Star’s acquittal a gross miscarriage and a statement on the digital age

If the mole doesn’t fit, you have to acquit!

OK, so defense lawyer Sam Adam never actually said that, nor did R. Kelly perform a parody of his god-awful theme song from “Space Jam,” retitled “I Believe I Can Lie.”

But that doesn’t mean that justice wasn’t abused like a young girl by a wealthy older man a week ago when R. Kelly was acquitted of all 14 counts of child pornography. The verdict itself would make me as sick as the tape that first brought about the charges, if it weren’t for the fact that the damage was already done.

At this point, the jurors were just adding insult to injury.

For those of you who haven’t been following this trial as obsessively as I have, let me give you the short version:

In 2002 a video tape of a man having sex with a young woman or girl — depending both on your definition of each and the still “unknown” truth of the matter — was mailed to the Chicago Sun-Times. In it, the man urinated on the female in question.

The tape itself had been made roughly four years earlier, allegedly by Kelly, who is rumored to have carried a duffel bag full of such homemade porn around with him. The girl was said to be 13 at the time, and Kelly 31.

How it took six years for this case to come to trial is anybody’s guess, but during that time, Kelly was free to tour around the country promoting his albums. By the way, those albums have continued to sell quite well despite the allegations against him. Like some Michael Jackson fans — and I’m talking about the man, not his music — people who bought those albums likely would claim that they always knew the allegations against him were false.

Sure, sure. Just keep telling yourself that. The truth is, there are people out there either so naive that they won’t believe, or so jaded that they don’t care, that this man might well have had kinky sex with a minor. In some places they even call that rape.

Then, the date of the trial finally arrived. Now, normally I like to pretend I’m above following celebrity justice cases. Other than my resentment at even knowing who somebody as worthless as Paris Hilton is, I try to avoid reading about the latest celebrity arrests and scandals.

But R. Kelly is a special case. Here is a man who’s pumped out wanky love song after awful, sleazy, paint-by-the-numbers “R&B” jam for the entirety of my adult life. When a musician like that is accused of taping himself urinating on an underage lady, I take notice.

So, I’ve waited for six years, and watched over the last few months as an FBI agent stepped forward and said there was no way the tape could have been doctored. I’ve read the accounts of testimony by former Kelly employee Lisa Van Allen, who says she engaged in sexual acts with both Kelly and the alleged victim on the tape, and could identify both.

I’ve gritted my teeth as Kelly’s scumbag lawyer discredited the woman and raised doubts in the jury’s mind as to the true identity of both people portrayed on the tape, Johnny Cochrane-style. Kelly has a mole on his lower back, you see, and the tape might or might not have showed this.

Call me crazy, but I might have just looked at his face. Naw, I’m sure that could be doctored.

Ultimately, this case seems to come down to two issues. One, R. Kelly had enough money to delay the trial until 10 years had gone by and the girl’s appearance had changed so much that it was impossible to tell if it was really her on the video. Two, we live in an age where we’ve seen so many images altered that we can’t even believe in the legitimacy of an artifact that an expert on the subject testifies could not have been faked.

In other words, I could tape myself killing somebody, and as long as I didn’t leave any physical evidence, and had enough dough, I could get off scot-free. It worked for the cops in the Rodney King trial, and it worked for R. Kelly.

Because perhaps the most important point in this whole case is that several jurors who were interviewed after the trial admitted that they were sure it was Kelly in the video. But because Van Allen was discredited and the victim refused to testify, jurors said they were unsure if it was really her on the tape.

Really? After Van Allen and several other witnesses got on the stand and testified that it’s her? You’re still not sure? Is it because she’s not famous or rich or powerful enough? Is that why you’re not sure? Or is it why you don’t care?

Maybe this isn’t as serious as the O.J. Simpson case, but to me it says something about how far our justice system has fallen, how we treat celebrities compared to everybody else, and the kind of cynicism advances in technology have bred in us over the years. To me, it’s one of those crux cases that brings many aspects of what’s wrong with us together into one damning picture.

Meanwhile, Wesley Snipes tries to avoid going to jail for three years on charges he didn’t pay his taxes. So, I guess the lesson here is: Screw as many little kids as you want. Just don’t screw the government.

Jake TenPas can be reached at jake.tenpas@lee.net or 758-9514.