Smollett gets all charges dropped

[jrry32]

They are telling baldfaced lies.

Their job is to zealously represent their client's interests.

 

[LesBaker]

Their job is to zealously represent their client's interests.

And the bar says they cannot tell lies about their client or the case. And they just did that to the media.

That is beyond puffery and zealotry.

 

[Ramhusker]

I like you , but that was crappy and not on point.

The fact that he is gay and you made that a target is wrong. And you know it.

He committed 16 crimes and is walking away. But you or I may do months in jail and pay hefty fines.

That is my point.

These are felony counts, and the police spent crap tons of resources because this was a high profile case.

He lied about it over and over.

Then admitted it after being confronted with video and cell records that proved he was lying.

Then suddenly charges are DROPPED.

And then he claims he was innocent all along.

He is clearly and completely guilty yet all 16 counts against this POS are dropped.

Have the Cook County authorities become a "reality show" too?

Doesn't matter if he is gay. A straight guy going to jail isn't going to have a good time either. It definitely would be worse on him for going in trying to stage a race crime. My point was he'll probably end up getting what's coming to him. He's the one that was trying to claim victimhood on the accounts of being gay and black. He decided to put that front and center in neon lights.

 

[LesBaker]

Doesn't matter if he is gay. A straight guy going to jail isn't going to have a good time either.

Your point was that he would enjoy being raped or having sex in jail. Because you said this.........."Not sure why he wouldn't like to go to jail. They would definitely oblige all his desires there I'm sure.
"

That's weak sauce and is way off point. I'm talking about the legalities and you dragged it down into the gutter because he is gay.

16 felony charges got dismissed when there is ALL evidence that this was staged. And he should be punished.

My point was he'll probably end up getting what's coming to him.

And you whiffed here because MY point is he is NOT getting what is coming to him. He should get what's coming to him in the form of justice through the system. And he just got excused from what should be coming to him.

You think him getting what is coming to him is getting actually really attacked and then raped in prison. That is ridiculous. Shame on you.

My point is that what should be coming to him is that he should be convicted of obvious crimes and held to account rather than having all 16 charges dismissed.

Right now people in CHI are at a loss for words, the police are pissed as fuck about this, and in a city with a raging crime problem with police forces under siege and having dark records in their own right.

Letting this turd walk is terrible.

Reducing it to his race or sexuality is just dumb.

This was criminal behavior and deserves punishment. But he just walked away.

 

[LesBaker]

Not sure why he wouldn't like to go to jail. They would definitely oblige all his desires there I'm sure.

Doesn't matter if he is gay. A straight guy going to jail isn't going to have a good time either.

You seem to say he would.

 

[thirteen28]

Their job is to zealously represent their client's interests.

And the bar says they cannot tell lies about their client or the case. And they just did that to the media.

That is beyond puffery and zealotry.

Actually, Les, Jerry is correct - it is indeed their job to zealously represent their client's interests. And a lawyer defending a client, even knowing he's guilty as hell, can still tell the court that his client is not guilty and didn't do it. To do otherwise against the client's wishes would be malpractice. I know it seems outrageous, but our system (theoretically, anyway) is set up to favor defendants.

I get the frustration with this case, and it is indeed a savage injustice that Smollett is going to walk when the evidence against him is overwhelming. But blame him, not his attorneys who are just doing their job. Hopefully, the feds will prosecute him on relevant charges for sending himself the white powder through the mail. And if he's violated any other federal laws in the Chicago case, he could conceivably still be tried that way as well, since technically, he wasn't tried for these crimes since the charges were dropped and there was no plea bargain, and thus no double jeopardy (I think anyway ... Jerry?).

 

[jrry32]

Actually, Les, Jerry is correct - it is indeed their job to zealously represent their client's interests. And a lawyer defending a client, even knowing he's guilty as hell, can still tell the court that his client is not guilty and didn't do it. To do otherwise against the client's wishes would be malpractice. I know it seems outrageous, but our system (theoretically, anyway) is set up to favor defendants.

I get the frustration with this case, and it is indeed a savage injustice that Smollett is going to walk when the evidence against him is overwhelming. But blame him, not his attorneys who are just doing their job. Hopefully, the feds will prosecute him on relevant charges for sending himself the white powder through the mail. And if he's violated any other federal laws in the Chicago case, he could conceivably still be tried that way as well, since technically, he wasn't tried for these crimes since the charges were dropped and there was no plea bargain, and thus no double jeopardy (I think anyway ... Jerry?).

Interestingly enough, you can be convicted at both the state and federal levels for the same criminal act. The United States Constitution does not bar that (it is called the dual sovereignty doctrine). It is possible that a state constitution could bar it, though (if the person was tried federally first).

 

[jrry32]

And the bar says they cannot tell lies about their client or the case. And they just did that to the media.

That is beyond puffery and zealotry.

I'm telling you that the Illinois Bar would do nothing.

 

[Dieter the Brock]

They are telling baldfaced lies.

A story about my recent ranch sale:
There was a 10 acres tract I had acquired that a previous deed had kept some surface mineral rights from back in the day. I wasn’t smart enough to have them turn that over to me when I acquired it.
Fast forward
When I sold the ranch in it’s entirety the buyers wanted those surface mineral rights lifted.
So i called the seller and asked if she would do so, and she agreed that evening to meet me the next day.
Come the next day I get a call from her agent saying that if I don’t pay her 40k she will keep her mineral rights — well he know what I was selling the ranch for and felt that 40k would be no problem.
He said, I quote “i’ll fuck your deal if you don’t pay.”
This was all above board cause he was repping his client.
Nothing I could do about it even though it was both a threat and extortion in my eyes.
But it was all fair game

 

[Farr Be It]

By the way, don’t give too much credit to the lawyer, this Kim Fox creature needs to go down. She took a phone call from a BO rep. basically and was told to drop charges.

I’m sure she received a nice reward. May they all go down in flames. The real victims of this one party town are the innocent people of Chicago.

 

[Ellard80]

Yeah you got the funds you can get out of a lot of shit - including murder.

If you are poor you be fucked though!

 

[RamsAndEwe]

Slander isn't a crime, and what his lawyer said wouldn't qualify as slander.
(There is criminal defamation in some states, but the law in Illinois wouldn't be applicable.)

Can Jussie Smollett sue the Nigerian Brothers for defamation of character? Is it defamation to claim Jussie planned the attack when he only wanted to buy beauty products?

 

[thirteen28]

Can Jussie Smollett sue the Nigerian Brothers for defamation of character? Is it defamation to claim Jussie planned the attack when he only wanted to buy beauty products?

He probably could, but discovery is going to be a bitch for Jussie. And he would lose badly in front of any reasonable jury.

 

[jrry32]

By the way, don’t give too much credit to the lawyer, this Kim Fox creature needs to go down. She took a phone call from a BO rep. basically and was told to drop charges.

I’m sure she received a nice reward. May they all go down in flames. The real victims of this one party town are the innocent people of Chicago.

Farr, Selassie asked us not to make it political. And what you said isn't correct (to my knowledge).

 

[thirteen28]

Interestingly enough, you can be convicted at both the state and federal levels for the same criminal act. The United States Constitution does not bar that (it is called the dual sovereignty doctrine). It is possible that a state constitution could bar it, though (if the person was tried federally first).

Yes, I've heard of that, and I think someone should challenge the constitutionality of that ... and if it's found constitutional, an amendment should make it unconstitutional. Even if it falls within the letter of the law, it certainly violates the spirit of what our judicial system is supposed to be. I understand there is a federalist argument in favor of it (and I'm generally very pro-federalism), but that's one thing that should be changed, because it would clearly be an injustice for someone to punished twice for the same crime.

 

[jrry32]

Yes, I've heard of that, and I think someone should challenge the constitutionality of that ... and if it's found constitutional, an amendment should make it unconstitutional. Even if it falls within the letter of the law, it certainly violates the spirit of what our judicial system is supposed to be. I understand there is a federalist argument in favor of it (and I'm generally very pro-federalism), but that's one thing that should be changed, because it would clearly be an injustice for someone to punished twice for the same crime.

It's constitutional. You have to remember that prior to the 14th Amendment, the Bill of Rights didn't apply to the states.

 

[Farr Be It]

Their job is to zealously represent their client's interests.

Yes, but in that zealotry, if I understand correctly, are limitations. For example, you cannot withhold evidence. A prosecutor may not withhold exculpatory evidence, etc.

Jrry, you’re a lawyer, tell me this: Is “zealous defense” the only charge of a defense lawyer, truth be damned?

Farr, Selassie asked us not to make it political. And what you said isn't correct (to my knowledge).

Forgive me for invoking “one party town”. Let’s go with “corrupt town”. What I said is absolutely correct. Maybe this thread will be deemed political, and I respect that, but I merely stated the facts reported in the news.

because it would clearly be an injustice for someone to punished twice for the same crime.

So when a corrupt official (Fox) decides that her constituency is not the public she swore to SERVE (maybe she was appointed, I haven’t looked into it, but the point is essentially the same. Political officials are servants of the interests of the citizen, NOT a ruling class) but a ideological ally that she deemed to be more important.

She and Smollett see themselves to be above the law, above the “common citizen”. You aren’t saying that Smollett would be a victim somehow if he were properly prosecuted for the 16 obvious crimes he committed, right?

 

[thirteen28]

She and Smollett see themselves to be above the law, above the “common citizen”. You aren’t saying that Smollett would be a victim somehow if he were properly prosecuted for the 16 obvious crimes he committed, right?

It's moot in this case. Since the charges were dropped and thus not adjudicated, he could still be prosecuted either at the state level or the federal level, with no double jeopardy applying. I don't know the structure of Illinois judicial system, but I presume if there is someone above those who made the decision to dropped the charges decided to re-instate them, they could. And of course, he can still be (and hopefully will be) prosecuted under any relevant federal statutes.

What I am saying is that if someone is criminally prosecuted for a particular act, all the way to a verdict (and assuming no subsequent declaration of mistrial on appeal, or other factors that render the verdict inoperative), I don't believe they should be able to be prosecuted again for that same act by another jurisdiction. So let's say you are prosecuted for felonious mopery at the state level and found not guilty. While Jerry correctly points out you could still be prosecuted for felonious mopery at the federal level, I don't believe that this should be permitted.

 

[LesBaker]

But this isn't the case. He didn't have clever lawyers who outwitted the DA in court.

The police had video of him with the two brothers, video of them going to the scene, a check written out for payment, one of these guys is his personal trainer by the way, cell phone records of him contacting them, confessions from the two brothers that it was staged and plenty of other evidence.

This was open and shut.

Even the prosecutor who dropped the charges said in his opinion the police work was right, and that Smollett was guilty.

Yet he dropped the charges.

Somewhere along the line something happened and people need to be held accountable. At this point other people should be going to jail with that fucking turd Smollett.