Score:   1
Docket Number:   ED-NY  1:20-cr-00395
Case Name:   USA v. Williams
  Press Releases:
Three separate criminal complaints were unsealed yesterday in federal court in Brooklyn charging defendants Richard Arline, Jr., Donnell Russell and Michael Williams, respectively, with crimes relating to their efforts to harass, intimidate, threaten or corruptly influence individuals named as alleged victims in the racketeering case against Robert Sylvester Kelly, also known as “R. Kelly,” currently pending in the Eastern District of New York (the Kelly case). 

Arline, Jr. is charged with attempting to corruptly persuade the testimony of an alleged victim in the Kelly case, identified in the complaint as “Jane Doe,” and engaging in misleading conduct towards the victim, with intent to influence, delay and prevent her testimony in the Kelly case, as well as corruptly offering something of value to the victim, with the intent to influence her testimony as a witness upon a trial, hearing and other proceeding.  Arline, Jr. was arrested earlier today in Dolton, Illinois, and his initial appearance took place yesterday afternoon before United States Magistrate Judge Young B. Kim at the federal courthouse in Chicago, Illinois.

A second criminal complaint charges Russell with using the mail, the internet and cellular telephones to attempt to cause emotional distress to another individual identified in the complaint as “Jane Doe,” an alleged victim in the Kelly case, as well as Jane Doe’s mother, with the intent to harass and intimidate Jane Doe and her mother.  Russell’s initial appearance will take place before a United States Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of New York at a date to be determined in the near future.

A third criminal complaint charges Williams with using and attempting to use intimidation and threats against an alleged victim in the Kelly case, with intent to influence, delay and prevent her testimony in the Kelly case.  The complaint also charges Williams with maliciously damaging and destroying a vehicle by means of fire and an explosive.  Williams was arrested yesterday in Pompano Beach, Florida, and his initial appearance is scheduled for this morning at the federal courthouse in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. 

Seth D. DuCharme, Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Peter C. Fitzhugh, Special Agent-in-Charge, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), New York Field Office, and Dermot F. Shea, Commissioner, New York City Police Department (NYPD), announced the charges.  

“The defendants are separately charged with engaging in multiple crimes that were intended to undermine and subvert the integrity of the criminal justice system and victimize the women who have come forward with serious allegations of criminal conduct against the defendant R. Kelly,” stated Acting United States Attorney DuCharme.  “Efforts to illegally influence pending federal cases, whether through threats of violence, intimidation, damage to property, or payments to buy a potential witness’s silence, will not be tolerated.” 

Mr. DuCharme expressed his grateful appreciation to the HSI Field Offices in Chicago, Illinois, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Long Beach, California, and Tampa, Florida; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Field Offices in Savannah, Georgia, and Tampa, Florida; the Florida Bureau of Fire, Arson & Explosives Investigations; the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, Florida, the Lowndes County Sheriff’s Office, Florida, the Polk County Sheriff’s Office, Florida and the Valdosta Police Department, Georgia, for their assistance in these cases.

“These crimes shock the conscience.  The men charged today allegedly have shown that there is no line they will not cross to help Kelly avoid the consequences of his alleged crimes—even if it means re-victimizing his accusers.  These acts not only fly in the face of human decency, they insult the very rule of law.  HSI will continue to bring the full force of our investigative powers to pursue those seeking to attack witnesses and pervert the cause of justice.  To the victims of these and other crimes: we stand with you.  We will meet your bravery with our resolve to keep you safe to tell your story,” stated HSI Special Agent-in-Charge Fitzhugh.

“The bribery, intimidation and violence alleged in these complaints reflects a nationwide pattern of criminality that further victimized civilian witnesses in a federal case. Such behavior can never be accepted and I commend the NYPD investigators, federal agents and prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York in bringing these charges,” stated NYPD Commissioner Shea.

