New topic
Printable Will R. Kelly's goddaughter testify?
R. Kelly is accused of filming himself having sex with his underage goddaughter. Now one huge question looms over his trial June 9, 2008 BY KIM JANSSEN AND ERIC HERMAN Staff Reporters Three weeks in, R. Kelly's child porn trial is coming to a boil -- with the defense expected to rest this week. Kelly, 41, will soon learn whether he has cleared his name or faces up to 15 years in jail for allegedly videotaping himself having sex with -- and urinating on -- his underage goddaughter. But as prosecutors and Kelly's expensive legal team prepare to make their closing arguments, two questions linger. Will the alleged victim testify on Kelly's behalf? And will the "mole defense" work? Jurors know the alleged victim refused to be a prosecution witness. They've also learned she told a grand jury it's not her on the notorious sex tape at the center of the case. But they haven't seen her face-to-face in the courtroom. Assuming she's willing to testify on Kelly's behalf, Kelly's attorneys may not yet have decided whether to call her, said Bob Loeb, a former prosecutor turned defense attorney. "They don't have to decide until the last moment, when they rest their case," Loeb said. "It's risky," Loeb said. "By calling her, you effectively reduce the entire defense to the believability of her testimony. . . . If the jury believes her when she says 'It isn't me,' that's a reasonable doubt and enough to acquit Kelly." "But if the jury thinks she's lying, it could wipe out all of the other doubts the defense has managed to raise," he added. Does it matter either way whether she testifies? "Maybe not," said California attorney Marc Mazzarella, a trial consultant and the author of the bestseller Reading People. "It's common in domestic abuse and sexual abuse cases for victims to testify for the defense, claiming they weren't abused. But prosecutors get convictions in those cases anyway," Mazzarella said. If the alleged victim does not testify, the mole defense could factor heavily in jurors' deliberations. It debuted in opening statements, when defense lawyer Sam Adam Jr. said Kelly has a mole on his back -- and asserted no mole can be seen on the back of the man in the tape. Prosecutors attacked that defense with video expert Grant Fredericks, who played a 17-frame clip in slow motion on a giant screen. A dark spot was clearly visible on the man's back. The defense responded last week with its own video expert, Charles Palm, who showed a lower-quality copy of the tape on which dark spots came and went from the man's back. Palm dismissed the spots as "video noise." Police photographs of Kelly showing a dark mole in the center of his back have been entered into evidence -- and are not in dispute. The photos were taken in 2002. The videotape was made in 1998, 1999 or 2000, prosecutors allege. "If the jury decides the guy in the video has no mole, and Kelly has a mole, then he wins," said defense lawyer Steve Greenberg. But, he said, "If their whole defense is predicated on 'this guy has no mole', and the jury decides the guy has a mole, the jury's going to feel deceived." Kim Janssen is a reporter for the SouthtownStar. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
R. Kelly lawyers try to revive tattered defenses
By MICHAEL TARM – 7 hours ago CHICAGO (AP) — R. Kelly's attorney guided his electric scooter down a hallway outside the courtroom where his client is on trial for child pornography, exclaiming as he sped past several reporters, "In the morning, we attack!" That battle cry last week from Ed Genson, who suffers from a neurological disorder that makes it difficult for him to walk, was apt: After two weeks of prosecution testimony, the R&B star's lawyers have a lot of ground to regain. After launching their defense days ago, Kelly's lawyers are endeavoring to breathe life back into several key claims when the case continues this week, including that a mole on Kelly's back proves his innocence and that a sex tape at the heart of the case could have been doctored, possibly as part of an extortion plot. Kelly, who won a Grammy Award in 1997 for "I Believe I Can Fly," has pleaded not guilty to child pornography for allegedly videotaping himself having sex with a female prosecutors say was at young as 13. If convicted, he faces up to 15 years in prison. Defense attorneys say neither Kelly nor the alleged victim are on the videotape, pointing to what they said in opening arguments was the absence of a fingernail-sized mole on the man's back in sex tape. Kelly, they noted, has such a mole. But the mole defense took a hit when a prosecution witness froze frames on the tape that showed a spot on a man's lower back — located in the same place as a mole on Kelly's back as it appears in 2002 police photos. On Thursday, however, the defense played their own frame-by-frame footage of the man's back for jurors. "Do you see a mole?" Kelly attorney Marc Martin asked defense witness Charles Palm. "I see a black mark but it doesn't appear to be a mole," the video expert replied. Palm also told jurors the spot appeared only intermittently — proof, he said, that it was likely