Then this is your lucky day! Apparently the one thing worse than seeing a tape of a new mother having sex with eight men for cash – a tape of Rihanna and Chris Brown having sex with each other – actually exists and could be put onto the internet at any point.

Appalling, sure, but at the least the Rihanna sex tape might show us what Rihanna can see in Chris Brown, because it can’t be his manners. Or his voice. Or his stupid face.

There’s always a moment after you split up with someone when you’re vulnerable. Will your ex tell everyone about your chronic flatulence? Publicly bemoan your depraved and unexplainable fixation with 35-year-old Columbo TV movies? Or will they just upload all the bizarre, kinky role-play sex tapes you’ve made together onto the internet for everyone to see?

This is apparently the predicament that Rihanna currently finds herself in. Not about the Columbo thing, obviously – she’s not that sick – but the sex tape thing. According to a bunch of hopefully-fabricated reports, Rihanna is worried that, now she’s split up with Chris Brown, he’s going to make all the sex tapes they recorded together available to the public.

Which, you know, would be weird because it’s perfectly obvious that Rihanna and Chris Brown will get back together the instant this fuss about his arrest blows over. But, hey, fingers crossed that the Rihanna sex tape exists – after all, there’s nothing sexier than watching two beautiful young people performing a physical expression of their love in a seedy, borderline-disturbing manner that’s a direct precursor to the moment when he allegedly lost her temper and punched her in the face until her mouth filled up with blood, is there? The Sun reports:

US publication Star Magazine is now claiming that the stunning R&B star fears her estranged boyfriend Chris Brown could release a steamy home video the couple allegedly made together. A source said: “They’ve had tons of crazy nights in bed, and Chris has recorded many of them… They both have very kinky sides.” It’s also claimed that Rihanna enjoys role-playing and dressing up as a dominatrix.

Role-playing. Of course the Rihanna sex tape has got role-playing in it. It’s just a question of what roles Rihanna and Chris Brown were playing in it. We don’t even know if the sex tape is real, but if it is we’d put money on one of these three role-playing fantasies taking place in it:

1 – The schoolgirl/ strict teacher fantasy.

2 - The Ali/ Frazier fantasy.

3 - The Cloverfield monster/ city of New York fantasy.

Anyway, if the Rihanna sex tape does exist, it’s not the end of the world. After all, surely most people would find it less grubbily opportunistic, unsettling and downright degrading than that duet Rihanna and Chris Brown apparently recorded together the other week.

You! Follow hecklerspray on Twitter!

But nothing – not even the hideous sight of Fred Durst pulling the camera round to his own face at the point of orgasm, could prepare us for this – it’s a Family Guy sex tape, and it’s possibly the most stomach-churning thing we’ve ever seen in our entire lives.

The above clip includes scenes of sex, anal sex, S&M sex, rimming, threesomes, topless rodeo, man-on-man-on-man-on-man action, incest, bestiality, gagging and simulated fellatio, whilst also throwing some force-feeding into the mix. It is, therefore, advisable that you don’t watch it at work, or after eating, or before eating. Or during eating for that matter. Especially during eating, now we mention it.

Therefore, we’ve decided to crown Kim Kardashian as our favourite girl in the whole wide world. Following that tape she made where she had loads of sex with that bloke, Kim Kardashian has apparently been sobbing her eyes out because she was voted off Dancing With The Stars this week.

True, that means there’s a full 18-month gap between Kim Kardashian having sex and Kim Kardashian crying, but we have to take what we can get. Anyway, the point is that Kim Kardashian was sad to be voted off Dancing With The Stars last night. But on the plus side, Kim can use this new free time to really try and work on closing that gap between the sex and the crying, maybe getting it down to a week or a good night’s sleep.

Differences between Britain and America, volume 14 – on British dance-based reality TV shows, the contestants tend to be retired journalists and wholesome television presenters. In America, though, they tend to pick people who are only famous for having sex on the internet.

And that’s how Kim Kardashian ended up on Dancing With The Stars this year, alongside that other noted sex tape star, 82-year-old Cloris Leachman. We’re just kidding, Cloris Leachman has never made a sex tape. But we heard rumours about a filthy wax cylinder once.

However – and we’re not going to pretend we know how – Kim Kardashian was voted off Dancing With The Stars last night, and reacted in the same way that most of us would if we discovered that our home nation had rejected us due to our participation in a grotty little sex film a year and a bit ago. People reports:

Though she concluded the show with a playful rendition of one of their earlier dances, once the cameras were off Kardashian rushed to the waiting arms of her family and immediately broke down into tears. Kardashian’s publicist followed the inconsolable bombshell around the press line with a box of Kleenex since, once the waterworks started, there was no stopping the outpouring of genuine emotion.

Yeah, we know all about following Kim Kardashian around with a box of Kleenex, right boys? There was no stopping the general outpouring of human emotion that night! Right? Anyone? Boys? No? Anyone? Too much?

