Topic: R. Kelly Reveals He Suffers From Illiteracy
Anonymous A started this discussion 13 years ago #28,600
R&B singer/songwriter R. Kelly revealed that despite his musical talents, he suffers from illiteracy and barely made it through grade school. The Grammy winner recently spoke at the Midwest Music Festival in Chicago, about the trials and tribulations of starting his career. "When I was trying to make it out here, I already knew, and I was stubborn about it," he said. "I don't even read really and I'm not afraid to say that. My cousins and brothers used to tease me 'you can't even read right. How you think you're going to come up?' The only reason I graduated from grammar school is because I had a great jump shot. I went to high school and [my teacher] told me 'you will one of the greatest writers of all time.' I believed. You [have to] believe it. You can't believe [anything] if you're hating. You can't achieve [anything] if you're hating."
Since being exonerated from child molestation charges Kelly has been working on his upcoming release. When news of Kelly's possible sexual escapades with a then underage girl broke in 2001, the singer maintained his innocence despite the leak of a sex tape showing him and the victim. He has received mixed reactions in response to the allegations but the 42-year-old stated that he is undaunted by his critics. "I got ya'll beat if you're hating on me," he said. "Because I love you. That's why I keep doing what I do."
Last year Kelly spoke publicly about the child molestation case. "I can't keep answering these questions," he said in an interview. "If you [were] charged with something and you [were] found innocent, then you can't be found guilty for being found innocent."
Kelly's forthcoming album is due in stores Oct. 12.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later[^] [v] #422,121
Poor guy.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 21 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #422,128
Ha-ha!
(Edited 32 seconds later.)
kook !!32zdfdzi+ joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 22 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,130
Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,133
@previous (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
I honestly have no idea about his molestation thing. I don't really follow celebrity news.
I honestly have no idea about his molestation thing. I don't really follow celebrity news.
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 13 years ago, 20 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,146
Anonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,150
@422,130 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
Damn. I mean, I understand that there isn't always a toilet around but that's just too far. Weren't there bushes around?
Damn. I mean, I understand that there isn't always a toilet around but that's just too far. Weren't there bushes around?
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 13 years ago, 47 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,158
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 40 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,167
@previous (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
If you were charged with something and you were found innocent, then you can't be found guilty for being found innocent.
If you were charged with something and you were found innocent, then you can't be found guilty for being found innocent.
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,169
kook !!32zdfdzi+ double-posted this 13 years ago, 48 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,170
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 6 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,171
@422,169 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
I got ya'll beat if you're hating on me. Because I love you. That's why I keep doing what I do.
I got ya'll beat if you're hating on me. Because I love you. That's why I keep doing what I do.
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,172
kook !!32zdfdzi+ double-posted this 13 years ago, 29 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,173
kook !!32zdfdzi+ triple-posted this 13 years ago, 6 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,175
The state called her a "victim," the defense called her a "harlot" and a "whore," but neither side called her to the stand — and her absence may make all the difference.
R. Kelly's child-pornography trial reached its end on Thursday (June 12) when both sides got one last chance to convince the jury with closing arguments, after which point the case was handed over to the jury to decide. While the state bolstered its case by reviewing the sex tape in open court one last time, Kelly's team went on the attack, calling several females involved in the trial either "liars," "extortionists" or "whores" all after the singer's money.
"In order to find R. Kelly guilty [of the 14 counts against him]," defense attorney Sam Adam Jr. said, "you're going to have to call this girl a whore 14 times. Before the whole world, you're going to have to say that [the prosecutors] proved it to you: that this girl is a whore."
"This isn't a case of a groupie who came into his trailer and presented herself as older than she was," Assistant State's Attorney Robert Heilingoetter countered. "They're calling her a prostitute. We're not saying that. We're saying she's the victim of child pornography."
As the two teams went head-to-head, the state reminded the jury of all the evidence that the defense would have them soon forget. "What about his house, for starters?" Heilingoetter asked. "The background of the tape is in his home. ... So either you believe he's walking around with that duffle bag of [sex tapes], or you believe that someone broke in, shot the background in his house, looped it, and — using technology that does not exist and goes undetected by the FBI — faked a tape. Or someone took a tape out of his bag while he was playing basketball or performing in the studio."