a mere glitch on the tape. Kelly, who at times appeared dejected as prosecutors presented their case, seemed more at ease as the defense got into the thick of their case, even occasionally nodding his head in agreement as witnesses spoke. He seemed particularly buoyed by three relatives of the alleged victim who took the stand for the defense to say they didn't recognize her as the female on the graphic tape. Four relatives testified earlier for the prosecution to say it was her. "It definitely wasn't her," one relative, Shonna Edwards, told jurors emphatically on Wednesday. Edwards said she saw the tape for the first time a few days before, saying the female's body in it was too developed to be her relative at the time. Among the most surreal testimony of the trail to date came when Palm, the defense video expert, sought to counter testimony that doctoring the nearly half-hour video — 100,000 frames on the entire footage — would be practically impossible. To demonstrate it was doable, he played an excerpt he digitally altered where just the heads of the man and woman disappeared as they had sex. At other points, their bodies fade in and out completely, as if they were ghosts. "I created most of that over a couple of spare hours," he said. Asked in cross-examination if anything indicated the tape had actually been fabricated, Palm conceded, "Nothing jumps out at me at being obviously faked." When they continue their case this week, Kelly's lawyers were expected to call a witness who came forward after the trial began to claim he could discredit Lisa Van Allen, the last witness for prosecutors before they rested their case Monday. In her potentially damaging testimony, the 27-year-old told jurors she engaged in three-way sexual encounters with Kelly and the alleged victim on several occasions, including once on a basketball court. She also described how Kelly allegedly carried a duffel bag stuffed full of homemade sex tapes. "Wherever he was at, the bag would follow him," she said. The defense has already begun trying to impinge her potentially devastating testimony. A law clerk for the defense, Jason Wallace, told jurors Wednesday that Van Allen's fiance sought $300,000 from Kelly in exchange for her silence. Van Allen also has admitted she once stole Kelly's $20,000 diamond-studded watch from a hotel. Associated Press writer Karen Hawkins also contributed to this report. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Timmy84 said: R. Kelly lawyers try to revive tattered defenses
By MICHAEL TARM – 7 hours ago CHICAGO (AP) — R. Kelly's attorney guided his electric scooter down a hallway outside the courtroom where his client is on trial for child pornography, exclaiming as he sped past several reporters, "In the morning, we attack!" That battle cry last week from Ed Genson, who suffers from a neurological disorder that makes it difficult for him to walk, was apt: After two weeks of prosecution testimony, the R&B star's lawyers have a lot of ground to regain. After launching their defense days ago, Kelly's lawyers are endeavoring to breathe life back into several key claims when the case continues this week, including that a mole on Kelly's back proves his innocence and that a sex tape at the heart of the case could have been doctored, possibly as part of an extortion plot. Kelly, who won a Grammy Award in 1997 for "I Believe I Can Fly," has pleaded not guilty to child pornography for allegedly videotaping himself having sex with a female prosecutors say was at young as 13. If convicted, he faces up to 15 years in prison. Defense attorneys say neither Kelly nor the alleged victim are on the videotape, pointing to what they said in opening arguments was the absence of a fingernail-sized mole on the man's back in sex tape. Kelly, they noted, has such a mole. But the mole defense took a hit when a prosecution witness froze frames on the tape that showed a spot on a man's lower back — located in the same place as a mole on Kelly's back as it appears in 2002 police photos. On Thursday, however, the defense played their own frame-by-frame footage of the man's back for jurors. "Do you see a mole?" Kelly attorney Marc Martin asked defense witness Charles Palm. "I see a black mark but it doesn't appear to be a mole," the video expert replied. Palm also told jurors the spot appeared only intermittently — proof, he said, that it was likely a mere glitch on the tape. Kelly, who at times appeared dejected as prosecutors presented their case, seemed more at ease as the defense got into the thick of their case, even occasionally nodding his head in agreement as witnesses spoke. He seemed particularly buoyed by three relatives of the alleged victim who took the stand for the defense to say they didn't recognize her as the female on the graphic tape. Four relatives testified earlier for the prosecution to say it was her. "It definitely wasn't her," one relative, Shonna Edwards, told jurors emphatically on Wednesday. Edwards said she saw the tape for the first time a few days before, saying the female's body in it was too developed to be her relative at the time. Among the most surreal testimony of the trail to date came when Palm, the defense video expert, sought to counter testimony that doctoring the nearly half-hour video — 100,000 frames on the entire footage — would be practically impossible. To demonstrate it was doable, he played an excerpt he digitally altered where just the heads of the man and woman disappeared as they had sex. At other points, their bodies fade in and out completely, as if they were ghosts. "I created most of that over a couple of spare hours," he said. Asked in cross-examination if anything indicated the tape had actually been fabricated, Palm conceded, "Nothing jumps out at me at being obviously faked." When they continue their case this week, Kelly's lawyers were expected to call a witness who came forward after the trial began to claim he could discredit Lisa Van Allen, the last witness for prosecutors before they rested their case Monday. In her potentially damaging testimony, the 27-year-old told jurors she engaged in three-way sexual encounters with Kelly and the alleged victim on several occasions, including once on a basketball court. She also described how Kelly allegedly carried a duffel bag stuffed full of homemade sex tapes. "Wherever he was at, the bag would follow him," she said. The defense has already begun trying to impinge her potentially devastating testimony. A law clerk for the defense, Jason Wallace, told jurors Wednesday that Van Allen's fiance sought $300,000 from Kelly in exchange for her silence. Van Allen also has admitted she once stole Kelly's $20,000 diamond-studded watch from a hotel. Associated Press writer Karen Hawkins also contributed to this report.  at "try to revive tattered defenses"
really, son? it's TATTERED? that bad???  "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SHOCKER!
Defense rests in R. Kelly case June 9, 2008 Sun-Times Staff Reports After just two days of witnesses, R. Kelly's defense team rested Monday morning. The legal team's surprise decision apparently means jurors will not hear from Kelly's "goddaughter" — the female who allegedly appears in the sex tape. The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday. The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: Timmy84 said: R. Kelly lawyers try to revive tattered defenses
By MICHAEL TARM – 7 hours ago CHICAGO (AP) — R. Kelly's attorney guided his electric scooter down a hallway outside the courtroom where his client is on trial for child pornography, exclaiming as he sped past several reporters, "In the morning, we attack!" That battle cry last week from Ed Genson, who suffers from a neurological disorder that makes it difficult for him to walk, was apt: After two weeks of prosecution testimony, the R&B star's lawyers have a lot of ground to regain. After launching their defense days ago, Kelly's lawyers are endeavoring to breathe life back into several key claims when the case continues this week, including that a mole on Kelly's back proves his innocence and that a sex tape at the heart of the case could have been doctored, possibly as part of an extortion plot. Kelly, who won a Grammy Award in 1997 for "I Believe I Can Fly," has pleaded not guilty to child pornography for allegedly videotaping himself having sex with a female prosecutors say was at young as 13. If convicted, he faces up to 15 years in prison. Defense attorneys say neither Kelly nor the alleged victim are on the videotape, pointing to what they said in opening arguments was the absence of a fingernail-sized mole on the man's back in sex tape. Kelly, they noted, has such a mole. But the mole defense took a hit when a prosecution witness froze frames on the tape that showed a spot on a man's lower back — located in the same place as a mole on Kelly's back as it appears in 2002 police photos. On Thursday, however, the defense played their own frame-by-frame footage of the man's back for jurors. "Do you see a mole?" Kelly attorney Marc Martin asked defense witness Charles Palm. "I see a black mark but it doesn't appear to be a mole," the video expert replied. Palm also told jurors the spot appeared only intermittently — proof, he said, that it was likely a mere glitch on the tape. Kelly, who at times appeared dejected as prosecutors presented their case, seemed more at ease as the defense got into the thick of their case, even occasionally nodding his head in agreement as witnesses spoke. He seemed particularly buoyed by three relatives of the alleged victim who took the stand for the defense to say they didn't recognize her as the female on the graphic tape. Four relatives testified earlier for the prosecution to say it was her. "It definitely wasn't her," one relative, Shonna Edwards, told jurors emphatically on Wednesday. Edwards said she saw the tape for the first time a few days before, saying the female's body in it was too developed to be her relative at the time. Among the most surreal testimony of the trail to date came when Palm, the defense video expert, sought to counter testimony that doctoring the nearly half-hour video — 100,000 frames on the entire footage — would be practically impossible. To demonstrate it was doable, he played an excerpt he digitally altered where just