horrifying attack on Jussie Smollett

[theprestige]

I was completely floored when Trump himself was one of the celebrities who appeared to accept this at face value early on.

Heh. Even when Trump tries to do the right thing, he gets it wrong.

But Kamala Harris is not Donald Trump. What's her excuse?

 

[William Parcher]

This coming on the heels of many new reports saying that Smollett is currently being written out of Empire...

“Jussie Smollett continues to be a consummate professional on set and as we have previously stated, he is not being written out of the show.” - STATEMENT FROM 20TH CENTURY FOX TELEVISION AND FOX ENTERTAINMENT

https://mobile.twitter.com/20centuryfoxTV/status/1098272321092038656

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Heh. Even when Trump tries to do the right thing, he gets it wrong.

But Kamala Harris is not Donald Trump. What's her excuse?

Neither Trump nor Harris need excuses. Both did the (ETA: Let's got with "a" right thing, not commenting would have been fine too) right thing. And both should just get behind the facts now.

 

[pharphis]

Or both. The anti-lynching bill would surely spotlight the 'attack' as an example of how necessary this legislation was. Guaranteed national publicity

What's the TL;DR on an anti-lynching bill? Why would such a thing be necessary or at all useful? Murder/attempted murder is illegal. All kinds of variations less severe than that are also illegal. Is this another useless bill to make one's side look good and the other look bad if they reject it as more useless legislation?

Or does the bill have a lot of other stuff attached like all of these things do

 

[Whip]

What's the TL;DR on an anti-lynching bill? Why would such a thing be necessary or at all useful? Murder/attempted murder is illegal. All kinds of variations less severe than that are also illegal. Is this another useless bill to make one's side look good and the other look bad if they reject it as more useless legislation?

Or does the bill have a lot of other stuff attached like all of these things do

I don't get it either. besides what you've stated, there are hate crime laws on the books already. why is this needed?

 

[BStrong]

I don't get it either. besides what you've stated, there are hate crime laws on the books already. why is this needed?

Cheap votes. Oldest political tactic in the world.

 

[sadhatter]

What's the TL;DR on an anti-lynching bill? Why would such a thing be necessary or at all useful? Murder/attempted murder is illegal. All kinds of variations less severe than that are also illegal. Is this another useless bill to make one's side look good and the other look bad if they reject it as more useless legislation?

Or does the bill have a lot of other stuff attached like all of these things do

Society now. Agree with something if it sounds nice or you are racist/sexist/etc.

I like to see how far I can push it in conversation before being called on taking the piss. My personal best was not being called on the statement " every white person should be forced to give give 20 dollars twice a week to a fund that redistributes the money to minorities. " I'm sure people disagree but no one will voice it out of fear.

 

[The Big Dog]

Top attorney Mark Geragos has joined #JussieSmollett legal team. He is assisting Todd Pugh and Victor Henderson. #CPD sources tell me an indictment of #Smollett could be coming in “a matter of hours. Not days”.

Rafer Weigel

 

[sir drinks-a-lot]

What's the TL;DR on an anti-lynching bill? Why would such a thing be necessary or at all useful?

I don't get it either. besides what you've stated, there are hate crime laws on the books already. why is this needed?

As you can plainly see, both of my political opponents think there should be more lynching in the future. Specifically of homosexuals and racial minorities.

This message was paid for by the Sir Drinks-a Lot 2020 Campaign Department

 

[TJM]

Can anybody imagine a defense strategy that wouldn’t be seen as utter bull **** right away?

 

[William Parcher]

Can anybody imagine a defense strategy that wouldn’t be seen as utter bull **** right away?

Different question...

Can anyone imagine a jury that would not convict Smollett?

 

[sadhatter]

Can anybody imagine a defense strategy that wouldn’t be seen as utter bull **** right away?

Seen as, or actually bs?

Not actually bs , not a chance.

One that might work public opinion wise?

I'd essentially plead an insanity like defense. State that years of being harassed for both his race and sexuality by both the public and Co workers ( find a couple people willing to attest to generic kind of events) caused him to snap, and that he felt the need to do something, anything to fight back against this constant harassment.

Is it a legal defense? Maybe, probably not, but it's going to put the judge in the super awkward position of seeming to punish a victim for being harassed to the point of mental break down (to a decent chunk of the population anyway).

Best defense is to make this an ugly **** storm, put as much pressure from the court of public opinion as possible, play up key sympathy points (race,sexuality, mental health, bullying, victimhood) , and get the judge thinking of how he can take care of this quietly as not to be known as " that judge who jailed that hate crime victim".

 

[sadhatter]

Different question...

Can anyone imagine a jury that would not convict Smollett?

Yes.

With an appropriate defense, and jurors like the most extreme people I know. He'd walk.

 

[BStrong]

Can anybody imagine a defense strategy that wouldn’t be seen as utter bull **** right away?

Negotiate, cop a plea, throw themselves on the mercy of public opinion while asserting general discrimination that led to diminished capacity in judgement.

 

[Elagabalus]

"it seems"?

Forgetting the several democratic candidates for the President of the United States who declared it a hate crime and modern day lynching are we?

Or is that par for the course?

I believe the mentality that SGM is referring to is this from Graham2001's post:

...And again this whole affair points out once again the problem with the 'Automatically Believe the Victim (Accuser)' mentality.

SGM's response:

Is there such a mentality? It seems Smollett was believed exactly the same amount as anyone who filed a report with the police. They investigated his claims, tracked down suspects.

Now, if you want to talk about the armchair detective mentality.....

Sadhatter's response to SGM:

You did not notice any claims of racisim in regards to legitimate issues with his story? In this very thread?

I did, go back and re read.

I think this is where everything left the rails since SGM's initial post didn't say anything about racist accusations.



ETA: In Paris there's a street bordering the Seine named Quai Louis-Blériot

'k

 

[William Parcher]

The defense doesn't have to demonstrate innocence, only just aim for reasonable doubt.

 

[LTC8K6]

I think he's probably going to come out okay.

His supporters are not going to waver an inch.

The only snag is the feds with that letter.

5 years from now he will still be the victim of a hate crime.

 

[LTC8K6]

Chicago detectives are seeking Jussie Smollett's financial records, police source says

By Ray Sanchez and Ryan Young, CNN

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

I think he's probably going to come out okay.

His supporters are not going to waver an inch.

The only snag is the feds with that letter.

5 years from now he will still be the victim of a hate crime.

The producers of Empire have already reduced his role in the show. And I would guess they had to go out of their way to do that, they were pretty far along in a season it seems.

 

[LTC8K6]

The producers of Empire have already reduced his role in the show. And I would guess they had to go out of their way to do that, they were pretty far along in a season it seems.

Fox says Jussie is in good standing on the show.