Society/Culture Jussie Smollett

Remove this Banner Ad

I think people who get off on other people getting raped in prison are shitheads. I hope that's not what you were doing.
 
RegHickeyStand said:
Explain "irrelevant" in the context that no-one is disputing it was the brothers.
Click to expand...
Most of what you said was irellevant to the case, IE Juicey not getting paid enough of empire or not, could be motivation but the set of circumstance are irellevant to the actual incident
 
Sainteric said:
Most of what you said was irellevant to the case, IE Juicey not getting paid enough of empire or not, could be motivation but the set of circumstance are irellevant to the actual incident
Click to expand...
Everything I said was to do with the police case that was stated at the time. You seem to be saying I knocked down a lot of strawmen I made up myself. Not true. It was the police who claimed Smollett paid them $3500 to attack him. It was the police who claimed the motive was because he wasn't being paid enough.

The story sounds weird. But ask yourself this. If you go through the whole story, there should be about dozen pieces of evidence that are slam dunk against Smollett and this case would have been over ages ago. If he was guilty. Not one text between the brothers that say something like "Jussie said we should....", or Smollett giving them instructions with voicemail or text. Is Smollett a master criminal?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

RegHickeyStand said:
Everything I said was to do with the police case that was stated at the time. You seem to be saying I knocked down a lot of strawmen I made up myself. Not true. It was the police who claimed Smollett paid them $3500 to attack him. It was the police who claimed the motive was because he wasn't being paid enough.

The story sounds weird. But ask yourself this. If you go through the whole story, there should be about dozen pieces of evidence that are slam dunk against Smollett and this case would have been over ages ago. If he was guilty. Not one text between the brothers that say something like "Jussie said we should....", or Smollett giving them instructions with voicemail or text. Is Smollett a master criminal?
Click to expand...
Can you provide any links to support all these holes in the narrative? So far, we just have to trust you that it's right. Which has a delicious but of irony to it.
 
ShanDog said:
Can you provide any links to support all these holes in the narrative? So far, we just have to trust you that it's right. Which has a delicious but of irony to it.
Click to expand...
Just one.

Cop's claim:
fox2now.com

Jussie Smollett paid $3,500 to stage his attack, hoping to promote his career, Chicago police allege

Actor Jussie Smollett paid two men $3,500 to stage an attack on himself last month, taking “advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career,” Chicago Police Superintende…
fox2now.com fox2now.com

Refuted here:
www.tmz.com

Jussie Smollett Did NOT Pay Brothers $3,500 for 'Attack'

The brothers in Jussie Smollett case say actor did not pay them $3,500 for attack, it was a training fee.
www.tmz.com www.tmz.com

And...can you provide a link saying I have to give you a link everytime I say something.
 
Last edited:
RegHickeyStand said:
Just one.

Cop's claim:
fox2now.com

Jussie Smollett paid $3,500 to stage his attack, hoping to promote his career, Chicago police allege

Actor Jussie Smollett paid two men $3,500 to stage an attack on himself last month, taking “advantage of the pain and anger of racism to promote his career,” Chicago Police Superintende…
fox2now.com fox2now.com

Refuted here:
www.tmz.com

Jussie Smollett Did NOT Pay Brothers $3,500 for 'Attack'

The brothers in Jussie Smollett case say actor did not pay them $3,500 for attack, it was a training fee.
www.tmz.com www.tmz.com

And...can you provide a link saying I have to give you a link everytime I say something.
Click to expand...
So the report you provided from TMZ (!) doesn't actually refute the cop's claim. I mean, if you're gonna pay someone to do something dodgy you generally don't write that stuff on the books. But nevertheless, yes, that's clearly a point of contention.

Also, there's no rule stating you have to back up your claims with evidence or sources, but as the saying goes, "what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
 
ShanDog said:
So the report you provided from TMZ (!) doesn't actually refute the cop's claim. I mean, if you're gonna pay someone to do something dodgy you generally don't write that stuff on the books. But nevertheless, yes, that's clearly a point of contention.

Also, there's no rule stating you have to back up your claims with evidence or sources, but as the saying goes, "what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Click to expand...
How doesn't it not refute the cop's claim? Johnson put it out there, and when the TMZ story came out, he went quiet. Johnson has nothing. Just bs the brothers told them to keep them happy.

