Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 6   Go Down
Author Topic: R. Kelly Acquitted - Hell, even I'm shocked!  (Read 19666 times)
The Shepherd
Brothas (male posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


A Black History Life


« on: June 13, 2008, 06:52:48 PM »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080613/ap_en_ot/r_kelly_trial

By MICHAEL TARM, Associated Press Writer
54 minutes ago

CHICAGO - R. Kelly was acquitted of all charges Friday after less than a day of deliberations in his child pornography trial, ending a six-year ordeal for the R&B superstar.

Kelly dabbed his face with a handkerchief and hugged each of his four attorneys after the verdict — not guilty on all 14 counts — was read. The Grammy award-winning singer had faced 15 years in prison if convicted.

Minutes later, surrounded by bodyguards, he left the courthouse without comment. Dozens of fans screamed and cheered as he climbed into a waiting SUV.

"All I heard (from Kelly) while those 14 verdicts were being read was 'Thank you, Jesus. Thank you, Jesus. Thank you, Jesus,'" said Sam Adam Jr., one of his attorneys.

Prosecutors had argued that a video tape mailed to the Chicago Sun-Times in 2002 showed Kelly engaged in graphic sex acts with a girl as young as 13 at the time. Both Kelly, 41, and the now 23-year-old alleged victim had denied they were the ones on the tape. Neither testified during the trial.

"Robert said all along that he believed in our system and he believed in God — and that when all the facts came out in court, he would be cleared of these terrible charges," according to a statement from his publicist, Allen Mayer. "But he never dreamed it would take six and a half years. This has been a terrible ordeal for him and his family and at this point all he wants to do is move forward and put it behind him."

Jurors said that fact that neither the alleged victim nor her parents testified weakened the prosecution. But the real key was the woman herself: One juror said he just was not sure the female was who prosecutors said she was — or that she was a minor when the tape was made.

Another said that while he was convinced it was Kelly on the tape, he had doubts about the female. "What we had wasn't enough," said the juror, who declined to give his name.

Prosecutors relied in part on a star witness who said she engaged in three-way sex with Kelly and the girl. Defense attorneys labeled that woman an extortionist, claiming she sought hundreds of thousands of dollars from Kelly in exchange for her silence and stole his $20,000 watch at one point.

Testimony in the monthlong trial centered on whether Kelly was the man who appears on a sexually graphic, 27-minute videotape at the heart of the case, and whether a female who also appears on it was underage.

Over seven days presenting their case, prosecutors called 22 witnesses, including several childhood friends of the alleged victim and four of her relatives who identified her as the female on the video.

In just two days, Kelly's lawyers called 12 witnesses. They included three relatives of the alleged victim who testified they did not recognize her as the female on the tape.

Assistant Cook County State's Attorney Shauna Boliker said she believed the female on the tape was a victim, not a prostitute as the defense had contended.

"This shows the world how difficult this crime is to prosecute," she said. "It also takes the soul of the victim, the heart of the victim."

Kelly won a Grammy in 1997 for "I Believe I Can Fly," and is known for such raunchy hits as "Bump N' Grind," "Ignition," and for "Trapped in the Closet," a multipart saga about the sexual secrets of an ever-expanding cast of characters.

Of the 12 jurors, nine were men and three were women; eight were white and four were black. They included the wife of a Baptist preacher from Kelly's Chicago-area hometown, Olympia Fields, as well as a compliance officer for a Chicago investment firm and a man in his 60s who emigrated from then-Communist Romania nearly 40 years ago.

Despite his legal troubles, Kelly — who rose from poverty on Chicago's South Side to become a star singer, songwriter and producer — still retains a huge following, and his popularity has arguably grown in recent years.

The singer has released more than half a dozen albums, most of them selling over a million copies. He's also had a multitude of hits and gone on tours. Kelly has a new song, "Hair Braider," out now, and is due to release a new album in July.

Kelly, always meticulously dressed in a suit and tie, appeared tense at times during the trial, furrowing his brow. He seemed particularly ill at ease when prosecutors played the sex tape in open court after opening arguments.

In the video, entered into evidence as "People's Exhibit No. 1," a man has sex with a young female, who is naked for most of the recording. She is often blank-faced. The man speaks to her in a hushed voice, and she calls him "Daddy."