the heads of the man and woman disappeared as they had sex. At other points, their bodies fade in and out completely, as if they were ghosts. "I created most of that over a couple of spare hours," he said. Asked in cross-examination if anything indicated the tape had actually been fabricated, Palm conceded, "Nothing jumps out at me at being obviously faked." When they continue their case this week, Kelly's lawyers were expected to call a witness who came forward after the trial began to claim he could discredit Lisa Van Allen, the last witness for prosecutors before they rested their case Monday. In her potentially damaging testimony, the 27-year-old told jurors she engaged in three-way sexual encounters with Kelly and the alleged victim on several occasions, including once on a basketball court. She also described how Kelly allegedly carried a duffel bag stuffed full of homemade sex tapes. "Wherever he was at, the bag would follow him," she said. The defense has already begun trying to impinge her potentially devastating testimony. A law clerk for the defense, Jason Wallace, told jurors Wednesday that Van Allen's fiance sought $300,000 from Kelly in exchange for her silence. Van Allen also has admitted she once stole Kelly's $20,000 diamond-studded watch from a hotel. Associated Press writer Karen Hawkins also contributed to this report. at "try to revive tattered defenses"
really, son? it's TATTERED? that bad??? Yeah that's not good if you're an R. Kelly fan.  "Wow, tattered?" That means, the defense is fighting a losing battle when you say tattered. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Timmy84 said: bboy87 said: at "try to revive tattered defenses"
really, son? it's TATTERED? that bad??? Yeah that's not good if you're an R. Kelly fan. "Wow, tattered?" That means, the defense is fighting a losing battle when you say tattered.everyone, keep Mistermaxx in your prayers "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: Timmy84 said: Yeah that's not good if you're an R. Kelly fan. "Wow, tattered?" That means, the defense is fighting a losing battle when you say tattered.everyone, keep Mistermaxx in your prayers I'll pray for him because he's my brother and I love him but God knows he's the biggest R. Kelly fan of all time. 
He's confident he'll be acquitted though but yeah my prayers and condolences go to Maxx right now. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Defense rests in R. Kelly case
After just two days of witnesses, R. Kelly's defense team rested Monday morning. The legal team's surprise decision apparently means jurors will not hear from Kelly's "goddaughter" — the female who allegedly appears in the sex tape. The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday. The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Defense lawyer Ed Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury. If called to testify, Myers would say family members of the girl allegedly in the tape contacted him about representing them — though he did not possess a copy of the sex tape. The Myers stipluation conflicts directly with the testimony of Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards, the aunt of the girl allegedly in the tape. Edwards testified Myers contacted her in December 2001, saying that he had the tape. Myers then sent a representative to her home to show her the tape, she said. The court reporter stipulated to transcribing the grand jury testimony of Bennie Edwards Sr., the uncle of the alleged victim. Edwards Sr. was one of several family members called by the prosecution to testify to the identity of the girl on the tape. On Tuesday, the prosecution plans to call assistant district attorney Robert Wolf from the Atlanta prosecutor's office. Wolf will testify that the fiance of Lisa Van Allen — who alleged she was in a threesome with Kelly and the underage girl — was not offered a deal in exchange for her helping the Kelly prosecution. In cross-examining Van Allen last week, defense lawyers pointed out that Van Allen's fiance, Yul Brown, was arrested on gun and drug charges shortly before they reached out to Cook County prosecutors with Van Allen's information about Kelly. Brown got probation. At one point today, defense lawyer Sam Adam Sr. referred to Yul Brown as "Yul Brynner," prompting Judge Vincent Gaughan to quip, "wrong movie." The prosecution's video expert, Grant Fredericks, will be called in response to defense video expert Charles Palm — who said last week there was no mole visible on the back of the male in the tape. Fredericks had previously testified that, when the frames are slowed down, a mole can be seen. Posted by Eric Herman on June 9, 2008 12:27 PM | Permalink | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
For those that didn't get his charges, here they are without all that PDF shit, lol:
