I hope nobody is getting sick of hearing about R. Kelly because the party is just getting started! Yesterday in court the prosecution showed the court the video of R. Kelly paying to have sex with a girl who was supposedly thirteen to fifteen at the time. However, there have been a couple of problems with the video before the trial even began. The first being that you can’t clearly identify the male in the video as R. Kelly, and the second being the fact that the woman in the video denies it’s her. Which leads to the natural question, what the hell is this doing court?

If the individual, whom one would assume would be the prosecutions key witness in the trial, denies that their even in the video, then how the hell can you take someone to court? I guess it’s just like the Jay-Z and R. Kelly song “Guilty Until Proven Innocent” off of Jay-Z’s The Dynasty: Roc La Familia.

It seems pretty clear to me that R. Kelly is just kind of getting jerked around right now and that his name has been getting dragged through the mud for the last 6 years.

Luckily for R. Kelly his lawyer brought forth an interesting piece of information yesterday after the court had watched the video, and this is where the loophole mole comes in to play. Apparently Kelly has a big, disgusting mole on his back and the man in the video was free of any such blemish which could only mean it wasn’t R. Kelly in the video right? I mean if the mole doesn’t fit, you must acquit? If OJ can get off for a glove not fitting his hand, surely R. Kelly should get off for something which like having a mole that isn’t on the guy in the video!

I always had faith that R. Kelly was innocent. Any man that makes music for the ladies would never do anything to hurt a member of the fairer sex. Plus after I heard what kind of shitty music was playing in the video I know it couldn’t have been ‘The Pied Piper’ in the video. R. Kelly is way too classy to bang to the Spice Girls or Backstreet Boys.