Monday, May 05, 2008

R. Kelly's Ice Is Getting Really Thin

For six years the child pornography trial of R. Kelly has been delayed. Oh sure, there have been lots of civil suits from girls who say they had sex with Kelly and those have been settled. The criminal charge though has been pending since June 2002. The trial starts this week, and R. Kelly may be in seeing his freedom slip because he loved threesomes.

R. Kelly and his defense team thought they could get away with saying that the girl Kelly is alleged to have had sex with is not the one on the tape. The alleged victim was also going to testify it is not her in the tape. I wonder why she would do that? Take a big guess.

Anyway, that whole theory may have gone up in smoke The Chicago Sun Times says there is another woman who did a threesome with Kelly and the 13 year old girl and can identify the girl in person and on the tape. Uh oh. Can you hear that? That's the sound of R. Kelly's butt clenching knowing he faces 15 years in the slammer if convicted.

Six years. The girl was allegedly 13 when it happened, 15 when the charges were filed and is now old enough to drink legally. R. Kelly is now 41, so that would have made him 33 when it allegedly happened. Tell me again why a parent hasn't killed him yet. Oh, yeah. Money. I don't care how much you offered me, if a 33 year old touched any 13 year old, he would be a goner. I know none of us would be interested in sex with children, but they would have already lethally injected us, and yet R. Kelly is out there. Free, and continuing to make some really bad music and quite a lot of money.

Don't ever believe there is just one justice system. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets off, and I don't mean looking at all the other videos he has stashed somewhere with a bunch of other teenagers.


mooshki said...

Ugh. I want to say this is unbelievable, but given that there are parents who still let their little boys visit Michael Jackson, I know there's no level people won't sink to.

Unknown said...

Ok, someone help me figure this out cause I'm confused. Juan over at Highbrid Nation told me that this new witness has popped up and is saying that she knows that the girl was underage because she joined Kelly and the underage girl in a threesome. So that makes her guilty and Kelly right? Or was she underage also? Which would make Kelly guity in another underage case. Kelly is off the chain.

Anonymous said...

michael - agreed - first thought that came to my mind is that either she is a consenting adult having sex with a 13 year old girl and she cut a deal with the prosecutors, or that she was in that weird over the age of consent/ but not an adult in the courts eyes limbo thing.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Wonder why people still buy his music.

I always believe perverts like these should get castrated :D.

Judi said...

Losing gonads doesn't change anything; they still have their nasty minds. Off with his head! :-D


Popular Posts from the last 30 days