CHARGES: Count 1: Child pornography – intercourse Counts 2 and 3: Child pornography – sexual contact Count 4: Child pornography – masturbation Count 5:Child pornography – lewd fondling Count 6: Child pornography – excretion/urination Count 7: Child pornography – pose/exhibition Counts 8-14: Child pornography – produces or performs Each charge is a Class 1 felony. If found guilty, the sentence would be non-consecutive, meaning he would get the same time – 4 to 15 years – whether he is convicted of one or all the charges. The charges are also non-probationable, which means, if convicted, he will have to serve time. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: Defense rests in R. Kelly case
After just two days of witnesses, R. Kelly's defense team rested Monday morning. The legal team's surprise decision apparently means jurors will not hear from Kelly's "goddaughter" — the female who allegedly appears in the sex tape. The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday. The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Defense lawyer Ed Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury. If called to testify, Myers would say family members of the girl allegedly in the tape contacted him about representing them — though he did not possess a copy of the sex tape. The Myers stipluation conflicts directly with the testimony of Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards, the aunt of the girl allegedly in the tape. Edwards testified Myers contacted her in December 2001, saying that he had the tape. Myers then sent a representative to her home to show her the tape, she said. The court reporter stipulated to transcribing the grand jury testimony of Bennie Edwards Sr., the uncle of the alleged victim. Edwards Sr. was one of several family members called by the prosecution to testify to the identity of the girl on the tape. On Tuesday, the prosecution plans to call assistant district attorney Robert Wolf from the Atlanta prosecutor's office. Wolf will testify that the fiance of Lisa Van Allen — who alleged she was in a threesome with Kelly and the underage girl — was not offered a deal in exchange for her helping the Kelly prosecution. In cross-examining Van Allen last week, defense lawyers pointed out that Van Allen's fiance, Yul Brown, was arrested on gun and drug charges shortly before they reached out to Cook County prosecutors with Van Allen's information about Kelly. Brown got probation. At one point today, defense lawyer Sam Adam Sr. referred to Yul Brown as "Yul Brynner," prompting Judge Vincent Gaughan to quip, "wrong movie." The prosecution's video expert, Grant Fredericks, will be called in response to defense video expert Charles Palm — who said last week there was no mole visible on the back of the male in the tape. Fredericks had previously testified that, when the frames are slowed down, a mole can be seen. Posted by Eric Herman on June 9, 2008 12:27 PM | Permalink Why the judge got jokes???
 They resting already after only two days??? DANG! Did they ever question Lisa Van Allen's baby daddy? The one that didn't want to give his SS#?? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SCNDLS said: Timmy84 said: Defense rests in R. Kelly case
After just two days of witnesses, R. Kelly's defense team rested Monday morning. The legal team's surprise decision apparently means jurors will not hear from Kelly's "goddaughter" — the female who allegedly appears in the sex tape. The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday. The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Defense lawyer Ed Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury. If called to testify, Myers would say family members of the girl allegedly in the tape contacted him about representing them — though he did not possess a copy of the sex tape. The Myers stipluation conflicts directly with the testimony of Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards, the aunt of the girl allegedly in the tape. Edwards testified Myers contacted her in December 2001, saying that he had the tape. Myers then sent a representative to her home to show her the tape, she said. The court reporter stipulated to transcribing the grand jury testimony of Bennie Edwards Sr., the uncle of the alleged victim. Edwards Sr. was one of several family members called by the prosecution to testify to the identity of the girl on the tape. On Tuesday, the prosecution plans to call assistant district attorney Robert Wolf from the Atlanta prosecutor's office. Wolf will testify that the fiance of Lisa Van Allen — who alleged she was in a threesome with Kelly and the underage girl — was not offered a deal in exchange for her helping the Kelly prosecution. In cross-examining Van Allen last week, defense lawyers pointed out that Van Allen's fiance, Yul Brown, was arrested on gun and drug charges shortly before they reached out to Cook County prosecutors with Van Allen's information about Kelly. Brown got probation. At one point today, defense lawyer Sam Adam Sr. referred to Yul Brown as "Yul Brynner," prompting Judge Vincent Gaughan to quip, "wrong movie." The prosecution's video expert, Grant Fredericks, will be called in response to defense video expert Charles Palm — who said last week there was no mole visible on the back of the male in the tape. Fredericks had previously testified that, when the frames are slowed down, a mole can be seen. Posted by Eric Herman on June 9, 2008 12:27 PM | Permalink Why the judge got jokes???
They resting already after only two days??? DANG! Did they ever question Lisa Van Allen's baby daddy? The one that didn't want to give his SS#??I guess the defense didn't wanna piss off the judge so they said "go home", lol. This is embarrassing. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The Defense Rests In The R. Kelly Case June 9, 2008 Link After just two days of witnesses, R. Kelly's defense team rested. The legal team's surprise decision apparently means jurors will not hear from Kelly's "goddaughter" — the female who allegedly appears in the sex tape. The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday. The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Defense lawyer Ed Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury. Never one to shy away from the kind of PR advantage a nationally reported child molestation trial can bring, R. Kelly has continued to release — officially and through Internet "leaks" — new music all year long. His latest, a bouncy and unusually light track called "Body, Body," began making the rounds online this past weekend. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Copycat said:
The Defense Rests In The R. Kelly Case June 9, 2008 Link After just two days of witnesses, R. Kelly's defense team rested. The legal team's surprise decision apparently means jurors will not hear from Kelly's "goddaughter" — the female who allegedly appears in the sex tape. The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday. The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Defense lawyer Ed Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury. Never one to shy away from the kind of PR advantage a nationally reported child molestation trial can bring, R. Kelly has continued to release — officially and through Internet "leaks" — new music all year long. His latest, a bouncy and unusually light track called "Body, Body," began making the rounds online this past weekend. I heard a little of it and R. Kelly has once again hold the title of Swagger Jacker: first he copied Bobby Brown, then he copied Aaron Hall, then he copied Marvin Gaye/Sam Cooke/Isaac Hayes, now he's T-Pain.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Conflicting pictures emerge of alleged R. Kelly victim
By MICHAEL TARM, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago CHICAGO - She's been described over several weeks of testimony as a Christian singer and a point guard, a participant in three-way sex and as the goddaughter to one of the music industry's biggest stars. Even the family of the alleged victim in the R. Kelly child pornography trial doesn't seem to agree about her, especially about whether she's on a 27-minute sex tape that could send the R&B star to prison for up to 15 year if convicted. The alleged victim says it's not her on the tape. So testimony from prosecution and defense witnesses has sometimes painted contrasting pictures of the person who once called Kelly her "godfather." Four family members have testified for the prosecution that she is the person on the tape; three have testified for the defense that she's not. Asked by prosecutors whether the family has "split in half as a result of this incident," one relative, Leroy Edwards Jr., answered softly, "Yes." Kelly, 41, has pleaded not guilty to 14 counts of child pornography. His lawyers say it's neither him nor the alleged victim on the tape, suggesting the images could have been computer-generated — possibly in a bid to extort money from the singer. Prosecutors say she was as young as 13 when the tape was made. Now 23, the woman has been identified at the trial, but The Associated Press does not name suspected victims of child pornography in most cases. She has not spoken publicly about the case. Photographs of her when she was about 13 show a short, smiling, cherub-faced girl. In pictures shown to jurors, she's in uniform after basketball games, her arms around other players. Prosecutors also played a music video featuring the girl and three other teens in a R&B-tinged musical group that toured Europe several times in the '90s. No one questions that Kelly and the alleged victim knew each other. Singer Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards, best known for the 1998 duet "Be Careful" with Kelly and is a relative of the alleged victim, introduced her to Kelly at a music studio when the girl was around 13 and Kelly was around 30, Edwards testified. "He liked her spirit," a teary-eyed Edwards told jurors. "She was a very jolly person." The girl was fond of Kelly "as a father figure," recalled Edwards, adding she didn't suspect a sexual relationship until news broke years later about the tape. Sometime after meeting Kelly, the alleged victim began telling her friends and acquaintances he was her godfather, her childhood friend Simha Jamison testified. Jamison, now a 24-year-old hair stylist, also told jurors that Kelly frequently gave her friend cash gifts and the two teens would go on shopping sprees with the money. Some of the testimony has focused on her physical features. A middle school