Anyway, Kim Kardashian’s partner seems to think that her innate shyness was what got her thrown off Dancing With The Stars. You see, Kim Kardashian just doesn’t like performing in front of large groups of people like that. She prefers intimacy, you know. Intimacy and a camera. Intimacy and a camera and a bloke’s ding-dong slapping around the inside of her mouth. Give her all that and Kim Kardashian probably would have won Dancing With The Stars.

Still, Kim should realise that there’s no point getting upset about being voted off a reality TV show. These moments are always a stepping stone to bigger and better things, so who knows? Maybe this time Kim Kardashian will be starring in a sex tape with two men. Or two men and a horse. Or two men and a horse and a pregnant diarrhea-stricken midget dressed as Heather Mills. The sky’s the limit.

Don’t get too excited, though – the existence of the Britney Spears sex tape was allegedly confirmed by Adnan Ghalib, Britney’s paparazzo ex-boyfriend. So, on the basis that at least 50% of the tape features a creepy dimwit with a funny accent and the world’s worst beard, it’s safe to say that nobody will ever ever form an erection while watching the Britney Spears sex tape.

Or will they? It’s been reported that Britney Spears is keen to pay whatever it takes to buy the master copy of this apparent Britney Spears sex tape from Adnan Ghalib. And you know what that means? It means that if Britney Spears is prepared to pay millions of dollars for a video of a mentally ill woman in a pink wig having squalid intercourse with one of the world’s least likable men, it must be sexy! Where can we get a copy?

Sometimes we’re desperately envious of Britney Spears, you know. We’ve spent so long wishing that our harrowing mental breakdown could be punctuated by a married man who’s effectively paid to stalk us coming to sweep us off our feet so we an embark on a high-flying romance that involves him taking naked pictures of us, trying to sell those naked pictures to the highest bidder, running off to the entertainment news shows to sell his story minutes after splitting up with us and generally bringing about the darkest period of our entire lives.

And, for a brief moment, that’s what Britney Spears had with Adnan Ghalib. Sure, he might have been married and hopelessly exploitative and in possession of a beard that made his neck look like a minge, but right up until the moment when she apparently took out a restraining order on him, Adnan loved Britney Spears.

He loved her enough to allegedly film himself having it off with her so that he could sell the tape for millions of dollars. And that’s the greatest love of all.

You see, Adnan Ghalib is apparently pimping about a Britney Spears sex tape. No, not the one that Britney allegedly made with Kevin Federline, or the one that some guy took on holiday where you couldn’t tell that it was Britney Spears he was having sex with but it definitely was, honest.

This is the infamous Pink Wig Britney Spears sex tape. The one claimed to be made during that time where Britney spent her days wandering around babbling to herself in a British accent. The one that, sadly, Adnan Ghalib co-stars in.

And now that Adnan Ghalib seems to have confirmed the existence of the Britney Spears sex tape, he’s apparently going to sell it. Funnily enough, he’s going to sell it to Britney Spears. The Sun reports:

Earlier this week, [Adnan] admitted: “There is such a tape, but I won’t discuss prices for hypothetical enquiries. Unless there is a locked-in deal, I will go no further.” It is thought a pornography website is prepared to offer the photographer up to £5million for the footage. But Britney is willing to pay whatever it takes of her own money to keep the tape off the market.

It’s a shame that Britney Spears is effectively being held to ransom over the sex tape, but buying it from Adnan Ghalib is definitely the best way forward here. Not only will it stop the tape from destroying Britney’s painstakingly choreographed comeback, but also it’s a bit of a nestegg should things go financially tits up for her in the future.

And, let’s be honest, nobody wants to see that particular Britney Spears sex tape anyway. If we wanted to get our kicks from watching videos about a depressed scrawny girl with obvious psychiatric issues having grubby meaningless sex with a creepy man she clearly doesn’t even like while possibly under the influence of all kinds of prescription medication, we’d just look at your parent’s honeymoon tape.

Because we like Lindsay Lohan – how could we not? She’s given us so much entertainment, so many words to write and so much vitriolic rage to spew. It’s hard to be really very mad at an old friend.

But it wouldn’t seem that hard for Lindsay’s ‘born-again Christian ex-convict of an absentee father’ (copyright Stuart Heritage 2008), Michael Lohan, to give up on his own flesh and blood for mere ‘religious’ reasons. Big Mike has decided he can’t walk his daughter down the aisle should her rumoured gay wedding come to fruition, as it would go against his born-again Christianity belief system.

You’ve got to love religion. Especially when it’s one that you’ve been turned on to about four minutes ago. Whereas your daughter has been around for most of her life. Can’t argue with the man’s priorities, we suppose.

Michael Lohan has said from the very beginning that he would be fine if young Lindsay were to come out publicly as a lesbian, though that is pretty much a given. When you have a daughter that whores herself off to every man in the world (give or take a few billion), gets boozed up on booze every two minutes and possibly has a sex tape where she’s all naked and stuff, well – there’s a lot he’s had to put up with through the years.

Plus we hear Christians are good at that forgiveness lark, so she’s onto a winner there.

But no, it would seem simply walking his daughter a few steps towards her wedding ceremony would prove too much for daddio. Talking to The Scoop, who happened to be listening for some reason, Michael said this collection of words:

“I haven’t heard anything [about an upcoming wedding] from Lindsay, but if she was marrying Sam, I don’t think she’d ask me to walk her down the aisle. She knows about my Christian faith … she just wouldn’t ask.”

But it’s not all doom and gloom from the big Negative Nancy, who still supports his daughter’s choices in life. Even if he acts like he doesn’t, then tries to put any family members or possible family members through the wringer for his own nefarious ways. Michael Lohan went on to say, most likely continuing by using his mouth:

“I want her to be happy and healthy and stay on the right path. If I discuss her relationship, I say that I want her to be happy.”

It would appear to be pretty clean cut and straightforward for once in the world of the Lohans – she is apparently having a gay wedding, he sees this as being against his beliefs so does not wish to be involved. Fair enough.

But when is he going to admit that the real reason he doesn’t want to walk Lindsay down the aisle is because of what is waiting at the end? Frankly, even hecklerspray would be afraid of the sight of Sam Ronson standing at the other side of a room, looking at you as you slowly approach. She’s even worse when she’s wearing those bloody hats – it’s downright menacing.

However, very few of us have seen what Madonna is actually like during real sex – something few of us would wish to change. But now something has come along that threatens to shatter our cocoon of not knowing how Madonna has sex forever – a man is claiming he’s in possession of a Madonna sex tape.

Wait, wait – don’t freak out just yet. This alleged Madonna sex tape is supposedly between Madonna and Alex Rodriguez! There’s not a sniff of Guy Ritchie anywhere! That means, at absolute worst, the Madonna sex tape will only be appalling enough to make your eyeballs burn up and pop. You won’t actually die from watching it.

This whole love nonspecific polygon that’s apparently going on between Madonna, Guy Ritchie, Alex Rodriguez, Alex Rodriguez’s wife, Lenny Kravitz and anyone else who manages to blindly stagger into this sordid middle-aged flesh party is starting to take its toll on those involved.

Alex Rodriguez is getting divorced from his wife, Madonna is said to be on the brink of a physical and emotional breakdown and last week Guy Ritchie actually wrote a line of dialogue that wasn’t hackneyed or derivative at all. This madness has to stop. It has to stop before Guy Ritchie makes an entire film that sort of makes some amount of sense!

But it’s not going to stop, is it? We’re already so far in, what with Madonna brainwashing A-Rod with Kabbalah and A-Rod proclaiming Madonna to be his soulmate and all. The one thing we can console ourselves with, at least, is the fact that Alex Rodriguez and Madonna supposedly only had an affair of the heart. There wasn’t any sex going on whatsoever. Nope. No siree.

What’s that? Someone’s got their hands on a sex tape? A Madonna sex tape? A secretly-filmed Madonna sex tape that shows her grinding away on top of Alex Rodriguez like your nan on one of those beer garden bucking bronco rides? We think we speak for everyone when we say this: ugh. Digital Spy reports:

The video, which was reportedly filmed by a hidden camera, apparently features the veteran popstar sleeping with Rodriguez. A source commented: “If footage was obtained in this way it would be an outrageous invasion of privacy. He would be prima facie guilty of voyeurism. Instead of making a million he’d be going to jail for a few years. Even if the video existed it would probably be seized by the courts.”

Right, so let’s get this straight – the Madonna sex tape, if it exists at all, was probably filmed in a legally dubious way and will therefore probably never find its way into public. Oh.

Is that a good or a bad thing? Probably a little bit of both, we’d imagine. Although it would be reassuring to know that the Madonna sex tape was in circulation – in case we needed to spook our children out of having sex forever or induce a bout of bulimic post-meal vomiting, for instance, it’s probably best that it’s kept under lock and key.

After all, imagine strolling home from a nice dinner out and realising that some evil genius has beamed the Madonna sex tape onto the surface of the moon. That really would be quite the faux pas.

Damn – someone should have told Britney Spears this before she started her relationship with British photo-jockey Adnan Ghalib. See, keeping one's enemies closer does work in many situations, but when your enemy's sole purpose in life is to get as close to you as they legally can, you should probably opt for 'running away quite fast and keeping your enemy at a few arms' length'.

Alas, our poor, maybe quite mental Britney wasn't warned, and now she's supposedly trying to stop another wonderful celebrity sex tape from being released to the baying public. If only people would help to look after the girl.

