Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Talk about a let-down. After only two days and a lackluster 12 witnesses, R. Kelly's A-List defense team rested it's case yesterday in his long-awaited child pornography trial.
After six years of various stalls, medical mishaps and Kelly's impassioned pleas for his fans to reserve judgement until the publication of all of the facts; one might question, why such a half-hearted defense?
The prosecution called well over two-dozen witnesses, including FBI video-tape experts, forensic specialists and the alledged victims (Kelly's God-daughter) own family memebers. But Kelly's defense chose a "low-ball" stratgey," and made a decision that might become the very thing thing that does Robert Kelly in: He didn't take the stand in his own defense.
There is a very well-known legal footnote that a lawyer cannot put a witness on the stand and knowingly allow said witness to lie. Let me break that down for you: Let's say R. Kelly had've taken the stand. Had the DA, during cross-examination, directly asked Kelly if he had in fact had sex with the girl in question, and or had he made the video-tape that sparked this entire investigation, and Kelly answered "No." Had his lawyer, Ed Gensen known Kelly's denial to be a lie, he would have a ethical obligaiton to ask to speak to the judge in chambers and ake him aware of his clients purgary. So I ask again: why would a completely innnocent man, with not only his freedom on the line, but also a man whose career finaially supports over half of his family, not take the stand in his own defense?
The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday.
The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Defense lawyer Ed Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury.
If called to testify, Myers would say family members of the girl allegedly in the tape contacted him about representing them — though he did not possess a copy of the sex tape. The Myers stipluation conflicts directly with the testimony of Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards, the aunt of the girl allegedly in the tape.
Edwards testified Myers contacted her in December 2001, saying that he had the tape. Myers then sent a representative to her home to show her the tape, she said.
The court reporter stipulated to transcribing the grand jury testimony of Bennie Edwards Sr., the uncle of the alleged victim. Edwards Sr. was one of several family members called by the prosecution to testify to the identity of the girl on the tape.
On Tuesday, the prosecution plans to call assistant district attorney Robert Wolf from the Atlanta prosecutor's office. Wolf will testify that the fiance of Lisa Van Allen — who alleged she was in a threesome with Kelly and the underage girl — was not offered a deal in exchange for her helping the Kelly prosecution.
In cross-examining Van Allen last week, defense lawyers pointed out that Van Allen's fiance, Yul Brown, was arrested on gun and drug charges shortly before they reached out to Cook County prosecutors with Van Allen's information about Kelly. Brown got probation.
Additional reporting from The Chicago Sun-Times
After six years of various stalls, medical mishaps and Kelly's impassioned pleas for his fans to reserve judgement until the publication of all of the facts; one might question, why such a half-hearted defense?
The prosecution called well over two-dozen witnesses, including FBI video-tape experts, forensic specialists and the alledged victims (Kelly's God-daughter) own family memebers. But Kelly's defense chose a "low-ball" stratgey," and made a decision that might become the very thing thing that does Robert Kelly in: He didn't take the stand in his own defense.
There is a very well-known legal footnote that a lawyer cannot put a witness on the stand and knowingly allow said witness to lie. Let me break that down for you: Let's say R. Kelly had've taken the stand. Had the DA, during cross-examination, directly asked Kelly if he had in fact had sex with the girl in question, and or had he made the video-tape that sparked this entire investigation, and Kelly answered "No." Had his lawyer, Ed Gensen known Kelly's denial to be a lie, he would have a ethical obligaiton to ask to speak to the judge in chambers and ake him aware of his clients purgary. So I ask again: why would a completely innnocent man, with not only his freedom on the line, but also a man whose career finaially supports over half of his family, not take the stand in his own defense?
The prosecution plans to put on two rebuttal witnesses on Tuesday: An assistant district attorney from Fulton County, Georgia, and its forensic video expert who has already testified. Closing arguments are expected Thursday.
The defense and prosecution stipulated to the testimony of two witnesses this morning — personal injury lawyer William "Buddy" Myers and a court reporter. Defense lawyer Ed Genson read the brief stipulations to the jury.
If called to testify, Myers would say family members of the girl allegedly in the tape contacted him about representing them — though he did not possess a copy of the sex tape. The Myers stipluation conflicts directly with the testimony of Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards, the aunt of the girl allegedly in the tape.
Edwards testified Myers contacted her in December 2001, saying that he had the tape. Myers then sent a representative to her home to show her the tape, she said.
The court reporter stipulated to transcribing the grand jury testimony of Bennie Edwards Sr., the uncle of the alleged victim. Edwards Sr. was one of several family members called by the prosecution to testify to the identity of the girl on the tape.
On Tuesday, the prosecution plans to call assistant district attorney Robert Wolf from the Atlanta prosecutor's office. Wolf will testify that the fiance of Lisa Van Allen — who alleged she was in a threesome with Kelly and the underage girl — was not offered a deal in exchange for her helping the Kelly prosecution.
In cross-examining Van Allen last week, defense lawyers pointed out that Van Allen's fiance, Yul Brown, was arrested on gun and drug charges shortly before they reached out to Cook County prosecutors with Van Allen's information about Kelly. Brown got probation.
Additional reporting from The Chicago Sun-Times
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment