horrifying attack on Jussie Smollett

Status
Not open for further replies.
NEW: Chicago police update Smollett case and now call 2 men being questioned suspects. “Detectives have probable cause that they may have been involved in an alleged crime and we are working to corroborate the allegations and investigative timeline”.

https://twitter.com/RobElgasABC7/status/1096437713622978560

To translate for skeptics:

NEW: Chicago police update Smollett case and now call 2 MAGA men being questioned MAGA suspects. “Detectives have probable cause that they may have been involved in an alleged MAGA crime and we are working to corroborate the allegations and investigative MAGA timeline”.
 
He says that the camera that would show the attack was turned the wrong way, yet he also says:

An emotional Smollett told GMA anchor Robin Roberts that he’s sick of people questioning his report and hopes police find video showing the attack.

“I want that video found, found badly. Number one: I want them to find the people that did it. Number two: I want them to stop being able to say ‘allegedly.’ Number three: I want them to see I fought back. And I want a little gay boy, who might watch this to see that I fought f—— back.”
Click to expand...

He should know there is no video...
 
The Big Dog said:
NEW: Chicago police update Smollett case and now call 2 men being questioned suspects. “Detectives have probable cause that they may have been involved in an alleged crime and we are working to corroborate the allegations and investigative timeline”.

https://twitter.com/RobElgasABC7/status/1096437713622978560

To translate for skeptics:

NEW: Chicago police update Smollett case and now call 2 MAGA men being questioned MAGA suspects. “Detectives have probable cause that they may have been involved in an alleged MAGA crime and we are working to corroborate the allegations and investigative MAGA timeline”.
Click to expand...

But they already raided their apartment...
 
varwoche said:
OK. But do you have any comment on how spectacularly obvious it is that those very different call-outs would prompt very different responses.
Click to expand...
What would be the point, varwoche? I already acknowledged I was being simplistic in my initial comments. I already looked at the choice of just walking away versus turning to engage. Those were the very posts that pissed you off. I've said my piece. You've said yours. If you think there's more to be said, say it yourself.
 
“And I want a little gay boy, who might watch this to see that I fought f—— back.”
Click to expand...

On the show next week, an exclusive interview with a disappointed little gay boy.
 
LTC8K6 said:
He says that the camera that would show the attack was turned the wrong way, yet he also says:



He should know there is no video...
Click to expand...

Fun twist: he set the attack up and let himself get beaten, but miscalculated the camera angles and it didn't get caught on video. That would really piss a brother off.
 
LTC8K6 said:
He said he saw the eyes and the bridge of the nose of the initial attacker.

So he should have been able to discern the skin color. White should have stood out against the dark ski mask.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/jussie-smollett-talks-attack-good-morning-america-1186312
Click to expand...
When he said that on Good Morning America he wanted the world to know that his attacker(s) was a white man.

Either the Nigerians are innocent or we have a serious problem with Jussie Smollett.
 
The Big Dog said:
No, not if they have a warrant.
Click to expand...

Did they knock first, or did they go straight to busting in?

I'm just curious how that works. Do police have to knock first if they have a warrant, or does the warrant enable them to just charge in? I guess if they have reason to believe that announcing their presence would create resistance, charging in would make sense.

I doubt any residence of mine will ever earn a police search warrant, but if it somehow ever did, I'd sure appreciate the chance to politely open the door before it comes flying off its hinges!
 
isissxn said:
Did they knock first, or did they go straight to busting in?

I'm just curious how that works. Do police have to knock first if they have a warrant, or does the warrant enable them to just charge in? I guess if they have reason to believe that announcing their presence would create resistance, charging in would make sense.

I doubt any residence of mine will ever earn a police search warrant, but if it somehow ever did, I'd sure appreciate the chance to politely open the door before it comes flying off its hinges!
Click to expand...

I'm quite confident it was a knock and announce warrant, which means the cops have to knock and announce who they are and what they are doing, and give the folks a reasonable time to respond.

Knock knock knock
POLICE!
wait three seconds
KNCOK KNOCK KNOCK!
POLICE we have search warrant!
KNOCK KNOCK.
wait 3 seconds
kick door in.
 
The Big Dog said:
I'm quite confident it was a knock and announce warrant, which means the cops have to knock and announce who they are and what they are doing, and give the folks a reasonable time to respond.

Knock knock knock
POLICE!
wait three seconds
KNCOK KNOCK KNOCK!
POLICE we have search warrant!
KNOCK KNOCK.
wait 3 seconds
kick door in.
Click to expand...

Ah, okay. That makes sense.
 
Thermal said:
Fun twist: he set the attack up and let himself get beaten, but miscalculated the camera angles and it didn't get caught on video. That would really piss a brother off.
Click to expand...

So let me get this straight.

A couple days ago, it was so implausible that a real attack would not be caught on camera that the lack of video was damning proof no attack happened.

But it's not so implausible that a fake attack that they were trying to get on video was not captured.

Really baseline logic here. Which is less plausible, that a real attack could not be captured where if there was planning, not being captured on video would be a goal?

OR

That a fake attack where video capture was the major goal would somehow accidentally end up being uncaptured?
 
Cavemonster said:
So let me get this straight.

A couple days ago, it was so implausible that a real attack would not be caught on camera that the lack of video was damning proof no attack happened.

But it's not so implausible that a fake attack that they were trying to get on video was not captured.

Really baseline logic here. Which is less plausible, that a real attack could not be captured where if there was planning, not being captured on video would be a goal?

OR

That a fake attack where video capture was the major goal would somehow accidentally end up being uncaptured?
Click to expand...

Are you blaming us for the confusion?

Or are you upset that we ran too fast and too soon?
 
LTC8K6 said:
Are you blaming us for the confusion?

Or are you upset that we ran too fast and too soon?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that the majority of posters in this thread started with the conclusion and are doing gymnastics to twist any facts to fit it.

The majority of posts in this thread are "These facts are unlikely if it was a real attack"

But the majority of posters are using wildly and obviously inconsistent and self contradictory standards for what is unlikely.
 
Just because the police said nothing was caught on camera, does not mean, nothing was caught on camera. Do you see what they might have done here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom