EXTRA: Where's Dr. Evil, just when we need him the absolute most?

Bond was set Saturday for R. Kelly at $1 million on the criminal charges he faces for supposedly sexually abusing four people -- including three underage girls.

Which made me continually think that Judge John Lyke, Jr., was internally doing his best impression of actor Michael Myers as Dr. Evil in setting the amount of money Kelly must come up with if he wants to avoid having to wait out his criminal trial as an inmate of the Cook County Jail.

FOR THE RECORD, Kelly must come up with 10 percent of that amount -- or $100,000 -- if he wants to remain free. It was not immediately known if Kelly would be able to do so. But it should be noted that Kelly doesn't suffer from the predicament of many people in the county jail; who are there because they CANNOT afford bond.

Kelly may well have recording industry officials who, out of a desire to keep him working, can come up with the kind of cash needed to ensure he doesn't have to resort to the bologna and cheese sandwich diet often served up to inmates at 26th and California.

For the record, Kelly's next court date will be March 8. If he does manage to post bond, must surrender his passport (in case he has fantasies of fleeing for Jamaica) and stay away from people under 18.

  -30-

Have times changed to shift support away from R. Kelly’s alleged penchant for being too close to young girls?

I’m eager to see how the whole saga related to R&B singer R. Kelly plays out – will his celebrity status continue to make people think he’s somehow above the law and shouldn’t be punished?

Or has his time finally run out? Will he wind up facing legal consequences as a result of the criminal indictments he was hit with Friday – as a result of allegations that Kelly (who is 52) has a thing for girls aged roughly 16.

THE CHARGES OF aggravated criminal sexual assault for which he was hit were for incidents involving four females – three of whom were 16 or younger. His initial appearance in Cook County Circuit Court for a bond hearing is set for Saturday.

Now the reason I’m not yet convinced that anything significant will become of all this is because this isn’t even the first time Kelly has faced criminal charges related to his conduct with young girls.

It was back in 2008 when prosecutors pushed for charges, and he wound up going on trial for claims that his use of video cameras to record his activities amounted to child pornography.

He was acquitted for all those charges, and there were people back then who were more than willing to believe speculation that Kelly was being persecuted. Similar to the 2005 trial of “King of Pop” Michael Jackson – who was found not guilty of criminal charges claiming he had a “thing” for young boys.

THERE WERE PEOPLE more than willing to see their prosecution as petty acts by petty prosecutors who couldn’t handle the thought of a black person being successful.

It was true that during Kelly’s last criminal trial, the case ultimately fell apart when the girls who supposedly were molested were unwilling to confirm that anything improper was done to them.

So what will happen as this case works its way through the legal process?

There are some who think that activists with a focus on abuse against women will manage to prevail. We’ll see his behavior as so tacky that we’ll eagerly hope he gets found guilty of each count against him – with prison terms piled up consecutively.

THERE ARE THOSE who already are speculating on a 70-year prison term for R. Kelly – with just the slightest touch of disgust that probation is also an option.

Not that I’m counting on such an outcome occurring yet. Let’s not forget the recently-completed criminal trial of former Chicago cop Jason Van Dyke. Remember the people who speculated on a pileup of sentences that could result it a 90-year-plus prison sentence?

And just what was it that Van Dyke ultimately got as punishment for the incident involving a 17-year-old being shot to death? A judge who figured out a way to give him a prison sentence that – when time off for good behavior is factored in – will come to just over three years served in prison somewhere.

There are those who think Van Dyke should suffer more. Will there be a outburst of anger from people eager to see Kelly suffer?

IT MOST DEFINITELY won’t be the same people. I suspect the kind of people anxious to see Van Dyke suffer will be the ones most likely to think that Kelly is somehow being persecuted.

It’s ultimately going to be a matter of how many people still have sympathetic memories of watching “Space Jam,” whose theme song “I Believe I Can Fly” was performed by Kelly. To the point where they can’t believe anybody connected through the film to basketball star Michael Jordan and Bugs Bunny himself could do anything immoral.

The fact is that some people do have the ability to overlook fact, thinking of them as the sordid details that distract from truth – or at least truth as they want to view it.

