As in the words of Ernie McCracken: "I'm above the law. I can buy my way out of anything."
Who in their right mind would want to enter the field of becoming a lawyer nowadays? It's pretty much a joke of a profession, at least with celebrities. R. Kelly was acquitted of all 14 charges leveraged against him in Illinois. WTF? What more evidence do you need? The prosecution had two eye-witnesses, and a video tape of him having sex with a 13-year old and pissing on another under-age girl. All the defense had was a clip from the Wayan Brothers' movie, Little Man.
What would it take for a celebrity to actually get found guilty of a crime? Clearly evidence, eye-witnesses, character testimony, and all other lawyer jargon does not work. My new life goal is to become a celebrity not for the money and girls, just so I am going to be above the law.
Showing posts with label r. kelly. Show all posts
Showing posts with label r. kelly. Show all posts
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Defense rests...
Unless our good friend R. Kelly quickly changes to a good lawyer (are there any left) it looks like he is so screwed in this case once and for all. Oh well I guess we are going to all have to get our s**ty R&B music elsewhere.
"Prosecutors said Monday they planned to recall to the witness stand Grant Fredericks, who previously testified that the videotape showed a dark spot on the lower back of the man in the video. The spot "corresponds" with a mole on Kelly's back, Fredericks told jurors.
Last week, Kelly's team presented its own video expert, Charles Palm, who showed a copy of the tape in which dark spots seemed to appear and then disappear from the man's back. He dismissed the spots as 'video noise.'"
I'm not a science man, but I'm not sure how noise could visually appear as a black spot on a video. I might be wrong though.
Oh well, lesson learned. Don't piss on girls when you are having relations with them, especially when they are 13 years old. You may become rich and famous someday and then 'girlfriend gonna get paid.'
"Prosecutors said Monday they planned to recall to the witness stand Grant Fredericks, who previously testified that the videotape showed a dark spot on the lower back of the man in the video. The spot "corresponds" with a mole on Kelly's back, Fredericks told jurors.
Last week, Kelly's team presented its own video expert, Charles Palm, who showed a copy of the tape in which dark spots seemed to appear and then disappear from the man's back. He dismissed the spots as 'video noise.'"
I'm not a science man, but I'm not sure how noise could visually appear as a black spot on a video. I might be wrong though.
Oh well, lesson learned. Don't piss on girls when you are having relations with them, especially when they are 13 years old. You may become rich and famous someday and then 'girlfriend gonna get paid.'
Friday, May 23, 2008
Ambulance Chasers
The lengths a lawyer will go to keep their client innocent has never surprised me...until now. As we all know R. Kelly is in court AGAIN for having sex with a 13-year old. This time they have been showing the video in court and I read this story about how his lawyer is building a defense.
WTF? Why compare it to Little Man? Because R. Kelly is black? The lady's response to the lawyer's questioning is hilarious. At this point I am hoping there is no way that R. Kelly gets away with this. This would be like the 3rd 13-year old girl he has been accused of having sex with. Can anyone in Hollywood be found guilty of anything?
I guess if you want to become a lawyer you need to take a class called "Terrible Movies and How to Build a Shaky Defense around Them."
I should have used evidence from White Chicks or some other terrible Wayans Brothers' movie (there's just so many of them) during my divorce hearing.
WTF? Why compare it to Little Man? Because R. Kelly is black? The lady's response to the lawyer's questioning is hilarious. At this point I am hoping there is no way that R. Kelly gets away with this. This would be like the 3rd 13-year old girl he has been accused of having sex with. Can anyone in Hollywood be found guilty of anything?
I guess if you want to become a lawyer you need to take a class called "Terrible Movies and How to Build a Shaky Defense around Them."
I should have used evidence from White Chicks or some other terrible Wayans Brothers' movie (there's just so many of them) during my divorce hearing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)