This is a discussion on R. Kelly Found Innocent within the Entertainment forums, part of the Entertainment Forums category; Originally Posted by TMZ
A jury has found R. Kelly not guilty!
A jury acquitted the singer of all fourteen ...
Welcome to Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forums
Hello and Welcome to WrestlingClique - Wrestling Forums!
We are the premier wrestling forum and your source for wrestling news and rumors, wrestling divas, wrestling gifs, sports discussion, e-feds, writing and more. Wrestling fans participate in active discussion on all the major wrestling leagues and events including WWE, ECW & TNA pay per view events, live wrestling streams, wrestling video games, collectibles, and other wrestling related products and services.
You're currently viewing our site as an unregistered guest which means you are limited to most discussions and features.
Take a few minutes to browse around, and if you like what you see, Register a free account to gain access to :
• Richer content, access forums that are not viewable by the public.
• Complete access to post topics, respond to polls, communicate privately (PM), take part contests, arcade, photo sharing, networking, groups.
• Create your personal profile and bio
• Meet and Chat Live with other members who share similar interests
Registration is simple and fast. Won't take you more than a minute and of course it's completely free.
So Join our Community today!
A jury acquitted the singer of all fourteen counts of child pornography.
The "Bump and Grind" singer was first charged six years ago after the kinky sex tape surfaced allegedly featuring him having sex -- among other things -- with a girl who was as young as 13 at the time.
Kelly had long denied being on the video tape -- and even the alleged victim said it wasn't her.
Even though jurors in the trial of R. Kelly absolutely believed it was him on the tape, they could not reach a guilty verdict because they said there was "not enough evidence to prosecute." Huh?!
Five of the twelve jurors met with reporters immediately after handing down the acquittal. They said that as recently as this morning, the vote was split nine to three for a not guilty verdict, but that fell apart as they voted -- on the hour, every hour -- because the alleged victim hadn't testified and refused to cooperate.
The jurors also say they were absolutely disgusted with the tape. They said unlike the bootleg version you can buy on the street corner, what they saw was "clear as day." Ew. But because the victim hadn't testified, they felt they had no option but to acquit.
WTF?! How much more proof do you need. I smell payoff somewhere
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Location: "O'er the land of the free, and the home of the SOONERS!!!"
Posts: 1,536
vCash: 500
Rep Power: 0
Re: R. Kelly Found Innocent
There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between being "innocent" and being found "not guilty". He's ruled not guilty because the prosecutors didn't have substantial evidence to prove to the jury that he committed a crime, so the jury had to vote not guilty. Not going off on you Joe, but considering that I believe he did it, I think the title of this thread is a little insulting to the victim.
There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between being "innocent" and being found "not guilty". He's ruled not guilty because the prosecutors didn't have substantial evidence to prove to the jury that he committed a crime, so the jury had to vote not guilty. Not going off on you Joe, but considering that I believe he did it, I think the title of this thread is a little insulting to the victim.
Being found "Not Guilty" is innocent in the eyes of the law.
AND btw - I didn't come up with the title of this thread...
It's on several news sites.
So your point is best argued with the reporters.
The Jurors verdict was an insult to the victim....I dont think they're concerned with how R Kelly comes off in the news.
Either way he got off today....debating semantics on what you call it is silly and pointless, imo
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
All R. Kelly has to say is: To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
__________________
There'll be no sorrow there, no more burdens to bear,
No more sickness, no more pain, no more parting over there;
And forever I will be with the One who died for me,
What a day, glorious day that will be.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 20 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
__________________
There'll be no sorrow there, no more burdens to bear,
No more sickness, no more pain, no more parting over there;
And forever I will be with the One who died for me,
What a day, glorious day that will be.
debating semantics on what you call it is silly and pointless, imo
lol, I love how you first make such an inaccurate comment on the subject, THEN say that further debating it is silly and pointless. And no, I don't need to take anything up with any reporters. My gripe wasn't directed at you, and my pointed isn't aimed at proving that anyone in particular was wrong.
I won't go too far into it, because it's obvious you're not too interested in arguing and/or you're not comfortable with your beliefs being questioned, but I will say there is a huge fundamental difference between the concept of innocence, and being given a not guilty verdict, even "in the eyes of the law" as you put it.
If you get a chance, see the movie Fracture with Anthony Hopkins. Even though it's a movie, it's a pretty good illustration of the difference between innocent and not guilty. They are not the same.
R. Kelly Found Innocent 
Linear Mode