We’ll have to wait and see just how much we’re willing to take a serious look at what has occurred here.

  -30-

R. Kelly “acquittal” is the way the judicial system in this nation is meant to work

The fact that a jury in Cook County Criminal Court acquitted singer R. Kelly on all criminal charges may leave some people disgusted, but it actually is perfect evidence of the superiority of the criminal justice system, as practiced in the United States.

As a reporter-type person myself, I must admit that when I hear of the end of a criminal case, my attention does not focus exclusively on the actual verdict. I immediately want to know which of the jurors – if any – talked.

I WANT TO hear what kind of account they give of the deliberations, and which bits of evidence they considered to be significant (and equally important, which bits of the prosecutorial or defense legal “strategy” were considered worthless). That is often more interesting than the “bottom line” ruling of “guilty” or “not guilty.”

In the case of sex-related charges against the man who created the song, “I Believe I Can Fly,” five jurors spoke (there usually are a few who are intimidated enough at the thought of trying to explain themselves that they run away from the courthouse without speaking.

What it came down to is that the jury had doubts – not about Kelly. They were all convinced that they were forced to endure repeated (and overly clinical) viewings of the now-infamous sex tape that (in their minds) showed Kelly himself having sexual intercourse with a young girl.

What they were not sure of was whether the girl who was allowing herself to be molested by Kelly was the same girl that prosecutors contend was underage at the time the tape was made, or just some other young girl who was barely of legal age who willingly submitted to Kelly’s video advances.

WHEN IT COMES to a statutory rape charge, that becomes a very important distinction.

Putting Kelly in prison just because one objects to him focusing his attentions on young girls would be outrageous – moreso than the thought of letting a so-called “guilty” man go free.

As they always try to emphasize, a person must be “guilty” beyond “reasonable doubt” in the minds of all 12 jurors in order to get a conviction in a criminal case. If jurors seriously doubted that the “victim” in this “crime” is who the prosecutors said she was, then they were totally justified in voting to acquit.

In fact, as uncertain as it sounds like the jury was, I was surprised that it took them as long as it did to reach their verdict (just over one day, with about half of the nine-man, three-woman jury initially voting “guilty” on the charges).

BUT THIS JURY took its duties seriously, which is why I consider it to be evidence of the superiority of the system that exists in this country.

Some places on this planet have criminal justice systems where guilt is presumed. In fact, some people in this country – no matter what they say publicly when they are questioned for jury duty about their political beliefs – have little or no problem accepting that concept.

Some people see someone who faces criminal charges and figure that the person must have done something to warrant attention from police and criminal prosecutors.

My point is that the prosecution, even though technically they have the burden of proof placed on them, has serious advantages going into any criminal case. From my time when I covered courts and the law (including trials and other legal proceedings at the very same Criminal Courthouse at 26th and California where Kelly “thanked Jesus” after learning of his acquittal), I know that many jurors are people who would not otherwise hang around the place.

THE STRUCTURE DATING back to the days of Anton Cermak as Chicago mayor (he lived in the neighborhood, which is why he had the courthouse built there) is imposing, particularly when one sees the Cook County Jail looming next door. It is enough to intimidate anyone into believing that “bad people” are brought here to be punished.

The easy thing for the jury in the Kelly case to do would have been to vote to “convict,” then go home and enjoy a nice dinner with their families, while beginning to share some personal stories about the time they helped “put away” that bad man R. Kelly.

Instead, they spent the time to seriously consider the charges, and they took the action that they knew would be unpopular – but which they felt was the “right” thing to do in light of the evidence.

Now some people might want to start bashing the prosecutors in this case, although I am inclined to do otherwise.

WHAT HURT THEIR case (which basically amounted to claims that Kelly had sex with a 13-year-old girl and recorded the moment on videotape) was the amount of time that had passed since the crime actually took place.

The girl whom prosecutors claim was the victim of statutory rape is now in her early 20s, which means anyone looking at her now would merely think she was a foolish woman who got involved with someone she shouldn’t have.

The visual image of today bears no resemblance to the video image of what once happened – which is what made it impossible for jurors to be certain that the young girl in the video was the same young woman who exists in real life today.

That is the biggest drawback to the fact that this particular criminal case took six years to come to trial. That’s how long it took from the time criminal charges were filed against Kelly until it finally went to trial last month.

EVEN BY THE standards of a crowded Cook County criminal justice system, that is a long delay (I seem to recall from my days covering criminal courts that the typical case took about 1.5-2 years from the time of arrest to when the case went to trial – if it didn’t end long before in a plea agreement).

That time delay ultimately hurt the prosecution. Perhaps a quicker trial might have provided a different result.

Now some will note that I have not mentioned Jim DeRogatis, the music critic of the Chicago Sun-Times, until now, even though he became a prominent part of this case. He was the one who originally received an anonymous bit of mail that was the videotape that became the primary evidence in the Kelly case.

He turned it over to police, and defense attorneys tried to demonize him for that act.

WHAT THEY REALLY wanted to do was to rip into prosecutors. But one cannot get too vicious in attacking the state of Illinois because if it chooses to be vindictive, it has significant powers of retribution.

So instead, they tried to divert attention by going after a newspaper guy, figuring no one in the general public would care if they beat up on him. All DeRogatis was doing when he cited the 1st and 5th amendments to the U.S. Constitution as his justification for not answering questions was refusing to let himself be used as the defense’s punching bag.

The true high point of the entire sordid Kelly trial was when Judge Vincent Gaughan had the sense to accept DeRogatis’ argument and exempt him from answering questions, rather than allow defense attorneys to try to persist in their attempt to “punish” the guy who cooperated with police and prosecutors by “snitching,” so-to-speak, on their client.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Would-be music fans were split on what they think of the R. Kelly verdict (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1589361/20080616/kelly_r.jhtml), heard late last week in Cook County.

“Not guilty” and “innocent” (http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/1005924,CST-NWS-dero15.article) are NOT synonyms.

New Yorkers (at least those included in this commentary, http://blogs.villagevoice.com/statusainthood/archives/2008/06/on_the_r_kelly.php) may be outraged by the Kelly outcome. Personally, I held off a few days before trying to write anything about the case so that I could think more rationally about it.

When it comes to Chicago 'celeb' trials, Kelly tops Rezko in public's eye any time

This has the potential to sound trite and trivial, but the criminal trial of Antoin “Tony” Rezko isn’t Chicago’s “Trial of the Century.” It isn’t the biggest criminal case of this decade.

Heck, it isn’t even the biggest criminal trial to take place in the Second City this week.

REZKO (WHOSE CRIMINAL proceedings appear to be wrapping up this week) will have to take Second Billing to the true Top Trial of Chicago – that of musician R. Kelly.

In the minds of Chicagoans, the Kelly trial will prove to be more interesting than anything that has come up during the Rezko case. Only the most hard-core of conservative Republican partisans in search of facts that can be distorted into political dirt will think Rezko takes precedence.

Actually, even most of those moralists will be more appalled by the Kelly case.

The simple fact is that sex will always top politics – particularly when the political corruption trial is one that involves arcane procedures that many people do not truly comprehend.

WHEN COMBINED WITH the fact that the Rezko case did not produce the political dirt that social conservatives wanted against Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama, the fact becomes that the trial of Rezko amounts to something that “real people” have to be reminded is something they should be concerned about.

The Kelly case involves no such reminders; sex and sleaze will automatically gain the attention of the public – thereby making the criminal courthouse on 26th Street the focal point of the Chicago legal world, shifting away from the Dirksen Building downtown.

Now personally, I could care less about the Kelly case. His music doesn’t interest me much, nor do any tawdry details about his personal life. I have never felt compelled to go searching for “The Video” that shows him committing acts that are illegal only because of the age of the girl.

In the words of a California defense attorney, I guess I am one of the people “living under a rock.” But I can appreciate that simplicity will make the Kelly story an easier sell to the American public.

WHETHER THAT MAKES it an easy conviction for the prosecution remains to be seen.

Kelly’s biggest advantage is that so much time has passed between the time “The Video” was made, the time he was indicted and now, the time when the case actually goes to trial.

The 14-year-old girl in the video is now a 24-year-old who claims she’s not the girl in the video. The visual image that jurors will get to see once they are picked is of a young woman, not a child.