basketball coach said he recognized the alleged victim as the female in the tape by her high forehead, saying he and her friends would joke with her about it. "You were joking about a seventh grade girl having a big forehead?" defense attorney Marc Martin snapped at Joel Rhea, sounding incredulous. "The kids were," Rhea responded. A relative testifying for the defense, Charlotte Edwards, told jurors the female in the video couldn't be the alleged victim because the breasts of that person were too large. Prosecution witness Lisa Van Allen, 27, told jurors she had three-way sex with Kelly and the alleged victim several times, starting in 1998. During one encounter in a trailer at the set of a music-video shoot, the alleged victim "had to run into the bathroom naked" when someone came to the door because Kelly didn't want others to see her there, Van Allen testified. Prosecutors said they would not ask the alleged victim to testify. The defense hasn't said whether they will, though Kelly attorney Sam Adam Jr. asked jurors in opening statements why prosecutors chose not to call her. "One answer," he said, his voice booming. "One: It's not her on that tape." To bolster their argument that the female on the tape and the alleged victim couldn't be the same person, the defense has taken frequent opportunities to praise her character. "(She) is as sweet, as nice and as lovely a person there is," Adam said during opening arguments. He juxtaposed that image with the female in the video, who takes money from the man before having sex with him. "The woman on that tape is getting paid," he said. "The woman is a prostitute, not a victim." Another Kelly attorney, Ed Genson, made a similar point when he cross-examined prosecution witness Bennie Edwards Jr., another relative and a member of the alleged victim's music group. Asked if the way the female acted in the video bore any resemblance to the alleged victim as he knew her, Edwards shook his head: "It's not her character at all." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
These mo-fo attorneys kill me. For him to say "The woman on that tape is getting paid," he said. "The woman is a prostitute, not a victim." is REALLY assinine since it's sooooo obvious that it IS that underage girl on the tape despite their so-called defense trying to prove otherwise.
Plus, if I were on that jury the fact that she's not taking the stand would speak volumes to me. I mean, who wouldn't want to clear their name, in person, if they were rumored to be on a videotape that shows them getting paid to let someone pee on them. I'd be all up in there standing next to the video screen, yelling, "See, that ain't me!!!" But naw, she's hiding. . .  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SCNDLS said: These mo-fo attorneys kill me. For him to say "The woman on that tape is getting paid," he said. "The woman is a prostitute, not a victim." is REALLY assinine since it's sooooo obvious that it IS that underage girl on the tape despite their so-called defense trying to prove otherwise.
Plus, if I were on that jury the fact that she's not taking the stand would speak volumes to me. I mean, who wouldn't want to clear their name, in person, if they were rumored to be on a videotape that shows them getting paid to let someone pee on them. I'd be all up in there standing next to the video screen, yelling, "See, that ain't me!!!" But naw, she's hiding. . . See this is what KILLS me. The defense keeps going back and forth about how the girl ain't on it but accusing the girl in the supposed tape of being a "prostitute" but they don't bring no smoking gun so what they do when that defense fails? They create this story that the people in the video weren't people at all but images computerized. COME ON! R. Kelly is illiterate, why would he have the smartness to know how to alter a fucking tape that showcase him fucking someone who appears to be a minor! And also if you are NOT on the tape, why the FUCK would YOU not show up and DEFEND yourself, your parents AND the man who you profess to be your "godfather" that neither he nor you were on the tape and to make sure that the defense runs with it. But they didn't. I mean, I don't see how the jury can believe their story when we've heard nothing but BULLSHIT from them. The prosecution shocked them and all they can come up with is the woman involved with the threesome stole one of Rrah's watches and family members who either believe or choose NOT to believe the girl isn't in the video. The expert who tried to say the man in the tape doesn't have a MOLE yet the other expert slowed things down and made sure that it wasn't "an artifact" on the tape. And here I was ready to give the defense to explain itself and it flopped! If I was a teacher and the defense team was my students and they were working on a project based on this man, I'll give them an F. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: bboy87 said: everyone, keep Mistermaxx in your prayers I'll pray for him because he's my brother and I love him but God knows he's the biggest R. Kelly fan of all time.
