ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
Idk no one is saying to stop listening to Ignition Remix...
Last edited:
R. Kelly Is Charged With Using Bribes to Marry Aaliyah at Age 15
- Thread starter 88m3
- Start date
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
personally I’d prefer if child rapists and child traffickers got serious time instead of slaps on the wrist but that’s me
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
Where did I say he should get a slap on the wrist? Where did I say he shouldn’t spend his life in prison?
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
it looks like you’re arguing that he was railroaded???
Last edited:
mastermind
Rest In Power Kobe
I’m not
Breh, there wasn't just "allegations", rape cases were reported against him in 2000 and 2005 and in both cases the D.A.'s decided not to do shyt. There was an entire civil trial against Cosby in 2005 where 13 women testified against him and he was officially deposed and admitted to drugging women for sex. It was reported in national newspapers, it was a BIG deal. How da fukk you think Hannibal Burress knew anything in the first place?
And since it was the "original allegation" a good 15 years later, it sounds like you'd be bytching that it's too far in the past just like you did earlier in this thread. Stop acting like RICO was the only shyt you were complaining about, you were throwing all sorts of random arguments against the wall. "But it was too long ago! But the family took money! But they sold their own girls so who are they to complain! But this is just about a video! But the prosecutors already had their chance! But jurisdictions! Statute of limitations! RICO!"
Epstein got let off EXTREMELY light on a sweetheart deal due to his money, and it was people bytching about that sweetheart deal and a re-exposure of the original allegations that led to the heat on him. It had already been known for years that he had been involved in FAR more than he was ever convicted of. The way they got him the second time was by running the case from the federal office in New York while the original case was out of Florida.
There's so much shyt going on in the world to get seriously upset about, I'm boggled that this is where you have your energy today.
Are suggesting that R Kelly committed a crime, prosecutors knew he committed a crime and chose not to pursue it and that's okay.
You're describing something every prosecutor in the country does literally every day. The court system could never handle all the crimes that are committed, the public straight up pays prosecutors to decide which ones to pursue and which ones not to pursue.
I obviously think they made the wrong decision, but I'm pointing out you have no chance in hell of doing anything to those prosecutors other than hurting their rep. Deciding not to pursue charges on likely criminals is part of their job description.
once convicted, people will play his music again.
We've reached the it happens therefore we shouldn't be upset about it stage in the argument.
R Kelly isn't just a regular criminal. He's a criminal celebrity. If law enforcement is turning a blind eye to high profile crimes they absolutely should be held accountable.
Or have we now decided that him being a celebrity is no longer valuable because it doesn't fit your argument after spending pages talking about how the wealthy are getting away with crimes due to their influence?
People pay people off all the time. It happens. Do we expect prosecutors to chase after those cases where victims and their families aren't willing to testify because they took a settlement?
Are we going to ask the Feds to step in?
You're better than this argument.
This whole conversation is becoming surreal. The key to holding criminals accountable....is to let a notorious, unrepentant criminal get off. Really?
I said that we SHOULD be upset about it. I also said that it's useless to claim we should "go after the D.A.'s who did it" when literally every D.A. does it and it's part of their JOB DESCRIPTION to do it.
That's a lie.We've reached the it happens therefore we shouldn't be upset about it stage in the argument.
I said that we SHOULD be upset about it. I also said that it's useless to claim we should "go after the D.A.'s who did it" when literally every D.A. does it and it's part of their JOB DESCRIPTION to do it.
No matter how we feel about it, you have absolutely zero recourse to hold them accountable for prosecutorial discernment in the 1990s. There's literally nothing you can do in our system because our system was designed to allow them to do that.R Kelly isn't just a regular criminal. He's a criminal celebrity. If law enforcement is turning a blind eye to high profile crimes they absolutely should be held accountable.
Or have we now decided that him being a celebrity is no longer valuable because it doesn't fit your argument after spending pages talking about how the wealthy are getting away with crimes due to their influence?
Out of simple lack of resources, we can't expect prosecutors to chase after cases where there is not enough evidence because victims/families aren't willing to testify because they got paid off. Thankfully though this isn't the last word - sometimes later evidence DOES emerge that allows said cases to be pursued even though there previously wasn't enough evidence. Isn't this a good thing?