Wednesday, January 30, 2019

Blind Item #1

The latest chance for the former A list singer/child molester to go to jail has evaporated because the singer was able to write a check to the victim and they agreed to not cooperate with the police. The thing is, it didn't even take that large of check. Less than six figures.

33 comments:

Tricia13 said...

R Kelley

Thot Crimes said...

Looks like it was a shakedown after all.

gauloise said...

I guess it was sthe girl who was suing him for giving her Herpes, the case was closed a couple weeks ago by the Dallas PD

DJS NOLA said...

as long as victims are willing to sell out for not pressing charges then i hav e a right to stop caring about these types of people.. if you really care about what this man is doing or has done then dont settle and take him to court.. otherwise your complaints ring hollow

Nor Cal said...

I wonder if the victim would have received more money if she pressed charges and then sued after he was found guilty.

Pissoff said...

Making America Great Again.

Real Sench said...

R. Kelly and for some reason, I'm not surprised.

Count Jerkula said...

The difference between whores and victims is victims don't get paid.

Sd Auntie said...

+100000 nor cal but he may be broke soon! That's the way to go though!

HeatherBee said...

I wonder if the victim had family members pressuring her to accept that payoff.

J said...

Cash is king.

astra worthington said...

Uh what?

astra worthington said...

+1

Aquagirl said...

Don’t know whether this victim had a lawyer or not, but if the payout was less than 6 figures and a lawyer and taxes need to be paid, the victim will be left with hardly anything. Must’ve been really pressured to settle.

MDAnderson said...

R kelly is a shady dude that has lived in Chicago and protected for all these years clearly by a lot of people. Some of these victims maybe physically intimidated to settle. Who is going to testify? The girl and her family on the tape denied it was her. R kelly just needs to be ended.

Unknown said...

Aquagirl: the money would be considered victims' compensation in most states, and is not taxed as income. I agree that a family member pressured/advised this young woman to take the chump change.

molly said...

So, if a victim settles for money , she should be written off by some here? Without knowing why she settled? Says more about the attitude of some here. Rotten.

Do Tell said...

Indeed, Molly. How nice that the girl can't think of other victims and that he will not stop doing this.

Count Jerkula said...

Unkown: without a crime on the books how would it be victim compensation?

Count Jerkula said...

Yep. With the exchange of cash and/or favors you relinquish your rights to be a victim.

Rose McGowan, whore, not victim. She took the cash and remained silent for years. To make it worse, she complained that other people didnt speak for her, when she gladly accepted cash for her silence and wasnt about to corroborate anything someone else would have said.

MJ said...

If you have to sell ( out) yourself, at lest be the price VERY high


SMH

Brayson87 said...

Might have been the same settlement offer made to a lot of victims. They're handed a surveillance photo of their family looking happy and a check. Both of which will cease to exist if they don't settle and cooperate.

Brayson87 said...

The weakness of all good people is their family. That's why it's usually not heroes who get the bad guys.

cat said...

That is how I feel about Woody Allen. There was a prosecutor ready and willing to prosecute and the mother backed out. Imagine if a top movie director had been very publicly prosecuted, prosecuted and found guilty.... how different Hollywood might be today?
So many children don't get the chance to take a case to trial. The mother made her choice. To me it's wrong to not proceed with a trial, but expect the world to treat Allen has a child molester.

Brayson87 said...

@cat, It's a view often taken in child abuse cases, trying to prevent further trauma to the child from the court proceedings. But really that bell has already been wrung, the worst possible sh!t has already happened to the child. At least the perpetrator might be prevented from harming more children in the future.
Then again even Hillary Clinton got an obvious child rapist off a charge using legal maneuvering, so pressing charges is never a slam dunk.

cat said...

@Brayson87 it's just bugs me that he wasn't prosecuted, supposedly to protect the child, but she was protected. The prosecutor made a point of publicly putting the information before the media. It was obvious who the child was. She grew up knowing, we all believed she was abused. Her supposed abuse was public knowledge, with her having a chance at justice. If she was abused, she was mistreated, not just by Allen. Her mom and prosecutor should have protected her privacy.

JL said...

New York State just extendes the Statute of Limitations for child sex abuse victims.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/28/nyregion/child-sex-abuse-victims.html

Brayson87 said...

@cat, I agree the whole thing was disgusting, maybe if they'd locked him up that time then all these later victims could have been spared. They had him on video, for most crimes a single eye witness account is good enough to prosecute.

Brayson87 said...

+1 JL, at least that's some good news for a change.

Sarton Bander said...

NYC just changed the law so a pregnant woman can get an abortion for any reason right up to birth!

astra worthington said...

So they’ve legalized murder. Horrible.

Count Jerkula said...

I am sure it is less traumatizing for the mothers than having to take the baby home, smother it with a pillow and say they died of SIDS. Like the cook in Spun's mom told him when she was drowning puppies in the bathtubn "i'm killin what i cant take care of."

Sal T said...

Woah! I’m pro choice but I don’t think it should be legal to abort an almost full term baby. There should be a cut off point.

Advertisement

Popular Posts from the last 30 days