R Kelly is a sick and sadistic individual

RustyShackleford said:
Dude is a troll.

He be in the Political thread caping for Trump and trying to piss dudes off with his antics.

He has a long history of caping for dudes that do fowl **** to young girls.

Even Meth be clowning him, don't take him seriously famb :lol:
Click to expand...
Lol fake fry lawyer is here? No surprise



It was funny at first but not anymore. Dude is only here to back sexual offenders, pedos, rapists, and child abuse. Get him out of here already.
 
Last edited:
That interview going down in history

giphy.gif
 
Hahahaha said:
How is this case better than the last one? This one has videos and women that are supposedly willing to testify.
Click to expand...

The last case had a video as well. But if the people who are allegedly in the video say they aren't I am not sure how he gets convicted.
 
dwalk31 said:
The last case had a video as well. But if the people who are allegedly in the video say they aren't I am not sure how he gets convicted.
Click to expand...

Supposedly this time the women are stepping forward unless they’re waiting for him to pay them.
 
Hahahaha said:
Supposedly this time the women are stepping forward unless they’re waiting for him to pay them.
Click to expand...

It seems like it is just family and friends again. His live-in girlfriends have come out with an interview stating that their parents are lying and trying to get money. Do you believe them or not? That is the ultimate question.
 
blastercombo said:
LDude is only here to back sexual offenders, pedos, rapists, and child abuse. Get him out of here already.
Click to expand...

I actually am here backing due process. People are innocent until proven guilty. R. Kelly was acquitted of 14 counts already. He is presumed innocent. Yet you leave out the word alleged.

Good thing people aren't sitting in jail based on your reasoning.
 
I do not know if this was addressed, from what I understand R Kelly was acquitted the first time because he agreed to give up his publishing rights, in order to stay out of jail. That was part of the agreement, and was how he got off. Apparently either the money goes to the state, or some company that dealt with fines and fees.
 
KHUFU said:
I do not know if this was addressed, from what I understand R Kelly was acquitted the first time because he agreed to give up his publishing rights, in order to stay out of jail. That was part of the agreement, and was how he got off. Apparently either the money goes to the state, or some company that dealt with fines and fees.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. He went to trial and a jury found him not guilty on 14 out of 14 counts of child pornography. There was no deal.
 
dwalk31 said:
That is incorrect. He went to trial and a jury found him not guilty on 14 out of 14 counts of child pornography. There was no deal.
Click to expand...
Did you google that? I am sure that you did. There was a deal in place, and that is why he does not own his publishing anymore. This is widely known throughout the music industry. Many entertainment lawyers attempt to make deal like this when their clients are in hot water.
 
KHUFU said:
Did you google that? I am sure that you did. There was a deal in place, and that is why he does not own his publishing anymore. This is widely known throughout the music industry. Many entertainment lawyers attempt to make deal like this when their clients are in hot water.
Click to expand...

:rofl::rofl:

Y'all something else.

His lawyers made a deal with the jury? To find him not guilty on 14 counts? In exchange for him giving up his publishing rights? :wow:
 
dwalk31 said:
:rofl::rofl:

Y'all something else.

His lawyers made a deal with the jury? To find him not guilty on 14 counts? In exchange for him giving up his publishing rights? :wow:
Click to expand...

You do realize that there was another investigation outside of the porn, correct? Now I see why people do not like you.
 
KHUFU said:
You do realize that there was another investigation outside of the porn, correct? Now I see why people do not like you.
Click to expand...

You said he was acquitted because he gave up his publishing rights. That is not true. He was acquitted, once, at trial, by a jury.

Now you talking about some other investigation. But whatever that is has nothing to do with his acquittal.
 
dwalk31 said:
You said he was acquitted because he gave up his publishing rights. That is not true. He was acquitted, once, at trial, by a jury.

Now you talking about some other investigation. But whatever that is has nothing to do with his acquittal.
Click to expand...

There was another investigation that was dropped due to the deal he made, which is why he no longer owns the rights to his publishing. Whether or not it had anything to do with the trial you are talking about does not matter. I am saying that one of the reasons that R Kelly does not own the rights to his publishing and the reason that he is not in jail, is because of that deal he made back in 2002. That case against him was dropped, but they continued with the child porn case.

You are one desperate guy.
 
One of the things that I find pathetic about insecure lawyers, is when they practice one form of law, some think that it translates into knowing another practice in law. It is like when Don King hired a tax lawyer to defend Mike Tyson for his rape case. We know how that panned out. So you have this so called lawyer trying to argue and prove his merit on topics that are political and social, which only proves that some people allow their supposed education, get in the way of their education.
 
This is kinda crazy.

Kelly got fans paying for his bail. 161k? Son what?!

Think how famous you gotta be to have fans do this.

How exactly are they gonna get a jury with no Kellz fans on it?
 
2001: Sued by intern
Tracy Sampson sues R Kelly, accusing him of inducing her "into an indecent sexual relationship" when she was 17 years old.

The woman, a former intern at Epic Records, claimed she was "treated as his personal sex object and cast aside".

"He often tried to control every aspect of my life including who I would see and where I would go," she said in her legal case against him. The case was settled out of court for an undisclosed sum, said the New York Post.

April and May 2002: Two more court cases
Kelly is sued for a third time by Patrice Jones, a Chicago woman who claims he impregnated her when she was underage, and that she was forced to have an abortion.

A woman named Montina Woods also sued Kelly, alleging that he videotaped them having sex without her knowledge. The recording was allegedly circulated on an R Kelly "sex tape" sold by bootleggers under the title R Kelly Triple-X.

The star settled both cases out of court, paying an undisclosed sum in return for a non-disclosure agreement.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-40635526
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Black woman calls cops only to be killed by cops.
Replies
11
Views
2K
1995
1995
tr1ll
I propose a new SPOILER rule for media in NT's Terms and Rules.
Replies
22
Views
1K
maldonado
maldonado
fdub
Dating a lady with kids..
Replies
23
Views
3K
sharpshooter718
sharpshooter718

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom