Is R. Kelly a serial kiddie sexual predator prevert or a wrongly targeted celebrity?
Regardless of which answer you choose it finally appears that the “R Kelly Saga” which which has taken longer to unfold than it took Tolstoy to write War and Peace is finally going to have some closure. Whether that closure is sound of steel bars closing behind Kelly for up to 15 years remains to be seen. Jury selection has finally started.
I have met R. Kelly. I met him in 2003 when he played a charity benefit concert at the American Airlines Center in Dallas. I actually hate his music. I was there on behalf of one of the charities the concert benefitted.
The sex tape scandal had broken the year before and at that time the big issue was whether he would be allowed to leave the state of Illinois to play concerts. At the time I was vaguely aware of the allegations against him but not being fan, vaguely was as much as I knew.
He seemed like a nice enough guy. It was not like he said, “”I’m R Kelly and I like to video myself with very young girls, you know any? By the way, nice to meet you…
The 41-year-old singer, whose real name is Robert Kelly, faces charges stemming from a 15-minute videotape that authorities say was made with a girl as young as 13 sometime between Jan. 1, 1998, and Nov. 1, 2000. The singer has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Regardless of whether you believe he should go to prison or is unfairly targeted, it can not be disputed that the R Kelly case is a prime example of a judicial system gone completely haywire. Let us take a look at the bizarre legal chain of events:
1. The case has been plagued by delays from the beginning, with the defense and prosecution blaming each other. There have to be stats on there on how delays of this length significantly reduce the chances of getting a conviction in a criminal case. It can not be favorable to the prosecution. This case has to be close to setting some kind of record for judicial delay in a criminal trial.
Someone explain to me how the state allows a case that hinges solely on the credibility of witness take six years to come to trial. The have been some legitimate delays but none of the type to make six years reasonable. Were they hoping to keep delaying in the hopes the victim would suddenly change her story and admit it was her? Are we letting a singers celebrity status dictate the course of justice? This was not a case where the passage of time helps the prosecution. I don’t get it.
2. The victim herself denies it was her in the video. She denied her involvement to the grand jury in 2002 and has never changed her story. She will probably testify on R Kelly’s behalf.
3. In an effort to contradict the alleged victim and bolster testimony of her friends and other witnesses prosecutors have petitioned Cook County Judge Vincent Gaughan to let them present evidence at trial of what they say are other crimes Kelly has committed.
When you’re entire case becomes about ‘bolstering” you are behind the “eight ball” bigtime.
4.. The prosecutions entire case is based on calling the victim a liar and using testimony of friends and confidants to show that there is a pattern of behavior by R. Kelly including a witness who says she had a three way with R. Kelly and the victim.
So let’s see, you are going to attack your victim and use testimony regarding other acts not involving the videotape in question. You have an entirely circumstantial case. You have no direct evidence that it is even R. Kelley or the girl on the tape. It appears your entire case is hinging on another girl saying she had a three way with the victim and R Kelly and then identifying and “carbon dating” the victim in the tape. There is going to be nothing left of that witness when the defense finishes with her.
I would rather be waterboarded than stake my life on the prediction of a jury verdict but I don’t think I am going to far out on a limb in predicting an acquittal for R Kelly.
What do you think? Targeted Celeb? Righteous Bust? Monster waste of money?
Maybe being labeled a “pervert pewee king” was just what R. Kelly needed for his career….
A strange kharma……
BLOG UPDATE 6/13/08 R.Kelly was found not guilty. You can read the story here.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
May 13th, 2008 at 2:26 am
First of all, I think this guy is probably lower than pond scum. And how does our judicial system allow the witness more probable grief on the stand from the defense attorneys than the defendant himself? And why is the alleged victim not pressing charges?
With all that said, he (the defendent) is allowed due process. According to the YouTube, he had a burst appendex and a judge fell off a ladder which contributed to the court delays. But the guy is entitled to a fair trial. This thing looks like nothing more than a witch hunt assuming jurors won’t be able to identify him or the girl in the video. It comes down to numbers, 2 to 1 in favor of R. Kelly and the 13 year old girl who will paid a king’s ransom for lying for him.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:33 am
@LewP: In a criminal trial, the state is the “complainant that presses charges. They can choose to proceed with the case even without the cooperation of the victim. This happens all the time in domestic abuse cases.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:43 am
Duly noted Brian and thanks for the clarification. I guess my thing is without solid proof to me there’s no case. I wonder about that 3rd person though. Why can’t that be enough for the potential jurors to convict him? Will the credibility of her statements be so skewed in court that she will be found unreliable? Will the defendent have to take the stand? Probably not huh?
May 14th, 2008 at 1:04 am
LewP, did you even read the story you’re commenting on? You’re a tool and a prime example of why I agree I’d rather be waterboarded than stand a jury trial (assuming you’re in the jury).
May 14th, 2008 at 1:17 am
R. Kelly’s forever
May 14th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
i dont think that you all read this and i think that you need to go back and re-read it.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Prosecutors generally have better things to do than chase losing cases. If they didn’t think they could convict R. Kelley, then they wouldn’t have pursued him this long. There are also not fool enough to share their evidence on the internet either so unless we are in the courtroom, it is unlikely we will ever know the extent of their evidence.
Witch hunt? No.
(found you via Blogrush by the way…)
Michael M.s last blog post..Deal’s Organizational Principle
May 15th, 2008 at 4:14 am
@Michael M.: As a general rule I agree but I absolutely disagree that it does not go on. It happens in sexual and domestic violence cases all the time. Prosecutor may not feel he/he has enough to convict but presents the case to the grand jury. The grand jury may in fact indict even though the state feels they will probably not get a conviction. They will proceed with the case regardless.
May 17th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
This jerk is guilty and it’s an embarrassment that so, many black women are out there screaming innocent good man when he has paid off other civil cases for child sex/assualt and child porn was found on his computer in Florida, but can’t be used because it was an illegal search.
May 29th, 2008 at 2:48 am
Unfortunately, we are left trying to defend a black man that did wrong. Sadly, R. Kelly has been doing this sort of thing for YEARS! This is only one tape. There are others. Remember the video and photos in Florida? They WERE him and she WAS underaged as well. They had to dismiss because they acquired the evidence illegally. LOL Basically, they were in his gym bag, someone saw them, told the police, they saw them, but it was illegal. No probable cause and good attorneys. He had them on a computer at his Florida home as well. That also had to be throwm out. That cause him to be arrested.
He owned the home where the video in question was taken. His spa, his camera, HIM!… Hard to defend that. He since sold the house, had it fixed up, to fool you into believing it was not the same sauna. BUT, he had it on videos, and it was on an episode of Cribs.
Remember Aliayah? Well that’s the only one we do remember. He has paid off at least four other young women that had threathened to sue him. Most were very young, and I believe one was 18 when he stopped messing with her. Those cases CAN’T be mentioned in this case because they don’t apply to this case. They were already resolved. He has a history of this behavior. He just has not been caught, with the evidence. There is evidence in this case.
That mole..lol Well anyone with bad acne understands, it wasn’t a mole, it was a zit. And it’s still there. Depends on how the defense wants to address it. And with plasic surgery out there, there is no telling. What if he had it removed? Is he lying or was there a legal ruling which caused it to go away. A good lawyer, expensive lawyer can get you out of alot of things. Even if your “lying” eyes convince you. That lawyer can make you see something that never happened. Or vice versa. Remember Rodney King? 9/11? They told us, we didn’t quite see, what we thought we saw.
Before we defend him or anybody else, we have to be careful. He needs help and we need better “heroes”!