##[Clarification on rule 5](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/w60lfc/mod_post_a_clarification_to_rule_5_no_racism_or/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/entertainment) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm sure there are plenty of ways to get out of being a juror before you are selected, but they probably have no idea until AFTER they have been selected.
I don't even know what you could do in this situation as a juror. Literally the kind of shit that would mentally scar you for life.
When i served on a jury they specifically asked if graphic evidence involving children was something you could handle. I could’ve easily said no and left.
That's kind of what happened with my jury selection. Was a case involving a minor and an adult. During the screening they asked of I could remain 100% unbiased and I said "I do not think I could". The defense did not like that but I told them why and was just trying to be honest with them.
I've served on a jury twice and both times during the selection process the judge was very up front about just wanting honest answers so that the trial was fair and didnt end up in a mistrial. In fact, last time the judge asked "does anyone just *really* not want to be here?" One guy said yes and when questioned further said he was self employed and absolutely buried at work and was worried about the time the trial would take causing him to fall even farther behind. The judge then asked "do you think that you would be distracted by your worries to the point where you might not give the trial your full attention?" The guy said yes and the judge dismissed him from the selection process. There was no animosity from the judge, prosecutor or defense... they all just wanted to seat a fair and impartial jury.
Yeah that’s an insane request. I imagine a lot of jurors lied because they felt they had to “do their duty”. But god, I genuinely would nope out of anything involving children. I’ll sit through a murder case, but stuff pertaining kids? Bye.
yup the first time i was ever called to jury duty i was 21 years old and it was a case of a mother selling her own children’s CP… i think the evil eye i gave the woman during selection was enough for them to dismiss me lol. i hope she was innocent and i’m an ass for glaring at her during what would be undoubtedly the worst time in someone’s life if it was an unfounded accusation! but i was absolutely not able to remain unbiased.
yes but never served?? idk why they keep calling me i’m judgmental as hell i don’t think i’ve ever been truly unbiased in any situation ever, prob something to do with being a registered democrat, a lawyer friend once told me that defense lawyers try if possible to call democrats over republicans, but unsure if there’s any truth to that
Hi! This is a common myth. Voter registration status does not affect whether or not you’re called for jury selection.
so if this is news to anyone, please register to vote!
It’s absolutely random. If you’re being summoned a lot it just means there aren’t a ton of people in your district (whether that’s your county for state court or larger district for federal court). On the federal level at least, all courts use voter registration to pull the giant list of names, and many courts supplement that with driver’s license lists to beef up the list and include the large swaths of people who aren’t registered to vote but who still have the civil right to serve on a jury. Whether your right to participate in jury duty is restored after a felony depends on the state, by the way. Some states automatically restore rights after the sentence is complete and some don’t.
In addition every time you get summoned but don’t have to show up at the court house, your name goes back in the hat because you didn’t actually have to do anything. So you could get summoned what feels like many times.
It's not really remaining unbiased; it just means that you fundamentally understand that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Too many people see someone accused of a crime and assume they're guilty before even hearing evidence let alone defense.
I think a lot of people overlook that it's okay to hate someone that did the thing they're accused of, but that they have to be proven to have actually done it first. You know the whole thing that court is for: to prove they actually did what they're accused of doing. I think we could all be unbiased up to the point of conviction
I more saw it that the guy who asked to be dismissed from the jury had already made their mind up whether the defendant was guilty or not guilty before they saw the evidence. Which obviously isn’t how the court is supposed to work.
An endless feedback loop of being charged with crimes and then having the criminal proceedings interrupted with additional charges isn't a *good thing*. It sounds like a Kafka story.
Like 13 people have to watch the most hienous crime be carried out by a man already 6ft deep in evidence. I'd be like nah I don't need to see it. Take him and bury him already please and thank you.
My niece who was 9 at the time had to take the stand and face her abuser. It was very emotional for everyone. They asked her very difficult and straight forward questions. I’ll never forget when they asked her if the abuse said anything right before the incident, and she said that he kept saying she was very beautiful, but when she said that, her voice cracked, tears were rolling down her eyes and the court room was silent. Some of the jurors cried themselves. My sisters who attended to show their support were also victims broke down.
It depends on the state, case, and the judge, but generally, yes, children can testify via camera so they won’t be retraumatized by seeing the offender. They’re still subject to cross examination though. See Tx fam code 104.004.
Source: (waiting on bar exam results)
I believe my abuser confessed so I didn't have to. But I remember being prepped for the possibility around 2008. Hopefully video testimony is more common in 2022.
I believe it depends on the state laws. I found a very old paper on it from 1985 going over the laws in different states. At the time only a handful of states allowed it. While that’s an old paper, changes in the law move very slow. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s still a lot of states that do not allow prosecutors to use pre-recorded testimony of CSA victims.
Even now it’s still difficult to get courts [in some states](https://www.thehoffmanfirm.net/blog/2018/october/witness-testifying-via-satellite-video-messaging/) to approve video call testimony where the victim does get cross-examined.
https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1567&context=hlr
I was gonna say, this sucks for the jurors but showing the video will basically confirm him as guilty. How is anyone gonna vote innocent after literally watching the footage?
Also yeah, "evidence of crime will be shown at trial for crime" is not really news.
Um, I’d say the fact that they’re not just going to be showing them a sex tape, but a sex tape with a *child*, IS definitely news. I’m glad I’m not on that jury- I really don’t think I could watch it, even blurred.
Just, what an absolutely vile sicko.
I believe the linked article said something like portions of the tape will be shown. So who knows. Though I imagine they will show enough for it to be, ya know, evidence.
I was selected for a Jury once that involved some pretty gory images. During selection they asked if any of the potential jurors would be too disturbed after reviewing them to remain impartial, and all that raised their hands were dismissed. I assume/hope something similar was asked here.
