All Charges Against Jussie Smollett Dropped

[Torrocca]

Justice has been served

By him basically bribing the court to drop his case?
Some justice.

Not everyone can afford to pay their way out of court.

$10,000, while larger than what most people can afford to spend in a day, isn't necessarily something I'd call an appropriate bribe for an institution as thoroughly corrupt as Chicago's justice system.

[Torrocca]

A climate where people get angry if they hear that a hate crime happened?


We have a veritable treasure trove of a paper trail showing how the far right has racialized Muslims over time for the purposes of encouraging bigotry towards them.

That Trump's core support is mostly white is an objective observation, not a deceptive, two-faced racialization tactic.

And unless you are going to also argue that the white nationalism that fueles a chunk of the Trumpist movement is synonymous with the entirety of white Americans... yeah, your rationalization here ain't flying.


"Authoritarianism and demonization"

Because feeling angry about blatant racism and the prospect of a racist hate crime happening is just the product of progressive anti-white indoctrination. No way that shit could be sincere and founded in good faith.

I'm not the one defending a movement who argues white identity in itself is an oppressive construct sometimes, or full of bluecheck journalists who out and out write articles like; "Yes I hate men" or "Yes sure I hate white people" and post publicly in that vein far more often.

Some of the racial aspects could be sincere and founded in good faith, but that quickly dissolves as it becomes progressive dogma; See police shootings.
The feminist aspects are not founded in good faith, the due process violations and handling of DV is reliant on manipulation of evidence and statistics from the outset to rant about masculinity. (The campaigns in institutions and the media, not necessarily the people who see the Klan grand wizards talking about how they "Just love white people" mid lynching and say "Hey, i'm a klansman too. But I don't hate blacks, not all klansmen!" like many feminists on this forum.)

Can you go one fucking thread without threadjacking about feminism and progressivism?

[Proctopeo]

I'm not the one defending a movement who argues white identity in itself is an oppressive construct sometimes, or full of bluecheck journalists who out and out write articles like; "Yes I hate men" or "Yes sure I hate white people" and post publicly in that vein far more often.

Some of the racial aspects could be sincere and founded in good faith, but that quickly dissolves as it becomes progressive dogma; See police shootings.
The feminist aspects are not founded in good faith, the due process violations and handling of DV is reliant on manipulation of evidence and statistics from the outset to rant about masculinity. (The campaigns in institutions and the media, not necessarily the people who see the Klan grand wizards talking about how they "Just love white people" mid lynching and say "Hey, i'm a klansman too. But I don't hate blacks, not all klansmen!" like many feminists on this forum.)

Can you go one fucking thread without threadjacking about feminism and progressivism?

Can you go one thread without getting incensed at it?
Usually there's a reason besides "FEMINISM BAD", he makes points if you bother to read what he writes.

[Torrocca]

Can you go one fucking thread without threadjacking about feminism and progressivism?

Can you go one thread without getting incensed at it?
Usually there's a reason besides "FEMINISM BAD", he makes points if you bother to read what he writes.

It's an entirely irrelevant diatribe regarding the topic of the thread. Unless you wanna care to explain how domestic violence relates to Jussie Smollett's case, of course.

[Novus America]

no he did have a roll in Alien Covenant in which his character was killed by the alien after it cam aboard the ship

Ah, so just a regular C-list actor who's gotten into at least one movie of note.

My default assumption is that celebrities are worth a lot, I could be mistaken.

I could be wrong myself, it's what I've heard though to be fair.

Indeed, pretty hard to have a fair trial by jury when the way the case was publicised would have made it impossible for any juror to judge it impartially in any way.

And that kids, is why you don't rant about ongoing court cases on Facebook before they're finished.

Exactly. The prosecution screwed the pooch pretty fucking royally.

They did.
So it sounds like he was guilty as hell, they screwed up, he forks over a chunk of cash, they call it a day.

Should be noted though he still could be facing federal mail fraud charges.

[Torrocca]

Ah, so just a regular C-list actor who's gotten into at least one movie of note.



I could be wrong myself, it's what I've heard though to be fair.



Exactly. The prosecution screwed the pooch pretty fucking royally.

They did.
So it sounds like he was guilty as hell, they screwed up, he forks over a lot of cash, they call it a day.

Should be noted though he still could be facing federal mail fraud charges.

Well, again, he didn't really fork over that much to Chicago's justice system in the grand scheme of things. A $10,000 bond isn't a lot regarding that particular institution.

Either way, they completely fucked up and mishandled any actual semblance of justice.

[Proctopeo]

Can you go one thread without getting incensed at it?
Usually there's a reason besides "FEMINISM BAD", he makes points if you bother to read what he writes.

It's an entirely irrelevant diatribe regarding the topic of the thread. Unless you wanna care to explain how domestic violence relates to Jussie Smollett's case, of course.

I'm not Ostro.
Ask him for a reason, not me.

[Cedoria]

Ah, so just a regular C-list actor who's gotten into at least one movie of note.



I could be wrong myself, it's what I've heard though to be fair.



Exactly. The prosecution screwed the pooch pretty fucking royally.

They did.
So it sounds like he was guilty as hell, they screwed up, he forks over a chunk of cash, they call it a day.

Should be noted though he still could be facing federal mail fraud charges.

The fact that the case was publicised in such a way that heavily prejudged his guilt would be a big part of it.

Impossible to put someone to trial if the way their case has been reported makes most people already think they're guilty despite not seeing all the evidence. Can't do a jury trial that way, so usually cases like that get dismissed, because it's impossible to have an even vaguely impartial jury.

[Cedoria]

Can you go one fucking thread without threadjacking about feminism and progressivism?

Can you go one thread without getting incensed at it?
Usually there's a reason besides "FEMINISM BAD", he makes points if you bother to read what he writes.

'
A point which is entirely irrelevant to the topic and context of the thread, despite Ostro's attempt to threadjack every thread into being about it.

People on here tend to get annoyed about that stuff. Don't tell them not to.

[Novus America]

By him basically bribing the court to drop his case?
Some justice.

Not everyone can afford to pay their way out of court.

$10,000, while larger than what most people can afford to spend in a day, isn't necessarily something I'd call an appropriate bribe for an institution as thoroughly corrupt as Chicago's justice system.

It was $100,000. Which is a pretty big chunk of change.
Though I agree, seems like they would have wanted more.

[Ostroeuropa]

Can you go one thread without getting incensed at it?
Usually there's a reason besides "FEMINISM BAD", he makes points if you bother to read what he writes.

It's an entirely irrelevant diatribe regarding the topic of the thread. Unless you wanna care to explain how domestic violence relates to Jussie Smollett's case, of course.

Discrimination against the demographic Smollett and those who supported him in the media were targeting to victimize is intersectional and reinforced through a sexist narrative as well as a racist one.

The progressive movements intersectional approach, through epistemic injustice committed against whites and males spanning several decades, mistreats both those groups, but white males specifically.

White supremacy is often linked with white males in the media rather than white women, and this also presents in mainstream feminist discussion of "White males" as the source of issues.

Pretending this was a crime solely along a racial axis is ignoring the fundamental ideology at play by those who ran with it. That ideology causes an attack on the outgroup to present in different ways dependent on circumstance, but the same ideology and its worldview produces the hostility in both cases.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Gotta love Chicago lol, never change you wildly corrupt hellhole.

[Proctopeo]

Can you go one thread without getting incensed at it?
Usually there's a reason besides "FEMINISM BAD", he makes points if you bother to read what he writes.

'
A point which is entirely irrelevant to the topic and context of the thread, despite Ostro's attempt to threadjack every thread into being about it.

People on here tend to get annoyed about that stuff. Don't tell them not to.

You can't tell me not to tell others not to get unreasonable angry at someone making a tangent just because it bothers your sensibilities or whatever.

It's an entirely irrelevant diatribe regarding the topic of the thread. Unless you wanna care to explain how domestic violence relates to Jussie Smollett's case, of course.

Discrimination against the demographic Smollett and those who supported him in the media were targeting to victimize is intersectional and reinforced through a sexist narrative as well as a racist one.

The progressive movements intersectional approach, through epistemic injustice committed against whites and males spanning several decades, mistreats both those groups, but white males specifically.

White supremacy is often linked with white males in the media rather than white women, and this also presents in mainstream feminist discussion of "White males" as the source of issues.

Pretending this was a crime solely along a racial axis is ignoring the fundamental ideology at play by those who ran with it.

There it is. I knew there was a good reason for this.

[Novus America]

They did.
So it sounds like he was guilty as hell, they screwed up, he forks over a chunk of cash, they call it a day.

Should be noted though he still could be facing federal mail fraud charges.

The fact that the case was publicised in such a way that heavily prejudged his guilt would be a big part of it.

Impossible to put someone to trial if the way their case has been reported makes most people already think they're guilty despite not seeing all the evidence. Can't do a jury trial that way, so usually cases like that get dismissed, because it's impossible to have an even vaguely impartial jury.

Definitely seems the prosecution screwed up.
Still it is fucked up you can pay $100,000 to have your case dropped.

Forfeiting bail to have your case dropped should be banned.

Federal charges still could be on the table though.

[Ostroeuropa]

'
A point which is entirely irrelevant to the topic and context of the thread, despite Ostro's attempt to threadjack every thread into being about it.

People on here tend to get annoyed about that stuff. Don't tell them not to.

You can't tell me not to tell others not to get unreasonable angry at someone making a tangent just because it bothers your sensibilities or whatever.

Discrimination against the demographic Smollett and those who supported him in the media were targeting to victimize is intersectional and reinforced through a sexist narrative as well as a racist one.

The progressive movements intersectional approach, through epistemic injustice committed against whites and males spanning several decades, mistreats both those groups, but white males specifically.

White supremacy is often linked with white males in the media rather than white women, and this also presents in mainstream feminist discussion of "White males" as the source of issues.

Pretending this was a crime solely along a racial axis is ignoring the fundamental ideology at play by those who ran with it.

There it is. I knew there was a good reason for this.

An example of this problem harming males other than white males is how this progressive approach botches the discussion of racism as it relates to treatment by justice institutions.

By omitting the "Male" factor, it is presented as a general issue blacks face. That's not true.
Black women are treated better than average, because they are women. (Less well than white women, but still better than the average citizen.). Likewise, white men are treated worse than average.

The issues of race and sex are linked when it comes to discrimination in almost all cases. With whites and males, the problem of progressive anti-white racism and feminist anti-male sexism are linked.

The media ran with the story in part because it was male suspects. A woman suspect would not garner interest because it does not fit the narrative, and doesn't do what it is designed to do;

Sell toxic crap to people who want their prejudices confirmed to them.

Much like male victims of women don't generate a media frenzy, because that doesn't validate the prejudices of those consuming that media, and they get angry and stop watching.

They were white AND male, and the "victim" was black. That's what made this a major scandal.

They were also "Trump supporters", it was tailor made to pander to the prejudice of the left wing media's audience. Literally, made up for that specific purpose.

Ignoring WHY that is the case and what ideologies MAKE that the case? Ridiculous.

[Cedoria]

'
A point which is entirely irrelevant to the topic and context of the thread, despite Ostro's attempt to threadjack every thread into being about it.

People on here tend to get annoyed about that stuff. Don't tell them not to.

You can't tell me not to tell others not to get unreasonable angry at someone making a tangent just because it bothers your sensibilities or whatever.

Indeed I can. I just did. Ostro's tangent is irrelevant to the entire thread, despite that pointless word-salad trying to claim otherwise. Don't expect other people not to point it out.

[Cedoria]

The fact that the case was publicised in such a way that heavily prejudged his guilt would be a big part of it.

Impossible to put someone to trial if the way their case has been reported makes most people already think they're guilty despite not seeing all the evidence. Can't do a jury trial that way, so usually cases like that get dismissed, because it's impossible to have an even vaguely impartial jury.

Definitely seems the prosecution screwed up.
Still it is fucked up you can pay $100,000 to have your case dropped.

Forfeiting bail to have your case dropped should be banned.

Federal charges still could be on the table though.

I am inclined to agree, on all points. Money shouldn't have a place in justice decisions, and yet it undeniably does, even in places far less rotten then Chicago.

No quick way to fix that unfortunately.

[Proctopeo]

You can't tell me not to tell others not to get unreasonable angry at someone making a tangent just because it bothers your sensibilities or whatever.

Indeed I can. I just did.

Well, fair, you just can't make me.

Ostro's tangent is irrelevant to the entire thread, despite that pointless word-salad trying to claim otherwise.

u wot m8
did you read his explanation? legitimately read, not just skimming or looking for keywords?

