New Pornstar Galleries -
All smartbuydisc.rus > World News Nonsense > Looks Like R.Kelly Didn't Dodge the Bullet :o)
AuthorPost

Senior Member


1932 Posts
8/04
Posted - Oct 29 2005 : 5:25PM


i am for one glad to here this news .



Senior Member

Silencio...
104341 Posts
2/00
Posted - Oct 29 2005 : 6:10PM
Now if we could just get some kind of restraining order to put an end to that godawful "closet" saga of his...

Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 29 2005 : 8:04PM
I wonder if the girl is white or black.

If she's white, he'll probably walk.


Senior Member

1932 Posts
8/04
Posted - Oct 29 2005 : 8:17PM
not in a child porn case he wont and with vid evidence of it he is as good as convicted and she don't have to testify
in the case the tape is the testimony so she can plead the 5'th all she likes But when it comes down to what age she
was during it that will be the Ball game for R. Pedo Kelly
!

PS: there are no stachu of limitations on CP Cases
as that is not only a state crime but also federal .

Edited by - lukemason on 10/29/2005 8:21:39 PM


Platinum Member

Discovry
30964 Posts
3/04
Posted - Oct 29 2005 : 10:45PM
Asking for charges to be dropped is merely a matter of form for a defense lawyer. Its like checking for change in pay phones you pass. There probably isn't something there, but you can hope to luck out.
Also, those are more billable hours.
to see fewer adsAdult DVD Talk is Sponsored by
email for advertising info
 
All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
4732 Posts
1/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 12:30AM
*scratches head*
 
All-Star Member

people pay me NOT to get naked
4071 Posts
2/04
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 3:25AM
I have no idea what that means at all...are you saying that a Black man is more likely to get away with defiling a minor if the minor is White ???

Thats just crazy.

I'm glad to see that Kelly will have to defend hisself, but their is some credence to the argument that it is prohibitive to expect a defendant to defend themselves against charges of an event that could've ocurred at anytime during a two year span !

And what if she were underage in 1998, but not in 2000? How do they handle that , since they are claiming it took place "somewhere between those periods."

It is a little strange that they can't narrow the timing of the altercation a little more.

"The poor-woman's Mandingo "


Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 4:02AM
I am absolutely saying that the race card makes it more difficult to convict a famous black man of a crime, especially a sex crime, if the victim if white, and the accused is black/rich/famous.

Does anyone really dispute that.

/scratches head

Edited by - cyberchicken on 10/30/2005 4:03:05 AM

Bandit One
Deactivated User

No Place That Far
2954 Posts
9/02
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 7:53AM
I agree.

OJ- Free man.
Kobe- Free Man.
Mike Tyson- prison time.

Scratch your head all you want, for the truth often itches.

Edited by - midnightmax on 10/30/2005 7:58:35 AM


Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 8:16AM
I could not have said it better.

In fact, I didn't

 
All-Star Member

people pay me NOT to get naked
4071 Posts
2/04
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 9:44AM
Let me see here...you can point to a couple of examples throughout the entire annals of history and that allows you to ignore that you live in a society whose legal system very often favors the White and punishes minorities more severely?

There are still a good many places in this country where a Black man can get in serious trouble just for looking at a White woman wrong...celebrity or not.


Senior Member

Arrogant & Obnoxious Narcissist
8868 Posts
10/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 10:15AM
Every once in a great while ADT fuckin' AMAZES me with the ignorance of some of its posters. Wow. Just wow. It's not even worth my time to list all of the well-known cases throughout history where minorities (mostly black) have received largely unfair penalties because their alleged victims were white.

Even if OJ and Kobe got off, I can't believe anyone in this day and age would actually believe a minority is more likely to be acquitted because their victim was white. That's just some bass ackwards logic/thinking. It's not hard at all to convict a black man of anything, celebrity or not. And YES, I really dispute that.

I can understand maybe saying the race of the accused may have a bearing on things, but to ask whether or not the VICTIM was white or black REALLY fuckin' confused me. So Cyberchicken believes that "If she's white, he'll probably walk." Well, what if she's black (which she is, for anyone who's ever seen the videos)? The court's gonna throw the book at him for defiling one their precious nubian sistas? Gimme a break.

ultradamno - The never-ending "Trapped in the Closet" saga has ALWAYS been an annoyance to my delicate eardrums. I pray for its demise nightly.


Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 10:20AM
Dude, grab a beer, and chill out.

