Judge allows R. Kelly tape viewing
Public and media can see what prosecutors say proves child pornography charges
The Associated Press
Originally published June 9, 2006, 9:19 AM EDT
CHICAGO // A judge will allow the public and the media to view a videotape in court that prosecutors allege shows singer R. Kelly having sex with an underage girl.

In his ruling Thursday, Judge Vincent Gaughan said he saw no "overarching interest" in banning the tape from public view.





"This is the whole crux and linchpin of the case," Gaughan said. "If there was no tape, we wouldn't have a case."

Kelly has pleaded not guilty to 14 counts of child pornography. Prosecutors claim the videotape was made sometime during a nearly three-year span between January 1998 and October 2000, when the girl may have been as young as 13.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys had asked Gaughan to limit the viewing of the video to only jurors, attorneys and the judge himself. They argued that the video is so lewd it would embarrass the girl, who is now 21.
Assistant Cook County State's Attorney Shauna Boliker said prosecutors do not plan to call the girl as a witness.

A trial date has not been set.

IT
WAS
HIS
BROTHER

When did these video first surface? I mean surely the statute of limitations will of elasped by the time case actually goes to court. What stage is the trial at?

it's been a while, the trial just started didn't it? I think the tapes came out before the Micheal Jackson trial.

Why any one tape this and let it get "out"? What a clown.

Adisa said:

HOW
COULD
THE
MOFO
GO
TO
JAIL
IN
THE
FIRST
PLACE?

HE
STILL
TRAPPED
IN
THAT
STUPID
CLOSET,
AIN'T
HE?

I'm so sick of watching that dvd...

ABeautifulOne said:

lol

ABeautifulOne said:

the sad thing is that there was more than one.....this fool taped a bunch of sex acts and he is such a horrible lay


according to what I've seen ....
[Edited 6/9/06 14:31pm]

The REAL sad part is that if this was a white girl(s) he had done this to, the trial would've started 2 weeks after the tape/allegations came down, but since it's "just" some black girls...no hurry.

StoneCrib said:

damn... you know that never even crossed my mind....

you might have a point there...

StoneCrib said:

WORD!!!!! If he had "pissed" on Paris or Nicky Hilton, tha ni**a would be UNDER THA JAIL (parts 1-12)!!!!!

StoneCrib said:

I never thought of that but you are so correct. It's taken what 4 and half years for this trial to finally happen. That's bull and race does play a part most definetly.

butterfli25 said:

wayy b4 mjs trial

Moonwalkbjrain said:

like.. 2001

EmbattledWarrior said:

co sign, this is one of the first things that came to mind when i noticed the shit had still not gone to trial

CinisterCee said:

yea, thats what always messed w/ me. mikes thing went to trial like that! with little evidence. this s.o.b got a damn VIDEO where u can tell its his ass, but 4 or 5 yrs later and it STILL aint go to trial!

Moonwalkbjrain said:

it's pathetic isn't it?

purplecam said:

extremely.

EmbattledWarrior said:

Trust me on that one, my friend.

woogiebear said:

purplecam said:

Yup.

Moonwalkbjrain said:

That has really pissed me off, also. They had NO evidence in MJ's trial, just a bunch of bullshit that was manipulated to embarrass and slander him. THAT case should never have even been filed. If it had been anyone but Michael, it would have been laughed out of court. You would have had to know the facts of this case, and you would be saying the same thing as I am. The media was pro-prosecution and reported what was happening in courtroom with a bias against the defense. This is the reason that I wish that the trial had been televised. If the public had seen what the prosecution called "evidence", they would have said "WTF"? The jury was intelligent enough to see through the bullcrap.

I agree that if R.Kelly accuser had been white, he would have been tried, found guilty and put under the jail. This case has basically been ignored by the media and they have a VIDEO with him caught in the act. They crucified Michael over rumors, innuendo, manipulation and fabricated "evidence." It makes me want to vomit to see the injustice of how they did him and how the media and public is basically ignoring the R.Kelly case. It's like they don't care because the girl was black and because the prosecutor doesn't have a vendetta to get Kelly. By the time that this goes to trial, if it ever gets to trial(5 years later), people will have forgotten what he was accused of.

The Boondock's episode "The Trial of R. Kelly" was probably the funniest thing i saw on TV in 2005.

Highly Recommend it!!

Rhondab said:

Exactly, especially the one part where he had that woman laying back in a chair and he was looking like Buckwheat's twin cousin or something...

skyecute said:

You hit right on with this dawg. The sad thing is that the public by large still
supports this clown by buying his music and BET promotes his ass like he is the
best artist to ever come out while Mint Condition are real music artists who struggles
to get promotion from BET and you figure if anyone should support Mint Condition
it should be BET. Stokley is far better than R.Kelly as a singer and
accomplished musician. Back to the subject. R.Kelly has a history of situations
with teenage girls. It just goes to show if you have money you can get away with
anything. Any other sexual predators who are just everyday people are arrested
with the quickness and thrown under the jail. It is unfortunate that justice
does not get served in this case.

If there were little boys in the video, he would have been to trial.


and if she was even younger. There are many who suggest this girl was consenting AND very experienced so therefore its different.

StoneCrib said:

Great point.....and No DOUBT true.

Rhondab said:

Another true statement.