They are going to have to make a lot of assumptions in order to find Kelly guilty. I’m not saying they won’t do that – the kind of people who usually wind up getting picked to juries are the types who are willing to assume that prosecutors do not go after people for no good reason.

BUT THERE’S A lot of room for a crafty defense attorney to create “reasonable doubt” as to the validity of the charges, which basically amount to having sex with an underage girl. The video itself is irrelevant – except that it allows jurors to actually watch the incident.

Their verdict will center on determining whether the act ought to be considered criminal. Public perception will depend on how credible the prosecution’s behavior is, since many of the fans of Kelly’s music are inclined to believe the case is being trumped up against him and his attorneys have gone so far as to say they would like to have some jurors who understand the technical aspects of doctoring videotape footage – to enhance their argument that the video is not truly what it appears to be.

By comparison, the Rezko case is extremely complicated.

Rezko’s attorneys would like us to believe it is just a case of a person who brought together business interests and government officials so they could do what political people often jokingly refer to as “the people’s business.”

REZKO, THEY WOULD have you believe, is little more than a lobbyist.

Of course, it is not that simple. The details are where most people will get that glassy-eyed look on their face, and shift their attention from the Dirksen Building to the Criminal Courts building.

One of the most damning bits of testimony during the Rezko trial involved former Illinois Finance Authority Chairman Ali Ata, who held the position with a salary of over $100,000 per year for just over one year.

Testimony he provided (as part of a plea bargain to get a lesser sentence for his own criminal charges) indicates he got the job after making two $25,000 contributions through Rezko to Blagojevich’s political campaigns.

SUPPOSEDLY, THE DONATIONS were made with the understanding that Ata would get the government job – which would put him in a position to make business contacts and potentially enrich himself further in the future.

Be honest. Reading through that, your mind probably started to doze off until the thought of R. Kelly taking his pants off snapped it back to attention.

What was supposed to be the “sexy” (not literally involving intercourse, but tantalizingly interesting) part of the Rezko case was the involvement of Obama, who knew Rezko, considered him to be something of a friend, and who took a financial loss in cooperating with a real estate transaction that increased the value of the property on which Obama’s home in the Hyde Park neighborhood sits.

There’s no evidence Obama did anything to help Rezko. But Rezko was the type of guy who established his political contacts so he could call in favors – including one or two from Obama at some point in the future.

IT NEVER WENT beyond that. Only the most hard-core social conservative Republican is going to bother dredging up Rezko’s name during a general election campaign against Obama, because his involvement in the trial was so miniscule.

It would take so much time to fully explain why people should care that Obama and Rezko knew each other that a candidate would risk putting the potential voters to sleep. Besides, the Obama critics have the name of Jeremiah Wright to toss around to scare rural America with.

They don’t really need the Rezko name anymore, although I couldn’t help but notice a Gallup Organization poll released Monday that showed Obama’s former pastor had the potential to hurt his campaign to about the same degree that President George W. Bush would have a negative impact on the chances of Republican presidential opponent John McCain.

So on Monday, the day that was the beginning of both jury selection for the Kelly case and closing arguments for Rezko, one might argue that triviality prevailed.

SERIOUS POLITICAL SCIENCE gave way to tawdry sex (with a video). By year’s end, more people will remember the upcoming Kelly case than will remember anything about Tony What’s His Name?

And for those people who are actually involved in the coverage of the trials, there is one significant advantage to shifting the focus from the federal building complex in the South Loop out to 26th and California – lunchtime.

The Criminal Courts building sits in between an Italian district that has some real great old world restaurants and some of the most authentic Mexican food (try Taqueria El Milagro, about one block west of the courthouse) in the city, unlike the Dirksen Building which is surrounded by some of the greasiest (and not in a good way) fast food stands imaginable.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: MTV is focusing its attention on Chicago for the Kelly case. Do you (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1587252/20080509/id_0.jhtml) believe they’d come here for Barack Obama?

For the half-dozen or so people who ever seriously believed that Rod Blagojevich had a chance to become (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/12/us/12illinois.html?hp) president of the United States, that dream has died for good with the Rezko affair.