Don't expect other people not to point it out.

And I'll point out the pointing out.

[Ostroeuropa]

You can't tell me not to tell others not to get unreasonable angry at someone making a tangent just because it bothers your sensibilities or whatever.

Indeed I can. I just did. Ostro's tangent is irrelevant to the entire thread, despite that pointless word-salad trying to claim otherwise. Don't expect other people not to point it out.

->

The media ran with the story in part because it was male suspects. A woman suspect would not garner interest because it does not fit the narrative, and doesn't do what it is designed to do;

Sell toxic crap to people who want their prejudices confirmed to them.

Much like male victims of women don't generate a media frenzy, because that doesn't validate the prejudices of those consuming that media, and they get angry and stop watching.

They were white AND male, and the "victim" was black. That's what made this a major scandal.

They were also "Trump supporters", it was tailor made to pander to the prejudice of the left wing media's audience. Literally, made up for that specific purpose.

Ignoring WHY that is the case and what ideologies MAKE that the case? Ridiculous.

"What characteristics do I need to give my made up boogeyman to get Fox news viewers glued to their televisions and generating a frenzy over it and thus to give me money for my story...

Hmmm...

Well, he's brown obviously, and muslim, and a democrat, and LGBT too... oh, and he screamed, "Black lives matter" at me when he hit me in the head."

"Hey man, why are you making this about the constellation of right wing prejudices? It's JUST about him being BLM, nothing else."

Sure. Seems like willful ignorance to me. The aspects of the fraud were calculated to play into the prejudices of the progressive left. What those prejudices are and where they come from are as important as the most in your face aspect of the story.

[Yusseria]

Indeed I can. I just did. Ostro's tangent is irrelevant to the entire thread, despite that pointless word-salad trying to claim otherwise. Don't expect other people not to point it out.

->

The media ran with the story in part because it was male suspects. A woman suspect would not garner interest because it does not fit the narrative, and doesn't do what it is designed to do;

Sell toxic crap to people who want their prejudices confirmed to them.

Much like male victims of women don't generate a media frenzy, because that doesn't validate the prejudices of those consuming that media, and they get angry and stop watching.

They were white AND male, and the "victim" was black. That's what made this a major scandal.

They were also "Trump supporters", it was tailor made to pander to the prejudice of the left wing media's audience. Literally, made up for that specific purpose.

Ignoring WHY that is the case and what ideologies MAKE that the case? Ridiculous.

"What characteristics do I need to give my made up boogeyman to get Fox news viewers glued to their televisions and generating a frenzy over it and thus to give me money for my story...

Hmmm...

Well, he's brown obviously, and muslim, and a democrat, and LGBT too... oh, and he screamed, "Black lives matter" at me when he hit me in the head."

"Hey man, why are you making this about the constellation of right wing prejudices? It's JUST about him being BLM, nothing else."

Sure. Seems like willful ignorance to me. The aspects of the fraud were calculated to play into the prejudices of the progressive left. What those prejudices are and where they come from are as important as the most in your face aspect of the story.

This is actually a very good point, tbh. The entire reason the story blew up was because it played into the narrative of blaming white males for all of American society's ills.

[Liriena]

A climate where people get angry if they hear that a hate crime happened?


We have a veritable treasure trove of a paper trail showing how the far right has racialized Muslims over time for the purposes of encouraging bigotry towards them.

That Trump's core support is mostly white is an objective observation, not a deceptive, two-faced racialization tactic.

And unless you are going to also argue that the white nationalism that fueles a chunk of the Trumpist movement is synonymous with the entirety of white Americans... yeah, your rationalization here ain't flying.


"Authoritarianism and demonization"

Because feeling angry about blatant racism and the prospect of a racist hate crime happening is just the product of progressive anti-white indoctrination. No way that shit could be sincere and founded in good faith.

I'm not the one defending a movement who argues white identity in itself is an oppressive construct sometimes

I'm sorry that you can't tolerate any sort of scrutiny of the concept of racial identity that's not uncritical or positive towards white identity in particular. And I'm also sorry that you can't conceive white supremacy and white identity as separate. No wonder you struggle with actually opposing the far right.

or full of bluecheck journalists who out and out write articles like; "Yes I hate men" or "Yes sure I hate white people" and post publicly in that vein far more often.

