Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Passion of The Jussie (FKA The Smollett Fiasco)


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

Expensive lawyers make **** go away. 

 

**** this guy for putting out a BS statement about being the victim though. 

 

This.  The ju$tice system is entirely different when you can afford a team of lawyers.  Most people get forced into a plea deal, but the wealthy reverse that pressure when it comes to less serious crimes.  The government suddenly is forced to consider if the expenses of a big splashy trial are worth getting a disorderly conduct conviction.  In this case it seems the government decided getting to keep 10k was a better deal. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, justice98 said:

So basically people dont care that all the charges were dropped.

I'd care to know if they they will be charging the two men that admittedly took part in the assault with a hate crime?  Or anything at all?  If Jussie wasn't involved than those two are violent criminals that committed a hate crime. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What angers me the most about this is how Smollet tried to capitalize on anti-MAGA sentiment for his cause, and again I am the last person to support Trump but it is a terrible thing to pretend you were attacked, claim it was from people who told you "You're that Empire epithet" "This is MAGA country" (in CHICAGO of all places) and then "beat him up" oh please. He did that to galvanize anti-Trump sentiment, we all know it. Look at all the people afterward who were like "this poor man assaulted by MAGA extremists" when he scripted this whole thing to further gain sympathy for himself and a political cause. Listen, you can be as vociferous as you want politically and I don't give a damn. Heck, I may even support your cause. But do it the RIGHT way. Don't stage an attack just to seize Anti-MAGA sentiment and garner sympathy for yourself, because you aren't a damn victim. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Destino said:

I'd care to know if they they will be charging the two men that admittedly took part in the assault with a hate crime?  Or anything at all?  If Jussie wasn't involved than those two are violent criminals that committed a hate crime. 

 

But he was involved.  (Supposedly).  He not only consented to being assaulted, he paid them to do it.  

 

If I hire Mistress DeSade to tie me up and hit me with a fur covered paddle, she's not guilty of assaulting me.  Because I gave her permission.  

 

Legal note - Actually, I've been told that, in some jurisdictions, victim consent is legally not a defense against assault.  However, I'll point out that the concept of consent is why MMA fighters and NFL players are not prosecuted for that they do.  And as a practical matter, I assume that having the victim take the stand and state that he gave the accused permission to do that to him, probably reduces the chance of a conviction.  

 

13 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

The judge sealed the case.

 

Something happened.

 

Wouldn't be surprised if that was part of the deal.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Bigger 2019 nothingburger...30 year old yearbook pictures or The Passion of The Jussie?

Robert Kraft handie honorable mention

 

Number one is DEFINITELY the private school kids though.

Edited by Sacks 'n' Stuff
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ixcuincle said:

What angers me the most about this is how Smollet tried to capitalize on anti-MAGA sentiment for his cause, and again I am the last person to support Trump but it is a terrible thing to pretend you were attacked, claim it was from people who told you "You're that Empire epithet" "This is MAGA country" (in CHICAGO of all places) and then "beat him up" oh please. He did that to galvanize anti-Trump sentiment, we all know it. Look at all the people afterward who were like "this poor man assaulted by MAGA extremists" when he scripted this whole thing to further gain sympathy for himself and a political cause. Listen, you can be as vociferous as you want politically and I don't give a damn. Heck, I may even support your cause. But do it the RIGHT way. Don't stage an attack just to seize Anti-MAGA sentiment and garner sympathy for yourself, because you aren't a damn victim. 

 

Oh, it's absolute that the guy has done incredible harm to the people who actually are victims of hate crimes.  

 

I'm just not sure that that ought to be criminal.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Oh, it's absolute that the guy has done incredible harm to the people who actually are victims of hate crimes.  

 

I'm just not sure that that ought to be criminal.  

So it is fine to lie to the police? 

 

Again I'm just judging from an impartial view. Most celebrities don't like Trump and that's okay. But use another venue to voice your discontent. And now this defense of what he did. "What he did was not a crime." Really. Wasting the police's time by pretending you got attacked is not a crime? Claiming you were the victim of MAGA extremists in order to boost your own ego and get attention is a very low blow :rofl89:crime or not 

 

The defense of him is extremely puzzling. He is a dirtbag. He brought his freedom. Good for him. Now fade from our memories, you B list actor 

Edited by ixcuincle
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything about his claims rang false.  Two white guys are wandering the streets way past midnight, carrying a noose, happen upon a minor character from a TV show they likely don't watch, and actually recognize this minor character? 

