In a shocking development that could have seismic implications for one of hip-hop’s most explosive legal battles, Tory Lanez’s former bodyguard recently claimed that Kelsey Harris confessed to firing shots during the July 2020 incident involving Megan Thee Stallion. The statement, which quickly ignited headlines and reignited fierce public debate, suggests that Harris may have admitted to discharging a weapon, though notably, not necessarily shooting Megan.
To help cut through the noise and examine the legal ramifications of this alleged confession, 21Ninety spoke to Dr. Keith White, Esq., a New York-based attorney with deep knowledge of criminal procedure and post-trial litigation.
Kelsey’s Bodyguard’s Allegations: A Confession or a Complication?
Dr. White emphasized that Lanez’s trial occurred in California, where rules of evidence differ slightly. His breakdown of what this new information could mean for Tory Lanez’s legal future is based on what he knows, according to the state of New York.
“Typically, evidence of an out of court statement cannot be admissible in court because it would be deemed hearsay. However, if the statement is an admission, it can be entered on a direct case. If the statement is a statement against the person’s interest, it can be entered to rebut the person’s previous statement,” Dr. White explained.
For those unfamiliar with legal jargon, hearsay refers to statements made outside the courtroom that are brought in as evidence. These are usually not allowed unless they fall under specific exceptions, like a confession or an admission against one’s own interest.
“So, if a bodyguard provides a sworn affidavit alleging an admission by Ms. Harris, it could have significant implications if there is other corroborating evidence to support the sworn affidavit,” Dr. White continued.
But context matters, especially in a tricky case like this.
“It is important to note that the statement being discussed in the press is not a blanket admission or a statement that asserts that Tory Lanez did not shoot Megan Thee Stallion,” he said. “Instead, the statement purports to say that Harris admits that she fired three shots. It does not say that Harris shot Megan Thee Stallion or that Tory Lanez did not shoot Megan Thee Stallion.”
This means that while the alleged statement could be powerful, it does not directly exonerate Lanez.
“This is important because any appeal or motion for a new trial will need to effectively argue that if this new information had been available at trial, the outcome of the trial would have been different.”
Could There Be a Retrial?
When asked whether this information could warrant a retrial, Dr. White was very clear.
“This new information could warrant a retrial if Tory’s appeal is successful,” he explained. “Tory’s appeal would likely have to show that information that should have been presented at trial was either unavailable, undisclosed by the prosecution or unknown to the prosecution.”
The appeal would need to prove that this alleged confession was not known during the original trial and that it would have made a difference in the jury’s decision.
“Tory’s appeal would also have to show that if this information would have been disclosed during the trial, the outcome of the trial would have likely been different. If Tory’s legal team is successful in their appeal, the case could be retried,” Dr. White added.
What Kind of Evidence Would Help?
When it comes to what evidence might be needed to support the bodyguard’s claim, Dr. White shared that its not as simple as one would think.
“This is a bit tricky because the forensic evidence needed to corroborate the new information should have been collected at the scene of the shooting and at the time of the shooting,” he shared. “Gun powder residue, fingerprints, DNA and other evidence to support the new theory of liability are often lost if not retrieved and maintained early in the investigation.”
That means without physical evidence collected at the time of the shooting, proving someone else pulled the trigger becomes much more difficult.
Could Kelsey Harris Face Charges?
When asked whether Harris could face legal consequences if the confession were proven true, Dr. White explained the legal process behind an admission.
“If the admission is proven to be true in court, and the admission establishes that Ms. Harris didn’t just shoot a gun, but actually shot Megan Thee Stallion, she could face legal consequences,” he said.
This means that if it turns out she shot Megan Thee Stallion and the courts determine that this was newly discovered information, Harris could be prosecuted, even years later.
“While the statute of limitations might have expired on her criminal and civil liability, if the prosecution newly discovers that Ms. Harris was the shooter, she could be prosecuted,” Dr. White said. “The key question would be when the prosecution discovered or reasonably should have discovered that Ms Harris was the shooter.”
The Power (and Pressure) of Public Opinion
Dr. White also offered a candid look at how media coverage and public perception play into high-profile trials.
“During the pre-trial phase, the public opinion and media coverage affect plea negotiations,” he explained. “District Attorneys are elected officials and thus, subject to public opinion. DA’s will often be swayed in the direction of public opinion as a mechanism of being re-elected. If the public opinion is against a Defendant, that Defendant will have a harder time getting a favorable plea deal.”
This means that prosecutors, who rely on public approval to remain in office, may be more aggressive in high-profile cases if the public is demanding justice or accountability.
Once the trial begins, the influence doesn’t stop.
“During the trial phase, public opinion and media coverage will make it harder for the litigating attorneys to pick a jury,” he said. “Potential jurors may be afraid of the public scrutiny associated with rendering a verdict on a popular case. Additionally, the litigating attorneys may engage in grandstanding in an effort to advance their personal agendas and egos. None of this bodes well for the Defendant, because these factors act as a distraction from the evidence being presented in the case.”
In other words, attorneys and jurors alike may be influenced by public perception, which can distort the legal process and shift focus away from facts and evidence.
“During the post-trial phase, the public opinion and media coverage serve as an additional barrier to post-trial remedies,” Dr. White shared. “Obtaining a post-trial remedy such as an overturned verdict, appeal or dismissal is an uphill battle. Post-trial remedies are often denied summarily. With the scrutiny of media coverage and loud public opinion, judges will be more deliberate and intentional with deciding on whether to grant a post-trial remedy. Judges will be reluctant to give the appearance of favoritism to celebrities or defendants with wealth.”
Public opinion can add pressure at every stage of a case, before, during, and after trial, making it more complicated for defendants to receive impartial treatment.
What the Public Should Know
Dr. White offered a closing thought on public expectations in cases like this.
“The public should understand that post-verdict remedies are very rarely granted,” he explained. “The courts would prefer to defer to the verdicts rendered by juries. Claims that Ms. Harris made a statement that proves Tory’s innocence will be under intense scrutiny and likely take a very long time to be seriously considered.”
As the story unfolds, one thing remains clear. While public speculation swirls, the legal pathway to reversing a conviction is anything but simple. The outcome will ultimately depend not on public discourse, but on how this new information is presented and whether it meets the strict legal standards for overturning a jury’s decision.
Anna Paulina Tory Lanez Update
In a recent appearance on TMZ Live, Florida Rep. Anna Paulina Luna voiced support for Tory Lanez, claiming he was unfairly convicted in the 2020 shooting incident involving Megan Thee Stallion. According to TMZ, Luna stated she found several alleged inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case. Luna pointed to what she says is unreleased Ring camera footage and a lack of forensic DNA on the weapon as key pieces of evidence that could exonerate Lanez. Luna is now reportedly pushing for both the release of the video and a pardon from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. While her statements have sparked fresh conversation, it’s important to note that none of this new information has yet been independently verified or introduced in a legal setting. As of now, Lanez continues to serve his 10-year sentence following his 2023 conviction.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was Tory Lanez found guilty of? Tory Lanez was found guilty in December 2022 on three felony counts: assault with a semiautomatic firearm, carrying a loaded unregistered firearm in a vehicle, and discharging a firearm with gross negligence. The charges stemmed from the July 2020 shooting incident involving Megan Thee Stallion.
Was Tory Lanez on probation? No, Tory Lanez was not on probation at the time of the 2020 incident. He was, however, taken into custody immediately after his conviction and later sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2023.