horrifying attack on Jussie Smollett

[TJM]

Police report.

Notice the spectacular lack of race of the aggressors or anything about MAGA COUNTRY!

Stick a fork in this dbag.

Battered about the face. No mention of ribs, bruised or otherwise.

Troubling.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Battered about the face. No mention of ribs, bruised or otherwise.

Troubling.

What is troubling?

 

[CaptainHowdy]

First of all, you can't possibly prove this claim with any empirical evidence. Second, some of the whites were lynched due to black sympathies. Lastly, comparing the lynching's in that list from wikipedia to modern day policing practices, especially when you read the circumstances and accusations, is beyond disgusting.

Please go sit on the stool in the corner with the proper triangular hat on your head.

You can prove that claim by looking at readily available crime statistics. The FBI tries to hide Latino crime rate by rolling it into the White crimes category. But it's clear that Black people commit a disproportionate amount of crime.

 

[Ziggurat]

You can prove that claim by looking at readily available crime statistics. The FBI tries to hide Latino crime rate by rolling it into the White crimes category. But it's clear that Black people commit a disproportionate amount of crime.

That last sentence is true, but it doesn't then follow that this was the reason blacks were disproportionately lynched. Correlation isn't causation.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

That last sentence is true, but it doesn't then follow that this was the reason blacks were disproportionately lynched. Correlation isn't causation.

Seems like a pretty safe bet.

 

[Puppycow]

So, I saw this today. He made some statements which may or may not clarify his claims for those arguing them. But I suspect everything he says will be overshadowed by a rather silly remark he included.

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-47107639

"I was bruised but my ribs were not cracked; they were not broken," he said referring to some notes he'd brought on stage.

Well, so much for that.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Well, so much for that.

You were only supposed to focus on the gay Tupac remark, not read the rest.

 

[Puppycow]

You were only supposed to focus on the gay Tupac remark, not read the rest.

And to be clear, earlier in the thread it was offered as a reason why the thing was not likely a hoax.

Tell me how you self-inflict a broken rib?

I had my doubts about whether he really had a broken rib, but no evidence until now. So no need to explain how he "self-inflicted" a broken rib, because there was no broken rib.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I had my doubts about whether he really had a broken rib, but no evidence until now. So no need to explain how he "self-inflicted" a broken rib, because there was no broken rib.

If the rib isn't fractured, the story's manufactured!

 

[Puppycow]

If the rib isn't fractured, the story's manufactured!

Johnnie Cochran would be proud.

I don't claim that this fact by itself is conclusive, but it does add to body of evidence (and lack of evidence) that is consistent with the hoax hypothesis.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

Johnnie Cochran would be proud.

I don't claim that this fact by itself is conclusive, but it does add to body of evidence (and lack of evidence) that is consistent with the hoax hypothesis.

Can you explain that?

 

[Puppycow]

Can you explain that?

What do you want me to explain? From the quote trail I would think it would be clear what I was talking about.

OK, here it all is:

It was originally reported that Jussie Smollett had suffered a broken rib in the attack. A poster cited this fact as evidence that the attack was real.

Why on earth would a successful person involve himself in something like this as a deliberate fraud? Does your "sniff test" not work the other way too? Mine does, and the idea that someone would risk ruining their career with a stunt like this fails to pass my sniff test. Unless, of course, you've got some evidence.

The guy has a broken rib and a bashed face. Therefore someone broke his rib and bashed his face. Either he got someone to do that to him and gave them enough incentive to keep quiet about it........or he was attacked. If he was attacked, there were attackers. The only thing I can see to be questioning of is where this attack took place, because it most certainly had to have happened somewhere.

Honestly? Sheesh. How did a mental illness break his rib? How did it smash his face up? Did it ever cross your mind for a second that there are some honest people on the planet? That someone who claims to have been beaten up and has the injuries to back up that claim, may have actually been beaten up? No?

Tell me how you self-inflict a broken rib?

Now, Smollett himself has backtracked and admitted that he did not suffer a broken rib, but only bruises (which we haven't seen, to my knowledge).

So, I saw this today. He made some statements which may or may not clarify his claims for those arguing them. But I suspect everything he says will be overshadowed by a rather silly remark he included.

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-47107639

"I was bruised but my ribs were not cracked; they were not broken," he said referring to some notes he'd brought on stage.

"I went to the doctor immediately. I was not hospitalised.

Basically, other than what we've seen photos of, it is hard to confirm the extent of his injuries, but I see no reason to think that he would need the assistance of a second person to "self-inflict" a few scratches and bruises.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

It was originally reported that Jussie Smollett had suffered a broken rib in the attack. A poster cited this fact as evidence that the attack was real.

Now, Smollett himself has backtracked and admitted that he did not suffer a broken rib, but only bruises (which we haven't seen, to my knowledge).s.

As far as I can tell this is wrong. Smollet himself has not backtracked because I know of no instance where he claimed his rib was broken. Is there one? You are correct that original reporting said that, but original reporting, as far as I know, never attributed that claim to Smollet.

 

[Puppycow]

As far as I can tell this is wrong. Smollet himself has not backtracked because I know of no instance where he claimed his rib was broken. Is there one? You are correct that original reporting said that, but original reporting, as far as I know, never attributed that claim to Smollet.

I don't know if it came from Smollett himself, but it was cited by MikeG in the quotes above as evidence that the attacks were real.

FWIW, the claim appears to come from TMZ, and is attributed to "Sources directly connected to Jussie"

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

I don't know if it came from Smollett himself, but it was cited by MikeG in the quotes above as evidence that the attacks were real.

FWIW, the claim appears to come from TMZ, and is attributed to "Sources directly connected to Jussie"

Yes, I know. I mentioned the TMZ source earlier.

 

[jeffas69]

You can prove that claim by looking at readily available crime statistics. The FBI tries to hide Latino crime rate by rolling it into the White crimes category. But it's clear that Black people commit a disproportionate amount of crime.

Perhaps you missed the part of tanks quote that I highlighted? Have you read through any of the list from the Wikipedia link?

 

[TJM]

What is troubling?

It's an inconsistency that could be attributed to either Jussie or someone in his circle, inaccurate media reports or an inaccurate police report. Jussie corrected the record himself on 2 February when he said his ribs were never broken, just bruised.

Either case is problematic.

 

[TofuFighter]

There is some value in being able to see racists identifying themselves.

 

[This is The End]

There is some value in being able to see racists identifying themselves.

Exactly. As I said in my other post:

In any thread, in any situation, we have to wait for facts. We all know that here. It is possible that this specific story was a hoax. But we can easily separate the posters that have healthy skepticism from those that have their oh so convenient (and confident!) extra careful special super cautious skepticism

Several posters (who always show up with their extra convenient super skepticism only in threads involving LGBT and/or POC) all showed up for this thread.

It makes this thread the perfect link to give to anyone who wants to see our resident racists and bigots out in the open.

 

[Darat]

It's an inconsistency that could be attributed to either Jussie or someone in his circle, inaccurate media reports or an inaccurate police report. Jussie corrected the record himself on 2 February when he said his ribs were never broken, just bruised.



Either case is problematic.

What's "problematic" about first reports being inaccurate? Sadly in the urgency to make money from reporting events by getting the first clicks we know many reporting sites first reports will be inaccurate.