In one scene, alluded to in one count of the indictment, the man urinates on the female.

The issue of whether there was or wasn't a fingernail-sized mole on the man's lower was a subject of hours of testimony. A defense witness told jurors there was no mole on his back, proving it's not Kelly, who has such a mole. But a prosecution witness displayed freeze frames of the video where a dark spot seemed to appear as the man turns to take off his pants.

Jurors later said the issue of whether Kelly had a mole was not a decisive factor.

One surreal moment came when a defense expert played a segment of the tape he doctored showing two headless bodies engaging in sex. The defense said that backed their argument that Kelly's likeness could have been computer-generated.

Cross examination was often heated. Several witnesses cried on the stand.

The star prosecution witness, Lisa Van Allen, became teary eyed as she told jurors she engaged in several three-way sexual encounters with Kelly and the alleged victim, including once on a basketball court. Kelly videotaped the trysts, she said.

Van Allen also claimed Kelly used to carry a duffel bag stuffed full of his homemade sex tapes.

The defense called several witnesses in a bid to discredit Van Allen, accusing her of trying to extort money from Kelly. Under cross-examination, Van Allen admitted she once stole Kelly's $20,000 diamond-studded watch from a hotel.

Logged

They call me the tail-dragger. That's because I cover my tracks when I walk. - "Howlin' Wolf"

The Shepherd
Brothas (male posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 750


A Black History Life


« Reply #1 on: June 13, 2008, 07:14:14 PM »

I am, and have been, unashamedly a huge fan of R. Kelly's music. I believe he belongs in the pantheon or R&B greats, along with James Brown, Sam Cooke, Barry White, Stevie Wonder, Curtis Mayfield, Marvin Gaye (all singer, songwriter, producers). I keep at least one R. Kelly cd in the car, along with at least one Prince, and one Jay-Z cd. I have argued the moral complexities of teenage sexuality, and argued the ambiguities of R. Kelly's complicity in sexualizing a child. Hell, I even stated, on this site once, that R. Kelly's music made me a better husband!

But I seen the tape! And I didn't think there was any way in the world that he would get acquitted!

I argued for suspended sentences and probation, but I never thought a jury would let him off completely! There is at least one person who thinks I'll be celebrating his acquittal. There is an old friend that I lost because of their intransigence with seeing the gray in not just the R. Kelly situation, but in the issue in its societal entirety. I'm not celebrating this verdict, though. That's not my nature.

What my former friend never seemed to realize was that my philosophical approach to the issue was never an advocacy for R. Kelly's acquittal or his actions. I always thought R Kelly was guilty and deserved punishment. What I advocated was a serious examination of how we can begin to prevent these situations because locking up the R Kelly's and Roman Polanski's of the world is not solving the problem.

And, they're not getting locked up anyway - obviously!
Logged

They call me the tail-dragger. That's because I cover my tracks when I walk. - "Howlin' Wolf"

bigmomma
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1793



WWW
« Reply #2 on: June 14, 2008, 03:20:43 AM »

 Shocked You seen the TAPE!!

 Cheesy Cheesy

I am happy that he got off.." I mean they need to get rapist and child KILLERS off of the darn street. Hell, these girl he are with are not snatched from their OWN bedroom  or from their front yard ..."
Logged


Keba
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +0/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 715



« Reply #3 on: June 14, 2008, 08:02:54 AM »

Unbelievable!  I can't believe he got off either,  especially not completely off.  I thought he'd surely get some type of punishment this time.  I don't understand it!  Huh  Do y'all think R. Kelly paid people off to effect such an outcome? 
Logged

I know a lot about a lot AND even more about nothing...

oceanus1
Guest
« Reply #4 on: June 14, 2008, 03:50:28 PM »

I am also shocked.  And no, I don't think the jury was "paid off". although I have no clue why they acquitted him.

