will be rewarded? God don't like ugly.......

__________________

Ok, this man should be prosecuted for tampering with evidence.

__________________

I don't get all the R. Kelly hate on here. The man was tried, and acquitted. Why continue to vilify him? WHO KNOWS what happened between him and those females he had sex with. Yes, we saw the tapes. Some say they look young, others say they don't look that young. It's a matter of opinion. Who's to say that they didn't lie about their age to him? We just don't know, and because I know that I don't know, I'm not going to vilify him about it.

__________________

Now you know good and well the Ruh knew how old those girls were...he's a perv (an acquitted perv but still a perv)

still your font though

__________________

There are some sick, lieing, money hungry cowards all throughout this case and those dirty defense lawyers lead the pack. As long as the checks were clearing the account I guess all is well. Man people will sell their soul for a buck. No backbone, no class, no morals ug....so frustrating. Oops im sorry here I go acting crazy, being too judgemental, a hater lol........Yep, we ALL fall short (including me) but, I will not and can not justify child molestation-nope NEVER.

My co-workers and I talked about this case last june and I told them then that what we heard in the media didn't even touch the surface of what is really going on. Oh well.....

Er, *I* know because I went to school with the girls he abused.

__________________

You're missing the point. Just because YOU know, doesn't mean he KNEW how old they were; it's possible they were dishonest about their age. But I have nothing else to say on this, because people have their minds set on what they want to believe about this. God forbid someone disagree or try to see all sides of the situation. So that's that.

__________________

I agree with you alittle, but some of these girls, parents/family worked for him. If you was checking someone out and you was sure about somethings wouldn't you ask the people or family that know them?

As for the PI, he should be charged if he stole or hid evidence.