'08
I can think of few things as truly awkward as having to watch a sex tape with a room of people around me. And frankly, I really don’t want to think about the kind of thing that’s even more awkward than this. The R. Kelly sex trial is finally underway, after six legendarily long years of seemingly impossible delays. Yesterday the jury had to watch the 25 minute sex tape – in front of a packed courtroom – in which a man who is allegedly R. Kelly has sex with a woman who was allegedly 13-years-old at the time. I’m tempted to say they were forced to watch it, as I really can’t imagine anyone being okay with seeing something like this.
Prosecutors played the sex tape at the center of R. Kelly’s child pornography trial in open court Tuesday, just hours after opening statements in which they accused the R&B singer of choreographing and starring in the footage with an underage girl.
The jurors, who had been taking feverish notes during opening statements, sat motionless while the video played. Their eyes were fixed on a 4-by-4-foot monitor just outside the jurors’ box; in the courtroom, the lights were dimmed and blinds drawn across windows.
A grim-looking Kelly, 41, appeared to watch the entire footage intently on a small monitor on the defense table. He occasionally rocked in his chair and rested his chin in his hand. The 27-minute homemade video shows a man having sex with a young female, who is naked for most of the recording except for a necklace with a cross dangling from it.
At the start of the videotape, the man hands the female money and she mouths the words, “Thank you.” She is often blank-faced, impassive. The man speaks to the female in a hushed, monotone voice, and she calls him “Daddy.” Songs from the Spice Girls and Backstreet Boys blare from a radio. The female dances - the man out of view. Back in view, he has sex with her. The man walks up to the camera to adjust it a few times, but his face is often obscured.
Prosecutors say the man in the video is Kelly, and that the female is a girl who was as young as 13 when the tape was made between Jan. 1, 1998, and Nov. 1, 2000.
[From the Associated Press]
According to several published reports, courtroom observers were focused just as intently on watching the jurors watch the tape as they were on the tape itself. I cannot imagine having to see something like that, and knowing that everyone was analyzing my expression. One juror was released yesterday after explaining to the judge that she only had 30 hours of vacation time and could not afford to serve. I’d be begging my boss to cut my vacation time if I were in that position.
The defense’s argument is essentially to deny everything. They’re claiming that’s not really R. Kelly on the tape and that the girl on the tape is not the alleged victim. And just to cover their bases, they’re claiming that the alleged victim was not 13 at the time. So just in case people don’t buy that it’s not her, they’re arguing that she’s older than she is. Which is funny, because they’ve been making that argument for six years now, and somehow it’s still up for debate. No one is totally clear how old the alleged victim really is.
The defense pointed out to the jury that the man on the sex tape does not have a prominent mole on his back. Supposedly R. Kelly does, and it’s been there since childhood. So everything’s hinging on a lot of denial, confusion, and a mole. Something tells me this is case is going to keep dragging on for a long while.
Here’s R. Kelly at the New York Premiere of ‘Trapped in the Closet: Chapters 13-22′ at IFC theatre on August 8th . Images thanks to WENN.
Written by JayBird
Posted in Legal Troubles, R. Kelly, Sex Tapes, Trials
11 Responses to “Sex tape shown in R. Kelly trial”
-
I completely agree. I haven’t seen the tape but I think it’s pretty clear it IS him (from what people who have seen it report) - but not in a way you could prove legally. There is way too much doubt - and when the victim claims she’s not the victim - and they can’t even prove her age at the time of the tape - I don’t see how a jury could convict him. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t want to though.
-
13 or not the girl was a willing participant. I personally think it’s disgusting, but it’s not like he raped her. When i was 13 I was definitely old enough to decide who i was going to have sex with, whether or not i wanted someone to pee on me naked, etc… Again, it’s disgusting BUT he didn’t rape her. He does need to seek mental health help for his problem and where the heck is the girl’s parents? Didn’t they teach her right and wrong?
-
I seen the tape years ago,before charges were brought up against him and it just a rumor that he was having sex with a young female.In my own opinion it looked like him,but like CB and Jaybird said that is probably not enough to convict.
At the beginning of the tape he was having sex with an adult woman and we were all like “what’s the big deal?” but then on the next scene you see this girl who looks very, very young and our jaws dropped!
From that day, I refused to listen to any of his songs and will not allow his songs to be played in my home. My husband simply DETEST that man. -
Wow! That’s pretty amazing. It’s shocking to me that 3 of you don’t want him to be convicted and the other one wants to blame the girl. I see people allow lots of things when you can make hit records. Just because she can decide does not mean she should, that’s why they call 13 year olds minors.
-
Yeah. Don’t convict him because of what some rag says. Let him go to molest more children. It’s the American way. /sarcasm
-
You don’t say: “I SEEN the tape.”
You say: “I SAW the tape.”That said, these little girls are looking and acting way older than they are. No girl should be wandering around concerts on her own at 13! Shame on the parents.
-
R Kelly is a musical genius and he made that decision to mess his life up………I don’t feel sorry for him at all.Maybe now he will start thinking like an adult and not a idiot!!!!!!!
-
It is amazing to me that as a society we don’t protect our children! if that CHILD’S mother or father did not protect her from the ills of society is that her fault? Of course not! we are all born into this world expecting to be protected. This man has an opportunity to impact masses of people but instead his grown (old) behind takes advantage of easy prey. And we have people that blame the child! It espcially alarms me to hear a woman say she looked like she knew what she was doing. I thought women’s natural instinct is to nurture. We are truly living in the last DAYS!
-
It’s well known that R Kelly has an interest in teen girls. I mean he didn’t marry Aaliyah for the money. But in this country, we have standard for a conviction and if you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it’s him and her and that she is underage, then you can’t convict him.
-
@Grammar police
I do not need you to correct my speech.Last time I check this was a celebrity blog not a job interview or a classroom.
Instead of appointing for yourself the Grammar police on CB, maybe you should go out and get a real job.
dan:
SOLO:
daisyfly:
Grammar Police:
Butterfly:
gods watching:
headache:
Leave a Reply
Comment Policy: Please be courteous as if you are having a conversation in person. No all-caps posts. If you make comments using different nicknames, repeatedly harass others, or spam, you will be banned. If you make an exceptionally rude comment that people complain about, it will be deleted. Do not dominate the threads by making the same point over and over again or you will be banned. We understand and respect that threads can get heated. Threads will occasionally be closed if the conversation gets very nasty. Repeatedly baiting other commenters or giving rude and attacking responses is not allowed. It's a shame we have to mention that because most of you are kind and respectful of other's opinions.
Get an icon next to your name by signing up for a free Gravatar
I don’t think I could convict him if I was on that jury. It sounds like they can’t even prove it’s him in the tape. And although I heard the background in the tape is similar to his home at the time, I don’t know if they have enough evidence to tie him to this. The girl isn’t testifying or prosecuting him, her family isn’t testifying, all they have is this tape little proof. The guy may have done it, and he is definitely skeevy and probably a pedophile, but this doesn’t sound like solid enough evidence to convict on.
Report this comment as spam or abuse