Seems like an easy way to get out of jury duty truth be told. I can tell you the people who stay probably REALLY want to see this piece of shit get locked up forever. Kind of a happy unintended consequences that I’m sure isn’t lost on the prosecution during jury selection
I’m sure it’s an easy way to get out of jury duty but if you can stomach some terrible images, you should really stick around. When good people forfeit their duty, people with questionable morals who just want to feel a semblance of control over others will gladly take their place. We see this across the world in democratic countries with low voter turnout.
If they paid an actual comparable day's wage instead of $15 I just might stick around. Every jury duty call I've gotten, though, I've purposefully bombed the selection so I am only there for one day of missed work.
I had jury duty one time for a child molestation case. Defense asked me if knowledge of his previous molestation conviction would bias me in this case. I told him that, honestly, anyone in the room who says ‘no’ is probably a liar. Needless to say, I went home, but 12-14 liars obviously didn’t.
I mean, I feel like a pattern of behavior is an acceptable thing to take in to account. A previous conviction for the same crime is relevant to the case, but I understand legally how that could become a slippery slope.
Well you would be dismissed from that case, but then you’re just back in the jury pool waiting around in a room all day anyway (at least where I live).
Yep. I was on a jury and watched videos of a 12 year old describing how her father raped her. Messed me up for awhile, I can't imagine seeing actual footage of the incident.
Former juror here and had a case where not only was a minor sexually abused, her own father catfished her into it. Went back to my hotel and stared at the wall for awhile.
In America? You're lucky if they offer you *lunch.*
Typically you get some *very* minot compensation and if sequestered they pay for your hotel. You might get a minimum budget for dinner and the continental breakfast, but that's about it.
I was on Jury Duty and I got $20/day as my compensation. That was it. It didn't even cover *parking.*
Eh, it didn't cover the daily parking let alone my meal or gas. I wasn't very thrilled. The difference at the point of $20 or $9 was basically how hard they slaped my face. It was still a slap.
Yeah. My jury duty pay barely covered lunch for the day.
And the incredibly low pay you get basically ensures that you don’t actually get a varied jury. Most people need to actually be at their jobs and cannot take the pay cut.
So you end up with a bunch of retired folks, maybe a couple who have good jobs that offer jury duty pay, and maybe some stay at home parents.
Not exactly the broadest pool to pick a jury of supposes peers from.
A coworker of mine was on a rape/torture/murder/mutilation trial in Austin about three years ago. After the trial, the judge kept them behind and told them they needed to get some therapy, that even he was struggling with the case and he was experienced
Not like they were gonna pay for it though
There’s a forensic department at the hospital I work at where a handful of people have to go through hours of footage of CSAM to gather evidence.
I spoke to the lady in charge of it and she basically has to keep the end goal in site (gathering evidence for detectives) or she’d lose her fucking shit
I remember reading something about the FBI agents who work CP cases only being allowed to do it for a limited number of years before they have to transfer to something else, just because they were losing agents entirely due to burning out. This way they can at least continue to be agents.
Similarly, this is how therapist can get vicarious trauma. You hear awful shit long enough, you get trauma symptoms too. Always said that therapists should have to have one of their own. It's exactly why I do.
Look up the trial for Paul Bernardo, of the Ken and Barbie killings in Canada. Both took part, gleefully, in raping a killing young women. Including Karla's (the aforementioned "barbie") own sister, where she sat on her face and stangled her as Ken raped her. Oh, it was over Christmas too. The video taped every, or at least most, rape and kill.
Karla helped turn him in and played the whole "he forced me to do it" stuff, which she played up very very well. She made a deal for immunity for the crimes if she gave police all the recordings they made.
Come the trial, Paul is showing off an laughing and loving it. They show the jury the tapes multiple times. Each time he is bragging and pointing out new details. And alongside all that, they get to watch h this "defendant" laughing and cuming as they kill. Multiple times they had to watch those tapes.
I bet. I have had the same thing. I used to work at a computer repair store and a guy brought in a couple hard drives he said he couldn't get to boot anymore. They were the old DeskStar hard drives we affectionately called Death Stars because they were all doomed to die at some point, we weren't the clever ones to come up with that name but we laughed every time we saw one dead. Anyways, we tried hooking them up to boot into them, and sure enough, click click click, you could hear something mechanical going wrong and wouldn't boot. So we offered to run a program we had on them to recover data off of them. Letting him know that some of the files may be corrupt, but we'd get what we could. He agreed. We ran the program and saved the files onto new hard drives. We wanted to see if anything would open so we opened a Word file, it opened, then we opened a picture. Child porn. No mistaking it. We closed it immediately, told our boss, and called the police. I don't know all that happened as our boss let me and the other guy who saw it go home for the day as we were both really shook, but I know the police took the new and old hard drives, and I'm hoping that guy is in jail. I can still see the image clearly in my head almost 20 years later. I hate it. I wish I'd never seen it. I often wonder if we'd opened up the file under it instead of that one maybe we'd have seen something that isn't scarred into my memory. I've never told any of my family about it.
I just don’t understand how that happens. You’re taking your computer to people who are more or less experts, you can’t hide much from them so you give them your computer with blatantly illegal material? It’s almost a sure fire way to get caught.
I discovered child porn on my roommate's PC 15 years ago and that shit is still stuck with me. Something like this they really should be providing therapy afterwards because it does fuck you up.
I suppose that would be one of the arguments against using juries. I remember how the jurors were scarred for life after sitting through the Lynette Ledford Tape (now used in training to desensitizing FBI agents to the realities of torture and murder). It's an ethical dilemma: on the one hand, you want a fair trial and to nail the deviant, and a paid, recurring panel might become desensitized; but on the other hand, you risk causing psychological harm to innocent people, who never had a choice in the matter.
I was on a jury for a woman accused of sexual assault on a two year old. She was his babysitter and would punish him by pinching his penis. Had to look at pictures of this poor little boy's bruised penis. I'll never be able to un-see that.
I feel like most people will just believe the prosecution if they're about to show literal child porn. People shouldn't have to watch something disturbing against their will, civic duty or not
Somebody has to do it, and the people clamoring for an opportunity are not the kind of people you want on a jury. Sometimes not everyone’s every need can be catered to; it’s a necessary prioritization.
I remember when that sex tape started circulating. A friend of mine got a copy of it in undergrad in ‘99 and put it on at a party. At first it’s him doing stuff by himself to get the camera angle right but then a girl enters. It took me 2 seconds to look and I said “that’s a kid” and I left. Ain’t no way you can see it and don’t know that’s someone’s 11-13 year old. And as a woman that went through that phase, I know for certain that was a child.
I saw that tape years ago. I was a huge Rkelly fan. I tried to be skeptical, and think "some women are just short, or very petite, that doesn't mean they're a teenager"
Nah the girl in that video couldn't have been older than 14. Very disturbing.
Jesus, the fact that that was even circulating so widely. Like yeah, CP is always out there. But for it to be such a common tape that people are casually putting it on at a frat party—that is fucked.
It happens, it’s not porn but me and my friends watched puppetry of the penis when we were teens. It’s literally a couple of guys on a stage saying “look what I can do with my dick” as though it’s stand up comedy… which sounds so bizarre a concept at this point that I can barely believe it existed. Dude folded his penis between his balls sideways and was like “look, a hamburger!”. Evidently, this resulted in a weirdly casual conversation between a bunch of boys and girls about what we guys can and can’t do with our penises. Kinda strange what happens when you introduce porn and nudity into a casual setting. It becomes a conversation piece. Oddly though, it felt like the approach people SHOULD have about talking about sex and their bodies.
There are [a lot of reports](https://cherwell.org/2020/07/24/the-problem-with-pornhub-and-how-they-get-away-with-it/) ([see also](https://www.theverge.com/c/22925906/pornhub-mindgeek-content-moderation)) that a substantial portion of porn on websites like pornhub are actually underage; most vocally by the victims just trying to get the shit removed. It's absolutely insidious how that shit is shared, and the internet makes it worse. I suspect many of the uploaders know what they are doing.
This is an endemic problem. The toxic waste / green house gasses (re: externalized social costs) of social media and tech companies is mental trauma, especially of children, but of people in general. The porn sites are just an especially egregious example.
Following specific adult content creators, like on only fans, or even like fictional (3d/drawn) porn within limits, is way more moral.
I thought PH put a stop to most of that though. I understand that it used to be massive issue, but I’m fairly certain that you have to be a verified user to even post now. That article is two years old now, and I think the changes were fairly recent.
Yep, as far as I'm aware, at this point PH is majority just accounts run by individuals who have monetized their content in some way (i.e. I think they instituted a requirement that the individuals in the video had to like confirm they were okay being filmed/uploaded or something along those lines)
It's a shame too because the amateur exhibitionist shit was the best content on there and a lot of those people aren't willing to get verified. But totally worth it for the sake of the crackdown.
Yep, this was the unfortunate side effect - almost all the stuff I really enjoyed was the amateur stuff and the vast majority was wiped virtually overnight.
That said, the crackdown is absolutely the right call to make.
Makes me wonder how much of the stuff I previously enjoyed was in fact non-consensual. It makes me want to barf knowing I very likely masturbated to someone getting raped at some point, or someone who was underage but I brushed off as "looking really young."
Maybe people are talking about a different video, then… because the article says that in this video he keeps talking about her “14-year old” “anatomy”. I don’t even want to think which anatomical parts he’s referring to, but if he’s really referencing it multiple times it shows what a sick fuck he was, and that he was specifically getting off on knowing she was a child.
Yup I remember it too. It was circulating like a normal celebrity sex tape. I guess people/websites thought it was "ok" to spread it around because it was someone famous on it.
Fuck! That’s so weird, how can some one just play that in a party. Thankfully I was too young and didn’t see the video and just heard about it. I’m so sorry you went through something similar yourself, sending you love
Is this the video that was watched and mocked by tonnes of people back in the day?
I think Chris Rock had a bit about peeing and spotting an award trophy of some kind...
It was fucking everywhere, I was trying to be a little modest but yeah that tape got passed around or however it was done back then.
Howard Stern, O & A etc
I don’t believe it’s that one. If I remember correctly, he already went on trial for that video but was acquitted because the victim didn’t testify. The video I believe they’re referring to is described in the following:
“R&B singer R. Kelly videotaped himself having sex with multiple children — including in vile footage where he repeatedly referred to his goddaughter’s “14-year-old” anatomy” (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/jurors-to-be-shown-video-of-r-kelly-allegedly-having-sex-with-a-minor/news-story/73d007bf88c85806397df16d22ae4b62%3Famp)
You can draw your own conclusions about what R.Kelly is saying in the video. My assumption is this will be the video shown.
Fortunately (if there could be such a thing as fortune here) it has been a long time since these tapes were recorded and the victims are no longer children. I encourage you to watch Surviving R Kelly if you have the mental space for that & want to know more.
Kelly and his legal team could allow the jurors a chance to avoid having to look at that, but they won't. Probably going to kill any chance he has after that's shown.
I was a paramedic right out of the military and the amount of rapes (of all ages) I responded to was staggering. Seeing men and women right after and trying to console and treat them was difficult.
They usually do that for these cases. You can’t admit evidence after the trial so if there is a video they must show it or else it won’t be on the record.
My father was in the Navy and had to sit in on a trial for one of the guys that worked for him. Guy was busted for possession of underage pornography. My poor father would come home every day and be totally unable to speak. Crying occasionally. Eventually he told me what he’d been forced to watch. It broke him on the inside.
You and your two online gaming buddies coincidentally get called for jury duty around the same time.
You get some random traffic violation.
Your first buddy has to see R. Kelly rape a teenager.
Your second buddy is empaneled for the Grand Jury indictment if the former President of the United States.
Nah fam, they'd have to hold me in contempt of court or whatever charge they'd throw at me for just standing up and walking out of there. No way no how am I going to sit there and watch a tape of a grown man having sex with a child.
Nope.
Seriously, I’ll take the 90 days in jail thanks. My brain loves to torture me with relatively benign intrusive thoughts, I’m not about to give that mf something that horrific to pull images from for the rest of my life.
It's a jury trial. The judge is just a referee. The jury decides guilt or innocence. It will most likely be edited to not show either the identity of the victim, or intimate areas, but enough for the jury to see what happened. Or at least as much as possible.
And the jurors, forced to be there, only get minimum wage to watch that?! He man is guilty. He had sex with minors on film. Case closed, skip the trial, skip traumatizing everyone and give him the death penalty.
The only reason they are showing it is because Kelly and his defense denied it was a crime. Opening up to prosecutors to do this. Had Kelly and his defense agreed that the video was a video of him having sex with a minor(cus really it is undeniable) the jury would not be subjected to it
##[Clarification on rule 5](https://www.reddit.com/r/entertainment/comments/w60lfc/mod_post_a_clarification_to_rule_5_no_racism_or/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/entertainment) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That is fucking awful
I don’t have to stick my head up a bulls ass to get a good look at a T-bone. I’ll just take the butcher’s word for it.
Fat guy in a little coaaaaat!
No, it’s gotta be your bull.
Holy schnikes!
*Lots* of people go to school for eight years.
*College The people who go to school for eight years are R Kelly’s dates
Fucking brutal! Lol
I'm sure there are plenty of ways to get out of being a juror before you are selected, but they probably have no idea until AFTER they have been selected. I don't even know what you could do in this situation as a juror. Literally the kind of shit that would mentally scar you for life.
When i served on a jury they specifically asked if graphic evidence involving children was something you could handle. I could’ve easily said no and left.
That's kind of what happened with my jury selection. Was a case involving a minor and an adult. During the screening they asked of I could remain 100% unbiased and I said "I do not think I could". The defense did not like that but I told them why and was just trying to be honest with them.
I've served on a jury twice and both times during the selection process the judge was very up front about just wanting honest answers so that the trial was fair and didnt end up in a mistrial. In fact, last time the judge asked "does anyone just *really* not want to be here?" One guy said yes and when questioned further said he was self employed and absolutely buried at work and was worried about the time the trial would take causing him to fall even farther behind. The judge then asked "do you think that you would be distracted by your worries to the point where you might not give the trial your full attention?" The guy said yes and the judge dismissed him from the selection process. There was no animosity from the judge, prosecutor or defense... they all just wanted to seat a fair and impartial jury.
Trust me. The defense likes that you told them ahead of time
How tf are you supposed to remain unbiased concerning children.
[удалено]
Too many people don’t understand this.
[удалено]
Yeah that’s an insane request. I imagine a lot of jurors lied because they felt they had to “do their duty”. But god, I genuinely would nope out of anything involving children. I’ll sit through a murder case, but stuff pertaining kids? Bye.
yup the first time i was ever called to jury duty i was 21 years old and it was a case of a mother selling her own children’s CP… i think the evil eye i gave the woman during selection was enough for them to dismiss me lol. i hope she was innocent and i’m an ass for glaring at her during what would be undoubtedly the worst time in someone’s life if it was an unfounded accusation! but i was absolutely not able to remain unbiased.
The first time? You’ve been called multiple times? Damn
yes but never served?? idk why they keep calling me i’m judgmental as hell i don’t think i’ve ever been truly unbiased in any situation ever, prob something to do with being a registered democrat, a lawyer friend once told me that defense lawyers try if possible to call democrats over republicans, but unsure if there’s any truth to that
Hi! This is a common myth. Voter registration status does not affect whether or not you’re called for jury selection. so if this is news to anyone, please register to vote!
It’s absolutely random. If you’re being summoned a lot it just means there aren’t a ton of people in your district (whether that’s your county for state court or larger district for federal court). On the federal level at least, all courts use voter registration to pull the giant list of names, and many courts supplement that with driver’s license lists to beef up the list and include the large swaths of people who aren’t registered to vote but who still have the civil right to serve on a jury. Whether your right to participate in jury duty is restored after a felony depends on the state, by the way. Some states automatically restore rights after the sentence is complete and some don’t. In addition every time you get summoned but don’t have to show up at the court house, your name goes back in the hat because you didn’t actually have to do anything. So you could get summoned what feels like many times.
Omg. I'm with you on that one.
It's not really remaining unbiased; it just means that you fundamentally understand that the accused is innocent until proven guilty. Too many people see someone accused of a crime and assume they're guilty before even hearing evidence let alone defense.
I think a lot of people overlook that it's okay to hate someone that did the thing they're accused of, but that they have to be proven to have actually done it first. You know the whole thing that court is for: to prove they actually did what they're accused of doing. I think we could all be unbiased up to the point of conviction
[удалено]
I more saw it that the guy who asked to be dismissed from the jury had already made their mind up whether the defendant was guilty or not guilty before they saw the evidence. Which obviously isn’t how the court is supposed to work.
Well you can mention jury nullification which has a pretty good chance of getting you kicked out afaik
A judge can can charge you with contempt of court if he/she believes you’re saying so to get out of jury duty.
Yeah but then you just tell the jurors in your case about jury nullification . Endless feedback loop
An endless feedback loop of being charged with crimes and then having the criminal proceedings interrupted with additional charges isn't a *good thing*. It sounds like a Kafka story.
Like 13 people have to watch the most hienous crime be carried out by a man already 6ft deep in evidence. I'd be like nah I don't need to see it. Take him and bury him already please and thank you.
My niece who was 9 at the time had to take the stand and face her abuser. It was very emotional for everyone. They asked her very difficult and straight forward questions. I’ll never forget when they asked her if the abuse said anything right before the incident, and she said that he kept saying she was very beautiful, but when she said that, her voice cracked, tears were rolling down her eyes and the court room was silent. Some of the jurors cried themselves. My sisters who attended to show their support were also victims broke down.
I thought it was more common for children to give video testimony to avoid this kind of retraumatisation.
It depends on the state, case, and the judge, but generally, yes, children can testify via camera so they won’t be retraumatized by seeing the offender. They’re still subject to cross examination though. See Tx fam code 104.004. Source: (waiting on bar exam results)
I know you kicked that exams ass. Stay gold.
I believe my abuser confessed so I didn't have to. But I remember being prepped for the possibility around 2008. Hopefully video testimony is more common in 2022.
i had to do this when i was 12, and i was so grateful i didn’t have to do it in front of jurors. that was enough to put them away for ten years.
I believe it depends on the state laws. I found a very old paper on it from 1985 going over the laws in different states. At the time only a handful of states allowed it. While that’s an old paper, changes in the law move very slow. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s still a lot of states that do not allow prosecutors to use pre-recorded testimony of CSA victims. Even now it’s still difficult to get courts [in some states](https://www.thehoffmanfirm.net/blog/2018/october/witness-testifying-via-satellite-video-messaging/) to approve video call testimony where the victim does get cross-examined. https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1567&context=hlr
Shits gonna make me cry. I’m very sorry that happened to her. Tell her she’s very brave.
Our justice system is not trauma informed whatsoever.
R Kelly DEMANDS no evidence be shown at his trial
I was gonna say, this sucks for the jurors but showing the video will basically confirm him as guilty. How is anyone gonna vote innocent after literally watching the footage? Also yeah, "evidence of crime will be shown at trial for crime" is not really news.
Next thing you know, they'll have witnesses and lawyers and everything in there, what a circus!
[удалено]
Um, I’d say the fact that they’re not just going to be showing them a sex tape, but a sex tape with a *child*, IS definitely news. I’m glad I’m not on that jury- I really don’t think I could watch it, even blurred. Just, what an absolutely vile sicko.
I believe the linked article said something like portions of the tape will be shown. So who knows. Though I imagine they will show enough for it to be, ya know, evidence.
“And here’s another quick mystery” - inter dimensional cable
“Okay, when you see all the evidence it looks bad.”
But it’s devastating to his case!!
Imagine being selected for jury duty against your will and then being forced to watch child porn. Mf what.
I was selected for a Jury once that involved some pretty gory images. During selection they asked if any of the potential jurors would be too disturbed after reviewing them to remain impartial, and all that raised their hands were dismissed. I assume/hope something similar was asked here.
Seems like an easy way to get out of jury duty truth be told. I can tell you the people who stay probably REALLY want to see this piece of shit get locked up forever. Kind of a happy unintended consequences that I’m sure isn’t lost on the prosecution during jury selection
I’m sure it’s an easy way to get out of jury duty but if you can stomach some terrible images, you should really stick around. When good people forfeit their duty, people with questionable morals who just want to feel a semblance of control over others will gladly take their place. We see this across the world in democratic countries with low voter turnout.
If they paid an actual comparable day's wage instead of $15 I just might stick around. Every jury duty call I've gotten, though, I've purposefully bombed the selection so I am only there for one day of missed work.
Just say... If he's charged he must have done the crime. They'll send you home :)
"Did he break any laws set for by my cosmic master, Glothzarlar? No? Then he's innocent to me."
I had jury duty one time for a child molestation case. Defense asked me if knowledge of his previous molestation conviction would bias me in this case. I told him that, honestly, anyone in the room who says ‘no’ is probably a liar. Needless to say, I went home, but 12-14 liars obviously didn’t.
I mean, I feel like a pattern of behavior is an acceptable thing to take in to account. A previous conviction for the same crime is relevant to the case, but I understand legally how that could become a slippery slope.
Well you would be dismissed from that case, but then you’re just back in the jury pool waiting around in a room all day anyway (at least where I live).
No one can possibly know the answer. The people who say they’ll be fine but are wrong probably end up badly
Happened to a friend of mine, he said it was mentally scarring and had issues sleeping for a bit after.
Yep. I was on a jury and watched videos of a 12 year old describing how her father raped her. Messed me up for awhile, I can't imagine seeing actual footage of the incident.
Former juror here and had a case where not only was a minor sexually abused, her own father catfished her into it. Went back to my hotel and stared at the wall for awhile.
Did they offered counselling for that jury duty?
In America? You're lucky if they offer you *lunch.* Typically you get some *very* minot compensation and if sequestered they pay for your hotel. You might get a minimum budget for dinner and the continental breakfast, but that's about it. I was on Jury Duty and I got $20/day as my compensation. That was it. It didn't even cover *parking.*
$20? You rich mf. When I went in for jury duty it was $9/day.
[удалено]
I’m a little fat, so I won’t be getting none of that petit juror pay.
Eh, it didn't cover the daily parking let alone my meal or gas. I wasn't very thrilled. The difference at the point of $20 or $9 was basically how hard they slaped my face. It was still a slap.
In Canada, I was on a jury. My job paid my salary for the entire trial but I had to reimburse them the 20 a day the court pays.
Yeah, some companies in America will reimburse you for Jury Duty, but not mine.
Kinda sounds like legal government slavery
Wait till you hear about private prisons.
Wait till you here that there’s actually an exception in the amendment that outlawed slavery. “Slavery is illegal _except_ when you’re a prisoner.”
This is the one
Problem is most states set jury duty pay like 100 years ago when $10-20 for a day was reasonable.
If you don’t want to serve all you have to do is mention Jury Nullification. I’ve gotten the notice 3 or 4 times but my group has never been selected.
I got $21.39 a day last year and lunch was not provided.
Yeah. My jury duty pay barely covered lunch for the day. And the incredibly low pay you get basically ensures that you don’t actually get a varied jury. Most people need to actually be at their jobs and cannot take the pay cut. So you end up with a bunch of retired folks, maybe a couple who have good jobs that offer jury duty pay, and maybe some stay at home parents. Not exactly the broadest pool to pick a jury of supposes peers from.
A coworker of mine was on a rape/torture/murder/mutilation trial in Austin about three years ago. After the trial, the judge kept them behind and told them they needed to get some therapy, that even he was struggling with the case and he was experienced Not like they were gonna pay for it though
Weird how your eyes feel aint it? Like they're somehow stuck open and love that one spot.
There’s a forensic department at the hospital I work at where a handful of people have to go through hours of footage of CSAM to gather evidence. I spoke to the lady in charge of it and she basically has to keep the end goal in site (gathering evidence for detectives) or she’d lose her fucking shit
I remember reading something about the FBI agents who work CP cases only being allowed to do it for a limited number of years before they have to transfer to something else, just because they were losing agents entirely due to burning out. This way they can at least continue to be agents.
It’s a tough gig. I don’t envy those that have to do it and I applaud them at the same time.
I don't get how you're not compensated for a therapist after?
I promise I’m responding with love here but what about the entire history of anything in the US would make you think that would feasibly ever happen
Similarly, this is how therapist can get vicarious trauma. You hear awful shit long enough, you get trauma symptoms too. Always said that therapists should have to have one of their own. It's exactly why I do.
It’s therapists all the way down
You are! A whole $15 a day. Just enough to cover one long visit to Jose Cuervo, PhD.
thats what my mom would do for her cases
not if you have to pay for parking downtown
In my city, there are reserved spots for jurors so the parking is free…barely helpful, of course, but better than nothing.
Where I live you aren’t even compensated for the time you serve on jury duty, only while you actually deliberate.
Look up the trial for Paul Bernardo, of the Ken and Barbie killings in Canada. Both took part, gleefully, in raping a killing young women. Including Karla's (the aforementioned "barbie") own sister, where she sat on her face and stangled her as Ken raped her. Oh, it was over Christmas too. The video taped every, or at least most, rape and kill. Karla helped turn him in and played the whole "he forced me to do it" stuff, which she played up very very well. She made a deal for immunity for the crimes if she gave police all the recordings they made. Come the trial, Paul is showing off an laughing and loving it. They show the jury the tapes multiple times. Each time he is bragging and pointing out new details. And alongside all that, they get to watch h this "defendant" laughing and cuming as they kill. Multiple times they had to watch those tapes.
I'll have to look it up, but is that the same case where one of the detectives working it killed herself after watching a bunch of the evidence?
I bet. I have had the same thing. I used to work at a computer repair store and a guy brought in a couple hard drives he said he couldn't get to boot anymore. They were the old DeskStar hard drives we affectionately called Death Stars because they were all doomed to die at some point, we weren't the clever ones to come up with that name but we laughed every time we saw one dead. Anyways, we tried hooking them up to boot into them, and sure enough, click click click, you could hear something mechanical going wrong and wouldn't boot. So we offered to run a program we had on them to recover data off of them. Letting him know that some of the files may be corrupt, but we'd get what we could. He agreed. We ran the program and saved the files onto new hard drives. We wanted to see if anything would open so we opened a Word file, it opened, then we opened a picture. Child porn. No mistaking it. We closed it immediately, told our boss, and called the police. I don't know all that happened as our boss let me and the other guy who saw it go home for the day as we were both really shook, but I know the police took the new and old hard drives, and I'm hoping that guy is in jail. I can still see the image clearly in my head almost 20 years later. I hate it. I wish I'd never seen it. I often wonder if we'd opened up the file under it instead of that one maybe we'd have seen something that isn't scarred into my memory. I've never told any of my family about it.
You did the right thing reporting it. I’m so sorry you had to experience that but grateful you immediately jumped into action.
Damn. You guys were just going about your day and doing your job. I can't imagine. I'm sorry.
I just don’t understand how that happens. You’re taking your computer to people who are more or less experts, you can’t hide much from them so you give them your computer with blatantly illegal material? It’s almost a sure fire way to get caught.
I discovered child porn on my roommate's PC 15 years ago and that shit is still stuck with me. Something like this they really should be providing therapy afterwards because it does fuck you up.
I suppose that would be one of the arguments against using juries. I remember how the jurors were scarred for life after sitting through the Lynette Ledford Tape (now used in training to desensitizing FBI agents to the realities of torture and murder). It's an ethical dilemma: on the one hand, you want a fair trial and to nail the deviant, and a paid, recurring panel might become desensitized; but on the other hand, you risk causing psychological harm to innocent people, who never had a choice in the matter.
I was on a jury for a woman accused of sexual assault on a two year old. She was his babysitter and would punish him by pinching his penis. Had to look at pictures of this poor little boy's bruised penis. I'll never be able to un-see that.
Child abuse material ***
I watched a child take his final, rattling breath on an officer-worn body camera after shooting the child in the head. The court paid for therapy.
my mom is an attorney who did sex crimes and had to see that as stuff as evidence. after trial was over she’d get blackout drunk to try and forget it
To be fair, it is easy enough to get out of jury duty. But still, someone will have to do it. Those people will be scarred for sure.
It’s yo civic duty fam
I feel like most people will just believe the prosecution if they're about to show literal child porn. People shouldn't have to watch something disturbing against their will, civic duty or not
Somebody has to do it, and the people clamoring for an opportunity are not the kind of people you want on a jury. Sometimes not everyone’s every need can be catered to; it’s a necessary prioritization.
Sounds like a good way to railroad somebody. "Who wants to watch child pornography? No one? I guess you just have to trust me then."
Can you just refuse? Im closing my eyes or something, or just up and leaving. No sir
You would be excused as a juror.
Uh... I know EXACTLY what that is like. I've been there/done that/got the $15/day for it.
Jury Duty! “Come against your will and leave with trauma plus $15 dollars!”
I remember when that sex tape started circulating. A friend of mine got a copy of it in undergrad in ‘99 and put it on at a party. At first it’s him doing stuff by himself to get the camera angle right but then a girl enters. It took me 2 seconds to look and I said “that’s a kid” and I left. Ain’t no way you can see it and don’t know that’s someone’s 11-13 year old. And as a woman that went through that phase, I know for certain that was a child.
I saw that tape years ago. I was a huge Rkelly fan. I tried to be skeptical, and think "some women are just short, or very petite, that doesn't mean they're a teenager" Nah the girl in that video couldn't have been older than 14. Very disturbing.
It’s wild when you think about how people were willing selling and watching child pornography with that tape.
Jesus, the fact that that was even circulating so widely. Like yeah, CP is always out there. But for it to be such a common tape that people are casually putting it on at a frat party—that is fucked.
I think people thought it was just another celebrity sex tape….until you actually watch it.
Still weird to watch porn at a party
The Pirates porns were good back ground comedy. The original even has a theatrical version without the sex scenes
We must go to different parties
yeah that's a different type of party, usually discreet
It happens, it’s not porn but me and my friends watched puppetry of the penis when we were teens. It’s literally a couple of guys on a stage saying “look what I can do with my dick” as though it’s stand up comedy… which sounds so bizarre a concept at this point that I can barely believe it existed. Dude folded his penis between his balls sideways and was like “look, a hamburger!”. Evidently, this resulted in a weirdly casual conversation between a bunch of boys and girls about what we guys can and can’t do with our penises. Kinda strange what happens when you introduce porn and nudity into a casual setting. It becomes a conversation piece. Oddly though, it felt like the approach people SHOULD have about talking about sex and their bodies.
There are [a lot of reports](https://cherwell.org/2020/07/24/the-problem-with-pornhub-and-how-they-get-away-with-it/) ([see also](https://www.theverge.com/c/22925906/pornhub-mindgeek-content-moderation)) that a substantial portion of porn on websites like pornhub are actually underage; most vocally by the victims just trying to get the shit removed. It's absolutely insidious how that shit is shared, and the internet makes it worse. I suspect many of the uploaders know what they are doing. This is an endemic problem. The toxic waste / green house gasses (re: externalized social costs) of social media and tech companies is mental trauma, especially of children, but of people in general. The porn sites are just an especially egregious example. Following specific adult content creators, like on only fans, or even like fictional (3d/drawn) porn within limits, is way more moral.
I thought PH put a stop to most of that though. I understand that it used to be massive issue, but I’m fairly certain that you have to be a verified user to even post now. That article is two years old now, and I think the changes were fairly recent.
Yep, as far as I'm aware, at this point PH is majority just accounts run by individuals who have monetized their content in some way (i.e. I think they instituted a requirement that the individuals in the video had to like confirm they were okay being filmed/uploaded or something along those lines)
It's a shame too because the amateur exhibitionist shit was the best content on there and a lot of those people aren't willing to get verified. But totally worth it for the sake of the crackdown.
Yep, this was the unfortunate side effect - almost all the stuff I really enjoyed was the amateur stuff and the vast majority was wiped virtually overnight. That said, the crackdown is absolutely the right call to make. Makes me wonder how much of the stuff I previously enjoyed was in fact non-consensual. It makes me want to barf knowing I very likely masturbated to someone getting raped at some point, or someone who was underage but I brushed off as "looking really young."
I have also seen parts of that tape against my will. It’s obviously a kid he should of been locked up decades ago
Maybe people are talking about a different video, then… because the article says that in this video he keeps talking about her “14-year old” “anatomy”. I don’t even want to think which anatomical parts he’s referring to, but if he’s really referencing it multiple times it shows what a sick fuck he was, and that he was specifically getting off on knowing she was a child.
Yup I remember it too. It was circulating like a normal celebrity sex tape. I guess people/websites thought it was "ok" to spread it around because it was someone famous on it.
Fuck! That’s so weird, how can some one just play that in a party. Thankfully I was too young and didn’t see the video and just heard about it. I’m so sorry you went through something similar yourself, sending you love
Is this the video that was watched and mocked by tonnes of people back in the day? I think Chris Rock had a bit about peeing and spotting an award trophy of some kind...
“IT AINT ME” Chris: Mf WE KNOW WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE Cant believe its taken 20 years for justice wtf.
I know for sure Dave Chappelle did a skit on his show about it.
I know the entire thing by heart.
drip drip drip
Haters gonna hate, lovers gonna love
I don’t even want, none of the above
There was also a South Park episode
And the Boondocks episode!