The Arline, Jr. Complaint

As alleged, between January 9, 2020 and June 2020, Arline, Jr., a self-proclaimed longtime friend of Kelly, attempted to illegally influence the cooperation and testimony of an alleged victim in the Kelly case.  After learning of Arline Jr.’s plan, the victim contacted law enforcement, and under the supervision of law enforcement authorities, continued to communicate with him.  During a series of consensually recorded telephone calls, as well as in calls and texts captured pursuant to a judicially authorized wiretap, Arline, Jr. discussed a scheme in which the victim would receive compensation, including a proposed payment of $500,000, to keep her from cooperating with the government.  During one of the recorded telephone calls, Arline, Jr. claimed that he had communicated with Kelly while Kelly was incarcerated via a three-way call with another individual. 

The intercepted communications also include Arline, Jr. discussing plans to pay the victim “to be quiet,” explaining that “if I had a way to talk to Rob [Kelly], being next to him, and telling him what’s going on, without nobody listening to, no feds, nobody, he gonna pay her . . . off to be quiet” because “[s]he got too much.  She got too much.” 

The Russell Complaint

As alleged, between November 2018 and February 2020, Russell, a self-described manager, advisor and friend of Kelly, used the mail, telephones and the internet to harass and intimidate Jane Doe, an alleged victim in the Kelly case, and her mother after Jane Doe filed a civil lawsuit against R. Kelly.  Specifically, Russell threatened to reveal sexually explicit photographs of Jane Doe and to publicly reveal her sexual history if she did not withdraw her lawsuit against Kelly and “cease her participation and association with the organizers” of a “negative campaign” against Kelly.  In November 2018, Russell caused a letter with attachments purportedly written by Kelly to be mailed to Jane Doe’s Brooklyn-based lawyer at the time.  The attachments included cropped nude photographs of Jane Doe with the following text: “the next two pictures have been cropped for the sake of not exposing her extremities to the world, yet!!!”  In December 2018, Russell, using his alias “Colon Dunn,” sent a series of text messages to Jane Doe and her mother, which contained the same photographs of Jane Doe, and stating “Just a sample.  We will seek criminal charges.  You’ve been warned,” as well as “Publishing soon” and “[T]his is Colon.”   

On January 3, 2019, Russell allegedly sent additional text messages to Jane Doe and her mother, stating, “Pull the plug or you will be exposed.”  On January 6, 2019, Russell, using the Colon Dunn alias, created a Facebook Page named “Surviving Lies,” a play on the title of Lifetime’s “Surviving R Kelly” documentary, and posted screen shots of text messages between Kelly and Jane Doe, which contained the same sexually explicit photographs of Jane Doe.  In late January 2020, Russell appeared on two live interviews with “vloggers” discussing Kelly’s legal troubles, which were streamed live on the internet via YouTube.  Russell again displayed the same sexually explicit photographs of Jane Doe and broadcast them publicly over the internet.  

The Williams Complaint

As alleged, on or about June 11, 2020, Williams, a relative of an individual who once served as a publicist for Kelly, set fire to an SUV parked outside a residence in Florida where an alleged victim in the Kelly case and others were staying.  The vehicle, leased by the victim’s father, was heavily damaged.  Fire investigators also detected an accelerant along the outside perimeter of the residence.  Cell site records, surveillance footage, toll records and photographs, and Williams’ internet searches for the victim’s address, revealed that Williams had driven from Georgia to the Florida residence.  Williams also performed internet queries about the detonation properties of fertilizer and diesel fuel, witness intimidation and witness tampering, and countries that do not have extradition with the United States.

The charges in the complaints are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

The government’s case is being handled by the Office’s Civil Rights Section. Assistant United States Attorneys Elizabeth A. Geddes, Nadia I. Shihata and Maria Cruz Melendez are in charge of the prosecution. 

The Defendants:

RICHARD ARLINE, JR.

Age:  31

Dolton, IL

DONNELL RUSSELL, also known as “Don Russell” and “Colon Dunn”

Age:  45

Chicago, IL

MICHAEL WILLIAMS

Age: 37

Valdosta, GA

E.D.N.Y. Docket Nos: 20-MJ-239; 20-MJ-629; 20-MJ-630

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1J_iWD-QokLHYP3HAl9Tk6VXKhiZLUk06Mif3Q6eXgb8
  Last Updated: 2023-10-29 00:34:35 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Magistrate Docket Number:   ED-NY  1:20-mj-00630
Case Name:   USA v. SEALED
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E