Just when things were getting back on track for the young pop-tart, something has to come along and send things royally tits-up. She of 'Toxic' and latterly 'mental' fame had seen the shattered pieces of her life being slowly put back together. First with some trepidation, but soon enough there was something resembling normality entering the Spears household – she had recently regained overnight access to her kids and was on her way (and probably still is on her way to) building a new home for said kids. Figuratively building, that is, not literally. She's not also become a builder, unfortunately.

And then, blammo, out of nowhere, it happens – allegations of a sex tape start flying around. Allegations that put Britney in a position – or possibly numerous positions – on some tape, having some sex, with the scu… paparazzo man. Of all the people she'd decide to record herself shagging, why choose a journalistic parasite that is a member of the British paparazzi? hecklerspray knows full well that the girl has had some problems, but come on – she can't be that stupid can she?

Really?!

For now, at least, it would appear that the sex tape allegations are remaining exactly that – rumour, speculation and non-fact. Not that we'd begrudge watching Miss Spears engaging in the act, hair or no hair (on her head you sick freaks), but it's hard to feel anything but a weary sympathy for the girl. She really has been put through the wringer over the last couple of years. We all need to take a step back from the poor thing, let her recuperate and then really stick the boot back in.

Torture can be used for entertainment, it would seem.

At least Britney can rest easy in the fact that, if the tape does turn out to be real, she has carte blanche to run over Ghalib's feet as much as she wants. In a way. She'd definitely get our blessing for that courageous act, and it would certainly do a great deal to get her back to the realms of normality she so clearly craves, as well as potentially taking out one of those useless, cretinous, morons.

Anyway, oddly enough it seems like Verne Troyer isn't especially thrilled that TMZ recently posted a video of him dipping his tongue in and out of his girlfriend's mouth like an underdeveloped naked little anteater feeding from a proportionately much larger anthill.

So he's sued them. And he's sued sex tape entrepreneur Kevin Blatt, who is apparently trying to market the Verne Troyer sex tape. They're big lawsuits, too – if he wins them, Verne Troyer could make himself very rich indeed. Sometimes we wish were born with genetic achondroplasia and lacked both the basic inhibition that stops most people filming themselves having sex and the nous to hide the sex tape properly afterwards. That money should have been ours, Troyer! Ours!

We've often thought that Verne Troyer was evil, but only because he's different to us and we're hopelessly undereducated village square bigots. However, we might have been onto something, because at the moment Verne Troyer is acting so selfishly that it might actually pass for evil in the minds of some.

That's because right now Verne Troyer wants to stop the entire population of planet Earth from indulging in one of its most time-honoured traditions – getting drunk and watching celebrity home sex tapes that are so mind-crappingly awful to witness that it makes you never want to have sex again.

Once people have seen the snippet of the Verne Troyer sex tape posted recently on TMZ, they're never quite the same afterwards. Sure, they can still walk and talk and function in a superficially normal way, but something's withered up and died inside them. Probably their testes. And we haven't even seen it going in yet.

And we never will. That's mostly because even our morbid curiosity has an outer limit, but partly because Verne Troyer is on the legal warpath about it. And first on Mini-Me's hitlist is TMZ itself, as E! Online reports:

The 39-year-old actor says that TMZ disregarded cease-and-desist letters sent both before and after the video showed up on the site. In addition to the gossip purveyor, which just posted the footage yesterday, Troyer has also sued One Night in Paris peddler Kevin Blatt. He claims that Blatt, who's known for his celeb-porn brokering ways, somehow acquired the stolen tape.

Troyer means business too – he's claiming violation of privacy, copyright infringement, trademark infringement, violation of right to publicity, and misappropriation of name and likeness and he's after $20 million for it. He must really, really not want people to see his funny little infant-like limbs pawing at an adult woman, or what his funny little penis looks like when it ejaculates. How much does Verne Troyer not want anyone to see that?

At a guess, we'd say not nearly as much as we don't want to see it ourselves.

Even Shaggy relied on it at one point, though the dolt did ruin the get-out clause for the rest of us by making it public knowledge.

Now, as fate would have it and as the mole/artifact argument would have us believe, the man in the video being examined in the R Kelly child sex trial isn’t actually R himself. It is, as the defence have stated, a lookalike.

According to the defence, the man in the video must have had access to Kelly’s property and the video was edited to make it look as if Kelly himself was taking advantage of the underage girl.

Though they also claim that the girl in the video isn’t actually the one who claims to be the girl in the video, and is actually a different girl altogether. In the video.

This was ascertained by interviewing members of the original girl’s family, who all basically said ‘yeah, that’s not her’.

Still with us? We don’t blame you if you aren’t, seeing as apparently no one in the video is who they were originally claimed to be. Never mind ‘it wasn’t me’, apparently ‘it wasn’t anybody anyone knows, at all, ever, anywhere’. It’s certainly a bold defence, that much is for certain. As MTV reported:

The lawyers suggested that the man is a look-alike who lacks a large mole on his back that Kelly has, arguing that a mark on the man’s back comes and goes during the tape. However, they provided no leads on this man’s identity and admitted that he must have had access to R Kelly’s house.