Kelly's team said there was no such bag, and the only person who testified she saw it was Lisa Van Allen, whom Adam equated with Satan, quoting 2 Corinthians 11:14: " 'Satan came disguised as an angel of light.' That's what she is." Adam said he took it personally when Van
Allen said he threatened and intimidated her during their meeting, instead claiming that it was she who had threatened him, seeking to get money in exchange for not testifying against Kelly. Adam also made a connection between the prosecution's copy of the sex tape — since the tape itself was manufactured in Peachtree, Georgia — and Van Allen, who lives in Atlanta. Could one of the fathers of her two children — both ex-cons — be behind this, he asked?
"We're not going to chastise Lisa Van Allen for her choice in men," prosecutor Shauna Boliker said, pointing out that it was revealing of Kelly's private life that Van Allen had been his choice of a live-in companion for three and a half years. "Maybe you don't want to bring her home," Boliker said. "Maybe you don't want your son bringing her home for dinner. But don't you think that if it was about money, she wouldn't have been here? They claim she has no proof, no tape. But she said it herself: When they asked for the tape, she said, 'Ask Robert.' "
The family of the girl in question wasn't much better, Adam claimed. If they were as well-meaning as the state claimed in coming forward to make IDs of the girl, why hadn't they done something before? Why didn't they confront Kelly? "Someone would have gone over there, broken his leg," he said, "beat the crap out of him. That's what you would have done." But not even her aunt Delores Gibson, herself a police officer, did so much as call the police, Adam said. Aunt Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards called her niece "my heart," but she might as well have called her "my meal ticket," Adam said.
Adam also questioned why no one ever noticed anything inappropriate between Kelly and the girl, which he said was proof nothing had ever happened between them. "This wasn't a gardener or the man down the street or a janitor," he said. "This was a 13-year-old girl having sex with a superstar, and she doesn't tell anyone? She doesn't let it slip to her best friend? Never? Not anyone? You can't keep a 13-year-old's mouth closed over Hannah Montana tickets, but this?"
And where was she in all of this, he asked, implying her absence itself also confirmed no molestation occurred. "She's just down the street," Adam claimed, "but [the prosecutors] don't go out and bring her in."
"Shame on them," Boliker said. "We don't need to drag that poor child here in court."
Boliker likened the case to one of first-degree murder, when the victim can't take the stand to say that he was shot point blank but the evidence proves it for him. And in this case, Boliker said, enough damage had already been done to the girl and her family, which has been divided "because of his crime, because of his action" ever since. Van Allen, Sparkle, all the people the defense casts aspersions on, Boliker said, they weren't the ones accusing Kelly, nor were they the ones on trial for their actions.
"This is the people of the state of Illinois versus R. Kelly," she said. "He is the one who is responsible. This is not a who-did-it; this is a he-did-it. We know what happened, no matter what they say. This young child who looks up to him, who admires him, who does what he tells her to do, she was a vulnerable young child. How dare he call her a prostitute?
R. Kelly's child-pornography trial reached its end on Thursday (June 12) when both sides got one last chance to convince the jury with closing arguments, after which point the case was handed over to the jury to decide. While the state bolstered its case by reviewing the sex tape in open court one last time, Kelly's team went on the attack, calling several females involved in the trial either "liars," "extortionists" or "whores" all after the singer's money.
"In order to find R. Kelly guilty [of the 14 counts against him]," defense attorney Sam Adam Jr. said, "you're going to have to call this girl a whore 14 times. Before the whole world, you're going to have to say that [the prosecutors] proved it to you: that this girl is a whore."
"This isn't a case of a groupie who came into his trailer and presented herself as older than she was," Assistant State's Attorney Robert Heilingoetter countered. "They're calling her a prostitute. We're not saying that. We're saying she's the victim of child pornography."
As the two teams went head-to-head, the state reminded the jury of all the evidence that the defense would have them soon forget. "What about his house, for starters?" Heilingoetter asked. "The background of the tape is in his home. ... So either you believe he's walking around with that duffle bag of [sex tapes], or you believe that someone broke in, shot the background in his house, looped it, and — using technology that does not exist and goes undetected by the FBI — faked a tape. Or someone took a tape out of his bag while he was playing basketball or performing in the studio."
Kelly's team said there was no such bag, and the only person who testified she saw it was Lisa Van Allen, whom Adam equated with Satan, quoting 2 Corinthians 11:14: " 'Satan came disguised as an angel of light.' That's what she is." Adam said he took it personally when Van
Allen said he threatened and intimidated her during their meeting, instead claiming that it was she who had threatened him, seeking to get money in exchange for not testifying against Kelly. Adam also made a connection between the prosecution's copy of the sex tape — since the tape itself was manufactured in Peachtree, Georgia — and Van Allen, who lives in Atlanta. Could one of the fathers of her two children — both ex-cons — be behind this, he asked?
"We're not going to chastise Lisa Van Allen for her choice in men," prosecutor Shauna Boliker said, pointing out that it was revealing of Kelly's private life that Van Allen had been his choice of a live-in companion for three and a half years. "Maybe you don't want to bring her home," Boliker said. "Maybe you don't want your son bringing her home for dinner. But don't you think that if it was about money, she wouldn't have been here? They claim she has no proof, no tape. But she said it herself: When they asked for the tape, she said, 'Ask Robert.' "
The family of the girl in question wasn't much better, Adam claimed. If they were as well-meaning as the state claimed in coming forward to make IDs of the girl, why hadn't they done something before? Why didn't they confront Kelly? "Someone would have gone over there, broken his leg," he said, "beat the crap out of him. That's what you would have done." But not even her aunt Delores Gibson, herself a police officer, did so much as call the police, Adam said. Aunt Stephanie "Sparkle" Edwards called her niece "my heart," but she might as well have called her "my meal ticket," Adam said.
Adam also questioned why no one ever noticed anything inappropriate between Kelly and the girl, which he said was proof nothing had ever happened between them. "This wasn't a gardener or the man down the street or a janitor," he said. "This was a 13-year-old girl having sex with a superstar, and she doesn't tell anyone? She doesn't let it slip to her best friend? Never? Not anyone? You can't keep a 13-year-old's mouth closed over Hannah Montana tickets, but this?"
And where was she in all of this, he asked, implying her absence itself also confirmed no molestation occurred. "She's just down the street," Adam claimed, "but [the prosecutors] don't go out and bring her in."
"Shame on them," Boliker said. "We don't need to drag that poor child here in court."
Boliker likened the case to one of first-degree murder, when the victim can't take the stand to say that he was shot point blank but the evidence proves it for him. And in this case, Boliker said, enough damage had already been done to the girl and her family, which has been divided "because of his crime, because of his action" ever since. Van Allen, Sparkle, all the people the defense casts aspersions on, Boliker said, they weren't the ones accusing Kelly, nor were they the ones on trial for their actions.
"This is the people of the state of Illinois versus R. Kelly," she said. "He is the one who is responsible. This is not a who-did-it; this is a he-did-it. We know what happened, no matter what they say. This young child who looks up to him, who admires him, who does what he tells her to do, she was a vulnerable young child. How dare he call her a prostitute?
kook !!32zdfdzi+ quadruple-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,176
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1589342/r-kelly-jurors-agreed-singer-was-on-sex-tape.jhtml
CHICAGO -- The jurors in the R. Kelly child-pornography trial didn't doubt whether it was the singer on the tape — they just doubted whether it was the girl prosecutors said it was.
"I thought it was R. Kelly on the tape," juror #9 said after the verdict was rendered. "I just wasn't 100 percent on the girl."
The five jurors who agreed to speak to the press following their not-guilty verdict said they felt the state hadn't presented enough evidence and that having the alleged victim on the stand would have made the difference.
"The key problem was the identity of the female," juror #23 said. "Her absence was a major lack."
"The family was too divided," said juror #9, who in the preliminary votes had voted for a guilty verdict. "So you had to discount the family testimony either way."
This didn't mean that the jurors bought all the defense arguments wholesale. The missing mole, for instance, was a non-issue, they said. They didn't want to examine the video any further, either.
CHICAGO -- The jurors in the R. Kelly child-pornography trial didn't doubt whether it was the singer on the tape — they just doubted whether it was the girl prosecutors said it was.
"I thought it was R. Kelly on the tape," juror #9 said after the verdict was rendered. "I just wasn't 100 percent on the girl."
The five jurors who agreed to speak to the press following their not-guilty verdict said they felt the state hadn't presented enough evidence and that having the alleged victim on the stand would have made the difference.
"The key problem was the identity of the female," juror #23 said. "Her absence was a major lack."
"The family was too divided," said juror #9, who in the preliminary votes had voted for a guilty verdict. "So you had to discount the family testimony either way."
This didn't mean that the jurors bought all the defense arguments wholesale. The missing mole, for instance, was a non-issue, they said. They didn't want to examine the video any further, either.
kook !!32zdfdzi+ quintuple-posted this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,177
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1588139/r-kellys-ex-assistant-identifies-him-underage-girl-on-tape.jhtml
CHICAGO — R. Kelly's been facing a litany of witnesses identifying the girl prosecutors say is on the sex tape at the heart of his child-pornography trial — mostly her relatives and childhood and family friends. But on Tuesday (May 27) the singer faced off with someone a little closer to home: his former personal assistant, who told the court she was "110 percent" certain it was both Kelly and the underage girl on the tape.
Lindsey Perryman, who worked for Kelly on and off from 1999 to 2006, sang the singer's praises at first, telling the court he was a great boss who helped her get better jobs whenever she grew dissatisfied with her work hours (she wanted something more 9-to-5, she said). "I think so highly of Mr. Kelly and his family," she testified.
So she paid little heed to the rumors and reports that Kelly allegedly had taped sex with an underage girl, even though she knew the girl in question. In fact, Perryman had seen the girl bring "a pillow and an overnight bag with her" when she visited the singer at his studio. And as Perryman's job duties grew from being an intern to a receptionist to the office manager at his studio to Kelly's personal assistant, she increasingly helped bring the two together — picking up the girl from school and bringing her to the studio, where she would do her homework, or taking her to Kelly's home in Olympia Fields. Still, she didn't suspect anything was untoward.I had never seen him be inappropriate with anyone, and he had never been inappropriate with me," Perryman said. "There's never been any reason to walk away."
But when asked to by the state's attorney's office last winter, Perryman watched the video, which she had been avoiding: "I didn't want to think it was them." But she testified that in her opinion it was. "The image that I saw looked like [the girl]," Perryman said. "She has distinct cheekbones, and the way she moves her mouth, the way she smiles, it's all very distinctive. The image I saw looked exactly like her. [And] it sounded exactly like her."
As for Kelly, Perryman said she was equally sure, claiming that the singer looked on the tape like he did when she first met him in the summer of 1999. Upon viewing the tape, "I was shocked," she said. "I was disturbed. I didn't want to see any of this."
Perryman also testified that she had seen another woman, Lisa Van Allen, visit Kelly in the studio, setting the stage for Wednesday's expected testimony that this second woman also had knowledge about sexual relations between Kelly and the girl in question. Van Allen is alleged to have participated in threesomes with the pair.
CHICAGO — R. Kelly's been facing a litany of witnesses identifying the girl prosecutors say is on the sex tape at the heart of his child-pornography trial — mostly her relatives and childhood and family friends. But on Tuesday (May 27) the singer faced off with someone a little closer to home: his former personal assistant, who told the court she was "110 percent" certain it was both Kelly and the underage girl on the tape.
Lindsey Perryman, who worked for Kelly on and off from 1999 to 2006, sang the singer's praises at first, telling the court he was a great boss who helped her get better jobs whenever she grew dissatisfied with her work hours (she wanted something more 9-to-5, she said). "I think so highly of Mr. Kelly and his family," she testified.
