Rob
12-02-2003, 08:02 PM
Lawyers for Singer R. Kelly Fight Charges (http://apnews1.iwon.com//article/20031202/D7V6DOG01.html?PG=home&SEC=news)
CHICAGO (AP) - Attorneys defending R&B star R. Kelly against child pornography charges have filed a host of motions, including one contending the alleged victim could have been old enough to legally consent to sex.
Also included in the 11 motions Kelly's attorneys filed Monday in Cook County Circuit Court is the argument that the case should be dismissed because prosecutors failed to specify the date of the alleged crime in their indictment against Kelly, 36.
Kelly, whose first name is Robert, was arrested in June 2002 after a videotape surfaced that allegedly showed the Grammy winner having sex with a girl.
By alleging that the illegal acts happened between November 1997 and February 2002, Kelly's attorneys argue, the girl could be anywhere from 13 to 17 years old. If she was 17 at the time, she would have been old enough to consent to sex.
Further, they argue, such a large window of time makes it impossible for Kelly to mount a fair defense.
"It's no secret that Mr. Kelly is a well-known musician, who frequently travels," the motion states. "By failing to narrow the date of the charged defense, Mr. Kelly is wholly deprived of the opportunity to bring an alibi defense."
The attorneys also raised questions about the law that allows for a man to have sex with girls 17 and older but illegal to videotape such acts with girls 17 and younger.
"It is illogical, irrational and disproportionate to subject one to a criminal conviction for taking pictures of conduct that does not otherwise violate the law," they said.
Defense attorney Edward Genson said he could argue the motions as early as Kelly's next scheduled court appearance on Feb. 6. Prosecutors have declined to comment on any of the motions.
::hammer:
CHICAGO (AP) - Attorneys defending R&B star R. Kelly against child pornography charges have filed a host of motions, including one contending the alleged victim could have been old enough to legally consent to sex.
Also included in the 11 motions Kelly's attorneys filed Monday in Cook County Circuit Court is the argument that the case should be dismissed because prosecutors failed to specify the date of the alleged crime in their indictment against Kelly, 36.
Kelly, whose first name is Robert, was arrested in June 2002 after a videotape surfaced that allegedly showed the Grammy winner having sex with a girl.
By alleging that the illegal acts happened between November 1997 and February 2002, Kelly's attorneys argue, the girl could be anywhere from 13 to 17 years old. If she was 17 at the time, she would have been old enough to consent to sex.
Further, they argue, such a large window of time makes it impossible for Kelly to mount a fair defense.
"It's no secret that Mr. Kelly is a well-known musician, who frequently travels," the motion states. "By failing to narrow the date of the charged defense, Mr. Kelly is wholly deprived of the opportunity to bring an alibi defense."
The attorneys also raised questions about the law that allows for a man to have sex with girls 17 and older but illegal to videotape such acts with girls 17 and younger.
"It is illogical, irrational and disproportionate to subject one to a criminal conviction for taking pictures of conduct that does not otherwise violate the law," they said.
Defense attorney Edward Genson said he could argue the motions as early as Kelly's next scheduled court appearance on Feb. 6. Prosecutors have declined to comment on any of the motions.
::hammer: