Anyone paying attention to the R. Kelly trial going on now?

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

R. Kelly's trial for CP is finally underway, after six years of delay...

If you thought the Michael Jackson trial was whack, just check this one out:

Day-by-Day Coverage of the Trial

If you want some background on the case, and R. Kelly's alleged sordid past, then check out:

Hitsville: R. Kelly SexFacts

ADG

[JamesK]

I heard he made some underage scat porn, is that true?

[sicone]

is this the 'piss on you' video?

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Originally Posted by JamesK

I heard he made some underage scat porn, is that true?

Originally Posted by sicone

is this the 'piss on you' video?

Yup, with a girl alleged to be 14 or so at the time. Problem is, she says it's not her but refuses to testify, and R. Kelly says it's not him on the tape, pointing out that he has a mole on his lower back that can't be seen on the tape.

The "Mole will keep me outta the hole", is how he put it, lol.

So far no one has come forward with a picture of the mole prior to the time the tape was shot (he says he had the mole since birth), leading some to speculate that he drew it on with a sharpie...

I know it's no laughing matter, but what I've read so far has been pretty entertaining...

ADG

[Mister E]

Originally Posted by sicone

is this the 'piss on you' video?

so it is....damn freakshows

[MetaMan]

no i have a life i dont give a fuck what celebs are up to.

[Deej]

Originally Posted by MetaMan

no i have a life i dont give a fuck what celebs are up to.

yea, im sure you have limited free time...

i mean with all the time you put in calling up all the places you take your bitches, making sure they clear the way and make the proper adjustments to their surroundings for your large penis.

I'm sure the fine dining establishments that you frequent have to special order their chairs, tables and doorways.


thats a lot of work. but only the best for the best, right?

[MetaMan]

Originally Posted by Deej

yea, im sure you have limited free time...

i mean with all the time you put in calling up all the places you take your bitches, making sure they clear the way and make the proper adjustments to their surroundings for your large penis.

I'm sure the fine dining establishments that you frequent have to special order their chairs, tables and doorways.


thats a lot of work. but only the best for the best, right?

actually i dont take my women out, i am a real pimp ;)

[Deej]

Originally Posted by MetaMan

actually i dont take my women out, i am a real pimp ;)

shit, me neither...

its crazy, i sit here and work and they still flock, to this day...




fuck rkelly...

[SykkBoy]

I often wonder how come we don't see the same outrage in this case as we did in the Michael Jackson trial...
I guess people were more upset that Michael's victims were male than the fact they were kids...

[Deej]

Originally Posted by SykkBoy2

I often wonder how come we don't see the same outrage in this case as we did in the Michael Jackson trial...
I guess people were more upset that Michael's victims were male than the fact they were kids...

or the fact that everyone knows MJ, he has the top selling album in the world...

how many know r kelly...

shit, i heard his name once before these accusations and trials...

Fuck R kelly

[Deej]

Originally Posted by SykkBoy2

I often wonder how come we don't see the same outrage in this case as we did in the Michael Jackson trial...
I guess people were more upset that Michael's victims were male than the fact they were kids...

same reason OJ took a year and you dont hear about every other jealous slaughtering that happens EVERY DAY

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Dave Chappelle tribute to R. Kelly: "I Want To Pee On You":



MadTV: Trapped in the Cupboard:



ADG

[Kudles]

No because he's an idiot

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Originally Posted by Biddy

No because he's an idiot

Good point! Did you know that R. Kelly is illiterate? (It's true)

So anyway, I was in Google News and searched on R. Kelly, and a link to this story came up:

R. Kelly Accused of Masturbating in Court During Sex Tape Viewing

CHICAGO, IL ? In the middle of his highly publicized trial covering 14 counts of child pornography-related charges, R&B star R. Kelly appears to have added a new crime to the pile.

A week after the infamous video ? allegedly showing Kelly having sex with a then-underage girl nearly a decade ago ? was shown in court, prosecutors have filed an additional charge of indecent exposure against the Chicago native. According to papers filed late Thursday, Kelly masturbated throughout the 27-minute showing of the prosecution?s key piece of evidence.

?There have been secret cameras all over the courtroom this whole time,? said a source with inside knowledge of the case. ?Judge [Vincent M.] Gaughan is one paranoid dude ? although, I mean, he did specifically say he wanted to make sure R. didn?t get up to any funny business during the trial. I guess this is exactly the sort of thing he had in mind.?

The source says that Judge Gaughan himself has been reviewing the tapes over the course of the last week, and only Thursday morning did he come upon an angle that showed Kelly massaging his exposed member, despite the courtroom?s dimmed lights and drawn shades.

Kelly, for his part, denies these new accusations, much as he has consistently and vehemently denied that he had any part in the filming of the video. Though the singer himself would not comment, his lawyer confirmed that denial.

?I would first like to say that the clandestine filming of a trial is highly unethical, and that I see no way these supposed recordings should ever be legally allowed to be a part of these proceedings,? said visibly fraught Kelly defense attorney Marc Martin. ?I would also like to reiterate that Mr. Kelly denies touching himself inappropriately during the playing of the video.

And finally, I should point out that even if he was doing that, it would just be further proof of his innocence with regards to the child pornography charges. I happen to know for a fact that Mr. Kelly never masturbates to his own videos.?

But prosecutors see things differently. Given Judge Gaughan?s supposed impartiality, they believe the tapes should not be considered an illegal act on the part of the state, and should be allowed in court.

?Let?s face it, Judge Gaughan shot these videos for us, and nobody even knew they existed until he showed us how Kelly was beating off in the courtroom,? prosecutor Shauna Boliker told SSNN. ?If he wasn?t gonna let us use them, why would he even admit to all these secret spy cameras?

Clearly the guy is a bit of a nut, but as long as he?s still in charge of this case ? those tapes are in, baby! And thank God he had that night vision camera, because otherwise it would be awful hard to see the deed getting done with the courtroom lights off.?

/ end story

ADG

[payd2purv]

WHAT!?!?!1one

oh for fuck sakes.

Not even Joe Francis is that nuts.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Originally Posted by payd2purv

Not even Joe Francis is that nuts.

The jury is still out on that...

Speaking of juries, when is Joe due in court for his next hearing about the latest four underage girls?

ADG

[dav3]

WTF!?


678

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Oh, no - they found the mole...

A prosecution witness used images of a lower back mole on Thursday to link R. Kelly to a sex tape at the center of the R&B star's child pornography trial.

The potentially damaging testimony came a week after the singer's own attorneys brought up the mole in their opening statements. A defense attorney argued then that since the man in the graphic 27-minute tape did not have a mole, that man could not be Kelly.

But video forensics expert Grant Fredericks froze several frames of the sex tape where a dark spot was visible on the man's back.

For comparison, Fredericks showed the jury a still photo taken of Kelly's back after his arrest in 2002, revealing a dark fingernail sized mole.

"There is a mark on the man's back in the exact same position," Fredericks said, referring to the tape.

Kelly and his attorneys looked grim and dejected during the expert's testimony, while prosecutors looked pleased, appearing to smile as they sat at their courtroom table.

ADG

[dav3]

hahahahah

[insert self ownage pic]

[AmeliaG]

Originally Posted by SykkBoy2

I often wonder how come we don't see the same outrage in this case as we did in the Michael Jackson trial...
I guess people were more upset that Michael's victims were male than the fact they were kids...

I don't recall all the details, but weren't the boys in the Michael Jackson case children and not teenagers? I think there is a HUGE difference and that the kid thing is a million times more awful.

[tony286]

the whole thing seems very vague.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

I don't recall all the details, but weren't the boys in the Michael Jackson case children and not teenagers? I think there is a HUGE difference and that the kid thing is a million times more awful.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that it's a HUGE difference what MJ did and what R. Kelly did, and what MJ did (and was never convicted of), is a million times more awful.

So, a 35 year old having sex with a 14 year old girl (she may have been as young as 12 years old), and urinating on her body and in her mouth, is okay in your opinion?

ADG

[AmeliaG]

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that it's a HUGE difference what MJ did and what R. Kelly did, and what MJ did (and was never convicted of), is a million times more awful.

So, a 35 year old having sex with a 14 year old girl (she may have been as young as 12 years old), and urinating on her body and in her mouth, is okay in your opinion?

ADG

Of course, it is not okay. I don't think anyone is alleging the girl was 12; everything I have seen says 14.

