RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Jussie Smollett Indicted Over False Hate Crime Attack By Special Prose - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Jussie Smollett Indicted Over False Hate Crime Attack By Special Prose Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,506
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 11 February 2020 - 08:20 PM

Jussie Smollett Indicted Over False Hate Crime Attack By Special Prosecutor; Ex-‘Empire’ Star Back To Court
Deadline - Dominic Patten - link

<excerpted>

DEVELOPING …. Over a year after claiming he was attacked on the cold streets of Chicago, Jussie Smollett today was indicted by a special prosecutor in the case that the former Empire star probably thought was behind him.

The move by special prosecutor Dan Webb will find Smollett back in court in the Windy City on February 24 to face the new criminal charges and potential jail time over the widely covered January 29, 2019 incident. With time behind bars again a real possibility, Smollett was indicted on six counts of disorderly conduct over falsely reporting the assault by a Cook County grand jury.

“Further prosecution of Jussie Smollett is in the interest of justice,” proclaimed former U.S. Attorney Webb in a statement on Tuesday as news of the indictment leaked out of the County Clerk’s offices.
*snip*
***********************************

It's about damned time.
0

#2 User is offline   MASH4077 

  • Wondergirl
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 1,619
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 11 February 2020 - 08:36 PM

Have to agree. I am shocked that this is moving forward at all.
0

#3 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 60,824
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 11 February 2020 - 10:06 PM

GOOD

How many police man-hours and taxpayer dollars were wasted on this fraud? How many real people experienced real crimes while the police were too busy "investigating" Smollett's outright lies?

I hope they throw the proverbial book at that sniveling little sh*t.

:redhot: :redhot: :redhot:
0

#4 User is offline   AntiObama 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 4,698
  • Joined: 07-April 09

Posted 11 February 2020 - 10:52 PM

Lock the President Trump denier up :rofl:
0

#5 User is offline   searcher 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 3,027
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:04 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 11 February 2020 - 10:06 PM, said:

GOOD

How many police man-hours and taxpayer dollars were wasted on this fraud? How many real people experienced real crimes while the police were too busy "investigating" Smollett's outright lies?

I hope they throw the proverbial book at that sniveling little sh*t.

:redhot: :redhot: :redhot:



He should be fined double the money spent plus jail time.

Mark
0

#6 User is offline   Howsithangin 

  • The more ppl I meet, the more I like my cats
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,054
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 11 February 2020 - 11:36 PM

:2up:
0

#7 User is offline   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 33,276
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 01:11 AM

The one who needs to be prosecuted more is the prosecutor who had dropped the criminal charges against Smollet.


I know that he's guilty, deserves it and was wrongfully let go, but I still frown upon double jeopardy which is what this crap really looks like.
One can say however that it isn't because he was never tried for the crimes the first time?

This post has been edited by Rock N' Roll Right Winger: 12 February 2020 - 01:14 AM

0

#8 User is offline   moocow 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,144
  • Joined: 18-December 04

Posted 12 February 2020 - 01:37 AM

View PostRock N, on 12 February 2020 - 01:11 AM, said:

The one who needs to be prosecuted more is the prosecutor who had dropped the criminal charges against Smollet.


I know that he's guilty, deserves it and was wrongfully let go, but I still frown upon double jeopardy which is what this crap really looks like.
One can say however that it isn't because he was never tried for the crimes the first time?

Have to agree with you. I think it was despicable that he basically had the charges dropped for no other reason than what appears to be political connections, but the charges were filed, and he went to court. To try him again on what seems to be the same crime, just smells a lot like double jeopardy.
0

#9 User is offline   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 13,228
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 03:03 AM

View PostRock N, on 12 February 2020 - 01:11 AM, said:

The one who needs to be prosecuted more is the prosecutor who had dropped the criminal charges against Smollet.


I know that he's guilty, deserves it and was wrongfully let go, but I still frown upon double jeopardy which is what this crap really looks like.
One can say however that it isn't because he was never tried for the crimes the first time?

