Smollett Released

[JoeB131]

We never let out rapists and muggers because the jails are full of non-violent offenders. We let out rapist and muggers when Democrats are running the show because as I've said so often, Democrats are nothing but the disciples of Satan. If they can support or expand evil, they do it.

I just can't take you seriously when you babble about "Satan" like that is a real thing.

We let out rapists and muggers because our jails are already filled to capacity and beyond capacity, and when TRUMP PLAGUE hit, we realized that crowding prisons to 200% capacity was a recipe for disaster.

I would say a six felony count warrants prison time. Thanks for supporting my point above.

Except no reasonable person would consider a prank that went wrong to be six felonies. Nor was the fact the special prosecutor excluded black people from the jury.

Again with your ignorance of our laws. He was not found innocent and then retried, she decided since it was a famous brother, she's not going to prosecute. And the fact her office had ties with Hillary Clinton made it even more suspicious. In other words double jeopardy is not to protect the guilty if higher ups refuse to do their job. Double jeopardy means you can't try a person twice for the same crime which he never was.

Except he paid a fine for the crime... so double jeopardy attaches.

This is why they let him out, they know he's going to win on appeal, and it's going to look that much worse if they have to apologize for locking him up.

 

[JoeB131]

It all matters. That's why we have judges in the first place. A human being understands other humans make mistakes, and that mistakes can be forgiven by society PROVIDED there is some remorse for committing the crime. But when a defendant approaches the court and spits in it's face, the judge understands this person did not learn their lesson yet and has zero respect for our laws much like you. They will always end up serving more time than somebody that made a mistake and tells them the honest to God truth.

None of it should matter. A white kid who can afford a nice suit and a fancy lawyer should not get a light sentence for the same crime as a poor black kid who was stuck with a public defender.

Judges should not have such wide latitude in imposing sentences. That's how you get Brock Turner raping an unconscious woman, because he was a nice-clean cut white boy and his victim was Asian-American, he only got six months!

No, the only reason was it was a racial crime and they investigate all those, especially in a commie city like yours.

The only reason why it was investigated was he was a celebrity. The CPD could reduce racial crimes by not actually committing them. That would be a good start.

 

[BackAgain]

Except of course, appeals take years. If we were talking about an actual crime, like Murder or Rape, where the person is likely to do it again, I have no problem locking them up. This isn't a real crime. He lied to the cops. Big whup. When the cops stop lying to us, I'll be worried about their feelings.

We had a case in IL where a man was railroaded to Death Row, TWICE, because cops lied on the stand about the evidence against him, even after DNA proved another guy did it. When they were prosecuted for lying by a special prosecutor, not only were they acquitted, but the mostly white jury went out and had drinks with them afterwards.



Uh, guy, this is America. The rich will ALWAYS get preferential treatment

As to your last paragraph, bullshit.

As to the earlier part of your post, the principle is the same regardless of the length of the sentence. If a defendant is convicted of armed robbery and gets a 20 year prison sentence, but wins his appeal two years later, he is still in prison for two years.

 

[JoeB131]

As to your last paragraph, bullshit.

Okay, if you need to beleive that to get through the day.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

None of it should matter. A white kid who can afford a nice suit and a fancy lawyer should not get a light sentence for the same crime as a poor black kid who was stuck with a public defender.

Judges should not have such wide latitude in imposing sentences. That's how you get Brock Turner raping an unconscious woman, because he was a nice-clean cut white boy and his victim was Asian-American, he only got six months!

It does matter in a court of law. Again, that's why we have judges in the first place. Circumstances are different in the same crimes. Beating the shit out of a guy who opened his car door into your car in a parking lot is different than beating the shit out of a guy trying to lure your daughter into his car. Judges and juries will look at both cases very differently.

 

[JoeB131]

It does matter in a court of law. Again, that's why we have judges in the first place. Circumstances are different in the same crimes. Beating the shit out of a guy who opened his car door into your car in a parking lot is different than beating the shit out of a guy trying to lure your daughter into his car. Judges and juries will look at both cases very differently.

Um, that was... kind of retarded. That first thing isn't even a crime.

