Ottensen said:

Yeah I heard Wendy took a lot of flak for her interview with Carey. Now that it's played back with the trial, his statements actually make MORE sense.

JackieBlue said:

Now I know that's right!

SCNDLS said:

Girl, back then when it was first aired I don't even remember if youtube existed...I imagine SOMEBODY is going to upload this SOMEWHERE on the net

Carey said his daughter got into a fight when she defended her daddy for not being on that tape.

Carey can't rap for shit.
[Edited 5/22/08 13:53pm]

purplecam said:

Sure can't.

That’s it? I could have sworn there was more. I must be combining everything I’ve heard her say about R. into that darn interview.

JackieBlue said:

Yeah must've been. Her interview with Carey was probably that length anyway.

So did they play the sex tape to the court? I don't feel like reading all these posts.

musicjunky318 said:

Yeah that was one of the first things they did in the trial. On the official first day (after jury selection), they showed it after opening arguments.

Prosecutors try to prove Kelly, victim are on sex tape

By MICHAEL TARM – 56 minutes ago

CHICAGO (AP) — A former backup singer for R. Kelly cried at his child pornography trial Thursday as she described introducing the R&B star to her relative, the alleged victim in the sex tape, at a Chicago music studio when the girl was 12 or 13.

"He liked her spirit. She was a very jolly person," said Stephanie Edwards.

She also leaned forward and identified the Grammy winner as the same man she saw on a sex tape at the center of the trial.

Before testifying, Edwards watched the videotape; during testimony she said she was sure her relative appeared on it having sex with Kelly.

"You know your blood ... you just know your family," she said.

The testimony is part of prosecutors' attempt to prove to the jury that the two people on the 27-minute homemade video are Kelly and the alleged victim. Both he and the female — now 23 years old — have denied they are in the footage.

Kelly, 41, is charged with 14 counts of child pornography for allegedly videotaping himself having sex with an underage girl. He has pleaded not guilty and faces up to 15 years in prison if convicted.

Edwards, who was a background singer on one of Kelly's albums, testified that her relative was fond of Kelly and "took to him as a father figure."

Cross-examination of Edwards got heated, with the defense grilling her about a falling out she had with Kelly around 2000, two years after Kelly produced her debut album.

Defense attorney Ed Genson suggested Edwards — whose stage name is "Sparkle" — may have hatched a plot aimed at "getting Robert," referring to Kelly's given name.

"Of course not, " Edwards responded. "I was cool with Robert."

Genson and Edwards talked over each other at one point. Genson suggested Edwards may have tried to squeeze money out of the R&B superstar.

Edwards replied with a raised voice: "Sweetie, I'm not trying to get money out of this."

"I'm not your sweetie!" Genson shouted into a courtroom microphone, the room booming.

At that point, Judge Vincent Gaughan intervened and told both Edwards and Genson to calm down and stop talking over each other.

"This is a court of law," Gaughan said.

Earlier Thursday, a college student testified that she recognized both the female in the tape and Kelly, saying the female was a minor when the video was made.

Audrey Hampton testified Thursday she played basketball with the alleged victim and went to school with her for several years. She told the jury "there's no question" that the female on the tape is her childhood friend at age 13 or 14.

Hampton, a 23-year-old senior studying business marketing at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, also said the alleged victim introduced her to Kelly at a party at a downtown Chicago basketball court. She said that rumors started to spread in her neighborhood about a sex tape with her friend in it.

Asked by a prosecutor how she recognized her friend, the witness said she recognized her face, voice, as well as some of her mannerisms in the tape, including "the way she licked the bottom of her lip."

Under cross-examination, Hampton conceded that she wouldn't be able to recognize her childhood friend's body.

Hampton's mother, Mary Kay Jerit, testified earlier in the day and said she found the sex tape in her daughter's room in early 2000. She said she viewed parts of it herself, and then threw the tape into the garbage.

Sam Adam Jr., one of Kelly's attorneys, asked Hampton and her mother if they handed over the tape to authorities that they suspected was child pornography. Both women conceded that they had not.

Adam has told the jury that neither Kelly nor the alleged victim are the two people on the tape.

Thursday's testimony followed an incident and the arrest of a 48-year-old woman who screamed "Free R. Kelly" at the jurors in the case as they stepped off an elevator near the courtroom.

Police immediately grabbed Debra Triplet and led her away in handcuffs. Gaughan later ordered her held on contempt charges in lieu of $50,000 bond.

Gaughan asked jurors before the proceedings if they'd heard what the woman had screamed. None of the jurors said they'd heard her, and testimony continued.

----
SPARKLE TESTIFIED.

Timmy84 said:

GOOD. Thanks Tim.

And to me, it seems like the defense doesn't know how to control their own emotions. Already one of them yelled at three of the family members of the girl and another yelled when Sparkle called one of them "sweetie". This is what happens on shows like "Law & Order"! The prosecutor always tries to tell the guy or lady to admit to guilt and when they throw their opinion back, the guy almost yells as if he's bleeding on the inside and then the judge warns him to cool it.

musicjunky318 said:

Ur welcome.

Who was the dumbass defending R. Kelly!

bboy87 said:

A female fan.

Timmy84 said:

I bet her dumb Ass is sitting in her cell wishing she had never step foot in that court house

banks said:

I know, right?

banks said:

or she's getting the top bunk ready for "Arruh"

bboy87 said:

LOL, the woman was reportedly 49. Stupid-ass, lol.

