As R. Kelly's attorneys launch his defense this morning, they've got some explaining to do. The prosecution presented a solid case against their man and, as in any criminal trial, there's damage control that needs to be done.
Here are five things the defense is certain to address now that it's calling the witnesses:
•Mole, mole, mole: The defense told the jury during opening statements that the sex tape at the heart of the child pornography case would actually set Kelly free. Attorneys said Kelly has had a dark mole along his lower spine since childhood, but said the man in the tape has an unblemished back. A prosecution expert, however, showed the jury a freeze-frame image of the man's back and there appeared to be a mole. Look for the defense to call its own video expert to dispute that.
•That's what friends are for: Three former friends of Kelly's alleged victim identified her as the female participant in the video. The young women, who are now in their early 20s and went to grade school in Oak Park, were adamant in their identifications, and no one suggested they had an ax to grind. The defense will counter their testimony by continuing to paint Oak Park as a place where normally bored residents leaped at the chance to take part in the seedy case.
•Family ties: Three relatives positively identified the alleged victim as the video's female participant. The defense will portray them as greedy opportunists who may have had a vendetta against Kelly. They'll also remind jurors that neither the victim nor members of her immediate family—including her mother—will identify her as the female participant during the trial.
•Technical difficulties: The defense has suggested someone may have framed Kelly by digitally placing his head on another man's body in the sex tape. Two prosecution experts have said such a seamless edit would be nearly impossible, especially with the technology available a decade ago. The defense team may need an expert to back up its theory or risk looking foolish to the jury.
•Lisa Van Allen: The Georgia woman testified she had three-way sexual encounters with Kelly and the alleged victim between 1998 and 2000. As titillating as her testimony may have been, it served a very important purpose: Van Allen is the only prosecution witness to assert direct knowledge of an inappropriate relationship between Kelly and the girl. The defense informed prosecutors Monday that it would be calling a former female friend of Van Allen's to undermine her testimony. Van Allen told the jury that she had a three-way sexual encounter with that woman and R. Kelly, as well.
Stacy St. Clair
June 3, 2008 3:35 PM: Sun-Times critic won't be arrested
There will be no jail time for Jim DeRogatis, but the R. Kelly trial judge ordered the Sun-Times music critic to come to court Wednesday.
A subpoena had been issued compelling him to appear Tuesday, but DeRogatis never showed.
The newspaper argued the renowned music critic never received the subpoena, though a Sun-Times reporter, attorney and the editor-in-chief's assistant all received legal documents indicating he was expected in court, according to statements made before Cook County Judge Vincent Gaughan.
Gaughan said it was possible DeRogatis was unaware of the ordered appearance and would not issue a warrant for his arrest.
"I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt," Gaughan said.
Gaughan ordered DeRogatis to appear Wednesday so the defense can question him in front of the jury about his connection to the sex tape at the heart of the case. DeRogatis, who first wrote about Kelly's relationships with young girls in 2000, received the video from an unknown sender in early 2002.
The critic turned the tape over to the Chicago police, prompting an investigation that eventually led to child pornography charges against the singer.
The Sun-Times contends DeRogatis is protected by the reporter's privilege and is not required to testify about information he gathered as a journalist. The judge, however, has ruled he is connected to the trial's most critical piece of evidence and can be questioned.
"He's a material witness," Gaughan said. "He turned over [the sex tape], which is the basis of this prosecution."
The Sun-Times intends to appeal the judge's decision and ask the appellate court to bar DeRogatis from being called as a witness until the matter is settled. Gaughan said he will not delay the testimony unless a higher court orders him to do so.
"I have 15 people in the jury box and this trial is into its fourth week," Gaughan said.
Stacy St. Clair
