So, I just read an article and they're finally starting to pick a jury for the R Kelly Trial. Wow, when did that incident occur again, like five plus years ago? Ain't being rich and famous great? I'm sure if Joe Average were to pee all over a fourteen year old girl (and be stupid enough to FILM himself doing it), he'd probably be in JAIL shortly thereafter.
And this isn't a matter of the courts being slow, either. Kelly's lawyers have been intentionally delaying the trial with more and more and motions and various other stall tactics, presumably to give the victim time to grow up, as a young woman will probably engender less sympathy than a young girl, and since Kelley sitting in jail during all of this, he feel NO motive to speed things up.
Ah, ain't being a celeb great?
Good. I hope he gets at least 5 years. Then he can see what it feels like to be the one being peed on.
Quote from: Killer Bees on May 11, 2008, 10:35:35 PM
Good. I hope he gets at least 5 years. Then he can see what it feels like to be the one being peed on.
Karma for THAT!!!
Also, I think some good came out of this becuse we now have Trapped In The Closet.
It's about time. But I must disagree somewhat with BTM. Being a celebrity in this case is not what is so great. Having the money that this celebrity has, to hire the best legal talent possible, is what is so great.
Quote from: BoyScoutKevin on May 20, 2008, 11:25:51 AM
It's about time. But I must disagree somewhat with BTM. Being a celebrity in this case is not what is so great. Having the money that this celebrity has, to hire the best legal talent possible, is what is so great.
Well, that's true, but him being a celeb is going to taint the jury pool because they'll be all starry-eyed and thinking, "Oh, he's so talented, he couldn't have done something like this!" etc, etc.
The jury panel may already be tainted. Or, I imagine that is the claim that the defense will raise, if he is convicted of the crime. Both the prosecution and the defense have a certain number of challenges, which they can use to strike potential jurors from the final selection of jurors. And the prosecution used its challenges to strike most of the black potential jurors from the final jury panel. So, now the jury is predominantly white, thus the taint. Or, so I imagine the defense will claim.
A little more news on the subject.
The judge has ruled that the jury can see the film that supposedly shows R. Kelly engaging in sex with an underaged girl. R. Kelly denies that he is the man in the film. Which makes sense. If I was R. Kelly, I deny it, too. What is more surprising is that the girl, who I suppose is suppose to testify against R. Kelly, denies that she is the girl in the film, too.
Just an update on the case, I got no further than the headlines, but it looks like R. Kelly was found not guilty.
(http://images.askmen.com/video/2007_mar/mar27_dave_chappelle.jpg)
"drip drip drip....."
Yep. R. Kelly was found not guilty.