Rapper R. Kelly was found not gulity of raping a thirteen year old child even though the incident was posted online. R. Kelly used the it wasn't me defense brillantly and the jury believed him. The defense claimed that it was R. Kelly's head super-imposed on another man's body. This despite the fact that several witnesses including one of the women on the tape testified it was infact R. Kelly. The thirteen year old girl in question refused to testify. Many people believe she, and her family were paid off by Kelly. Even so what does it take to convict a celebrity in this country.
Prosecutors called 22 witnesses that said it was the girl on the tape. The Defense called the girl in question and three family members of the girl would said it wasn't her. What did the case come down to, "The issue of whether there was or wasn't a fingernail-sized mole on the man's lower back was a subject of hours of testimony. A defense witness told jurors there was no mole on his back, proving it's not Kelly, who has such a mole. But a prosecution witness displayed freeze frames of the video where a dark spot seemed to appear as the man turns to take off his pants."
That's what the jurors were debating and why they found him not guilty. What about the fact he's on tape having sex with an underage girl. I can't believe the jurors bought that his head was superimposed. If the tape was the only evidence the prosecution had of the crime, maybe you believe that, but when 22 witnesses identify the girl on the tape has being underage, and 11 idenify R. Kelly has the man on the tape I think it's obvious what happened. Furthermore, the star prosecution witness told the jury, she engaged in several three-way sexual encounters with Kelly and the alleged victim, including once on a basketball court. Kelly videotaped the trysts, she said.
I think the jurors just wanted to go home instead of delibating according to an article on MSNBC.com a juror broke a bottle of beer on the table while having dinner with his fellow jurors because the waiter took to long to bring him his beer. “I’ve been waiting for fucking half an hour — how long do I have to wait? All I want is a couple of beers and a hamburger," said the juror. Things got so out of hand the juror had to be given his own room last night and prosecutors wanted him kicked off the jury, the juror told the judge he was claustrophobic, after the judge ask if he had mental problems. Then the next morning another juror wrote the judge a note asking to be let off the juror, "“How can I be removed and go home? I really need to.” Before the judge could even decide if the juror could be removed their was a verdict. The jury took less tan a day to delibrate on this case which took a month to prosecute. I'm thinking maybe they didn't delibrate as well as they might have.
I guess you have to give the defense credit, if that's what you want to call it, for confusing the jury and underminding the Prosecution's star witness by getting her to admit from stealing for Kelly on the stand, but still it's on tape! It's times like this I'm glad I believe in Heaven and Hell because even though he might not get held accountable during his lifetime I have no doubt he will be held accountable for his actions in the afterlife.