Sounds provocative. Inflammatory, even. What's the actual content of those articles, if they exist?

Also, nice to see I am yet again made responsible for shit I've never even read.

Some of the racial aspects could be sincere and founded in good faith, but that quickly dissolves as it becomes progressive dogma; See police shootings progressive narrative V reality.

Disregarding the fact that you are, yet again, using an unrelated issue as an example...

The feminist aspects are not founded in good faith, the due process violations and handling of DV is reliant on manipulation of evidence and statistics from the outset to rant about masculinity. (The campaigns in institutions and the media, not necessarily the people who see the Klan grand wizards talking about how they "Just love white people" mid lynching and say "Hey, i guess i'm a klansman too. But I don't hate blacks, not all klansmen!" like many feminists on this forum.)

This is not a feminist thread. Jussie Smollett is not even a woman.

[Liriena]

The progressive movements intersectional approach, through epistemic injustice committed against whites and males spanning several decades, mistreats both those groups, but white males specifically.

TIL white people are the real victims of the past several decades of American history. Please, ignore pretty much everything that's actually transpired in American social, economic and political history since Nixon.

[Ostroeuropa]

The progressive movements intersectional approach, through epistemic injustice committed against whites and males spanning several decades, mistreats both those groups, but white males specifically.

TIL white people are the real victims of the past several decades of American history. Please, ignore pretty much everything that's actually transpired in American social, economic and political history since Nixon.

Your issue is viewing society as a monolith rather than a series of institutions with their own norms and cultures, one of which has been exclusionary to whites and males and is extremely dominant at this time. The epistemic injustice against males by the feminist movement is basically a fait accomplis at this point to argue. Whites is perhaps a little more troublesome, or would be, if not for;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prejudice_plus_power

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemic_injustice

->

The media ran with the story in part because it was male suspects. A woman suspect would not garner interest because it does not fit the narrative, and doesn't do what it is designed to do;

Sell toxic crap to people who want their prejudices confirmed to them.

Much like male victims of women don't generate a media frenzy, because that doesn't validate the prejudices of those consuming that media, and they get angry and stop watching.

They were white AND male, and the "victim" was black. That's what made this a major scandal.

They were also "Trump supporters", it was tailor made to pander to the prejudice of the left wing media's audience. Literally, made up for that specific purpose.

Ignoring WHY that is the case and what ideologies MAKE that the case? Ridiculous.



"Hey man, why are you making this about the constellation of right wing prejudices? It's JUST about him being BLM, nothing else."

Sure. Seems like willful ignorance to me. The aspects of the fraud were calculated to play into the prejudices of the progressive left. What those prejudices are and where they come from are as important as the most in your face aspect of the story.

This is actually a very good point, tbh. The entire reason the story view up was because it played into the narrative of blaming white males for all of American society's ills.

It seems incredibly obvious to me.

[Gravlen]

The fact that the case was publicised in such a way that heavily prejudged his guilt would be a big part of it.

Impossible to put someone to trial if the way their case has been reported makes most people already think they're guilty despite not seeing all the evidence. Can't do a jury trial that way, so usually cases like that get dismissed, because it's impossible to have an even vaguely impartial jury.

Definitely seems the prosecution screwed up.
Still it is fucked up you can pay $100,000 to have your case dropped.

Forfeiting bail to have your case dropped should be banned.

Federal charges still could be on the table though.

$10,000

Also:

"He was prosecuted. It may not have been the disposition that everybody thought would occur," Magats told CNN affiliate WLS. "He did do community service. He did forfeit $10,000. It's a fair and just disposition in the case."

Magats said there were 5,700 other cases with similar results, but this one stood out in the media because of the defendant's celebrity.

When asked whether he considered Smollett to be innocent, the prosecutor told WLS: "No."

If prosecutors didn't think he was innocent, they made the wrong call in dropping the charges here, unless there's something in the evidence we don't know about which could have made it more difficult to get a conviction.

[Torrocca]

$10,000, while larger than what most people can afford to spend in a day, isn't necessarily something I'd call an appropriate bribe for an institution as thoroughly corrupt as Chicago's justice system.

It was $100,000. Which is a pretty big chunk of change.
Though I agree, seems like they would have wanted more.

Nah, it was $10,000, like Grav just posted.

Either way, though, it really wasn't much of a bribe.