CHICAGO - Prosecutors at R. Kelly's child pornography trial Thursday replayed for jurors the graphic sex tape at the centre of the case, working to lay to rest any doubts in jurors' minds that the R&B singer and an underage female are on the video.
But defence lawyers said again in closing arguments that neither Kelly nor the alleged victim are the people on the tape.
As the video played, assistant state's attorney Shauna Boliker told jurors the man on the tape is Kelly - who denies accusations he videotaped himself having sex with a female as young as 13 - and that he controlled the encounter.
"We're going to see his direction," Boliker said. He is "directing her to dance, where to stand, when to stop urinating," she said.
At one point in the video, entered into evidence as "People's Exhibit No. 1," the female dances and urinates on the floor - the man out of view. Back in view, he has sex with her. In one scene near the end of the video, alluded to in one count of the indictment, the man urinates on the female.
The month-long trial has centred on whether the R&B superstar is the man who appears on the 27-minute videotape, and whether a female who also appears on it is underage.
Kelly, 41, has pleaded not guilty to 14 counts of child pornography. Both he and the alleged victim, now 23, deny being on the tape and neither testified at trial.
Defence lawyer Sam Adam Jr. told jurors that charges against Kelly came about because people were trying to extort money from the Grammy winner because the man on the tape "may favour him."
"That's what this is about money, money, money," Adam said.
He also suggested that prosecutors pressured people into testifying against Kelly.
Over seven days presenting their case, prosecutors called 22 witnesses, including several childhood friends of the alleged victim and four of her relatives who identified her as the female on the video. Some said she had referred to Kelly as her "godfather."
In just two days, Kelly's lawyers called 12 witnesses. They included three relatives of the alleged victim who testified they did not recognize her as the female on the tape.
Adam said that the alleged victim's relatives know it's not her on the video because "any solid man in that family, any solid woman in that family would have gone over there and broken his legs, would have gone over there and beat the crap out of him."
The family also would have gotten an order of protection against Kelly, but none of that happened, Adam said.
-Don Babwin contributed to this report.
See Also