Ray, you are sputtering out trying to justify a case of judicial overreach. When we throw every Karen who reports a black guy into the klink for five months, then you can come back and talk to me about Jussie.

 

[BackAgain]

Okay, if you need to beleive that to get through the day.

And you seem to find it crucial to believe it’s true. I guess that’s what gets you through the day.

 

[daveman]

Actually, if you go back to posts I made at the time, I doubted his story from the Get, but that's because I live here and know you aren't going to actually encounter any MAGAts in Downtown Chicago. They'd get their asses kicked.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Brothers in Jussie Smollett Case Can Sue Over 'Whiteface' Comment: Judge​

Ajudge has determined that the brothers at the center of Jussie Smollett's hoax controversy can continue their lawsuit against one of the actor's attorneys.

A ruling on Friday from U.S. District Judge Mary Rowland allows a defamation suit filed by Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundairo against attorney Tina Glandian to continue. The lawsuit will center around a specific comment made by Glandian during a 2019 Today show appearance, when she said that Chicago police failed to investigate a video where one of the brothers donned "whiteface doing a Joker monologue" as well as the idea that the brothers could have "put makeup on" to disguise their skin color, the Chicago Tribune reported.

Brothers in Jussie Smollett Case Can Sue Over 'Whiteface' Comment: Judge

The lawsuit will center around a specific comment made by Jussie Smollett's attorney Tina Glandian during a 2019 television appearance.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Then like I said, post a link to what you're talking about. If you are going to just drop names then I go by what the source I found told me. According to what I read she picked up a phone charger the black woman dropped. They argued about who's charger it was. The girl who picked up the charger is the one that called the cops. It had zero to do with her race so there is no comparison to this topic here.

The black woman complained because they wouldn't allow her to file a report which the police were correct on. There was no proven crime in this situation so you don't fill out a report of a crime that never happened.

WTF are you talking about? Amy Cooper is a white woman fool.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

WTF are you talking about? Amy Cooper is a white woman fool.

So? What's your point?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Um, that was... kind of retarded. That first thing isn't even a crime.

Ray, you are sputtering out trying to justify a case of judicial overreach. When we throw every Karen who reports a black guy into the klink for five months, then you can come back and talk to me about Jussie.

It's not a crime to beat the shit out of somebody who opened their door into your car? Of course it is.

 

[JoeB131]

It's not a crime to beat the shit out of somebody who opened their door into your car? Of course it is.

What the fuck are you talking about?

 

[Superbadbrutha]

So? What's your point?

The point is you don't have a clue.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Except he paid a fine for the crime... so double jeopardy attaches.

This is why they let him out, they know he's going to win on appeal, and it's going to look that much worse if they have to apologize for locking him up.

Thank god he's now out!
Imagine, being locked up and being forced to share a jail cell with your own attacker!

 

[JoeB131]

Thank god he's now out!
Imagine, being locked up and being forced to share a jail cell with your own attacker!

Hah, hah,.... let's all laugh at this man. Heck, he deserves all the scorn he gets.

What he doesn't deserve - having the legal system bend itself into a pretzel to throw him in jail.

My own view is that he's mentally ill, and shame on his family and the people around him who are enabling him instead of getting him help.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Hah, hah,.... let's all laugh at this man. Heck, he deserves all the scorn he gets.

What he doesn't deserve - having the legal system bend itself into a pretzel to throw him in jail.

My own view is that he's mentally ill, and shame on his family and the people around him who are enabling him instead of getting him help.

He could indeed be mentally ill, and if so his defense should bring a doctor in during the appeal and confirm it.
If he isn't however, my opinion is he should spend some time in jail.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The point is you don't have a clue.

With you, no I don't.

 

[JoeB131]

He could indeed be mentally ill, and if so his defense should bring a doctor in during the appeal and confirm it.
If he isn't however, my opinion is he should spend some time in jail.

Jail should be there for people who are ACTUALLY DANGEROUS.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Jail should be there for people who are ACTUALLY DANGEROUS.

I look at incarceration being there for two reasons.

1. To protect society from violent criminals.
2. To punish someone who has been convicted of certain crimes.

We can throw out #1 in this case, but IMO, Smollette deserves a stint behind bars for his conviction and the seriousness of what he attempted to get away with.