 

As for the case AGAINST Smollet

They have statements from two acquaintances of Smollet - African American men  - admitting to staging the crime.

They have those accomplices on surveillance cameras near the "crime" scene.

They have the checks Smollet wrote to the guys paying for their efforts.

 

Who knows why the charges were dropped.  It feels like we're being gaslighted on this.   What's galling is Smollet sticking to his original story and claiming vindication.


 

Edited by Dan T.
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ixcuincle said:

So it is fine to lie to the police? 

 

Do you see the word "fine" anywhere in my post?  

 

I didn't think so.  

 

8 minutes ago, ixcuincle said:

He is a dirtbag. He brought his freedom. Good for him. Now fade from our memories, you B list actor 

 

Agree completely.  

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Oh, it's absolute that the guy has done incredible harm to the people who actually are victims of hate crimes.  

 

I'm just not sure that that ought to be criminal.  

 

Are you saying he shouldn't be charged criminally for staging a hate crime and filing a false report to the police about it?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The charges were fine. Lot of policemen and detectives spent time looking into his injury and it turns out it was just a lie. Now, it's not as bad as perjury and he wasn't under oath but it should be a damn crime to lie to the police. Come on now. 

 

The fact that the charges were mysteriously dropped and the case sealed is very sketchy. Everything about this is sketchy. I just hope Smollet goes away now. Disappear and let's move on to the next celebrity SCANDAL 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dan T. said:

 

Are you saying he shouldn't be charged criminally for staging a hate crime and filing a false report to the police about it?

 

Not sure what to charge him with.  

 

"Filing a false police report", I'm pretty sure is a crime.  But what's the typical punishment for a first time offender?  

 

Just as a theoretical matter (as opposed to this particular case), I'm not sure it should involve jail time.  

 

(Now, I could see "filing a false police report" deserving a civil suit from the person falsely accused.  But that doesn't apply in this case.)  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Not sure what to charge him with.  

 

"Filing a false police report", I'm pretty sure is a crime.  But what's the typical punishment for a first time offender?  

 

Just as a theoretical matter (as opposed to this particular case), I'm not sure it should involve jail time.  

 

(Now, I could see "filing a false police report" deserving a civil suit from the person falsely accused.  But that doesn't apply in this case.)  

 

 

Here's the prosecutor's narrative of the case against him:

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Read-the-Proffer-Prosecutors-Detail-Allegations-Against-Jussie-Smollett-506171221.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Filing a false police report is a class 4 felony in Illinois.

 

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/fulltext.asp?DocName=072000050K26-1

 

Class 4 felonies in Illinois are punishable by 1 to 3 years in prison and can include fines up to $25,000.

 

https://www.dennisdwyerlaw.com/what-is-a-class-4-felony-in-illinois

~~~

 

Maybe the biggest indictment against Jussie Smollet is that he's put himself in the same category as Donald Trump, who also was a two-bit, B-list celebrity who lied for attention and notoriety.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dan T. said:

Everything about his claims rang false.  Two white guys are wandering the streets way past midnight, carrying a noose, happen upon a minor character from a TV show they likely don't watch, and actually recognize this minor character? 

 

As for the case AGAINST Smollet

They have statements from two acquaintances of Smollet - African American men  - admitting to staging the crime.

They have those accomplices on surveillance cameras near the "crime" scene.

They have the checks Smollet wrote to the guys paying for their efforts.

 

Who knows why the charges were dropped.  It feels like we're being gaslighted on this.   What's galling is Smollet sticking to his original story and claiming vindication.


 

 

The top part I'm with you on. His story still seems dubious, at best.

 

But playing devil's advocate, none of those things regarding the case against Jussie really prove that he was involved. 

 

The guys gave statements confessing.  So what.  Confessing, but blaming Jussie basically got them out of trouble. 

 

They're on camera buying the supplies.  Again, so what.  All that does is incriminate them.

 

They have checks written to one the guys.  So what.  His claim it was for personal training seems plausible.  It's confirmed they worked out together.  TMZ had texts confirming PT services around that time. Connecting the check to the crime is far from conclusive.  In fact, the two guys even told the grand jury Jussie didnt technically pay them for the attack.

 

Now, the cops claim they had more evidence.  I guess we'll never know.  But Chicago PD ain't exactly got the best reputation.  But if that's the case they had more stuff, the cops and the DA's office need to have a chat, because somebody effed up, or somebody isnt on the up and up.

Edited by justice98
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

The top part I'm with you on. His story still seems dubious, at best.

 

But playing devil's advocate, none of those things regarding the case against Jussie really prove that he was involved. 

 

The guys gave statements confessing.  So what.  Confessing, but blaming Jussie basically got them out of trouble. 

Get them out of trouble for what? Jussie said it was a couple of white guys saying racist things that attacked him. So it couldnt be these guys, unless he was lying to police/making a false report........

Quote

 

They're on camera buying the supplies.  Again, so what.  All that does is incriminate them.

Again, nothing wrong with buying those supplies, why would they need to make up a story to protect themselves.... Hmm

Quote

They have checks written to one the guys.  So what.  His claim it was for personal training seems plausible.  It's confirmed they worked out together.  TMZ had texts confirming PT services around that time. Connecting the check to the crime is far from conclusive.  

 

Now, the cops claim they had more evidence.  I guess we'll never know.  But Chicago PD ain't exactly got the best reputation.  But if that's the case they had more stuff, the cops and the DA's office need to have a chat, because somebody effed up, or somebody isnt on the up and up.

Those two guys have no need to make up any story about Jussie if hes telling the truth, the only way it matters is if he lied to police and made a false report about what actually happened.

 

In addition, the DA never said he wasnt guilty or didnt do it. They just said they decided to drop the charges as he spent time doing community service and let them keep 10k. Why would he let them keep 10k if he was innocent and didnt do anything? And why seal the records unless there is something he or the DA didnt want the public to find out about?

Edited by MisterPinstripe
Link to post
Share on other sites

Options on what really happened. Feel Free to put a percentage next to each (or add to list). 

 

# 1 Prosecution made a deal (similar to a deferred prosecution but not quite?) where they drop the charges but Smollet forfeits his bond. Mistake by prosecutor to not require Smollet to acknowledge guilt if this was the case.

 

# 2 Someone in the investigation or prosecutors office screwed up royally and violated Smollets rights and case was sealed to prevent embarrassment.

 

# 3 Standard Chicago corruption (may be linked to option #1), Palms got greased or influence used to make case go away.

 

# 4 Smollet was telling the truth all along. 

 

IMO  Percentages of likelihood? #1 = 50%, #2 30%, #3 19.999%, #4 .001%

  

Edited by nonniey
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nonniey said:

Options on what really happened. Fell Free to put a percentage next to each (or add to list). 

 

# 1 Prosecution made a deal (similar to a deferred prosecution but not quite?) where they drop the charges but Smollet forfeits his bond. Mistake by prosecutor to not require Smollet to acknowledge guilt if this was the case.

 

# 2 Someone in the investigation or prosecutors office screwed up royally and violated Smollets rights and case was sealed to prevent embarrassment.

 

# 3 Standard Chicago corruption (may be linked to option #1), Palms got greased or influence used to make case go away.

 

# 4 Smollet was telling the truth all along. 

 

IMO  Percentages of likelihood? #1 = 50%, #2 30%, #3 19.999%, #4 .0001%

  

 

Those percentages are whack.

 

1 = 49.9%, 2 = 30.1%, 3= 19.9999%, 4=.0001%

 

Crap, they really are whack.  Your's add up to 99.9991%.  Option 5 - This is all a figment of @twa's imagination = 0.0009% (9 times as likely as option 4.  Sounds about right). 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

Those percentages are whack.

 

1 = 49.9%, 2 = 30.1%, 3= 19.9999%, 4=.0001%

 

Crap, they really are whack.  Your's add up to 99.9991%.  Option 5 - This is all a figment of @twa's imagination = 0.0009% (9 times as likely as option 4.  Sounds about right). 

Yeah I had an extra 0 in there. I removed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nonniey said:

What he is asking should it not be a crime to file a false report? 

 

I think it should be illegal. 

 

Not sure it deserves jail time. At least not in this case, where it's not part of a bigger crime. Might feel differently it it were, say, claiming your car was stolen when actually you had a hit and run while driving drunk. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...