Any adult having sex with a 14 yr old IS a rapist and a child molester.  A child does not have to be abducted from their bedroom and killed in order for it to be a crime or harmful.  R. Kelley is worse than those scum on NBC Dateline "To Catch a Predator".  Most of them are in jail, and that's where he should be.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2008, 04:07:17 PM by oceanus1 » Logged

mochagirl1
Full Member
***

Karma: +2/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 161


« Reply #5 on: June 15, 2008, 01:11:47 AM »

I wasn't really shocked.  Everyone I knew touts him as the greatest thing since our early greats like Marvin Gaye.  I don't think so (sorry shepherd).  I don't like his music (repetitive, unimaginative, etc.) but he has alot of supporters.  Most people I knew were blaming the girl.  They were like "She knew what she was doing, she was probably out there already."  So I kind of had a feeling that's how it would turn out.  Unfortunately, most people don't see an older Black man with a young Black girl as rape.  They're more prone to just say "It's all her fault, she's a fast little girl that should have known better."  It's a shame, but most of the young girls I know who got pregnant at an early age were by men in R. Kelly's age group. 
Logged

Ndgo
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


Ponong nomboo o daat doiti' ? (Malaysian)


« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2008, 06:21:33 AM »

Quote
Jurors said that fact that neither the alleged victim nor her parents testified weakened the prosecution. But the real key was the woman herself: One juror said he just was not sure the female was who prosecutors said she was — or that she was a minor when the tape was made.

Another said that while he was convinced it was Kelly on the tape, he had doubts about the female. "What we had wasn't enough," said the juror, who declined to give his name.
Reasonable Doubt.... That's all it takes and the defendant goes free. While I personally have no doubt that it was indeed Mr. Kelly on the tape WITH a child...sexually and emotionally violating her... in this case, I too would have sided with the jury. In our system of justice, gut-feelings don't count. The Prosecutors HAVE TO prove their case and they couldn't... kinda hard to do when you have an alleged victim saying... "It wasn't me"... so that't it... that's the way the cookie crumbles....

BUT this does serve as a warning to all parents out there.... you have to watch out for the R. Kelly's of this world. They are up to no good... I mean, c'mon now... R. Kelly is no stranger to having inappropriate relationships with young girls... look at Aaliyah (may she rest in peace). Her parents were livid.... but powerless... when it came to their relationship because they handed her over to the pervert on a silver platter.

Watch out for men that have an inordinate interest in your child... period. Their motivations could be stemming from some very deep dark sick desire. I just don't know what it is about these old men wanting young nubile females. What do they really get out of it? Shep... your thoughts on that... I just dunno   Undecided
Logged

very sweet and not at all harsh and bitter... Smiley

Ndgo
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


Ponong nomboo o daat doiti' ? (Malaysian)


« Reply #7 on: June 15, 2008, 06:56:34 AM »

Quote
  R. Kelley is worse than those scum on NBC Dateline "To Catch a Predator".  Most of them are in jail, and that's where he should be.
You know, that show makes me feel very uncomfortable. Their tactics are very, very suspect to me. They pose as children BUT they also lured those men over to the house with very sexualized conversatons... shoot, some of the stuff that's supposedly being typed by that "child" is so explicit, dirty and nasty they have to blur it out. Do real children actually type that kind of stuff? I dunno... If so, then the parents have a lot of explaining to do. And that's the piece that's missing for me.

Makes me feel very itchy after watching it because those men, while some may be predators, are not knocking down a door to get at a child... they are walking right through the door WITH an invitation. These "predators" couldn't get in without the child providing information about where they live, and time schedules for when noboby's home along with enough smut talk to get predator over to the house... And in those cases, I think we'd need to see a parent on tape and on the ground surrounded by SWAT... because THAT's who's really at fault.

It's the type of bait that they use that troubles me. They entice and then set up a snare... I dunno... I just dunno....
Logged

very sweet and not at all harsh and bitter... Smiley

devineone
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1364


The sound of joyous laughter lifts me up.


« Reply #8 on: June 15, 2008, 07:37:45 AM »

You know, that show makes me feel very uncomfortable. Their tactics are very, very suspect to me. They pose as children BUT they also lured those men over to the house with very sexualized conversatonsIf so, then the parents have a lot of explaining to do. And that's the piece that's missing for me.

