What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

CNN: Questions As To Whether Jussie Smollett Faked Attack (1 Viewer)

Well, it's not unusual for someone who was found guilty after pleading not guilty to sill claim they are innocent, but I am guessing a small percentage do it in the way Smollett did.  It looks great in the movies, but I am guessing most guilty people who do not yell like that when being taken out of court after sentencing. 

And not sure what the proper etiquette is, but the lawyer to Smollett's left during the sentencing is lucky the judge didn't verbally admonish her, as she was shaking her constantly when the judge was reading Smollett the riot act.  I have to think that most judges do not take kindly to a lawyer shaking their head at them when they are sentencing someone who was found guilty. 

 
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 


The latter, his acting career is finished. 

 
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. 
Thanks for all this Pink. Keep doing you.  

 
Sadly no. For some, this guy is a hero and a martyr.  His agent is already lining up a deal. Something about being forced to share a cell with your attacker.


If I were Hollywood I'd hire him to portray Jussie Smollett in the Jussie Smollett story.  Who would be a better choice?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hard to believe this many people would be so outraged if he was a random white guy.
Random (meaning some random citizen no one knows), probably not, but if it was a C level white celebrity, I think there would actually be outrage.

Smollett did this (apparently) to try and make the MAGA peeps looks bad, right? I think we can all agree that many view the extreme MAGA types as racist white people (no clue if they all are, but I think the perception with many is that they are), so Smollett was trying to make some white people look bad.  If we can agree on that and then flip the situation...

If a white celeb staged a hoax to try to make some bad black people look bad and then threw his own pity party about it to the press, and was then exposed for having staged it, trust me, the outrage would be quick and would be harsh. And would be deserved, just like it was in the case of Jussie Smollett. 

 
Random (meaning some random citizen no one knows), probably not, but if it was a C level white celebrity, I think there would actually be outrage.

Smollett did this (apparently) to try and make the MAGA peeps looks bad, right? I think we can all agree that many view the extreme MAGA types as racist white people (no clue if they all are, but I think the perception with many is that they are), so Smollett was trying to make some white people look bad.  If we can agree on that and then flip the situation...

If a white celeb staged a hoax to try to make some bad black people look bad and then threw his own pity party about it to the press, and was then exposed for having staged it, trust me, the outrage would be quick and would be harsh. And would be deserved, just like it was in the case of Jussie Smollett. 
Sure.  The outrage would be quick.  But it wouldn’t be the same people who are outraged today.

 
Copied and pasted for your hate-reading pleasure.  Come for undiluted appeals to identity-based tribal loyalty.  Stay for the argument that prosecuting a person for committing a crime is "legal vigilantism."  It's worth a read just to marvel at it all.

I don’t believe Jussie Smollett but I recognize when a Black man gets railroaded through a justice system that is out to get him. A rich entitled actor is hardly the most sympathetic face of reform. Still, Smollett’s case demonstrates that when powerful elites decide they want a Black man locked up, nothing and nobody — not even the elected prosecutor — will stop them.

Smollett’s the Black, gay actor who falsely claimed he had been the victim of a hate crime — attacked, he said, by two masked men who used racist and homophobic slurs and tied a rope around his neck.

Smollett’s story quickly fell apart, even as he continued to maintain his victimhood. He was charged with disorderly conduct. The charges were dropped in exchange for community service and surrender his $10,000 bond — an appropriate result for a first-time offender in a nonviolent crime.

But that wasn’t enough for many White people — and some Black people as well — who wanted a pound of Smollett’s flesh. Not for then-President Donald Trump, who tweeted the case was “an embarrassment to our nation.” Not for then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who called the resolution a “whitewash.” New York Post columnist Kyle Smith wrote, presciently and unsympathetically, “Smollett has not been nailed, and Chicago wants him nailed. He will get nailed.”

And nailed he was. The case against Smollett was revived, he was convicted of five counts of disorderly conduct, and last week sentenced to 150 days in jail. But incarcerating Smollett for falsely reporting a hate crime has nothing to do with protecting actual victims of racist and homophobic violence. Rather, it’s legal vigilantism that sends a stern warning about the limits of criminal justice reform: If those in power want a Black man locked up, they will find a way to do it.

Here’s the bizarre procedure they used to reprosecute Smollett: A retired Chicago judge who had nothing to do with the case filed a petition with the city’s criminal court, claiming that she had been so personally damaged by the derogatory media commentary that her “ability to live peacefully has been diminished.”

In response, Chicago’s chief criminal court judge appointed a special counsel to examine whether Smollett should be recharged, and to investigate how Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx’s office had handled the case. Setting aside any presumption of innocence, the judge’s order described Smollett as a “charlatan who fomented a hoax the equal of any twisted television intrigue.”

Famed attorney Dan K. Webb, who served as special counsel in the Iran-contra scandal, was installed to oversee Foxx’s handling of the case. Trump had reportedly asked Webb to defend him in the Mueller investigation but Webb declined. He found time, however, to charge Smollett with several felonies. He also released a report saying Foxx’s office had not broken any laws but abused its discretion when Foxx remained involved with the case after saying she recused herself.

So a White male lawyer in private practice was handed more control over a criminal case than the Black female prosecutor elected to make those kinds of decisions. But Webb’s decision to throw the book at Smollett didn’t just undermine the legitimacy of the system. Public safety took a hit too.

Sending a Black gay man to jail for lying about being attacked will not encourage hate crime victims to come forward. Instead, it sends the message that they, rather than their assailants, are subject to being incarcerated if authorities don’t believe their stories. The most victim-sympathetic response would have been for the police to express disappointment in Smollett’s false report, but to let the community know that other allegations would receive the same intense response that Smollett’s had.

Except that no one would actually believe that, particularly not those minorities who seldom receive equal protection of law. Smollett’s initial claims got special treatment because of his celebrity status. It’s why then-Chicago police Superintendent Eddie Johnson flew to New York to be interviewed on national television, and devoted about two dozen officers and $130,000 to investigating Smollett’s allegations. In a city where most homicides go unsolved, Foxx’s decision to focus her prosecutorial resources on the real bad guys seems eminently reasonable.

Progressive prosecutors such as Foxx are an important component of criminal justice reform. But Black female elected district attorneys face the most pushback. Florida Gov. Rick Scott took away death penalty cases from the state’s first elected African American prosecutor, after she criticized capital punishment. A rogue Massachusetts judge tried to force then-Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins to prosecute a LGBTQ rights activist, before the state’s high court affirmed her independence.

Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police, which had launched repeated racist and sexist attacks against Foxx, made the Smollett case the major issue in her reelection. Foxx won, indicating that the people of Chicago have confidence in her criminal justice priorities — even if certain elites do not.

As for Smollett, he is just another Black man serving time — in a system more perverted than his crime.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/03/15/jussie-smollett-jail-sentence-unfair/

 
Because the crime itself was not extraordinary - look at what he was charged with. Sentences for crimes are supposed to be applied consistently by judges and I don't think his sentence was out of line with the norm (and one's celebrity status, in theory, shouldn't increase the penalty beyond which the maximum that is normally imposed). 
Link to the normal sentence please? 

 
You are contending that a white c-list actor attempting to frame BLM activists for a false crime of attempting to lynch him would get….no outrage? 
 

Are you for real?
I’m actually a tv character.  So not real, no.

There would be outrage.  But not from the same people who are outraged now.  Folks can use their imagination as to why that would be.

 
I’m actually a tv character.  So not real, no.

There would be outrage.  But not from the same people who are outraged now.  Folks can use their imagination as to why that would be.
I see, so you are suggesting that anyone outraged at this is doing so because the key perpetrator was black.  And that’s a bad thing of course.  

It also seems like you are saying that if the roles were reversed, a different group of people than the ones currently outraged, would be the ones outraged.  And that their being outraged wouldn’t be bad.  

Otherwise I’m not sure of your point (other than the obvious point that it’s based on a ridiculous supposition from the outset). 

 
I see, so you are suggesting that anyone outraged at this is doing so because the key perpetrator was black.  And that’s a bad thing of course.  

It also seems like you are saying that if the roles were reversed, a different group of people than the ones currently outraged, would be the ones outraged.  And that their being outraged wouldn’t be bad.  

Otherwise I’m not sure of your point (other than the obvious point that it’s based on a ridiculous supposition from the outset). 
Anyone?  No.  Some people?  Sure.

I think it’s strange in most cases where people are outraged on behalf of “their side” but then flip positions just because roles are reversed.  It’s a common human trait, but it’s hard to take people seriously who form political viewpoints based on tribal loyalty instead of based on underlying merits of the situation.

You may find the supposition ridiculous.  I don’t.  Enjoy your day.

 
Anyone?  No.  Some people?  Sure.

I think it’s strange in most cases where people are outraged on behalf of “their side” but then flip positions just because roles are reversed.  It’s a common human trait, but it’s hard to take people seriously who form political viewpoints based on tribal loyalty instead of based on underlying merits of the situation.

You may find the supposition ridiculous.  I don’t.  Enjoy your day.
Who exactly are the “some” to whom you are referring?  You’ve been speaking in pretty broad generalities and I think if you are being honest-in this case, you’ll not find much partisanship or tribal loyalty unless it’s some unflagging defense of Smollet.  Otherwise people see a liar that tried to stoke racial divisions in support of his own tribalism and got caught.  Unless you can throw some specific examples out of what you described above, with regard to this situation, then I maintain that your supposition is ridiculous.

 
I don’t care whether he wins the appeal or not. (It appears to be on legalistic grounds.) Smollett lied to the media and did more damage to the cause of fighting bigotry in our society than a million right wing talk show hosts ever could. I hope he rots. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even if he wins the appeal, the damage is already done.  Like OJ being found not guilty didn't matter cause most still know he is guilty, I think most reasonable people know that Smollett is guilty, so an overturn on a technicality wouldn't matter much in the court of public opinion.  He is damaged goods. 

 
Just terrible that he doesn’t do any reasonable jail time.  There’s no defending this.  He did it,  The facts are indisputable.  And he didn’t pay a price for it.  I don’t care what race you are and what tribe you belong to.  it’s a miscarriage of justice.  My nephew was the victim of a race-based hoax and it’s going to haunt him until the day he dies.  So yeah this one hits home a bit.  He’ll cash in on it, and folks like @Alex P Keatonwill score points by inferring that people like me who are irked by it are somehow racist.  So freaking comical.  America 2022.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just terrible that he doesn’t do any reasonable jail time.  There’s no defending this.  He did it,  The facts are indisputable.  And he didn’t pay a price for it.  I don’t care what race you are and what tribe you belong to.  it’s a miscarriage of justice.  My nephew was the victim of a race-based hoax and it’s going to haunt him until the day he dies.  So yeah this one hits home a bit.  He’ll cash in on it, and folks like @Alex P Keatonwill score points by inferring that people like me who are irked by it are somehow racist.  So freaking comical.  America 2022.
Actually, you are inferring something about me.  But hey, it happens.

He deserves to face consequences.  Zero doubt about that.  Anyone should be able to agree on that.  His actions aren’t defensible — and I haven’t defended him.

edit to add:  I apologize if you feel I’ve called you racist.  I don’t recall doing that. But clearly my comments were interpreted that way, so I’ll apologize and bow out.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top