The music-site-cum-ultimate-news-source went on:

The defence countered the statements from relatives of the girl on the tape by finding other relatives who testified to say that it wasn’t her, this helped their argument by spreading confusion.

You’re bloody well right it spread confusion. Now we don’t know who to believe, or what to believe, or even why to believe anything. hecklerspray prides itself on knowing everything there is to know, but these crafty lawhounds have ruined everything by being really, really, irritatingly confusing. How do they sleep at night?

Christ – they didn’t even call any star or surprise witnesses to throw everyone off and give us the surprise and joy that we all get through watching the trial of a major musician for serious crimes. Twats.

There are, fortunately, some things we do know:

1) R Kelly’s defence rested after just two days, clearly feeling confident that their campaign of sending sane minds into disarray will bring their client home free.

2) The prosecution is expected to recall video experts to analyse the footage. Again.

3) There are only a few stages left before a verdict is finally reached and Kelly is either released into a world where trial-by-tabloid incites fear in any celebrity, or he is sent down for abusing an adolescent. Neither of which will be that rosy for the R&B star.

The trial continues.

Really, it isn’t. R Kelly has a caterpillar-shaped mole on his back, you see, and the man in the R Kelly sex tape doesn’t have a caterp… oh wait, yes he does. Bum.

However, just because R Kelly and the man in the sex tape appear to have similarly-shaped birthmarks on the same part of their backs, it doesn’t make R Kelly guilty of anything. That’s because, according to a defence analyst yesterday, there aren’t any moles on the R Kelly sex tape at all – only artifacts. What’s an artifact? God knows. Let’s go!

Credit where credit’s due, R Kelly’s defence is really earning its money at the moment. Had it been us in charge of proving his innocence, we’d have sat through all the prosecution’s witnesses and video experts and then, when it was our turn, we’d have conceded because we couldn’t resist stopping R Kelly from releasing any more albums until the year 2023.

But not R Kelly’s defence, because that’s playing out of its skin right now. No matter what you throw at it, it’s got an answer. All those family members positively identifying the alleged victim in the sex tape? Here’s a bunch of family members negatively identifying the alleged victim in the sex tape. That woman who said she had threesomes with R Kelly and the alleged victim? She’s not very trustworthy, you know.

That mole on R Kelly’s back that seems to match the mole on the back of the man in the sex tape? Well, um, wait a minute.

No, hang on, that’s not a mole on Mr Sex Tape’s back. That’s an artifact. Forensic video analyst Charles Palm said so. So shove it, haterz. The Chicago Tribune reports:

When the sex tape is played at normal speed, the man’s naked back is visible for less than a second, and it’s difficult to spot any markings. But a prosecution witness last week showed jurors a freeze-frame image of the male participant’s back and pointed out what the witness called a mole to the left of his spine. Kelly’s defense team countered the potentially damaging testimony Thursday with their own expert, who described the markings as “artifacts” created by the tape’s poor quality and multiple reproductions.

It’s a completely feasible argument, because the recording in question is not the original tape, and could have been copied several times over. When that happens, all sorts of blips and scrapes can sneak onto the tape – like that old home video of us eating a picnic that, when copied, made it look as if were forcing a 14-year girl to urinate and call us ‘daddy’. It’s a common technical glitch, happens all the time.

While he was in court, Charles Palm also countered the prosecution’s claim that it would be impossible to doctor the tape in any way by showing the jury self-edited versions of the sex tape where he made the participants vanish from a hot tub and another one where he erased their heads for the duration.

According to Charles Palm, he managed to manipulate the tape in a couple of afternoons, putting a dirty, great hole in one of the prosecution’s main arguments.

True, that means he spent two whole afternoons watching illegal and degrading child sex acts in painful slow motion on a giant screen in a dark room and it’s probably made him afraid of all human intimacy for the rest of his life, but if it means R Kelly stays free to release new albums of sexy R&B every couple of years, then he can write it off as an acceptable loss.

Oh, who to believe? Well, since R Kelly’s defence began yesterday with testimonies from the accused sex tape victim’s relatives, all claiming that it wasn’t her who R Kelly was having it off with, our microscopic attention span means we’ll have to side with them.

So that’s it, R Kelly definitely didn’t have sex with the 14-year-old girl that everyone thinks he had sex with because the very few members of her family who didn’t say that R Kelly definitely did have sex with her say he didn’t. We can’t believe it was this obvious all along.

If you’ve been following the R Kelly child pornography trial so far, then a) congratulations, you’ll never be able to hear Everybody by the Backstreet Boys again without thinking of a child urinating for the sexual pleasure of a grown man, and b) you’ll have realised that everyone so far has been pretty sure that R Kelly is guilty of all the stuff he’s been accused of.