Neither Michael Jackson nor R. Kelly has been convicted at this time, but, yes, I think what Michael Jackson was alleged to have done was infinitely worse. Of course, the evidence that R. Kelly actually did what is alleged appears to be stronger, at least based on press coverage.

I think if someone has inappropriate sex with a 14-year-old, even a precocious one, that is wrong. I think if someone has any kind of sex with a 10-year-old, that is an evil worthy of the lowest levels of Hell. We're not talking right and wrong here, just levels of wrongness.

As near as I can tell from what I just read today about the R. Kelly case, the man appears to be disturbed, was probably molested by both a neighbor and his stepfather, and is most likely literally retarded.

[GregE]

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

So, a 35 year old having sex with a 14 year old girl (she may have been as young as 12 years old), and urinating on her body and in her mouth, is okay in your opinion?

Nobody said anything about this being okay.

The lady simply pointed out that with a younger victim the damage is likely to be more severe and life altering. Makes sense to me.

In a perfect world both Kelly and Jackson would be locked away until long, long after they were too old to bother anyone....if not longer.

Jackson walked, with any luck, Kelly won't

[AmeliaG]

Originally Posted by GregE

Nobody said anything about this being okay.

The lady simply pointed out that with a younger victim the damage is likely to be more severe and life altering. Makes sense to me.

In a perfect world both Kelly and Jackson would be locked away until long, long after they were too old to bother anyone....if not longer.

Jackson walked, with any luck, Kelly won't

Yeah that.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

Originally Posted by AmeliaG

Of course, it is not okay. I don't think anyone is alleging the girl was 12; everything I have seen says 14.

Neither Michael Jackson nor R. Kelly has been convicted at this time, but, yes, I think what Michael Jackson was alleged to have done was infinitely worse. Of course, the evidence that R. Kelly actually did what is alleged appears to be stronger, at least based on press coverage.

I think if someone has inappropriate sex with a 14-year-old, even a precocious one, that is wrong. I think if someone has any kind of sex with a 10-year-old, that is an evil worthy of the lowest levels of Hell. We're not talking right and wrong here, just levels of wrongness.

As near as I can tell from what I just read today about the R. Kelly case, the man appears to be disturbed, was probably molested by both a neighbor and his stepfather, and is most likely literally retarded.

Originally Posted by GregE

Nobody said anything about this being okay.

The lady simply pointed out that with a younger victim the damage is likely to be more severe and life altering. Makes sense to me.

In a perfect world both Kelly and Jackson would be locked away until long, long after they were too old to bother anyone....if not longer.

Jackson walked, with any luck, Kelly won't

Thanks for the clarification. From what I have read, R. Kelly alledgedly has a long history of the type of behavior he is accused of in his current case.

With all of his millions in earnings, he should be able to obtain some very good psychological help in dealing with his past, either as a free man or from behind bars.

It's hard to imagine he can beat this case, especially when there is a videotape as evidence, but we've already seen how juries can be in celebrity cases (OJ, MJ, Robert Blake, Phil Specter, etc)...

ADG

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

The Prosecution rested it's case today...

Prosecution rests in R. Kelly trial

Published: June 2, 2008 at 8:26 PM

CHICAGO, June 2 (UPI) -- Prosecutors in R. Kelly's child pornography trial in Chicago rested their case Monday but not before the defense tried to impugn the motive of a key witness.

The R&B singer is charged with videotaping himself having sex with an underage girl some time between 1998 and 2000. Kelly's attorneys maintain the female on the tape isn't who prosecutors say she is and the man having sex with her isn't Kelly.

But Lisa Van Allen, 27, testified about three sexual encounters she allegedly had with Kelly and the alleged victim, and also identified Kelly and the girl in the video, the Chicago Tribune reported.

Defense attorney Sam Adam Sr. brought out the fact that Allen waited years before coming forward, and that her fiance and a former boyfriend were convicted of federal fraud charges.

"What, do you have some thing where guys have to have some federal fraud charge before you are interested in them?" Adam asked.

Kelly's lawyers are expected to start presenting their case Wednesday, a day after Chicago Sun-Times music critic Jim DeRogatis is to be questioned by the defense.

DeRogatis is the person who gave police the sex tape at the core of the case, the Tribune said.

ADG