I went out of my way to point out that I was talking about FAMOUS BLACK MEN.


Senior Member

Arrogant & Obnoxious Narcissist
8868 Posts
10/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 10:47AM
So I'm guess that's someone else logged in as you who wrote "I wonder if the girl is white or black. If she's white, he'll probably walk." That comment left more than a few people here confused.

Either way, whether you're commenting on white victims or black accused, you're way off base. I can't just "chill out" when I see a comment so ignorant and with nary a fact to back it up, especially when history has proven, time and time again, at least in this country, the EXACT OPPOSITE.

I'm curious as to how old you are and what would make you say something so stupid and what examples you have (other than the previous listed two) that would make you honestly believe what the hell you said.

Edited by - Crucifixio_Jones on 10/30/2005 10:51:34 AM


Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 10:59AM
I explained what I meant, in a second post, long before you even commented in this thread.

Were you so enraged, by what I said, that you couldn't even wait to read the entire thread, before attacking me?

Edited by - cyberchicken on 10/30/2005 11:05:15 AM

to see fewer adsAdult DVD Talk is Sponsored by
email for advertising info

Senior Member

Arrogant & Obnoxious Narcissist
8868 Posts
10/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 11:14AM
And the race card is so powerful it gets everyone off, no matter the accusation or evidence stacked against them. Sure, I know what it means, but I have to wonder, do you?

Get a clue.

Even more than I'm tired of black people sometimes unfairly pulling the race card, I'm sick of white people wrongly blaming everything that doesn't go their way on blacks pulling the race card. Not everything is a result of someone pulling the race card or your worst fear, Affirmative Action. Yours is a cop out answer; one that wasn't thought through fully, if at all and are the thoughts of (to quote Harvey Keitel in "Cop Land"), "a boy. You made it on the back of a matchbook, without thinking, without looking at the cards."

"R. Kelly will walk because he's famous and black and especially if his victim is white?" Bullshit. And you still have yet to explain how you came to this ludicrous assumption. Oh? You can't? Surprise, surprise.


Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 11:44AM
If the race card is powerful enough to allow a jury to convince themselves that DNA wasn't enough proof to convict, then I expect that the race card is powerful enough to allow a jury to believe that R. Kelly didn't know the girls age, and assumed she was legal.


Senior Member

Arrogant & Obnoxious Narcissist
8868 Posts
10/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 12:07PM
You don't have to pull the race card to convince a jury of that. Hell, did it ever occur to you that might be the TRUTH? That R. Kelly didn't know the girl's age, that she just may have lied to him? Would he be the first guy that's ever happened to?

Edited by - Crucifixio_Jones on 10/30/2005 12:07:57 PM


Administration, Defenestration

Porno movies, sexy videos, xxx. Adult DVD Talk at your service.
14461 Posts
11/99
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 2:30PM
I think how cyberchicken came to that ludicrous assumption is obvious from his many posts. He's the suffering white male who think illegals are "takin rrr jebs" (southpark) and that minorities get special treatment.
Every Color of Fun
Deactivated User

146 Posts
8/05
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 3:18PM
Re: OJ Simpson.

OJ most certainly did not "get off."

He was convicted in the civil trial and held liable for something like $2,500,000 and change.

i don't know where you come from, but around here that sure as fuck doesn't equate to "getting off scot free."


Comstock Films

6887 Posts
8/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 3:35PM
Minorities do get special treatment Steph – just ask BSD.

Edited by - TonyC on 10/30/2005 6:14:18 PM

 
All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
4732 Posts
1/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 4:10PM
So the basis about CC's rich theory is Kobe and Mike and their differences? He might as well look in a mirror and scream "I'm Rick James, Bitch!".

Weren't there some other differences between them besides the colour of their victims?


Senior Member

1932 Posts
8/04
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 6:09PM
i did not expect this thread to go in this wild of direction .
 
All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
4732 Posts
1/03
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 6:15PM
Let's put it this way. If CC's race card conspiracy theory was true, he didn't have to ask about the colour of the victim. If she was white, we would've heard about it by now.

This case is how old? The video has been out there how long?


Platinum Member

Discovry
30964 Posts
3/04
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 10:24PM
OJ - Excellent defense team, called for good reason 'The Dream Team'. Judge who lost control. Prosecutors who did not dot their 'i's. Did not go through witnesses, did not prepare experts. Mentally, they were losing it at the end.
Kobe - Misplayed by prosecutor. Victim with past that could be attacked on stand.

Just because you can pick some that on the surface fit the pattern doesn't mean that they are what you say.

to see fewer adsAdult DVD Talk is Sponsored by
email for advertising info

Platinum Member

Discovry
30964 Posts
3/04
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 10:31PM
The chain of evidence went through Mark Thurman. Defense went after him to the point where a jury member could convince themselves that he might have tainted the evidence. Prosecution never prepared for this, as they should have with a highly public case.
The DNA expert was dry and boring, very technical. Juries, by and large, are average people. People do not respond well to this. They also don't know if the questions the defence lawyer asks mean anything. So their DNA specialist lawyer asked a bunch of questions designed to make that expert look like a monkey. So he becomes an unlikable idiot in the eyes of the jury.
Prosecution never comes back to clarify why those questions were irrelevant.
Juries can react very much on emotion, which high priced law firms are very aware of.

Or is looking at the whole (real) picture too much to ask?


Platinum Member

Discovry
30964 Posts
3/04
Posted - Oct 30 2005 : 10:39PM
Hey, at least he hasn't said (yet) that it all started falling apart when women got the vote. So its not like he is against everything.

Edited by - croy on 10/30/2005 10:40:19 PM


Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 31 2005 : 1:21AM
It's interesting.

If I had said that a white jury would be more likely to convict a black man, if the victim were white, no one would have said anything, because it's true.

But when I said that a black jury would be less likely to convict a famous black man, if the victim were white, everyone freaks out.

This is at the heart of liberal politics.

That only whites are capable of being racist.

That only a white jury is capable of allowing race to taint their verdict, but never a black jury.

Not even if the accused is rich and famous.

This sort of Orwellian nonsense must be purged from liberal politics, if the Democratic party ever wants to run all three branches of government, again.


Edited by - cyberchicken on 10/31/2005 1:22:24 AM


Platinum Member

Discovry
30964 Posts
3/04
Posted - Oct 31 2005 : 4:54AM
Actually, your posts say nothing about having a black jury at all. You are just adding that now to try to shift the issue.

And maybe people are reacting because they believe what you say isn't true.

I've already refuted your OJ argument, can you credibly resurrect it?

Bandit One
Deactivated User

No Place That Far
2954 Posts
9/02
Posted - Oct 31 2005 : 8:01AM
Yeah, spending the rest of his life playing golf and fucking Playmates- I feel so god-damned sorry for that poor bastard. BTW, I'm from Texas- on the map, that's nowhere near Mars.

Edited by - midnightmax on 10/31/2005 9:32:55 AM


Senior Member

1475 Posts
4/02
Posted - Oct 31 2005 : 10:48AM
What I said was:
The race card implies juries of the opposite race, than the accused, whether they are black or white.

I didn't have to specifically say that the jury would be black, because the term race card makes that clear.

And I can assure you that most Whites absolutely believe that OJ Simpson walked, because his lawyers played the race card.

If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit - my ass.

 
All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
4732 Posts
1/03
Posted - Oct 31 2005 : 6:16PM
Wait, why would the race card imply juries of the opposite race than the accused?

The race card can be played at any time to any jury or the general public to argue that the accusation was motivated by racism.

 
All-Star Member

people pay me NOT to get naked
4071 Posts
2/04
Posted - Oct 31 2005 : 9:22PM
I'm sorry CC, I see the point you are trying to make...I may not agree, but I see it. However, playing the race card does not in any way suppose the jury is any particular race. If that is what you meant, it was lost on all of us.

"The poor-woman's Mandingo "


Platinum Member

Discovry
30964 Posts
3/04
Posted - Oct 31 2005 : 10:57PM
Not at all.
They may believe it, but that would be because of the lack of reading and critical thinking they applied. The disparity in legal talent was amazing. I described some of the problems.
Of course it is easier to just have simple excuses. In this most groups are just as dumb.

Why did Robert Blake get off? The freakish Michael Jackson? It is notoriously difficult to prosecute celebrities both because of the jury reaction and the quality of lawyer they can both afford and attract (due to free publicity).


Senior Member

1932 Posts
8/04
Posted - Nov 1 2005 : 8:43AM
Blake got off cuz he didn't pull the trigger and they could not even prove that a pay off was made to do it there for reasonable doubt .


MJ Got off simply cuz the family involved were pathological liars and gold diggers and that was
plain to see in there past court cases basically
they cried wolf to many times and the video of the
boy removed from the mom's influence seed emphatically
that he didn't touch me and the mom on the stand in the case was a complete loony didn't help either so
reasonable doubt there .


Knuckle Dragger

9505 Posts
2/03
Posted - Nov 1 2005 : 10:40AM
Where was the mandatory minimum sentence for Jeb Bush's daughter? Huh? Huh? What if it had been you or me?

What does this have to do with R. Kelly?

I don't know. I try not to think too much about the existence of R. Kelly.

 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13923 Posts
1/08
Posted - Mar 6 2019 : 8:54PM
He's back in the clink for not paying child support.

Meanwhile, the memes have started with a vengeance:

rKelly meme.jpg

 
All-Star Member

Literotica.com - grover10
28999 Posts
11/04
Posted - Mar 7 2019 : 7:36AM

 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13923 Posts
1/08
Posted - Mar 8 2019 : 12:09AM
^
LOL. Y'know, even if they ARE of legal age...it is still not a good look for a guy charged with sex crimes to have two girlfriends. They may have done more to hurt than help.
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13923 Posts
1/08
Posted - Mar 9 2019 : 3:25PM
^And let me clarify something: His girlfriends -- unless the relationship started when either was under age -- are not germane to this case. He can have 100 girlfriends and as long as all is between consenting adults, it's OK. Gayle King made kind of a misstep going after the more, well, shall we say prurient interests of viewers when asking if this is a threesome relationship. Now, sure I at that, but it has little bearing on the case from a strictly legal standpoint.

I'm just saying in the court of public opinion, (and in the views of potential jurors), it's not a good look. Especially when you're complaining about being broke/not being able to afford child support.

Edited by - Smiler Grogan on 3/9/2019 3:26:02 PM

 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13923 Posts
1/08
Posted - Mar 9 2019 : 4:03PM

It's the right thing to do in general, but also, RICO tactics. Start with his boys, and pump whatever information you can out of them. You tell them they're looking at 10 years in the joint, they'll start singing better than their boss ever could. Especially given the fact that they realize their trip on the Kelly gravy train may have pulled into its' final station.

 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13923 Posts
1/08
Posted - Jul 17 2019 : 7:53AM
I keep forgetting we have a specific thread for him.

^

***
Per the report, federal prosecutors in the Northern District of Illinois allegedly have in their possession now more than 20 videos of Kelly allegedly engaged in sex acts with minors — and many of those videos were straight up handed over by the R&B singer’s former employees who the feds were able to flip.

Though it’s unclear exactly what is on the alleged videos themselves beyond “Kelly engaged with minors,” one can probably assume the horrific, disgusting content based on the context here. Add to that the fact that federal law enforcement sources are telling the media that the videos were “exactly what the feds needed to secure indictments for sex crimes, including child pornography,” and it’s clear to see how important the tapes are to this arrest, indictment, and inevitable courtroom battle.

It’s a big deal for a former employee (or several, it would appear) to have flipped on the once-popular R&B singer, but clearly, the conscience got the better of ’em, and thankfully it sure appears like they finally did the right thing.


***

Maybe it was conscience, but more likely, Domino Effect; one guy gets brought in and is told he might face charges of being an accomplice; he gives up some names; they go after those guys; they get more names and maybe the first few tapes; and on and on until you get something that can bring the big dog down. Kelly's entourage can clerly see the writing on the wall; the money's gone, the albums and shows aren't selling anymore (and in fact many of those questioned may not even be employed with him any more) so there's no upside in loyalty to him if it means they might be looking at a decade or more in the federal pen.

 
All-Star Member

pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world
17062 Posts
9/07
Posted - Jul 19 2019 : 4:02AM
I couldn't believe when he first walked, look forward to seeing his ass put in jail finally.

Lord of Lust

az-mo-day-us
14086 Posts
10/01
Posted - Jul 19 2019 : 4:09AM
Never mind R. Kelly, he'll get what he deserves eventually. But look at this smartbuydisc.ru thread. Talk about a blast from the past. Before Instagram, before Twitter, before Facebook. ADT was truly ahead of it's time!
 
All-Star Member

Woman of the Decade
13923 Posts
1/08
Posted - Aug 5 2019 : 9:46PM
All smartbuydisc.rus > World News Nonsense > Looks Like R.Kelly Didn't Dodge the Bullet :o)

Previous topic: Why are retail chains tanking if the economy is do
Next topic: Karl Rove vs. The GOP



Jump To:

Online porn video at mobile phone