But that’s just because the prosecution has been hogging the limelight, with witnesses ranging from the alleged victim’s friends and family to R Kelly’s former employees, who all agree that R Kelly is the man in the sex tape.

And since the prosecution in the R Kelly child pornography trial rested earlier this week, it’s now time for the defence to have a bash at convincing everyone that R Kelly is guilty of nothing except making the occasional metaphor-heavy song about all the different things his cock can do.

So far it looks like the defence has an uphill task, because so far it appears that its two main arguments are that someone digitally transplanted R Kelly’s head onto someone else’s sex tape (Official FBI response: “What are you, stupid?“) and that it can’t be R Kelly in the sex tape because R Kelly has a mole on his back and the man in the tape hasn’t (Official response from everyone with eyes: “Hey geniuses, they’ve both got moles in exactly the same place”).

Chances are the defence will get to this in the coming days – but first it’s found a list of people who say that the accused victim in the sex tape isn’t who the prosecution says it is, as the Associated Press reports:

“It definitely wasn’t her,” said Shonna Edwards, when asked Wednesday whether the underage girl seen having sex with the Grammy winner on the video was her relative. The 27-year-old Edwards said she saw the tape for the first time several days ago in a lawyer’s office, telling jurors that the female’s body in the tape was too developed to be her relative at that time.

As well as Shonna Edwards, two other relatives of the accused victim denied that it was her, putting the current tally of family members who say it is her at four and isn’t her at three.

R Kelly’s defence also punctured the credibility of prosecution witness Lisa Van Allen – the woman who said that she had threesomes with R Kelly and the accused victim – with a witness who claims that she sought $300,000 from Kelly to keep quiet.

But with the R Kelly child pornography trial more than halfway over, what have we learnt so far? Well, not much. Except that if you keep writing about 14-year-old girls who wet themselves at the sound of the Backstreet Boys, eventually you’ll start instinctively wetting yourself at the sound of the Backstreet Boys as well, something we learnt recently in a crowded lift where some idiot decided to use Quit Playing Games With My Heart as their ringtone.

That’s right – a woman who says she’s been in underage threesomes with R Kelly and the girl everyone thinks is in the R Kelly sex tape, and who also claims that R Kelly used to carry around a giant duffel bag full of his own sex tapes no matter where he went.

Well it’s your lucky day, because that’s exactly what happened to the R Kelly child pornography trial yesterday, and it’s all thanks to star prosecution witness Lisa Van Allen, a woman who bursts into tears whenever anyone asks her what sex with R Kelly was like. That makes us doubt that Lisa Van Allen actually did have sex with R Kelly, by the way, because the correct response to that is prolonged projectile vomiting. Again, that’s prolonged projectile vomiting.

It took a while, but the R Kelly child pornography trial finally looks like it’s starting to get exciting.

Although it opened strongly, with the prosecution playing a sex tape of somone they say is R Kelly having some fairly urine-intensive sex with a 14-year-old girl, it’s since slid into one dreary positive identification after another, with the occasional FBI officer popping up to call the defence stupid. Hardly edge of your seat stuff, is it?

But that was before the prosecution called Lisa Van Allen, by far the most entertaining witness of the lot so far. Why? Because she says she’s had sex with R Kelly. And with the girl who’s thought to star in the R Kelly sex tape. At the same time. And she says that R Kelly recently offered her $250,000 to recover one of his old sex tapes. And that he carries all his old sex tapes around with him in a duffel bag like some kind of creepy, old bastard.

Sadly, R Kelly must have forgotten the duffel bag in court yesterday, because that would have probably made the prosecution’s job a little bit easier, all said. Anyway, according to the Associated Press:

Star prosecution witness Lisa Van Allen cried on the witness stand, pausing to regain her composure, as she described several alleged three-way sexual encounters with the R&B star and the alleged victim, some of which she claimed Kelly videotaped… Van Allen told jurors Monday she first had sex with Kelly and the alleged victim in 1998. Kelly would have been around 30 years old at the time, Van Allen about 18 and the alleged victim would have been 14, according to prosecutors’ estimates.

There were other threesomes, too, she claims – once where Lisa Van Allen started crying in the middle, and one that was interrupted by a knock on the door that sent the underage girl running.

However, there are a few things that might cause Lisa Van Allen to be looked upon as not completely trustworthy. Firstly, there’s the fact that she admits stealing one of R Kelly’s $20,000 watches. Then there are claims that she’s only testifying against R Kelly to get her boyfriend a reduced sentence for a gun crime. Then there’s the defence’s secret new witness, who can apparently prove that Lisa Van Allen is making it all up.

And then there’s the way that – if she’s telling the truth – Lisa Van Allen actually had it off with R Kelly and a 14-year-old girl, so her judgement is clearly all spazzed and out of line and she shouldn’t be trusted, even with factual recollections of things that definitely happened.

Still, all that’s for the defence to worry about. And it gets to have a crack at the R Kelly child pornography trial starting tomorrow. Countless witnesses spending days on end saying that R Kelly definitely isn’t the man in the sex tape? We’re not sure if we’ll be able to take the excitement.

Anyway, our point is that the very first act of the R Kelly child pornography trial involved showing everyone the infamous alleged R Kelly sex tape. And since it’s physically impossible to top the sight of a full-grown man ordering a 13-year-old girl to wet her knickers to the sound of the Backstreet Boys, the trial’s got a little dull.

The most exciting thing that can happen now is seeing people try to identify the star of the tape. People like R Kelly’s former employee Lindsey Perryman, who turned up yesterday to say that not only is it R Kelly in the tape, but the female star is who everyone thinks it is because of the distinctive way she moves her mouth. We’ll finish writing this article as soon as we’ve stopped shuddering involuntarily.

It’s difficult to find trustworthy staff these days. One minute they’re all like “No Mr Kelly, don’t compare your penis to a car key in a song, you’ve already done that. Try comparing a woman’s genitals to some salad instead” and the next minute they’re all like “That’s definitely R Kelly having sex with a minor in that video, your honour.”

That’s certainly what happened yesterday at the ongoing R Kelly child pornography trial when – following a previous positive identification by a witness – R Kelly’s former assistant Lindsey Perryman took to the stand to claim that R Kelly was the star of the sex tape in question.

And if anyone should know that it’s R Kelly, it’s Lindsey Perryman – she worked as R Kelly’s assistant right up until last year, a full five years after the scandal around the R Kelly sex tape broke. Which isn’t weird at all, as the Associated Press reports:

“I didn’t want to think it was them,” a sometimes anxious-looking Perryman said, the 41-year-old Kelly sitting at the defense table just yards away. “The image I saw looked exactly like Mr. Kelly,” she said, adding she was “shocked” and “disturbed” by the video. Perryman said she saw the alleged victim numerous times, including when she would come to Kelly’s Chicago music studio. She recognized the girl as the one in the video by her cheekbones, as well as by the “distinctive” way she moved her mouth, smiled and talked, she told jurors.

Perryman may have a point – much like a fingerprint or a snowflake, every human has a completely unique way of reacting when someone pisses on their face to the sound of the Backstreet Boys. It’s true – you know those episodes of Scooby Doo where there’s an evil imposter dressed up as Scooby Doo and nobody knows which Scooby Doo is good and which Scooby Doo is evil? If R Kelly had been around to piss all over both of their faces to the sound of the Backstreet Boys the problem would have been solved with much less fuss. It’s biometric or something. We don’t know.

Anyway, since he’s facing up to 15 years in jail for these charges, R Kelly is still maintaining his innocence over the matter. And it’s easy to see why, because Lindsey Perrymen could just be an ex-employee with a grudge and nothing more.

And by serious, we mean dull. To convict R Kelly, the prosecution needs to prove that it’s him in the aforementioned sex tape – something that’s hard to do because R Kelly says it isn’t him and the girl accused of co-starring in the tape says she’s got nothing to do with any of it either.

But yesterday a witness stepped forward to say that R Kelly is definitely the guy in the video doing a wee on a child, and that the child is who everyone thinks it is as well. So it looks like everyone can go home soon. Cocktails all round!

The R Kelly child pornography trial has only been going on for a couple of days, but it’s already taught us some valuable lessons. Lessons like:

1) Forget paper rounds – doing a wee to the Backstreet Boys for the illegal sexual pleasure of creepy men is by far the most lucrative way for 13-year-old girls to augment their pocket money,

2) Although accused of being a fan of urine, R Kelly doesn’t like it when poo vapour goes up his nose, and

Actually we haven’t got a clue whether the man in the sex tape is R Kelly or not – R Kelly certainly doesn’t seem to think it’s him – but yesterday at the R Kelly child pornography trial a witness came forward to say that it was.

Twenty-four-year-old Simha Jamison was called as a witness by the prosecution because she apparently recognises both participants in the sex tape. The girl, Jamison claims, is her friend Roshona Landfair, and the man is – wait for it – R Kelly.

Rishona Landfair is the girl widely suspected to be the female lead in the sex tape, and she’d make a valuable witness for the prosecution, except she denies that it’s her and doesn’t want anything to do with the trial.

So, with the prosecution’s Plan A – to get Landfair in court and play Everybody by the Backstreet Boys at her to see if she instinctively starts writhing around and weeing in her knickers – torpedoed, much of the prosecution’s case rests on people like Simha Jamison to go to court and tell creepy stories about R Kelly that make everyone feel a bit weirded out. Job well done, then, as BBC News reports:

Simha Jamison, 24, told the Chicago court that she recognised her friend Roshona Landfair, 23, from her face. She said the two of them often met Mr Kelly when they were around age 12… Ms Jamison said Ms Landfair had first introduced Mr Kelly as her godfather and that they often visited him at his recording studio and a Chicago basketball court. She said Mr Kelly would give Ms Landfair money – “no less than $100 (£50) and no more than $500″. Ms Landfair often stayed on with the singer after Ms Jamison went home, she said.

However, let’s not get too excited. The R Kelly child pornography trial must still be treated fairly, even if it does revolve around a man who once wrote a song entitled Come To Daddy. And, as such, we have to remember that this is just one side of the story, and that the rest will come out when the defence makes its case.

We’re particularly looking forward to that, in fact, since during cross-examination yesterday the defence suggested that the tape may have been digitally altered. Fingers crossed that its entire argument revolves around the tape being a cleverly edited fake pieced together from bits of the music video to Feelin’ On Yo Booty and segments from the underground porno classic Upset-Looking Children Urinating To The Backstreet Boys For Cash.

Hunker down kids, we might be here for a while.

Read more:

Witness friend ‘in R Kelly video’ – BBC

Because, on the opening day of the trial, the now infamous alleged R Kelly sex tape was played to jurors and – we can’t believe we have to tell to tell you something as sordid as this – it features dancing. To a Backstreet Boys song.

Oh, and also it allegedly shows R Kelly urinating, his possibly 13-year-old sex partner urinating and several creepy instances of the word ‘Daddy’. But one thing the R Kelly sex tape doesn’t feature is The Spice Girls, because as soon as one of their songs comes on the radio, R Kelly allegedly halts proceedings and switches channel. Suck it Geri Halliwell, you’re not even good enough to soundtrack lurid child sex videos! In your face!

A show of hands please – who’s ever listened to a Backstreet Boys song, say Quit Playing Games With My Heart or Everybody, and been so touched by its magic that you’ve had to immediately go out and degrade a child by urinating on its face? Most of you? Wow, you guys really like the Backstreet Boys.

R Kelly allegedly too, if prosecutors at the just-started R Kelly child pornography trial know what they’re talking about. After years of delays thanks to ladder-related mishaps and improperly-rested bus drivers, opening arguments were yesterday heard in a trial that could stretch on for several weeks. And, really, what are opening arguments without grainy home video footage of a man having sex with a 13-year-old girl?

Because make no mistake, the prosecution seemed so keen to go out and nail R Kelly from the outset that it just went and played jurors the alleged R Kelly sex tape right from the get-go – but not without getting all creepy circus ringmaster on them first. The Chicago Tribune reports:

“You will see that child perform acts you’ve never seen before,” Boliker said. The tape begins with a man handing the female participant money. At his instruction, the female dances for him while “Everybody” by the Backstreet Boys plays. At times, he can be heard telling her to “dance faster, baby,” before instructing her to urinate for the camera. The female often refers to him as “Daddy” while the two engage in dirty talk. The two pause briefly when a Spice Girls song comes on the radio and the man stops to change the station. The video ends with the man urinating and finishing the sex act.

Acts we’ve never seen before? That’s building her part up a bit, isn’t it? Hang around Chatham High Street for long enough on a Friday night and you’ll see children doing worse than that, trust us. Although, to be fair, none of them will ever be seen dead dancing to the Backstreet Boys. They’re not animals.

Anyway, it wasn’t just the prosecution that got to have a crack at an opening argument – the defence also managed to creep in with a compelling angle or two as well. According to R Kelly’s lawyer Sam Adam Jr, the man in the sex tape can’t be R Kelly because R Kelly has a mole on his back and the man in the tape doesn’t, also the girl accused of taking part in the tape isn’t who everyone thinks she is either, because:

“[The alleged victim] is sweet and nice. The woman in this tape is a prostitute.”

I’ll be interesting to see where the R Kelly child pornography case goes from here, because now that everyone’s seen the sex tape for themselves and the mole argument is already out there, there can’t be much else to discuss. It’s not like the Phil Spector murder trial, where days can be spent analysing exactly how a woman’s tongue would loll around immediately after you’ve shot her in the mouth, is it.

There’s a chance that a bunch of 13-year-old girls could be pulled into the courtroom and ordered to dance to the Backstreet Boys and piss on the floor at the same time for demonstrative purposes to see if it whips R Kelly up into such a sexual frenzy that he immediately composes another song about how his willy works in a similar way to a car key on the spot, but that seems unlikely.

Also, we should mention that a member of the jury left the R Kelly child pornography trial yesterday as well. It was the rape victim juror, who apparently wouldn’t be able to keep up her mortgage repayments if she remained on the jury. She was replaced by a man whose uncle once went to jail for child pornography offences. That’s bound to make a difference to the outcome of the trial, but we won’t find out exactly how until we’ve discovered whether he calls his uncle Uncle Disgusting Paedo or Uncle Wrongly Incarcerated And I Will Have My Vengeance. Makes a difference, see.

Read more:

Lurid opening to Kelly trial - CT