He's confident he'll be acquitted though but yeah my prayers and condolences go to Maxx right now. And don't forget that you are a undercover fan. But you are trying to make others here think you are not. You were right over on the R Kelly fan site for several years before being banned. [Edited 6/9/08 16:59pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: Flowerz said: please keep posting  ... R.Kelly should have been in jail long agosomething Prince fans AND MJ fans can agree on this is true | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
LaCienega said: Timmy84 said: I'll pray for him because he's my brother and I love him but God knows he's the biggest R. Kelly fan of all time.
He's confident he'll be acquitted though but yeah my prayers and condolences go to Maxx right now. And don't forget that you are a undercover fan. But you are trying to make others here think you are not. You were right over on the R Kelly fan site for several years before being banned. [Edited 6/9/08 16:59pm] As the Org's main R Kelly hater, I approve of Timmy's efforts [Edited 6/9/08 17:33pm] "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Flowerz said: bboy87 said: something Prince fans AND MJ fans can agree on this is true I've been working hard spreading the hate
Have you seen the pamphlets to the "I Hate Arruh" members community? "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: LaCienega said: And don't forget that you are a undercover fan. But you are trying to make others here think you are not. You were right over on the R Kelly fan site for several years before being banned. [Edited 6/9/08 16:59pm] As the Org's main R Kelly hater, I approve of Timmy's efforts
[Edited 6/9/08 17:33pm] It's all good. I understand why she's upset but hey what can I do? I just report the news. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: Flowerz said: this is true I've been working hard spreading the hate
Have you seen the pamphlets to the "I Hate Arruh" members community? i may need some of them pamphlets lol .. we need to spread as many of them as possible lol
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Flowerz said: bboy87 said: I've been working hard spreading the hate
Have you seen the pamphlets to the "I Hate Arruh" members community? i may need some of them pamphlets lol .. we need to spread as many of them as possible lol
As you can see, membership's free, you get a T-shirt, a probationary membership to the NWO's bteam(you must work up to get to the a team and join me, Timmy, LBC, Muthafunka, phunkdaddy...etc) and you get an apple pie when you sign up "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: Flowerz said: i may need some of them pamphlets lol .. we need to spread as many of them as possible lol
As you can see, membership's free, you get a T-shirt, a probationary membership to the NWO's bteam(you must work up to get to the a team and join me, Timmy, LBC, Muthafunka, phunkdaddy...etc) and you get an apple pie when you sign up With milk to top it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: bboy87 said: As the Org's main R Kelly hater, I approve of Timmy's efforts
[Edited 6/9/08 17:33pm] It's all good. I understand why she's upset but hey what can I do? I just report the news. Correction you are the upset one. You are the one after being banned started running from message board to message board making threads about R Kelly. You are the one with the obsession for another man. You are easy to spot at any other board. just look for the name R Kelly and you will be right in that thread under one of your many user names. You may come here to give your lil cyber space friends a laugh. But you are crying inside over being banned. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Timmy84 said: bboy87 said:
As you can see, membership's free, you get a T-shirt, a probationary membership to the NWO's bteam(you must work up to get to the a team and join me, Timmy, LBC, Muthafunka, phunkdaddy...etc) and you get an apple pie when you sign up With milk to top it. sign me up! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Flowerz said: Timmy84 said: With milk to top it. sign me up! 
and this is the real thing! not that sugar free bullshit! "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
LaCienega said: Timmy84 said: It's all good. I understand why she's upset but hey what can I do? I just report the news. Correction you are the upset one. You are the one after being banned started running from message board to message board making threads about R Kelly. You are the one with the obsession for another man. You are easy to spot at any other board. just look for the name R Kelly and you will be right in that thread under one of your many user names. You may come here to give your lil cyber space friends a laugh. But you are crying inside over being banned. 
This will be an unimmaculated splendiferous occasion! Timmy84 vs La Cienega on Org Fights Volume One! Coming Soon "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: LaCienega said: Correction you are the upset one. You are the one after being banned started running from message board to message board making threads about R Kelly. You are the one with the obsession for another man. You are easy to spot at any other board. just look for the name R Kelly and you will be right in that thread under one of your many user names. You may come here to give your lil cyber space friends a laugh. But you are crying inside over being banned.
This will be an unimmaculated splendiferous occasion! Timmy84 vs La Cienega on Org Fights Volume One! Coming Soon Only in America can bloodshed spread online. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
bboy87 said: Flowerz said: sign me up!
and this is the real thing! not that sugar free bullshit!  yum | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |