Lawyers for singer Boy George – who is currently on trial for handcuffing an escort and then beating the crap out of him – claims he’s too fat to have attacked the escort. George has put on some serious poundage since his “Karma Chameleon” days. Most of the time that’d be considered a bad thing, but I guess he managed to find the one advantage to a larger pant size: getting away with crimes.

Boy George was too fat to have attacked a male escort in his flat, according to his own lawyer. The Culture Club singer has gained so much weight since his Eighties heyday that he would not have stood a chance in a fight against his alleged victim Audun Carlsen, Adrian Waterman QC told Snaresbrook crown court.

The DJ and former pop star, appearing in court under his real name George O’Dowd, is accused of handcuffing the six-foot tall, wiry male escort to a hook above his bed and then beating him with a chain. The alleged attack took place after an erotic photo shoot by the pair at O’Dowd’s Shoreditch home in April last year.

Mr Waterman told the jury: “With the greatest of respect to George O’Dowd, he is not someone you could describe as terribly fit. He has put on a few pounds since the 1980s. He is not going to be a match for Audun Carlsen.”

[From the Daily Mail]

George is definitely portly, but it’s been agreed in the court that he’d gotten Carlsen handcuffed to a hook in his bedroom. Without knowing the nitty gritty details of what went on, it seems quite likely that Boy George still could have beaten the crap out of Audun Carlsen, considering the way he was tied up.

I think the lawyer’s assertion that Carlsen’s accusations are baseless and the case is falling apart is ridiculous. But from a legal angle it sounds like he might have poked enough holes in the guy’s story that Boy George may get off. If so, I beg all of you to please make sure you don’t somehow end up locked in a room with Boy George. I don’t know how, but you will end up naked and begging for your life.

Here’s a photo of Auden Carlsen. Header of Boy George taken in February. Images thanks to Fame.

Boy George scares the crap out of me. And male or female, he should scare the crap out of you too. If you are within 200 yards of him at any given moment there is a 7 out of 10 chance that he will handcuff you to a radiator and threaten to do incredibly degrading things to you. Seriously, the guy is all-out batshit insane. Assuming the charges against him are true, which… it sorta seems like they are.

George’s trial for false imprisonment and other really horrifying things (some legalese for you there) started today in London.

A Norwegian escort told a court Monday that Boy George manacled him to a bedroom wall and beat him with a metal chain after accusing him of hacking into his computer. The former Culture Club singer is on trial for the false imprisonment of 29-year-old Audun Carlsen. The 47-year-old singer, who is standing trial under his real name, George O’Dowd, denies the charge.

Carlsen told London’s Snaresbrook Crown Court that he met the singer through a Web site and went to his London home for a naked photo shoot. After the encounter Boy George sent a series e-mails accusing Carlsen of hacking into his computer, but Carlsen nonetheless agreed to return for a second photo session several weeks later in April 2007.

Carlsen told the jury that when he arrived Boy George and another man held him down and beat him before the singer handcuffed him to a hook in the bedroom wall. “George was slapping me and beating me and punching me and screaming things,” Carlsen said. Carlsen said he was able to escape by unscrewing the hook and running for the door. “I took a bit of time getting the door open and he had a metal chain that he was hitting me with,” Carlsen said.

Carlsen said he ran into the street clad only in his underwear. The court was shown photographs of red welts on Carlsen’s head and injuries to his arm which he said had been inflicted during the attack.

[From the Huffington Post]

Carlsen’s testimony sounds consistent with the published reports of the accounts he gave to the police. I’m guessing the defense’s main angle will be to try to discredit him by using his profession against him and/or finding character witnesses to do the same. Unfortunately for Boy George, it’s more than possible for the prosecution to do the same with him. He’s had a long list of relatively minor infractions including some drug charges.

People joke about this story because it’s so bizarre, but honestly it’s really horrifying. If you take out the name “Boy George” and just make it some random man, you realize this was a really terrible crime. The brutality is especially disturbing and hints at a deep problem. Combined with drugs, it’s easy to guess that Boy George may very well be a threat to others. I cannot imagine how he’d be able to survive prison, but I think there’s a decent chance that’s where he’ll end up.

Here’s Boy George deejaying at Queen Night Club in Paris in July of 2007. Images thanks to Fame.

Comedian Dane Cook’s landlord is trying to evict him for basically never cleaning up his miniature pinscher’s poop from the common areas of his West Hollywood apartment complex. Both Cook and his girlfriend have been warned multiple times and put on notice by their neighbors and the landlord, who was forced to start eviction proceedings when they continually refused to pick up their dog’s nasty presents. There are even “no dog poop” signs right on the yard where Cook was letting his dog defecate without apparently picking up a single pile. The case has now gone to trial, where it will be decided by jury.

Cook’s lawyer questioned potential jurors ahead of the trial, trying to weed out people who have the crazy idea that it’s grosser to step in dog poop than some minty gum:

Cook’s landlord has gone to court, trying to get the “comedian” evicted because his dog habitually craps in the public areas of the apartment building. Dane’s lawyer is asking prospective jurors a number of revealing questions, including:

- What’s worse. Stepping in gum or stepping in dog poop?
- If you live next to a park and saw dog poop, would you avoid that park?
- Would you confront someone about spitting out gum on the sidewalk or not picking up dog poop in a public place?
- Would you confront a neighbor about picking up after their dog?

From TMZ

There is no way the defense would pick me for that jury. My husband and I recently moved to Berlin and after a few months I’m still steamed nearly every day when I encounter piles of dog crap on the sidewalk. I was practically screaming when my son got out of the car yesterday and almost stepped in a pile. It is socially acceptable to let your dog crap on the sidewalk here and I have stepped in sh&t more in the few months I’ve lived here than my entire life leading up to this point. I now carry plastic lunch bags in my purses and pick up the crap when I go for a walk it’s near my house and my family is likely to step in it, but it’s hard to avoid it when you’re on a bike. (For the record this is a lovely city and I really like the people and all the great things to do here. I would highly recommend you visit. This is a major pet peeve of mine, though, and the main thing that distracts from an otherwise wonderful place for me.)

TMZ also reports that the jury is due to see a video of Cook’s squatting dog, aptly named “Beast,” which will prove beyond a doubt that he’s the owner who is irresponsibly leaving bacteria bombs all over the lawn. Cook should get his unfunny ass evicted, and he should be forced to pay a fine to the neighbors he’s inconvenienced during the time he’s lived there. Cook could potentially use this experience for material for his mostly plagiarized routine, but Louis CK (link leads to video) probably cleans up after his dog.

A jailhouse snitch says he was offered £20,000 by Blake Fielder-Civil to beat up Pete Doherty – because Doherty was sleeping with Amy Winehouse. At least according to Civil. My first thought when reading this was “No freaking way, no one would ever touch Pete Doherty’s naked body.” But then I had to give pause, and realize that I can’t imagine the man that’d touch Amy Winehouse’s scabies-infected skin either. So really, they’re a match made in medical literature heaven – and I guess the odds are so vastly against it after all.

Amy Winehouse’s husband offered a fellow prisoner £20,000 to beat up Pete Doherty whom he accused of having an affair with his wife, the Old Bailey heard today… While in prison before trial he was said to have told Richard Lyttle that he had received threats that the 24-year-old millionaire singer would be abducted. The evidence emerged today during a trial of two men accused of taking part in a contract killing.

it was while he was in Pentonville that Mr Lyttle met Fielder-Civil, who he said had found out about his wife’s alleged affair “when he learned he [Doherty] had been around there in the early hours of the morning”. Questioned by defence barrister Sir Desmond de Silva QC, Mr Lyttle said Fielder-Civil had offered him £20,000 “to cause damage” to the 29-year-old Babyshambles front man.

“He said he would give £20,000 to anyone who done him – cause him injury – he was quite annoyed at the time.” Sir Desmond asked: “Because he believed there was an affair between Amy and Pet e Doherty?” Mr Lyttle replied: “Yeah.” Sir Desmond: “Did he say ‘smash him to pieces?’ “ Mr Lyttle: “That’s what he said.” Sir Desmond: “There are a lot of hard men in prison?” Mr Lyttle: “I would say so, yes.”

Sir Desmond: “But Mr Fielder-Civil seemed to have entrusted you with this business of carrying out this particular mission?” Mr Lyttle: “He seemed quite upset and annoyed.” He went on to say that he had felt sorry for Fielder-Civil who had treated him as a friend, but admitted that he later tried to obtain £5,000 from a newspaper about what he had been told.

[From the Daily Mail]

Richard Lyttle goes on to describe how several other men had threatened to kidnap Amy Winehouse, but didn’t say why they’d made the threat, or what Fielder-Civil did about it. Though the testimony of jailhouse snitches is always suspect, this man wasn’t testifying in Blake’s trial or in the trial of any of his associates. So I can’t imagine that they were offered any deal in exchange for their testimony regarding Fielder-Civil. Nonetheless, Richard Lyttle is on trial for taking part in a contract killing, so it’s not like he’s made up of the highest moral fiber.

Amy and Blake really do manage to bring a lot of drama into their lives. It seemed like it was more than enough with the alcoholic blackouts, the drug overdoses, and the wasted joint visits to rehab. But that all really pales in comparison to kidnapping, witness tampering, and sleeping with Pete Doherty. Which is far, far worse than offering a guy $40,000 to beat up Pete. I was wondering exactly what Doherty would look like if someone knocked him around a bit. And I’ve decided he’d look like… Pete Doherty.

Here’s Amy Winehouse greeting a fan at her house today, who broke down in tears after traveling all the way from Canada. Fans are forever showing up at Amy’s door, and it seems like she’s always remarkably kind and welcoming to them. Images thanks to WENN.

Details have finally been released in the criminal case of Amy Winehouse’s husband Blake Fielder-Civil. Blake has been on trial for assault and perverting the course of justice (akin to witness tampering here in the states). Last week he copped a plea, but it couldn’t be released until this week, due to some stipulations put on the media by the judge.

It’s now been learned that Blake Fielder-Civil and friend Michael Brown tried to bribe pub landlord James King with approximately $400,000 after they assaulted King. It appears they beat him up in June of 2006 due to something relating to a woman: Brown used to date one of King’s friends. Fielder-Civil and Brown attacked King around closing time at the bar, and kicked him repeatedly.

Using two middle men, they offered King £200,000 to withdraw the charges, refuse to testify, and leave the country so that he couldn’t be forced into court. One of the middle men and King brought the plan to the Daily Mirror, trying to sell their story (after they’d already extended the bribe, and King had accepted). The Daily Mirror – being remarkably scrupulous – reported what they’d learned to the police, which launched the investigation. King clearly isn’t that bright, since by going to the Daily Mirror, he alerted police to his illegal activities all on his own.

But the plot was exposed when King and Kelly contacted the Daily Mirror in an attempt to sell their story – and staff informed the police. Kelly claimed that Miss Winehouse, a Grammy Award winner, was effectively funding the bribe, the court heard.

…King, who is being tried for conspiring to pervert the course of justice, said he would ‘effectively throw the case and not turn up’, so that Fielder-Civil and Brown would not face prosecution, Snaresbrook Crown Court, in East London, heard.

When they met journalist Stephen Moyes, in October 2007, he asked if Amy Winehouse was involved in the plot. ‘He was told by Kelly, “Who do you think is paying for it? Of course she is”,’ Mr Larkin said.

But there was no evidence she was part of the conspiracy. King claimed that he was ‘hounded’ by people to stop the case from going to court and suggested money was coming from Amy Winehouse to ‘make this go away’, the jury was told.

[From the Daily Mail]

It’s hard to believe that Amy Winehouse wasn’t involved in this in some way. Where else would Blake Fielder-Civil possibly get money like that? I’m not saying it was Amy’s idea, but I doubt even she would hand over that amount of money without asking what is was for. Police did investigate her involvement, but for whatever reason decided not to charge her. But it sounds like it’s pretty clear that she had something to do with the witness tampering all along.

Here’s Amy Winehouse briefly leaving her London home to hand out ice pops to fans and photographers today. Images thanks to WENN.

Amy Winehouse’s useless husband Blake Fielder-Civil, plead guilty last week to assault and conspiring with the guy he assaulted. Fielder-Civil, 26, beat up Macbeth’s Pub owner James King – and then he tried to bribe King to withdraw his allegations and leave the country. While Fielder-Civil could have gotten about three years for the original assault, it’s the witness tampering – called perverting the course of justice in the U.K. – that’s the much bigger crime. That carries up to life in prison – though Fielder-Civil is unlikely to get such a harsh sentence.

Amy Winehouse’s husband has admitted assaulting a barman and then attempting to cover it up. Blake Fielder-Civil, 26, is standing trial in London on charges of attacking pub landlord James King, and then conspiring with him to withdraw as a witness at the trial. Fielder-Civil and three-co-defendants pleaded guilty last week, but a court order barred reporting the pleas because King is due to face a separate trial. Judge David Radford lifted that restriction Monday.

Soul diva Winehouse and Fielder-Civil married in Miami in May 2007. He was arrested in November and has been in jail awaiting trial ever since. Winehouse was at London’s Snaresbrook Crown Court last week for the opening legal arguments in her husband’s trial.

Fielder-Civil faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison for the assault charge. Perverting the course of justice carries a maximum sentence of life, though that is unlikely to be imposed in this case.

[From the Huffington Post]

I can’t even imagine what Winehouse is going to do as a result of this. Since the plea actually happened last week, it’s safe to assume she already knows about it. Fielder-Civil will be sentenced in about a month, once his co-defendants are finished with their other trials. I would imagine that if he ends up being sentenced for any significant amount of time, we’ll find Amy hallucinating on top of someone’s chimney or something. And that’d be a big improvement for her, behavior-wise.

Here’s Amy Winehouse with her dad Mitch at Guanabana restaurant in Camden, London last night. Amy then stopped at a newsstand for cigarettes and candy. Header of Blake and Amy in November, 2007. Images thanks to WENN.

Amy Winehouse sure knows how to keep it classy. After doing her best to clean herself up for her husband Blake Civil-Fielder’s pre-trial hearings on Monday (and by best, I mean her nicest beehive and too-tight skirt), but the attempt seems to be short-lived. Today she didn’t bother to show up until 3 in the afternoon, wearing a shirt with stains on it, and generally caused a scene throughout the ENTIRE half an hour she managed to stay in the courtroom.

Amy Winehouse gave her verdict on court Wednesday, announcing aloud as pretrial arguments were going on in her husband’s case: “It’s like Disneyland.”

Fielder-Civil, who spent the first part of the afternoon with his face buried in his right hand, appeared to come to life as his wife arrived. As they did on Monday, (Winehouse did not appear in court Tuesday) the pair beamed at each other across the courtroom, raising their eyebrows, winking and blowing each other kisses.

At one point, Fielder-Civil motioned to his lawyer, who brought him paper and pen, apparently to write Winehouse a note. After the court usher shook his head no, the lawyer only whispered to Winehouse, but did not pass her the note.

The singer got up and left after about a half hour. She was unsteady on her feet and whispered “f— you” as she left.

[From People]

Ahh, the traditional “F-you.” I find few things are more likely to turn a biased judge’s favor towards your husband than uttering one of the more offensive curses. Whispered or not, it clearly was audible. But you know, let’s be fair here. If Winehouse didn’t do that, she might have just brought too much elegance and grace to the court proceedings. Really, such sophistication would have caused a major distraction in court. Amy Winehouse behaving herself is much bigger news than Amy Winehouse uttering obscenities and eyeball flirting with her husband. Yeah I know that was oddly specific, but I keep thinking of this picture for some reason.

Can’t you just imagine Winehouse and Civil-Fielder exchanging googly eyes like this at each other throughout court proceedings? I don’t even want to guess what was on the note Blake tried to pass Amy, but I’m guessing that anyone passing notes at 24-years-old is probably making fun of the judge’s wig… and then trying to get some drugs. We all know what Amy keeps in the beehive.

Here’s Amy returning home in London today after her grueling half-hour at Blake’s trial. WENN notes: “Amy Winehouse arriving home from court clutching her arm after reportedly hurting it during a clash with photographers earlier in the day. She is also carrying a bottle of Malibu.” Images thanks to WENN.

The R. Kelly child pornography trial just gets weirder and weirder. And a good deal of it is downright disgusting. In testimony yesterday, the prosecution’s star witness (and three-way sex tape participator) Lisa Van Allen said Kelly carried around a duffel bag filled with his homemade sex tapes. She said wherever Kelly went, the bag went. Not necessarily for safekeeping, but for easy access. Van Allen had a relationship with Kelly from early 1998 to 2001.

R&B superstar R. Kelly carried a duffel bag filled with homemade sex videotapes wherever he went, a woman testified Monday. While making one such tape, Kelly cut off the filming when the woman — Lisa Van Allen — started crying during three-way sex with an underage girl, Van Allen testified.

“He got upset and said he couldn’t watch that. He couldn’t do anything with that, with me crying. He stopped the camera,” Van Allen said. The tapes Kelly liked went with him to his recording studio, to his favorite basketball gym — Hoops on the near West Side — and to video shoots, she said.

“Wherever he was at, the [duffel] bag would follow,” Van Allen said.

[From the Chicago Sun-Times]

Van Allen also described her relationship with Kelly and how many times they made sex tapes.

Van Allen’s testimony — covering her relationship with Kelly and how she ultimately became a witness against him — came under fierce attack by the defense, which contended she wanted money from Kelly. After Van Allen spent most of the day on the stand, the prosecution rested.

Van Allen said Kelly told her the girl was 16, though prosecutors contend she was as young as 13. Van Allen testified that Kelly videotaped the threesome — a tape separate from the one at the heart of the current case.

A year later, the trio had sex again — this time on Kelly’s indoor basketball court, she testified. Van Allen wept as she described how Kelly put a futon mattress on the court. It was during that three-way encounter that she cried, Van Allen said, prompting Kelly to stop the videotaping.

The three had sex again in 2000 inside Kelly’s trailer at a video shoot in Chicago, Van Allen said.

[From the Chicago Sun-Times]

Van Allen was 18 at the time she made the first sex tape with R. Kelly, which the prosecution points out makes the other girl in the video 14 at the time. Which is utterly disgusting. The defense managed to paint Van Allen as a thief and a liar – getting her to admit that she stole a Rolex from Kelly. They’ve also managed to really cloud the prosecution’s case in terms of the identity of the man on the tape, who they claim is not R. Kelly and was digitally manipulated to look like him. Unfortunately for the defense, an F.B.I. expert testified that the tape had not been digitally altered.

The prosecution rested today, and did a good job, given their resources. The defense’s whole strategy is to muddy the waters, blame the victim, and give ridiculous explanations – basically do anything and everything, no matter how extreme, to get Kelly off. It seems pretty clear to most people following the case that he’s guilty as sin – but if I were the betting type, I’d still put all my money on R. Kelly getting off.

Here are older file photos of R. Kelly. Images thanks to WENN.

Amy Winehouse showed up for the first day of husband Blake Fielder-Civil’s trial today – but in classic Amy style, she made her appearance four hours late. Fielder-Civil is being tried on charges of assault and witness tampering. Yeah, he’s all sorts of classy. He’s been held in jail for over six months while he awaited trial. Amy did her best to clean herself up. She managed to wear a decent dress and put on her best beehive. But she still had crack-addict skin and the generally slovenly Winehouse appearance.

Amy Winehouse turned up more than four hours late to court to show support for husband Blake Fielder-Civil on Monday. Asked how her husband looked, Winehouse told PEOPLE: “He’s gorgeous as f—. Haven’t you seen him before?”

Dressed in a blue spotted shirtdress, cream platform peep-toe Christian Louboutin shoes and carrying a black quilted Chanel handbag, Winehouse arrived at court shortly after 2 p.m. She sat alone in the court’s empty front row, blowing kisses and mouthing “I love you” to her husband, who was seated behind glass across the courtroom.

The singer appeared alternately dazed, bored, and outraged as pretrial arguments wore on. At one point, Fielder-Civil got the bailiff to have the court’s usher fetch one of Fielder-Civil’s lawyers in order to relay a message to his wife. After a whispered conversation with the lawyer, Winehouse rummaged in her handbag and held up a heart brooch bearing the word “Blake” in her husband’s direction.

Winehouse continued a mouthed conversation with her husband until the usher stopped her. At about 4 p.m., she motioned to her husband that she’d had enough and was leaving. “I love you, you’re fit,” she said, using the British slang for gorgeous as she stood up and exited the courtroom.

[From People]

What a picture of wifely devotion. Winehouse had quite the hickey on her neck when she gave a widely-panned performance at her concert in Lisbon on Friday night. Here’s Winehouse at court today in London. Images thanks to Splash.

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.