The Truth Be Told, There Is No Mole: R Kelly Trial Update

R Kelly

Jurors began deliberating in the good old R Kelly trial yesterday having been shown for a second time the graphic sex tape at the heart of the case as part of the prosecution's summing up.

As previously reported, it's hard to tell the identities of the man and woman in the tape, though the prosecution claim it is Kelly and a then 13 year old girl, and have presented witnesses who know one or the other (especially the alleged victim) who say they reckon so too. The defence deny that it is Kelly or the girl in the tape, and have presented family members of the alleged victim who agree. There has also been discussion about whether or not the tape could have been manipulated to frame Kelly, and as to whether a mole on Kelly's back is present on the man in the tape - the prosecution say it can be seen, the defence say it cannot, and that what the prosecution say is a mole is just a smudge on the tape. And then there was the woman who claimed to have had threesomes with Kelly and the underage girl - Lisa Van Allen - a star witness for the prosecution whose credibility has been greatly questioned by the defence, who say she is lying for financial gain, or to ensure her boyfriend gets leniency from the authorities in an unrelated criminal case.

While the sex tape played once again in the court room, Robert Heilingoetter for the prosecution summed up by reminding the jury of the charges Kelly faces, and adding: "During this trial we have heard from 14 people that personally identified [the girl]. Twelve of them identified R Kelly".

In a more dramatic summing up, Sam Adam Jr for the defence returned to the mole - "The truth be told, there is no mole. That means one thing. It ain't him, and if ain't him you can't convict"; again questioned the reliability of Lisa Van Allen - "Second Corinthians 11, verse 14. And Satan shall come disguised as an angel of light. That is what she is. She is a liar. She is an extortionist"; and finally stressed that the alleged victim's family were in absolutely no doubt that the girl in question did not appear in the tape, concluding: "If this was really their daughter, if they saw what you just saw, we would not be having a trial. Any solid man in that family would have gone round there and broken his legs. How many of the family even came in here and said they confronted him. Zero".

The jury will continue deliberating today.