So she paid little heed to the rumors and reports that Kelly allegedly had taped sex with an underage girl, even though she knew the girl in question. In fact, Perryman had seen the girl bring "a pillow and an overnight bag with her" when she visited the singer at his studio. And as Perryman's job duties grew from being an intern to a receptionist to the office manager at his studio to Kelly's personal assistant, she increasingly helped bring the two together — picking up the girl from school and bringing her to the studio, where she would do her homework, or taking her to Kelly's home in Olympia Fields. Still, she didn't suspect anything was untoward.I had never seen him be inappropriate with anyone, and he had never been inappropriate with me," Perryman said. "There's never been any reason to walk away."
But when asked to by the state's attorney's office last winter, Perryman watched the video, which she had been avoiding: "I didn't want to think it was them." But she testified that in her opinion it was. "The image that I saw looked like [the girl]," Perryman said. "She has distinct cheekbones, and the way she moves her mouth, the way she smiles, it's all very distinctive. The image I saw looked exactly like her. [And] it sounded exactly like her."
As for Kelly, Perryman said she was equally sure, claiming that the singer looked on the tape like he did when she first met him in the summer of 1999. Upon viewing the tape, "I was shocked," she said. "I was disturbed. I didn't want to see any of this."
Perryman also testified that she had seen another woman, Lisa Van Allen, visit Kelly in the studio, setting the stage for Wednesday's expected testimony that this second woman also had knowledge about sexual relations between Kelly and the girl in question. Van Allen is alleged to have participated in threesomes with the pair.
kook !!32zdfdzi+ sextuple-posted this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,178
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1526835/r-kellys-brother-singer-has-more-hide.jhtml
R. Kelly's Brother Accuses Singer Of More Abuses
Carey Kelly levies additional allegations against brother on low-budget DVD.
A few years back a rumor circulated that R. Kelly planned to claim that it was actually his brother featured on the sex tape that prompted child-pornography charges against the singer. But R. Kelly's younger brother has a tape — and a few claims — of his own.
Carey Kelly has resurfaced in a new low-budget DVD in which he puts forth a number of allegations against his more famous brother. Chief among them, Carey says R. offered him $50,000, a record deal and a house if he would perjure himself on the witness stand. Previously Carey had expressed concern when he heard that his resemblance to his brother might be used as a defense strategy to cast doubt that it was really the singer on the tape (see "R. Kelly's Brother: I Support Him But Won't Take The Fall").
"I got a call about a year and a half ago," Carey says on the Drahma Magazine-produced DVD, which was first available on MediaTakeOut.com and was released Tuesday. "My brother wanted me to do some sh-- pertaining to this case that would leave me behind bars with a record deal. It doesn't make sense, so I turned it down. ... Since I couldn't lie for him in a court of law, we're back to beefing again, and we ain't brothers no more."
Carey elaborated on New York radio station Hot 97's Friday morning show, saying R. made the offer while the two were in a hot tub, ostensibly so the singer could be sure his younger brother wasn't wearing a wire. Even though he was alternately living in an abandoned building and sleeping in his car at the time, the offer of money and fame "was not worth it to me," Carey said. "I'd rather get it on my own than sell my soul, so that's why I'm speaking the truth."
Carey also claims that R. abuses his wife (see "R. Kelly, Wife Separate — Petition For Restraining Order Tells Of Alleged Abuse"), tried to molest their other brother's daughter and molested their 12-year-old second cousin. And if those claims weren't enough, Carey also says R. is bisexual ("He in the closet for real," Carey said on Hot 97).
"This is not the first time Carey has made ridiculous accusations against his brother," an R. Kelly spokesperson said. "We're not going to dignify them with a comment."
A source close to the singer said Carey's accusations are "frustrating" because "R. Kelly doesn't want to go after him publicly." But the source said R. considers Carey to be "troubled guy with lots of problems who's mouthing off."
Carey says all his claims can be proven. But Carey's credibility might be called into question for a number of reasons — most of them self-admitted. His grudge against his brother, however, is paramount — he says he believes the singer has prevented him from having a successful music career of his own. Even though he contributed to a few tracks to R.'s 1993 record, 12 Play, Carey says he hasn't received any royalties. "I never asked for a handout, but pay me for what I do," he told Hot 97. Carey says he also believes that his brother got him blacklisted by the music industry.
"Why are people feeling sorry for [R.]?" Carey asked. "Saying that the girl's lying and that's why he caught the case? He caught the case because that's God's way of waking him up. What you put out there comes back. It's called karma. But I'm not trying to say anything that's going to put him behind bars. I just wish that people that supposedly love him really reach out to him and say, 'You need help, man.' He's sick and he needs help."
R. Kelly's Brother Accuses Singer Of More Abuses
Carey Kelly levies additional allegations against brother on low-budget DVD.
A few years back a rumor circulated that R. Kelly planned to claim that it was actually his brother featured on the sex tape that prompted child-pornography charges against the singer. But R. Kelly's younger brother has a tape — and a few claims — of his own.
Carey Kelly has resurfaced in a new low-budget DVD in which he puts forth a number of allegations against his more famous brother. Chief among them, Carey says R. offered him $50,000, a record deal and a house if he would perjure himself on the witness stand. Previously Carey had expressed concern when he heard that his resemblance to his brother might be used as a defense strategy to cast doubt that it was really the singer on the tape (see "R. Kelly's Brother: I Support Him But Won't Take The Fall").
"I got a call about a year and a half ago," Carey says on the Drahma Magazine-produced DVD, which was first available on MediaTakeOut.com and was released Tuesday. "My brother wanted me to do some sh-- pertaining to this case that would leave me behind bars with a record deal. It doesn't make sense, so I turned it down. ... Since I couldn't lie for him in a court of law, we're back to beefing again, and we ain't brothers no more."
Carey elaborated on New York radio station Hot 97's Friday morning show, saying R. made the offer while the two were in a hot tub, ostensibly so the singer could be sure his younger brother wasn't wearing a wire. Even though he was alternately living in an abandoned building and sleeping in his car at the time, the offer of money and fame "was not worth it to me," Carey said. "I'd rather get it on my own than sell my soul, so that's why I'm speaking the truth."
Carey also claims that R. abuses his wife (see "R. Kelly, Wife Separate — Petition For Restraining Order Tells Of Alleged Abuse"), tried to molest their other brother's daughter and molested their 12-year-old second cousin. And if those claims weren't enough, Carey also says R. is bisexual ("He in the closet for real," Carey said on Hot 97).
"This is not the first time Carey has made ridiculous accusations against his brother," an R. Kelly spokesperson said. "We're not going to dignify them with a comment."
A source close to the singer said Carey's accusations are "frustrating" because "R. Kelly doesn't want to go after him publicly." But the source said R. considers Carey to be "troubled guy with lots of problems who's mouthing off."
Carey says all his claims can be proven. But Carey's credibility might be called into question for a number of reasons — most of them self-admitted. His grudge against his brother, however, is paramount — he says he believes the singer has prevented him from having a successful music career of his own. Even though he contributed to a few tracks to R.'s 1993 record, 12 Play, Carey says he hasn't received any royalties. "I never asked for a handout, but pay me for what I do," he told Hot 97. Carey says he also believes that his brother got him blacklisted by the music industry.
"Why are people feeling sorry for [R.]?" Carey asked. "Saying that the girl's lying and that's why he caught the case? He caught the case because that's God's way of waking him up. What you put out there comes back. It's called karma. But I'm not trying to say anything that's going to put him behind bars. I just wish that people that supposedly love him really reach out to him and say, 'You need help, man.' He's sick and he needs help."
Anonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,181
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,183
Anonymous C replied with this 13 years ago, 45 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,185
@previous (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
aw man
just imagine a crying toilet
that would be the most disturbing shit ever
aw man
just imagine a crying toilet
that would be the most disturbing shit ever
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,186
@422,175 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
@422,176 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
@422,177 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
@422,178 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
If you were charged with something and you were found innocent, then you can't be found guilty for being found innocent.
@422,176 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
@422,177 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
@422,178 (kook !!32zdfdzi+)
If you were charged with something and you were found innocent, then you can't be found guilty for being found innocent.
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,187
kook !!32zdfdzi+ double-posted this 13 years ago, 15 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,188
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,189
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #422,190
@previous (A)
Seriously, have you ever seen/heard Trapped in the Closet? It was an epic piece of shit
Seriously, have you ever seen/heard Trapped in the Closet? It was an epic piece of shit