Makes me feel very itchy after watching it because those men, while some may be predators, are not knocking down a door to get at a child... they are walking right through the door WITH an invitation. These "predators" couldn't get in without the child providing information about where they live, and time schedules for when noboby's home along with enough smut talk to get predator over to the house... And in those cases, I think we'd need to see a parent on tape and on the ground surrounded by SWAT... because THAT's who's really at fault.
It's the type of bait that they use that troubles me. They entice and then set up a snare... I dunno... I just dunno....
Ndgo I feel the exact same way about that show!  I commented on it in the Let's revisit the rape thread.  IMO, it is an entrapment situation and how does that hold up in court?  It sensationalizes internet sex solicitation with the "underage" girl in the starring role.  I think that show is ridiculous!  I wrote a letter to the today show. (Because at one point, the Today show was always showing clips from "To catch a Predator".

I said that the show should emphasize what parents need to do in order to monitor their children's computer behavior.  That if an underage girl is trawling the internet looking for sex, then that points to a lack of parenting and that the show is doing a disservice to the viewers by not emphasizing this aspect of it.  I think the show is one-sided in that it didn't advocate preventative behavior for these "underage girl sex solicitors".  It almost took the implied stance, that what these girls were doing is OK".  That's why I say the law is flawed at least when it comes to sex crimes with minors in some instances. 
« Last Edit: June 15, 2008, 03:18:13 PM by devineone » Logged

"A note can be as small as a pin or as big as the world, it depends on your imagination."

Thelonious Monk

oceanus1
Guest
« Reply #9 on: June 15, 2008, 07:42:02 AM »

Ndgo, in the Dateline Predator shows that I’ve seen (and I’ve seen most of them) the decoys set up a profile of say, a 13yo old girl, go into a chatroom and just wait.  Within a couple minutes guys flock to them, and the sex talk is always, always, without exception initiated by the guys.  The entrapment/enticement defense doesn't hold up.  I read some of the transcripts online and I really didn’t see any nasty talk from the decoys (who are really adults).  In every case where a nude pic (full body or just genitals) is transmitted, it is always sent by the guys (predators).  These guys show up with liquor, condoms, sex toys, etc.

In most states it’s against the law to solicit sex from someone who says he/she is a minor and it’s a federal offense to sent nude pics over the internet to someone who says he/she is a minor.

As far as enticing, even if a real 13 yo girl/boy walks on the street naked and begs a grown azz man to have sex, it’s still illegal.  That’s hardly the case on To Catch a Predator.
Logged

devineone
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1364


The sound of joyous laughter lifts me up.


« Reply #10 on: June 15, 2008, 08:12:01 AM »

I hear what you're saying Oceanus and I do think these men are sick peverts.  However that show still leaves a bad taste in my mouth for some reason.  Someone once said, "Whatever you focus on you strengthen."  I think by constantly focusing on these underage girls soliciting sex by establishing profiles in chat rooms and opening themselves up for these predators, Dateline sensationlizes inappropriate behavior in young girls.  Dateline should combat that negativity by focusing on and emphasizing preventative methods, positive and productive activities for these underage girls to become involved.

This show may give negative ideas to some troubled young girl sufferng from low self esteem who may not even be thinking about doing this, but they'll see it on TV and in order to get some 'attention" even if it's negative inappropriate attention, they may just do what they see. 

While I do agree with the message, that adult men who seek out sex with with minors are peverts and should be punished by law.  I don't like the way Dateline goes about doing this.  Why couldn't the show give parents tips on what they could do to prevent this from happening to their child?  Why couldn't the show offer ideas for young girls to get involved in constructive activity that will occupy their time so they'll spend less of it in chat rooms?
I didn't watch the show, but saw bits and pieces of it, on the Today Show and just those bits and pieces I saw, left a bad taste in my mouth.  Dateline has the right idea, but they're going about it the wrong way IMO.
« Last Edit: June 15, 2008, 06:22:56 PM by devineone » Logged

"A note can be as small as a pin or as big as the world, it depends on your imagination."

Thelonious Monk

Legacy
Brothas (male posters)
Hero Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 2655


I betcha a buck fifty, ya can't f@$# wit me!!


« Reply #11 on: June 15, 2008, 09:50:14 AM »

*smh*

The only thing about R. Kelly is not only do they have video tape but they had precedent in Aaliyah. Dude is pedophile & I can't defend that.


Logged

My mic's the gavel when I talk courts adjourned
Respect even if you were ashes you couldn't earn  © Pharoahe Monch

Ndgo
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


Ponong nomboo o daat doiti' ? (Malaysian)


« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2008, 12:37:31 PM »

...the decoys set up a profile of say, a 13yo old girl, go into a chatroom and just wait.  Within a couple minutes guys flock to them, and the sex talk is always, always, without exception initiated by the guys.  The entrapment/enticement defense doesn't hold up. 
Yep, that's how it usually happens.... I'm not saying that these guys don't initiate contact... because they do... all you have to do sometimes is have female on your profile... but what I am saying is that the "kids" have to play along and encourage the adults in order for the deal to be sealed... how else do they get these guys to come to the house. These guys aren't googling kids, stealing addresses and stalking kids to find out when parents aren't home.  They are getting the invite and encouragement directly from the horses mouth. What I'm saying is that the "kids" have to play along and without that... there'd be NO SHOW.... AND while I do believe that what these guys eventual do is criminal... it's a weird give and take dynamic that isn't solved by putting just one party behind bars.  There is a problem INSIDE the home that's being exploited by an adult true... but without getting to the meat of the problem... these are the sorts of kids that are prone to engaging in unlawful sexual encounters... on the net and off. And policing doesn't get at the root-cause...
Logged

very sweet and not at all harsh and bitter... Smiley

Ndgo
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


Ponong nomboo o daat doiti' ? (Malaysian)


« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2008, 12:49:25 PM »

.... Dateline sensationlizes inappropriate behavior in young girls.  ...While I do agree with the message, that adult men who seek out sex with with minors are peverts and should be punished by law.  I don't like the way Dateline goes about doing this.  Why couldn't the show give parents tips on what they could do to prevent this from happening to their child?  Why couldn't the show offer ideas for young girls to get involved in constructive activity that will occupy their time so they'll spend less of it in chat rooms?
ITA... this is more my take on the situation...It's the whole Lolita-ization of our young girls. And it's all over the TV, in ads, on the runway... the sexualization of our children at such a very young age. The door in many homes is left unlocked and wide open. And although these young people are far too young to see the consequences of their actions or choices... no matter how inappropriate and criminal and hurtful... these children are making choices... we have to teach our children HOW to say no.

A predator approaching your kid online or in real life should be an easy out IF they are taught at an early age how to respect themselves and given a strong sense of right and wrong. Parents have to arm their kids with the knowledge early on. And I do think it's possible if we stop giving so much attention to the perverts. Don't put the onus on the pervert NOT to be perverted with your kid. Ahhhhh... that NEVER works. That's what they do. The onus should be on the parents to properly outfit their kids to withstand and survive the pressures in this world as it is... not how they'd like it to be.
Logged

very sweet and not at all harsh and bitter... Smiley

Ndgo
Sistah's (female posters)
Sr. Member
*

Karma: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 1297


Ponong nomboo o daat doiti' ? (Malaysian)


« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2008, 01:03:39 PM »


Ndgo I feel the exact same way about that show!  I commented on it in the Let's revisit the rape thread.  IMO, it is an entrapment situation and how does that hold up in court?  It sensationalizes internet sex solicitation with the "underage" girl in the starring role.  I think that show is ridiculous!  I wrote a letter to the today show. (Because at one point, the Today show was always showing clips from "To catch a Predator".
Oh, okay -- Let me go look over there to see what you said. You are probably the only other person I've heard of that had a problem with the show. I'm just not a fan of what I've seen. And I do believe that we have to expand our vocabulary for these sorts of sexual encounters... The term rape is used far too broadly imho. It's a far more complicated dynamic and our laws have a difficult time labeling these sorts of encounters.

Several years back... a step-relative of mine had a incident with her 14-year old daughter... constantly running away from home.... the mother knew exactly where to find this child and had a hard time finding an agency to press charges against the adult involved. Didn't matter how her mother tried to pry her away... and labeling the encounter as rape just complicated everything, stopping the investigation cold. And yes, there were serious problems inside the home that were never addressed. Shoot, we are not even allowed to talk about it. This child's youth wasn't stolen away as much as it was freely given away.

We have to learn how to be better parents!!!  The dangers our children face will ALWAYS be there. We have to give them tools on how to cope and successfully navigate around the minefields.
Logged

very sweet and not at all harsh and bitter... Smiley

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 6   Go Up
Print
 
Jump to: