Singer R. Kelly: Sex Crime Accusations

Posted on: June 2, 2008 at 4:27 p.m.

R. Kelly and Sex Crimes

The child pornography and statutory rape trial of Grammy winning and critically acclaimed artist R. Kelly finally began. The preparation of the trial has gone on for some time, and Kelly, 41, faces 14 counts of child pornography for allegedly videotaping himself having sex with an underage girl. He has pleaded not guilty.

While the trial has seen some excitement, with a recent surprise witness being called, the charges are fairly straightforward. Much was made of the video tape made that allegedly shows Kelly and the underage girl, as the video even floated around the black market for some time. There was also found in Polk County, FL a video camera showing Kelly having sexual relations with an underage girl as well as other pornographic images of a minor, however some poor police work allowed some of the images to be thrown out.

While this case does have a video tape, many statutory rape charges can have some level of difficulty. Rarely is there a great deal of physical evidence in a statutory rape or sexual offense trial, often it is a "he said/she said" scenario. Statutory rape is when one individual (regardless of gender or age) performs a sexual act with someone who is not old enough to consent to that act. While in some foreign countries the age of consent for women is 16, the age of consent in California is 18, and often the law favors the female. Meaning that if two sixteen-year-olds are either caught in the act, or one accuses the other, the male could be charged.

In recent cases however, many of which have received national attention, women (teachers mostly) have been found having sexual relationships with males under the age of 18.

In the matter of child pornography, most judges and juries will obviously be quite harsh on any individual found guilty of such a crime. Obviously physical evidence is a vital part of any matter involving child pornography, however strong witnesses may cause problems for the defendant.

Here are some important tips and bits of information that may be helpful in any defense of sex crime:
- In a matter of statutory rape, the age difference between the two individuals is an important face for both judges and juries to consider. A 48-year-old that has sex with a 12-year-old will face greater punishment than a 20-year-old that has sex with a 17-year-old in California.
- Taking an underage individual across state lines for the purpose of sex is also a federal crime, and may carry with it increased jail time.
- While jail time for a statutory rape crime can range from 4 to 30 years, a good attorney can assist in decreasing the initial offer from the court.
In the matter of child pornographer, a sex offender title isn't something that an individual can lose, it follows you the rest of your life.

Tagged as: california criminal laws, counterfeit goods pc 350, sex crime accusations

Comments:

Aaron Bensoua on June 10, 2008 at 3:20 a.m. wrote:

I absolutely think that child molesters/pornography users should be punished with the full extent of the law. There is nothing more damaging to a child than a person of authority abusing that right. However, I do find it interesting how the courts have very different interpretations of how old 16 is really? In this case, a 16-year old absolutely didn't possess the capability to know whether or not she wants to have sex or not, and yet there is that case in Florida where that 15-year old kid absolutely knew what he was doing when he accidentally killed his niece by performing a wrestling move on her. They charged him as an adult and sent him to prison for life. I'm not making excuses for R. Kelly, but I just find these discrepancies in the legal system very interesting.

Samantha Chen on June 9, 2008 at 10:20 p.m. wrote:

I feel that R. Kelly should definitely be punished as he clearly committed the crime of statutory rape. Though some celebrities receive a lesser punishment due to their wealth and power, I feel that this would be a poor choice in this case because it creates precedent. However, I also feel that it is unfair that the court generally sides with the female in the situation, especially if both members of the act are under age. This issue is so difficult to map out in terms of how to deal with certain aspects because cases are always different and each case is difficult to prove. Nobody knows what actually happened except for those involved, and one person is always lying.

Tatiana Vardanyan on June 9, 2008 at 2:54 a.m. wrote:

In terms of celebrity cases in the courtroom, jurors feel that if the defendant does not pose a threat, they may rule in a more lenient fashion. However, if it is a gruesome crime, not much evidence is needed to convict the mofo. This was stated by Neil Osherow, a public defender who was a guest speaker for my Psych of Law course. He also stated that in terms of sex crimes, liberals are just as likely to convict as conservatives bearing in mind that politically speaking, liberals are pro defense and conservatives are pro prosecution. In terms of how the jury would rule, many psychological studies have demonstrated that race of the defendant is highly correlated to race of the jurors. Example: if one is accused of a crime, whether or not the jury decides to convict has to do with who else sits on the jury panel. In regards to the posted blog, R Kelley is African American and whether or not he gets a conviction would have to do with the number of African Americans on the jury panel. Research shows that if more people on the panel are of the same race as the defendant, than you would rule in a more harsh manner. However, if you are the only one of the defendants race siting on the jury panel, you will rule more leniently. Furthermore, since R Kelley is African American, it would be to his advantage if the counselor accepts only ONE African American on the jury panel because that ONE African American would feel a strong sense of loyalty to defending his like-me-attributes but if there were more than ONE African American on the panel, they would feel intolerant to the crime and bear no loyalty to the accuser. This strategy was utilized on the OJ Simpson case.

Gabe Rose on June 7, 2008 at 2:07 p.m. wrote:

Yeah, agreeing with Amanda- if they're both 16, how is it fair to place the burden on the male? Aren't women supposed to mature faster anyways, thus making an argument that they perhaps are better able to consent? I wouldn't actually argue this, but an interesting point, and the current situation doesn't really seem terribly fair. What about a 16 year old gay or lesbian couple- who would receive the blame there? Oh, and is there any way R Kelly isn't guilty? Doesn't the prosecution just have to show the videotape and rest its case?

Amanda Hester on June 6, 2008 at 2:04 p.m. wrote:

In my opinion it is clear that R. Kelly has committed a crime by having sex with an underage girl (his biggest mistake filming it) and that he should be punished for this crime. Other individuals, regardless of sex, should also be punished for taking advantage of children that don't have the ability to offer legitimate consent. The excuse that it was a mutual relationship so many times offered by the older party in the 'relationship' disgusts me as the cases most frequently heard of are not angry parents trying to punish a 20 year old for sleeping with their 17 year old daughter, but instead is usually an adult (30 to 40 year old) having sexual relations with someone under 16 years old. While I feel statuatory rape cases of this sort should be punished, I have a hard time finding the legitimacy in punishing a 16 year old male for having sex with a 16 year old female. They are both equally as unable to give consent and if the sexual act was mutually consented to, I see no case. If the act was not consentual then the case is rape and not up for discussion under this topic. For the court to side with females and assume that they are somehow less able to understand the implications of their consent than a male is, is sexist in both regards. It is unfairly disadvantaging the male and belittling the female and her ability to make decisions at the same time.

Tyler J. Marik on June 5, 2008 at 6:07 p.m. wrote:

R. Kelly is a powerful man. Individuals are attracted to powerful people. I don't agree with Sam's comment that what he says in his lyrics are indicative of his personal moral culpability for committing a Felony. Just because he is an outright misogynist in his lyrics does not mean he is guilty of anything other than being a misogynist. And unfortunately misogyny is not a crime. After what we've seen with the Kobe Bryant case several years ago, bungeled police work, combined with an accuser that has a less than stellar track record can lead to a swift and easy acquittal. I would caution everyone to not be so quick to judge until a final verdict of Guilty comes down, if it does. A grainy video in a dark room can show everything, yet nothing, depending on who is viewing it. I will wait till all the facts are in to judge this case, R. Kelly certainly should select a legal team that is ready for a battle, this will not be an easy case of public opinion to overcome.

Sam Cortina on June 5, 2008 at 2:13 p.m. wrote:

Normally I would think that high-profile persons are better able to receive lesser charges or not guilty verdicts because of their popularity with the the jurors. A juror does not want to sentence a person whose music they like to a harsh prison sentence. However, with this case, I feel that the prosecution probably has an edge over the high-profile person ebcause of R. Kelly's explicit lyrics and degradation of women in his music. It would be easy to turn his high-profile status around and use it against him. I believe that he should be found guilty of the highest charges possible because of the physical evidence that has been produced along with the public lack of concern he exhibits for morals in his music.

Aida Ter-Khachatryan on June 2, 2008 at 6:21 p.m. wrote:

I am all for punishing these child molestors and rapists with the full punishment that they deserve. But I also believe that when people lie (minors under the age of 18) and say that they are over 18 and the other person is in a state of mind that the person that they are sexually involved with is over 18; they are not really at fault. Sure, there are ways to check and see if the person is lieing, especially if the person looks young. But at the same time, most people don't really take age into consideration. When they get involved with someone they are interested in, they never think about how the young girl/boy might be lieing about their age. In my opinion, even if the court decides to press charges against the person in a case like this, all these factors should be taken into consideration before a final decision about a person's sentencing is made.

Kestenbaum Eisner & Gorin LLP has been recognized as one of the best U.S. law firms, based on the experience, professionalism, and ethics of its criminal defense lawyers and attorneys. We aggressively defend clients in all Southern California courtrooms on state and federal charges, including DUI, DMV, misdemeanor, felony, juvenile cases, in the following communities and courthouses.

Los Angeles County, CA: Agoura, Altadena, Alhambra, Bellflower, Beverly Hills, Burbank, Calabasas, Century City, Chatsworth, Compton, Culver City, Diamond Bar, Downey, Downtown Criminal Court, El Segundo, East Los Angeles, Eastlake, Encino, El Monte, Glendale, Glendora, Hermosa Beach, Hidden Hills, Hollywood, Huntington Park, Inglewood, Los Angeles Lawyer, La Canada, LAX Court, Los Padrinos, Long Beach, Los Angeles Attorney, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Marina Del Rey, Newhall, Norwalk, Palos Verdes, Pasadena, Pomona, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, San Dimas, San Fernando, San Marino, San Pedro, Santa Clarita, Sherman Oaks, Sierra Madre, Santa Monica, South Gate, South Pasadena, Sylmar, Torrance, Universal City, Valencia, Van Nuys, West Covina, West Hollywood, Walnut, Westchester, West Hollywood, Westlake Village, Whittier, Woodland Hills, California. Orange County, CA: Anaheim, Anaheim Hills, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine Attorney, Laguna Beach, Laguna Hills, Laguna Niguel, La Habra, La Palma, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Orange, Orange County Lawyer, Rancho Santa Margarita, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Seal Beach, Tustin, Villa Park, Westminster, Yorba Linda, California. Ventura County, CA: Camarillo, Moorpark, Oxnard, San Buenaventura, Simi Valley, Thousand Oaks, Westlake Village. San Bernardino County, CA: Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland.

Prior Criminal Law Posts

Singer R. Kelly: Sex Crime Accusations

Comments:

Add your comment!

Firm Fan Page & News

Our Criminal Defense Partners

Criminal Defense Resources

Prior Criminal Law Posts