{"id":23635,"date":"2026-03-12T20:07:47","date_gmt":"2026-03-12T20:07:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/readtrends.com\/en\/ray-j-kim-kris-sex-tape\/"},"modified":"2026-03-12T20:07:47","modified_gmt":"2026-03-12T20:07:47","slug":"ray-j-kim-kris-sex-tape","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/readtrends.com\/en\/ray-j-kim-kris-sex-tape\/","title":{"rendered":"Ray J Accuses Kim Kardashian and Kris Jenner of Lying Under Oath Over Sex Tape"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Lead:<\/strong> Rapper Ray J told TMZ on March 12, 2026, that Kim Kardashian and Kris Jenner lied under oath about any role in the release of the widely circulated sex tape, and he urged prosecution. He said he once met with Kris, Kim and executives from distributor Vivid to negotiate a deal and that both he and Kim were paid $400,000 each for three tapes. Ray J also alleged Kris encouraged a Santa Barbara shoot to be made “dirtier,” and he has filed a countersuit claiming the Kardashians breached a settlement banning discussion of the tape. The dispute follows an October defamation suit the Kardashians filed against Ray J.<\/p>\n

Key Takeaways<\/h2>\n
    \n
  • Ray J publicly accused Kim Kardashian and Kris Jenner of perjury on March 12, 2026, after declarations were filed in court, calling their statements “completely” false.<\/li>\n
  • He says he sat in a meeting with Kim, Kris and Vivid executives over distribution and payment terms; Vivid has long maintained it acquired the tape from a third party.<\/li>\n
  • Ray J claims Kim and he were each paid $400,000 in connection with three sex tapes\u2014two recorded in Cabo and one in Santa Barbara.<\/li>\n
  • He alleges Kris Jenner urged the Santa Barbara shoot to be made “dirtier,” an assertion central to his perjury accusation.<\/li>\n
  • The legal posture: Kim and Kris filed a defamation suit in October 2025; Ray J filed a countersuit alleging violation of a settlement preventing parties from discussing the tape.<\/li>\n
  • Ray J cited reputational and family harm\u2014he said his children should not grow up believing he engaged in revenge porn or intentionally harmed anyone.<\/li>\n
  • Ray J\u2019s mother, Sonja Norwood, publicly questioned who actually released the tape if not Kim or Kris, offering family support on social media.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Background<\/h2>\n

    The dispute centers on a sexually explicit video that was commercially distributed and became a subject of prolonged public and legal scrutiny. Distributor Vivid has consistently said it acquired the recording from a third party rather than from the principals shown. Past legal arrangements between the parties included a settlement that, according to Ray J, barred any party from publicly discussing the tape; that settlement wording is now at the heart of the countersuit he has filed.<\/p>\n

    In October, Kim Kardashian and Kris Jenner initiated a defamation lawsuit against Ray J, alleging false statements that harmed their reputations. Ray J then responded with a countersuit asserting the Kardashians breached the earlier settlement by discussing the tape and related matters. The present exchange of sworn declarations and public statements has escalated the matter into renewed litigation and heightened media attention.<\/p>\n

    Main Event<\/h2>\n

    On March 12, 2026, Ray J spoke to TMZ alleging Kim and Kris “completely lied about everything” in court declarations and suggested those actions could amount to perjury. He told reporters he participated in a negotiation meeting that included Kris Jenner, Kim Kardashian and executives from Vivid, the company that later distributed the tape. Vivid\u2019s longstanding position has been that it purchased the tape from an outside source, a claim Ray J disputes.<\/p>\n

    Ray J said he and Kim received $400,000 each for three tapes\u2014two made in Cabo and one in Santa Barbara\u2014and specifically accused Kris Jenner of directing the Santa Barbara session to be “dirtier.” He framed the alleged false statements as materially important to ongoing litigation and public reputation. Ray J pressed the legal stakes rhetorically, asking whether false sworn statements should carry criminal or civil penalties.<\/p>\n

    He also spoke about personal consequences, stating that as a father of a son and daughter he rejects any narrative that portrays him as intentionally creating revenge material or inflicting harm. Ray J\u2019s mother, Sonja Norwood, posted in support, publicly asking who would have released the tape if the Kardashians were not involved. The exchange followed court filings in which the Kardashians alleged defamation; Ray J\u2019s countersuit invokes the prior confidentiality settlement as a breach.<\/p>\n

    Analysis & Implications<\/h2>\n

    Allegations of perjury raise both procedural and evidentiary questions. For a criminal perjury charge to succeed, prosecutors generally must prove a knowingly false statement under oath that is material to the proceeding. Public statements to media outlets do not themselves constitute perjury unless made under oath in a judicial or comparable setting. The declarations Ray J referenced will be examined for inconsistencies, materiality and context by counsel and potentially by the court.<\/p>\n

    Civil litigation over the settlement and defamation claims will turn on contract terms, the scope of any non-disclosure clauses, and whether the defendants\u2019 statements fall outside protected speech. Even if criminal perjury is unlikely without new corroborating evidence, civil remedies\u2014damages, injunctions or contractual penalties\u2014remain plausible outcomes. Each side\u2019s filings and witness testimony will shape how a judge assesses credibility and breach allegations.<\/p>\n

    Reputational consequences differ from legal ones and can be immediate; high-profile accusations often drive public narratives regardless of courtroom outcomes. For Ray J, asserting perjury is part legal strategy and part public argument to shift perception; for the Kardashians, defending the truthfulness of sworn statements is essential to their counterclaims. Absent independent documentary evidence (emails, drafts, witness affidavits), courts typically rely on deposition testimony and corroborating records to resolve such disputes.<\/p>\n

    Comparison & Data<\/h2>\n
    \n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Item<\/th>\nRay J’s Claim<\/th>\nOther Position<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
    Number of tapes<\/td>\n3 (two Cabo, one Santa Barbara)<\/td>\nDistributor: not specified publicly<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Payment<\/td>\n$400,000 each to Ray J and Kim<\/td>\nDistributor says tape came from a third party<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Distributor<\/td>\nVivid participated in meeting per Ray J<\/td>\nVivid maintains third-party acquisition<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

    The table summarizes the competing factual positions: Ray J provides specific counts and payment figures, while Vivid\u2019s public stance (as reported) emphasizes third-party acquisition. These differences are central to claims about collusion, breach of settlement and potential perjury. Absent production of contracts, payment records or contemporaneous communications, resolving factual disputes will depend on sworn testimony and documentary discovery.<\/p>\n

    Reactions & Quotes<\/h2>\n
    \n

    “They completely lied about everything,” Ray J said in an interview with TMZ, characterizing recent declarations as false and material to ongoing litigation.<\/p>\n

    Ray J \/ TMZ<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    \n

    “Are [Kim & Kris] out of their minds? … if you lie like that under oath, don’t you go to jail? Don’t you get fined?”<\/p>\n

    Ray J \/ TMZ<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    \n

    “If they didn’t collude to release the tape, then who did?”<\/p>\n

    Sonja Norwood (Ray J’s mother) \/ Social media post<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Each quote has been widely circulated in entertainment media; lawyers for the parties will test the statements’ veracity in filings and depositions. The Kardashians’ legal team has framed its October filing as a defamation claim, while Ray J’s countersuit relies on the settlement\u2019s confidentiality provisions.<\/p>\n