It is not double jeopardy. Double jeopardy is being "tried" for the same crime, twice. This is simply one prosecutor declining to prosecute and another deciding to prosecute. Smollet was never tried and either acquitted or convicted so the principle does not apply.
0

#10 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 7,721
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 12 February 2020 - 05:48 AM

Don't drop the soap, Jussie...
0

#11 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 22,346
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 12 February 2020 - 07:57 AM

View PostMontyPython, on 11 February 2020 - 10:06 PM, said:

How many police man-hours and taxpayer dollars were wasted on this fraud? How many real people experienced real crimes while the police were too busy "investigating" Smollett's outright lies?

I hope they throw the proverbial book at that sniveling little sh*t.

View Postsearcher, on 11 February 2020 - 11:04 PM, said:

He should be fined double the money spent plus jail time.

Mark


Unfortunately, Illinois caps it at $10,000.... likely just a mere faction of what was actually spent.

(720 ILCS 5/26-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 26-1)
Sec. 26-1. Disorderly conduct.


(a ) A person commits disorderly conduct when he or she knowingly:...

... (6) Calls the number "911" or transmits or causes to be transmitted in any manner to a public safety agency for the purpose of making or transmitting a false alarm or complaint and reporting information when, at the time the call or transmission is made, the person knows there is no reasonable ground for making the call or transmission and further knows that the call or transmission could result in the emergency response of any public safety agency;...

(b ) Sentence. A violation of subsection (a)(1) of this Section is a Class C misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(5) or (a)(11) of this Section is a Class A misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(8) or (a)(10) of this Section is a Class B misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(2), (a)(3.5), (a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(7), or (a)(9) of this Section is a Class 4 felony. A violation of subsection (a)(3) of this Section is a Class 3 felony, for which a fine of not less than $3,000 and no more than $10,000 shall be assessed in addition to any other penalty imposed...

(e ) In addition to any other sentence that may be imposed, the court shall order any person convicted of disorderly conduct under paragraph (3.5) or (6) of subsection (a) to reimburse the public agency for the reasonable costs of the emergency response by the public agency up to $10,000.



So, $10,000 fine + $10,000 reimbursement. That's chump change to TV actor like Smollett.
0

#12 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 60,824
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 08:27 AM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 12 February 2020 - 07:57 AM, said:

Unfortunately, Illinois caps it at $10,000.... likely just a mere faction of what was actually spent.

(720 ILCS 5/26-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 26-1)
Sec. 26-1. Disorderly conduct.


(a ) A person commits disorderly conduct when he or she knowingly:...

... (6) Calls the number "911" or transmits or causes to be transmitted in any manner to a public safety agency for the purpose of making or transmitting a false alarm or complaint and reporting information when, at the time the call or transmission is made, the person knows there is no reasonable ground for making the call or transmission and further knows that the call or transmission could result in the emergency response of any public safety agency;...

(b ) Sentence. A violation of subsection (a)(1) of this Section is a Class C misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(5) or (a)(11) of this Section is a Class A misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(8) or (a)(10) of this Section is a Class B misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(2), (a)(3.5), (a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(7), or (a)(9) of this Section is a Class 4 felony. A violation of subsection (a)(3) of this Section is a Class 3 felony, for which a fine of not less than $3,000 and no more than $10,000 shall be assessed in addition to any other penalty imposed...

(e ) In addition to any other sentence that may be imposed, the court shall order any person convicted of disorderly conduct under paragraph (3.5) or (6) of subsection (a) to reimburse the public agency for the reasonable costs of the emergency response by the public agency up to $10,000.



So, $10,000 fine + $10,000 reimbursement. That's chump change to TV actor like Smollett.


Really? That's it? No jail time or anything?

Hell, it'll cost more than that to just conduct the trial.

<_<
0

#13 User is offline   scotsman 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 17,651
  • Joined: 02-December 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:02 AM

About farging time.
0

#14 User is offline   Natural Selection 

  • Decrypt the truth
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 19,235
  • Joined: 31-December 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 11:26 AM

But...but...he was just raising awareness!
0

#15 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 22,346
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 12 February 2020 - 01:04 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 12 February 2020 - 08:27 AM, said:

Really? That's it? No jail time or anything?

Hell, it'll cost more than that to just conduct the trial.

<_<


Oh yes, potentially jail time as a 4th degree felony. Probably not much, though. Possible even time served

My point being, the maximum he can be ordered to pay doesn't even come close to what it cost.
0

#16 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,506
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 04:13 PM

View PostJerryL, on 12 February 2020 - 03:03 AM, said:

It is not double jeopardy. Double jeopardy is being "tried" for the same crime, twice. This is simply one prosecutor declining to prosecute and another deciding to prosecute. Smollet was never tried and either acquitted or convicted so the principle does not apply.


That's what I thought, too. I wasn't sure where the double jeopardy argument came from at all.
0

#17 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,506
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 04:16 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 12 February 2020 - 07:57 AM, said:

Unfortunately, Illinois caps it at $10,000.... likely just a mere faction of what was actually spent.

(720 ILCS 5/26-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 26-1)
Sec. 26-1. Disorderly conduct.


(a ) A person commits disorderly conduct when he or she knowingly:...

... (6) Calls the number "911" or transmits or causes to be transmitted in any manner to a public safety agency for the purpose of making or transmitting a false alarm or complaint and reporting information when, at the time the call or transmission is made, the person knows there is no reasonable ground for making the call or transmission and further knows that the call or transmission could result in the emergency response of any public safety agency;...

(b ) Sentence. A violation of subsection (a)(1) of this Section is a Class C misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(5) or (a)(11) of this Section is a Class A misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(8) or (a)(10) of this Section is a Class B misdemeanor. A violation of subsection (a)(2), (a)(3.5), (a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(7), or (a)(9) of this Section is a Class 4 felony. A violation of subsection (a)(3) of this Section is a Class 3 felony, for which a fine of not less than $3,000 and no more than $10,000 shall be assessed in addition to any other penalty imposed...

(e ) In addition to any other sentence that may be imposed, the court shall order any person convicted of disorderly conduct under paragraph (3.5) or (6) of subsection (a) to reimburse the public agency for the reasonable costs of the emergency response by the public agency up to $10,000.



So, $10,000 fine + $10,000 reimbursement. That's chump change to TV actor like Smollett.

That may be, but this case is unique and therefore there are exceptions to be made.

Especially since there was a lot of back office corruption and string pulling that went into the original decision not to prosecute.
0

#18 User is offline   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 22,346
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 12 February 2020 - 06:34 PM

View PostTicked@TinselTown, on 12 February 2020 - 04:16 PM, said:

That may be, but this case is unique and therefore there are exceptions to be made.

Especially since there was a lot of back office corruption and string pulling that went into the original decision not to prosecute.


Makes me wonder, "what's changed"? Well, a year ago he was riding high, could basically "buy" (so-called) "justice" in a place like Chicago where such things are for sale.

Well, now it's a year later, best as I can tell he hasn't worked since; I doubt he has the pocket change to even buy a stale proverbial Ham Sandwich from the corner Deli.
0

#19 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 29,506
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 06:50 PM

View PostDean Adam Smithee, on 12 February 2020 - 06:34 PM, said:

Makes me wonder, "what's changed"? Well, a year ago he was riding high, could basically "buy" (so-called) "justice" in a place like Chicago where such things are for sale.

Well, now it's a year later, best as I can tell he hasn't worked since; I doubt he has the pocket change to even buy a stale proverbial Ham Sandwich from the corner Deli.


Maybe those who pulled those strings and who provided protection are pulling back into safer hidey-holes while the swamp is draining?
0

#20 User is offline   Rock N' Roll Right Winger 

  • Pissing off all of the right people
  • Group: Silver
  • Posts: 33,276
  • Joined: 14-October 03

Posted 12 February 2020 - 07:06 PM

View PostTicked@TinselTown, on 12 February 2020 - 04:13 PM, said:

That's what I thought, too. I wasn't sure where the double jeopardy argument came from at all.

That was from me.

I'm not a fan of when the feds often come in after the fact and charge criminals again for the same offense (on a federal level) or other similar crimes when the state either didn't charge, convict or sentence someone enough to their liking for a high profile high publicity in-the-news crime.

They do that shidt all of the time and it's wrong.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users