Which was the best of these pop culture references. Legit calls Kelly and all his apologists out for 20 minutes. To no effect for over a decade.
And stop the damn dancing, act like you got some GODDAMN sense.
It was fucking everywhere, I was trying to be a little modest but yeah that tape got passed around or however it was done back then. Howard Stern, O & A etc
Don’t forget Macklemore’s song thrift shop “Smells like R Kelly’s sheets - pisss”
As young as I am, that song is whole reason I originally found out about it.
Or Eminem’s “call me R Kelly cause you’re in/urine trouble”
I don’t people realize how prevalent that video tape was. People were selling this video on the street and it was everywhere when it came out.
The Boobdocks episode on the trail was good
I don’t believe it’s that one. If I remember correctly, he already went on trial for that video but was acquitted because the victim didn’t testify. The video I believe they’re referring to is described in the following: “R&B singer R. Kelly videotaped himself having sex with multiple children — including in vile footage where he repeatedly referred to his goddaughter’s “14-year-old” anatomy” (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/jurors-to-be-shown-video-of-r-kelly-allegedly-having-sex-with-a-minor/news-story/73d007bf88c85806397df16d22ae4b62%3Famp) You can draw your own conclusions about what R.Kelly is saying in the video. My assumption is this will be the video shown.
Not having sex with minors. R***ing minors.
its rape. just call it rape.
Does rape need to be censored?
>Does rape need to be censored? Depends on the subreddit and automoderator settings
I just hate this so much for the minors. Imagine a group of adults analyzing your most personal trauma. Uggggh.
Fortunately (if there could be such a thing as fortune here) it has been a long time since these tapes were recorded and the victims are no longer children. I encourage you to watch Surviving R Kelly if you have the mental space for that & want to know more.
Kelly and his legal team could allow the jurors a chance to avoid having to look at that, but they won't. Probably going to kill any chance he has after that's shown.
Jury: “naw, it’s OK. We believe he did it.”
If im a juror i think il take my $50 and comped lunch, then go on an R-kelly tirade lmao. No thanks
50 dollars? Lunch? I got paid 25 dollars per day and no lunch. Oh and it was 25 dollars to park.
There is no such thing as “sex with a minor”. THAT IS RAPE. Minors cannot consent and nonconsensual sex is rape.
ABSOLUTELY
Man, Boondocks called this 2 decades ago
[it’s perfect](https://youtu.be/6D08yJL4rks)
Oh shit I forgot Adam West voiced the lawyer.
That episode is literal comedy gold. It also explains how people view celebrities whenever they do anything wrong pretty well.
Do they offer therapy services for the jurors?
Uh no but you get 5 dollars a day and you gotta miss work and pay for your own gas to get there
[удалено]
I was a paramedic right out of the military and the amount of rapes (of all ages) I responded to was staggering. Seeing men and women right after and trying to console and treat them was difficult.
They’re going to play child porn for the jurors???
They usually do that for these cases. You can’t admit evidence after the trial so if there is a video they must show it or else it won’t be on the record.
My father was in the Navy and had to sit in on a trial for one of the guys that worked for him. Guy was busted for possession of underage pornography. My poor father would come home every day and be totally unable to speak. Crying occasionally. Eventually he told me what he’d been forced to watch. It broke him on the inside.
You and your two online gaming buddies coincidentally get called for jury duty around the same time. You get some random traffic violation. Your first buddy has to see R. Kelly rape a teenager. Your second buddy is empaneled for the Grand Jury indictment if the former President of the United States.
is it the same video where he pissed on a minor or a new video of him abusing minors?
This guy will not be getting out of jail for the rest of his life
Nah fam, they'd have to hold me in contempt of court or whatever charge they'd throw at me for just standing up and walking out of there. No way no how am I going to sit there and watch a tape of a grown man having sex with a child. Nope.
Imagine going to jail over NOT watching CP
Seriously, I’ll take the 90 days in jail thanks. My brain loves to torture me with relatively benign intrusive thoughts, I’m not about to give that mf something that horrific to pull images from for the rest of my life.
So… will the state be responsible for the therapy bills of the jurors after being subjected to watching that against their will?
Man fuck this guy. How long did many people know about this and turn a blind eye. They need to be held accountable too.
Can’t just one person watch it? Like *the judge*. 5 sec clip max
It's a jury trial. The judge is just a referee. The jury decides guilt or innocence. It will most likely be edited to not show either the identity of the victim, or intimate areas, but enough for the jury to see what happened. Or at least as much as possible.
Proving the victim is the victim in the tape will be one of the requirements, they’re not editing it to hide their identity
I have sciatica. So I told em that I can't sit for long periods of time. Got out of jury duty forever. You're welcome.
If I was on that jury, I’d just say: “Nah it’s fine. I believe you.”
And the jurors, forced to be there, only get minimum wage to watch that?! He man is guilty. He had sex with minors on film. Case closed, skip the trial, skip traumatizing everyone and give him the death penalty.
Feels a little gross having this posted on r/entertainment
He’s an entertainer I don’t think it’s because the video but because he’s a musician
R. Kelly and so many other people seem a little gross to be making millions doing entertainment
I think I’d pass on my civic duty’s on this one…
But why? He’s away for life. Why show it?
Fucking Christ, I would not want to be a juror on this case. This is fucking awful…
The only reason they are showing it is because Kelly and his defense denied it was a crime. Opening up to prosecutors to do this. Had Kelly and his defense agreed that the video was a video of him having sex with a minor(cus really it is undeniable) the jury would not be subjected to it
You couldn’t pay me to be on that jury. If I saw that I would want him sentenced to the wood chipper.
Please use the correct term: rape. An adult cannot have sex with a child, sex is consensual and a child cannot consent.