I'm still trying to figure out why Wesley Snipes is sentenced to several years of actual jail time for tax stuff...yet pissing on and sexually abusing a minor doesn't stick to R. Kelly...despite a known history of hanging out at high schools to pick up underaged girls.Ah, America...the land of loony justice.
You know what really makes this post? The "urinating on kids" tag. That's so deliciously wrong, you sick, beautiful bastard.
You can rape, kill, sodomize, and piss on kids and apparently cut peoples heads off in your fancy Italian loafers...but boy if those taxes aren't paid...look out!
Clearly the jury of his peers was just that.
deacon blue,You can't understand why Wesley Snipes is in jail and R. Kelly was aquited.Well Og forbid you actually take the time to read reports about kelly's trial. Slate.com has had a court reporter following the trial and it would take 20 minutes max to read all of the posts.But why bother to do that? better in your mind not only to remain ignorant but to display said ignorance for all and sundry to see.I'll break it down for you: Kelly was acquited because while the jury believed it was Kelly in the video being the pisser, they didn't think the pissee was the underage girl in question and thus reasonable doubt was raised and thus Kelly was acquited.Oh and Chez, for someone who allegedly worked in the news business and who brags about it incessantly on his blog your bit about 13 year old girls makes me question your credibility.
Relax pal -- it's a joke (as evidenced by the Chappelle video). To be honest, I don't really care what that dingbat R Kelly does or who he chooses to urinate on.
Thanks, anonymous 10:55...but you know why the case wasn't strong? Let me give you the 95% most likely cause...because R. Kelly paid people off. Wesley Snipes fucked with the government's money and got nailed harder than any other tax-fucking-with celebrity I've ever seen (you see Willie Nelson in jail? No.). R. Kelly engages in habitual abuse of minors and gets off(I don't have any personal evidenciary witness of his crap, but I do know people in and around the community, and if it's just scuttlebut in the community what he does, then it's some mighty freaking extensive scuttlebut.)But hey, defend a man who's a shameless molester of minors...that's your choice.Am I being judgmental? Sure. Guilty on that score. But he has a reptutation not based on assumptions but on what people have seen him do and heard about him doing from those people. So I take their word for it. And the people who haven't been paid off are a little sick of watching neibhborhood girls being sexed up and people being paid off and shutting up...because it kind of feels to them like the community is just pimping off its girls to him. But hey, I guess I shouldn't believe the people who live around the guy and his sexual hunting grounds, right? What am I thinking?Sorry, Chez...this is twice in nearly as many days I've gone off on a rant. I shouldn't even bother. But this is two topics in a row some numbnut has (in my opinion at least) gone off all high-and-mighty about in the wrong fucking moral direction.
Post a Comment