Summer Wheat
Footballguy
This was not an everyday crime.
If fact in many ways it could be considered a hate/racial crime. This could have snowballed into another riot type of situation had Smollett not been so stupid.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
CNN: Questions As To Whether Jussie Smollett Faked Attack (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Joe Bryant
- Start date
This was not an everyday crime.
If fact in many ways it could be considered a hate/racial crime. This could have snowballed into another riot type of situation had Smollett not been so stupid.
Chaz McNulty
Footballguy
He just told you he isn't advocating for him. He wants to know if his punishment fell in line with the minimum and maximum for what he was charged with.
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
His motivation was entirely selfish. Blaming MAGA was just easy target. (Although absurd for many reasons.)
squistion
Footballguy
I am not, I am an advocate for consistency in sentencing for any crime, irrespective of the celebrity status of the defendant.
PhillipPhoto
Footballguy
It's Jessie Smollett, it's the Jessie Smollett thread. He's the only one in here defending the sentencing he received, until now.
PhillipPhoto
Footballguy
They have maximum and minimum sentences for a reason. Are you advocating that we get rid of that concept or do you just not understand it?
squistion
Footballguy
I understand it fine, and still would like to know if his sentence was in line with the typical sentence handed down by that judges or judges who preside in that jurisdiction.
PhillipPhoto
Footballguy
Irrelevant. It should have been towards the maximum in this case. Unless you're lobbying for Jessie.
I understand it fine, and still would like to know if his sentence was in line with the typical sentence handed down by that judges or judges who preside in that jurisdiction.
squistion
Footballguy
I am lobbying for fairness in sentencing in the judicial system. Was his sentence in line with what is usually handed out? What is the typical sentence most convicted of that crime receive?
PhillipPhoto
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
All I know is that you and some others here have never answered some simple questions: What is the usual sentence in that jurisdiction for that time of crime? And did Smollett receive the usual sentence handed out or a more severe sentence?
PhillipPhoto
Footballguy
Your question was directed towards a post that said his sentencing is not enough. You think it was a gotcha question, but it isn't. It put you in the positional paradox of either defending Jessie Smollett or admitting judges have a range to choose from and this case deserved more, just like the poster you responded to said.
squistion
Footballguy
Sorry but you kept trying to set up a Straw Man that I'm lobbying for Jessie and then gave a false choice. Of course, judges have a range to choose from...sheesh! And you used that to avoid addressing the still unanswered question: Did Smollett receive a sentence similar to what is normally handed down in this jurisdiction?
In any event I am tired of going around in circles with you and will not continue this discussion.
You may have the last word on this.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaz McNulty
Footballguy
I read the max was something like 3 years. So, this was not anywhere near the max.
squistion
Footballguy
The maximum is 3 years, however it appears that most similarly situated defendants convicted of this offense, do not do any jail time and it appears that was expected by legal experts:
https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2022-03-09/jussie-smollett-to-learn-fate-in-staged-attack-conviction
[...]
Smollett faced up to three years in prison for each of the five felony counts of disorderly conduct — the charge filed for lying to police — of which he was convicted. He was acquitted on a sixth count.
But because Smollett does not have an extensive criminal history and the conviction is for a low-level nonviolent crime, experts did not expect him to be sent to prison.
[...]
Last edited by a moderator:
It wasn't a single crime. He was convicted of 5 felonies. It's always interesting how articles such as yours make a claim without specifying who those "experts" are. I don't know what qualifies one as an expert, but in my experience people convicted of 5 felonies usually do at least some time. And when you're defiant and don't take responsibility judges tend to make the sentence harsher.
squistion
Footballguy
They probably talked to defense attorneys who handle those type of cases. Most defense attorneys in a jurisdiction are aware of what the normal sentences are for those who are convicted of that type of crime.
From my take of the article, it appears that the typical sentence for a defendant such as Smollett involves no jail time at all, so his sentence of 150 days in jail, plus paying restitution of $120,000 and a $25,000 fine is probably the among the most severe that have been handed out.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Chicago DESERVES everything it gets. They keep electing the same people expecting different results. Screw 'em - they voted for their misery so let them have it.
We just need to make sure they don't move to other places and ruin them too.
Last edited by a moderator:
BladeRunner
Footballguy
I remember not to long ago that this same historian was lecturing us that LGBTQ+ had no civil rights protections at all in the USA.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
The prime example of the system's failure was her getting elected. When people like her can get elected, your system has failed catastrophically.
squistion
Footballguy
No, he's right. I remember that distinctly. But I can understand why you'd rather people think that's not what happened.
identikit
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Today I learned that hate crimes hoaxes are actually very common, so much so that defense attorneys encounter these kinds of cases all the time and there is a well-established sentencing pattern in place for all of them.
We should all keep this in mind the next time something like this makes the news.
We should all keep this in mind the next time something like this makes the news.
squistion
Footballguy
No he isn't. He misstated exactly what I did say. I never said that "LGBTQ+ had no civil rights protections at all in the USA." (particularly since I live in California)
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I was there for that too. Mr. Legal Expert was completely unaware of the most important SCOTUS case with regard to trans issues in US history. But that's probably because of all the research he was doing on the legal consequences of filing false police reports, and we can't really expect anybody to be an expert in everything now can we?
You can be your typical Mr. Semantic all day long. It won't change anything. And if you think he's not being accurate you're welcome to post a link to your actual post so others can form their own opinion. But you won't.
squistion
Footballguy
I know what I said and being a California resident I would never make the statement that "LGBTQ+ had no civil rights protections at all in the USA" as I know that would not to be true as far as my state is concerned.
Last edited by a moderator:
Apparently you didn't know that at the time........I used to live in CA and never read EVERY law in that state. This doesn't absolve you of your ignorance, but it illustrates that just because you live somewhere doesn't make you an expert on every law in that jurisdiction.
So......no link to your actual comments, huh?
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion
Footballguy
Actually I did know because I live in California. No, I don't know EVERY law, but I did know the protections the state offers LGBT+ folks.
And I know what I said, or rather didn't say and am not going to spend an hour searching for a quote.
Manster
Footballguy
Boston
Footballguy
My guess is he was hoping for exactly what he got before his obvious hoax was exposed…a very sympathetic political, media and entertainment establishment who turned him into a saint because he checked the right boxes and was involved in the perfect narrative that they so wanted to be true.
Last edited by a moderator:
Juxtatarot
Footballguy
That’s what it seems like. Being a beloved hate crime victim could be good for his acting career.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
All I know is that Smollett has now ruined it for MAGA guys running around the Conservative-run Chicago at 2am in -30 degree below weather armed with bleach and rope.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov said:
can you share a link maybe? I didn't know it was " very common " but it doesn't surprise me
BladeRunner
Footballguy
The Big Donkey
Footballguy
The flaw in your logic is that people are actually concerned with the truth. They’re not. They immediately choose a side regardless of what the evidence (or common sense) tells them. They won’t learn from this. They never do. Duke rape case, Michael Brown, Freddie Gray, Nicholas Sandman, Kyle Rittenhouse… I’m sure I’m missing all sorts of other examples. Shoot first - aim later.IvanKaramazov said:
dkp993
Footballguy
Cool. Wasn’t looking to argue with someone was just trying to catch up. Figured people would be willing to talk about the case in the thread about the case. Crazy talk I guess.
pinkham13
Footballguy
You just come off as snarky and condescending as if there was no proof and no witnesses to his stupid prank. Why wouldn’t you just check one of your safe news sites? You know the ones still calling Kyle a white supremacist who killed two black guys? But this is the kind of lazy conversation people expect from you on here now. It’s your reputation. No insight. Just typical regurgitation of safe news views from Diversity, Inclusion and Equity outlets.
Last edited by a moderator:
shadrap
Footballguy
the two guys he paid to do it to him ratted. they had them on camera practicing the day before. I think.
the moops
Footballguy
squistion
Footballguy
DropKick
Footballguy
It wasn't presented as an answer. The intent was to provide some precedent of similar nature and magnitude so that your question could be addressed, if not answered.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
the real tell
is how Hollywood will react - will they shun/ban him like they have Roseanne and Tim Allen or will they embrace him and grace him with tens of millions of dollars of acting gig's ?
"Your honor, I respect you and I respect the jury, but I did not do this," the actor told the judge, before turning to the court. "And I am not suicidal. And if anything happens to me when I go in there, I did not do it to myself. And you must all know that."
Not suicidal maybe, but exceptionally paranoid ! and still saying he didn't do it - incredible
is how Hollywood will react - will they shun/ban him like they have Roseanne and Tim Allen or will they embrace him and grace him with tens of millions of dollars of acting gig's ?
"Your honor, I respect you and I respect the jury, but I did not do this," the actor told the judge, before turning to the court. "And I am not suicidal. And if anything happens to me when I go in there, I did not do it to myself. And you must all know that."
Not suicidal maybe, but exceptionally paranoid ! and still saying he didn't do it - incredible
Similar threads