Timmy84 said:

She's 35 years too old

bboy87 said:

R. Kelly Defense Returns the Favor
Today 3:47 PM PDT by Natalie Finn

The jury had the day off. The judge—and possibly a few witnesses—weren't so lucky.

While court was adjourned Friday, Cook County Judge Vincent Gaughan spent the day hearing arguments from both sides after he was informed that R. Kelly's camp wants charges brought against some of the prosecution's witnesses.

The R&B singer's lawyers are claiming that, if the people who testified they possessed a copy of the sex tape—which Kelly is accused of making with an underage girl years ago—did not ever alert authorities, then they are guilty of child pornography. (Despite the fact that the defense has argued that the tape may have been doctored and that the illicit intimate encounter never occurred at all.)

Prosecutor Shauna Boliker didn't reveal which witnesses the defense is looking at and she and Kelly's team met with Gaughan in closed chambers, but the Chicago Sun-Times questions whether Kelly's team is planning to point the finger at a woman who's planning to testify she had a threesome with Kelly and the girl said to be on the tape.

The defense has also requested a subpoena for Sun-Times reporter Jim DeRogatis, who first received the tape from an anonymous source and turned it over to police in 2002. Kelly's people are suggesting the journalist may have committed a crime by making and keeping a copy of the lewd video.

Meanwhile, adding to the four people who have already positively identified the alleged victim, another relative of the girl's (and a former Kelly protégé), Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards, testified Thursday she was the one who introduced her young relative to Kelly.

An attorney arranged for her to see the tape in 2001, she said.

Edwards also warded off the defense's accusation that she was testifying against the Grammy winner because she was bitter about the end of their business relationship after he produced her eponymous debut album in 1998.

"He was my homeboy. We were still cool," Edwards said.

Testimony is scheduled to resume Tuesday morning.

I was startin' to get worried. . . I came through here earlier and there weren't any new updates since yesterday. I was all: "Whaaaaattttt, Timmy and Bboy ain't got no new updates???? I hope them fools didn't fall off the planet (cuz that's apparently the ONLIEST thang that would keep ya'll from telling the Org what's goin' on with Sylvester's case ) Welcome back

Timmy84 said:

Uh-oh. . . this sounds like a potential loophole. We better keep our fingers crossed that the defense doesn't succeed in this attempt to bring the witnesses up on charges.
[Edited 5/23/08 19:11pm]

SCNDLS said:

You know they would try that since so many said they identify the girl though they claim the girl is a prostitute though I haven't heard them say she wasn't underage.

Looks like the guy who sent authorities the tape won't testify if the judge's emotion remains the way it was when it was brought up:

Kelly's lawyers seek charges against state's witness

R. Kelly's attorneys are trying to have witnesses for the prosecution charged with crimes, it emerged in court this morning as the defense continued its pursuit of Sun-Times reporter Jim DeRogatis.

The jury has the day off but Judge Gaughan spent much of this morning in a secret hearing with both sides after prosecutor Shauna Boliker revealed that Kelly's attorneys have asked that state's witnesses be charged.

Boliker did not say which witnesses the defense wants charged, or with what, but Kelly's team has repeatedly questioned this week why witnesses who had seen the sex tape at the center of the case did not contact police sooner.

The defense has also suggested several times that anyone who possessed a copy of the tape committed the crime of child pornography, including DeRogatis.

It's also possible that the defense wants witnesses who have yet to testify charged. The Sun-Times exclusively reported two weeks ago that a state's witness was prepared to testify that she participated in a taped three-way romp with Kelly and the alleged victim.

The defense may be seeking to have that witness charged with child pornography, but until the judge unseals the defense's motion, there's no way of knowing.

During Friday's hearing, defense attorney Marc Martin repeated his demand that DeRogatis testify for the defense, arguing that DeRogatis had "immersed himself in these proceedings" by passing the sex tape to police.

He said he expected DeRogatis would undermine Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards' testimony and that establishing the circumstances in which the tape found its way into police custody was "crucial to the defense."

Sun-Times attorney Damon Dunn said DeRogatis would assert his "reporter's privilege" against testifying. And Boliker said she could not see what DeRogatis could add to what has already been said in court.

Gaughan seemed unimpressed with the defense's attempts to force DeRogatis to take the stand, telling Martin that he was failing to make a convincing case.

Martin then claimed that Kelly had a Sixth Amendment right to call whatever witnesses he wanted.

But Gaughan responded, "You don't have a right to call (just) anybody as a witness, or the trial would last until infinity."

The judge indicated he would rule next Friday on whether DeRogatis must appear.

Speaking outside court, Dunn said it was clear that the defense "would rather have a reporter on trial than their defendant."

Also during Friday's morning hearing, the prosecution asked Gaughan to reconsider his decision to forbid a doctor from testifying. The state says the doctor would testify why the alleged victim might not be prepared to admit it's her on the tape.

The trial is set to continue Tuesday morning.

The fans that defend this sick bastard are just as bad as he is.
If it was an average joe blow who committed this act, the same
people would be singing a different tune. I don't get the infatuation
with this guy.

phunkdaddy said:

I advise you not to visit the Chicago Tribune, you can tell their take on the case is basically pro-Kelly, bringing up the loud cross examination by his defense. In the latest one, they mention five things that is supposedly not known about Kells, like who gives a fuck? And also you have some of his fans always saying stupid ish to defend him. I don't think the judge will give the defense leeway to do what they ask him to but I hope for the prosecution's sake that the doctor should be brought to court, that way maybe we won't see a deadlocked, hung jury.

Someone please post pictures after he is found guilty. I want to see them take him away in handcuffs.

Absolutely 100% GUILTY