11
comments
|
Sunday, June 15, 2008
This post is a special feature courtesy of loldarian.com affiliate Gyant from SOHH.com.
What If It Were A Boy?
by Gyant
I should warn you now that this particular post has absolutely nothing to do with Atlanta, but my feelings are SOHH strong that I can't keep them bottled inside. Late Friday afternoon the verdict was handed down against R.Kelly and his pending child pornography charges. And the juror's decision has left me feeling shameful and sad towards the future of this country.
Wendy Williams once said that the biggest problem in this country is not drug abuse, its child abuse. Robert Kelly was acquitted on 14 counts of child pornography Friday afternoon. It seems that despite the graphic material on the now infamous tape, an eye witness who came forward for the prosecution confirming the "pied piper of R&B's" identity, his brother also publicly confirming Kells identity, plus, a forensic expert confirming the authenticity of the tape, that the jury still decided that R. Kelly is an innocent man.
The way this country treats sexual predators is deeply, deeply disturbing to me. I can't help but think that once again this sends a message to our nation, as well as sexual predators, that little girls are OK to be prayed upon. After six years of said tape circulating around the world R.Kelly has emerged unscathed. And let's just forget for second that the court system once again has failed us, what about all the fans? Nobody can dispute that after the allegations broke six years ago that R.Kelly received virtually no backlash – if anything he became more popular.
Mothers, Daughters, Uncles, and Aunt's were still "Stepping In The Name Of Love". Artists across the board were still ponying up big money for Kelly to be affiliated with their musical projects. And adding even more insult to injury, since the allegations broke R.Kelly even managed to have a damn near sold out tour.
Am I the only one who is looking at all of the R.Kelly fans as pillagers and supporters of child porn themselves? How one can continue to support a man who is linked to such horrible sexual crimes/allegations is preposterous to me
Now I'm not going to argue whether or not he did it or not because I have eyes and my God given common sense. However, I can't help but think to myself what if this had been a young boy? If the same tape had emerged six years ago with a man who resembled in any small way R.Kelly making a young boy strip, pissing on his chest, and sodomizing him would all the R. Kelly fans be pumping their fists in support? I'm thinking HELL NO!
Uh, can anyone say Michael Jackson….
However in the back of societies mind when these acts are committed against our young girls [and note I didn't say "black girls" because this, isn't a black thing, it's a people thing] somehow people are able to reconcile it and never fully blame the predator. It's always somehow the victims fault. Today's verdict, in my opinion, just perpetuated that notion.
In my opinion to let this sick, disgusting, child predator get off Scott free only sends yet another example that if you're financially better than most, and if you're committing a crime against a female, particularly a young female, then everyone will simply choose to look the other way rather then stand together as a protective shield for our youth.
In a country that was built on freedom and justice for all those words seem all but gone to me. In my eyes we are a country that prides money, wealth and the deletion of the human spirit.
It's just another sad day in America!
11 Comments:
...if you're financially better than most, and if you're committing a crime against a female, particularly a young female, then everyone will simply choose to look the other way rather then stand together as a protective shield for our youth.
kinda reminds me of rob lowe getting caught back in the day. what ever happened to him in a court of law? nada...but he sure did get a lot of movie and TV jobs.
our society is so mixed up...priorities are just all out of whack.
June 16, 2008 9:51 AM
Media accounts indicate that the jury in the sex tape was sure the man in the tape was R. Kelly.
The alleged victim, who had said prior to the trial that the female in the video was not her, did not testify or appear in court. Her parents did not testify or appear in court. Some of the "victim's" relatives testified it was her. Some of her relatives testified it was not her.
The jury, therefore, could NOT identify the female in the sex tape. That created reasonable doubt. The jury did its job because the female in the video also had to be identified. Not just R. Kelly.
Of course, people with enough money to pay the best lawyers (instead of having to rely on overworked, second or third rate public defenders) are more likely to get off. What else is new?
June 16, 2008 11:15 AM
So what will happen next? Will people boycott his concerts and refuse to buy his music? Will radio stations continue to play his songs? Or will we, the public, demand a level of justice and accountability the court failed to provide?
June 16, 2008 1:35 PM
The court DID provide justice. If the female in the sex tape could not be identified, how could the jury know beyond a reasonable doubt that she was too young to be in a sex tape?
The verdict in this case indicated was that the concept of reasonable doubt was respected. This doesn't mean that R. Kelly didn't film sex acts with an underage female. It means that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
What the public does about R. Kelly's music is up to the public. My guess is that it will be business as usual.
June 16, 2008 2:23 PM
@ bernie...
LOL...those were rhetorical questions right? 'cause i'm sure you already know the answers...random supporters showed up to the courthouse...during this 6 year period, other artists had no problem collaborating with him on songs...the radio continued to play his music (despite all his new stuff is garbage). and lastly good ole al and the revy rev jesse were nowhere to be found during this whole thing (go figure). so accountability...don't count on it. and that's a shame, if you ask me.
June 16, 2008 2:32 PM
If the child R. Kelly had abused was a boy, I wouldn't have to hear a Kelly song on my local R&B station at least twice every hour. Kelly would have been blackballed long ago, and his career would have been over. And that's just because many would have labled him gay, and not because he is a child molester.
There were actually people on one local radio program this morning saying that it's okay just as long as a girl wants it too. And that most young girls are curious, and that they are usually the agressors. These same people who spout this crap go ballistic when asked to deal with consenting adults of the same sex who want to be treated with respect and equality.
June 16, 2008 6:33 PM
I mean, geez, come on guys. He's RICH. Of course that makes him right... and innocent
DUH. :-)
June 16, 2008 10:18 PM
R. Kelly had enough money to create reasonable doubt.
Im sure this girl's family was paid off years ago. She would be about 23 years old today. She is living a nice life in the Chicago area.
The End.....Case Closed
June 17, 2008 12:30 AM
Michael Jackson has been accused of molesting boys but his OLD music is still very popular on the radio. Admittedly he hasn't had any new hits in years, but DJs now often play MJ's music without making "jokes" about his alleged liking for young boys. In other words, people are starting to "forget".
If R. Kelly's alleged victim (alleged because he was acquitted on all counts so there is no victim legally speaking), had come forward and testified she was the female in the sex tape at age 13 or 14 and that the man in the tape was R. Kelly, the verdict may have been different. Why didn't the prosecution compel the alleged victim (and her parents) to testify?
June 17, 2008 8:47 AM
It was a travesty of justice, but
as said already, "What else is new?" The young lady did not testify, and denied it being herself, because she likely did not want to go through all that again, and of course Kelly denied
it because he doesn't want to go to jail at be at the risk of more
hardened criminals' sexual perversions. I saw the tape, way back when....that was him, he can
deny it all he wants. He has a thing for too young girls--y'all
remember Aaliyah, right? Some in
the various Yahoo groups were coming to Kelly's defense saying
that the girl was willing. That may be, but the fact that she was underage was what the charge was.
Some even said it was "no biggie".
Wonder if it had been your mailman
screwing and pissing on your little
daughter/sister, and not some celebrity, would it have been "no biggie"? Kelly dodged a bullet this time---hope he seeks help and
avoids this type shit in the future. If that had been a male,
Kelly would be shunned by many who
commune with him now.
June 19, 2008 5:47 PM
If it were a boy, R. Kelly would have gotten off just like Michael Jackson did. As long as you have money, the law doesn't apply to you.
June 24, 2008 2:24 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home