Cop: what was the 3500 for?! To attack Jussie, right?!
Brothers: no. for training.
Cop: Don't give me that!!
Brothers: Ummm...ok, for the attack.

It sounds like you are saying Smollett figured he might get caught so he wrote that on the cheque. Gosh!!! That must have made the brothers nervous. lol

"Ummm, Jussie, why did you write that, and why tf didn't you just pay us cash? And what about the money for the 7 weeks of personal training etc?!"

$500 a week is not unreasonable for the service, espesh seeing as he was rolling in dough. The brothers admit they were employed by him for personal training/ diet. Are you saying he paid them $3500 for the attack, and nothing for 7 weeks of PT?!

Why a cheque? Smollett claims the PT fee on tax. Thats opinion.

But if you think it doesn't put a hole in the cop's claim, you go right ahead. Raise that bar.

The master criminal you are painting doesn't exist. The police case was leaking all over the media to destroy Smollett's credibility. But I've seen nothing to back up their initial claims.
 
Last edited:
RegHickeyStand said:
How doesn't it not refute the cop's claim? Johnson put it out there, and when the TMZ story came out, he went quiet. Johnson has nothing. Just bs the brothers told them to keep them happy.

Cop: what was the 3500 for?! To attack Jussie, right?!
Brothers: no. for training.
Cop: Don't give me that!!
Brothers: Ummm...ok, for the attack.

It sounds like you are saying Smollett figured he might get caught so he wrote that on the cheque. Gosh!!! That must have made the brothers nervous. lol

"Ummm, Jussie, why did you write that, and why tf didn't you just pay us cash? And what about the money for the 7 weeks of personal training etc?!"

$500 a week is not unreasonable for the service, espesh seeing as he was rolling in dough. The brothers admit they were employed by him for personal training/ diet. Are you saying he paid them $3500 for the attack, and nothing for 7 weeks of PT?!

Why a cheque? Smollett claims the PT fee on tax. Thats opinion.

But if you think it doesn't put a hole in the cop's claim, you go right ahead. Raise that bar.

The master criminal you are painting doesn't exist. The police case was leaking all over the media to destroy Smollett's credibility. But I've seen nothing to back up their initial claims.
Click to expand...
One logical leap to another.

I'm teaching my students about logic and persuasion at the moment. It's funny seeing so many posts around the site that don't use them. You've gone from this supposedly putting a hole in the case to the cop"having nothing". This is apparently the only part of that diatribe from before that has any evidence associated with it and it's finally AF.

Clearly Smollett is innocent. It's all racist!
 
ShanDog said:
One logical leap to another.

I'm teaching my students about logic and persuasion at the moment. It's funny seeing so many posts around the site that don't use them. You've gone from this supposedly putting a hole in the case to the cop"having nothing". This is apparently the only part of that diatribe from before that has any evidence associated with it and it's finally AF.

Clearly Smollett is innocent. It's all racist!
Click to expand...
Please provide a link where the cops have a case.
 
ShanDog said:
He's going to trial. You can choose whichever news outlet takes your fancy.
Click to expand...

He's going on trial where this happens:

chicago.suntimes.com

Charges dropped against teen tased by cops at Marshall High School

The girl's father welcomed the decision but said he was still concerned with the presence of police officers at the school.
chicago.suntimes.com chicago.suntimes.com




and...

Smollett's attorneys would have been present at the grand jury hearing and would have heard all the sealed evidence. Quote from Smollett's attorney: "I have not seen one piece of evidence, and they don't have one piece of evidence that they've turned over, that links Jussie to this.” https://www.amaphome.org/news/2019/3/26/jussie-smollett-all-charges-dismissed
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Unrelated case and lawyer's huffing and puffing from the previous charges.

Again, not evidence of anything at all and absolutely irrelevant to the fact, which is the police and public prosecutor believe they have a case. You can try to play judge and jury from half a world away based on TMZ articles and your hunches, but it's not worth the cost of the electricity charging your phone.
 
ShanDog said:
Unrelated case and lawyer's huffing and puffing from the previous charges.

Again, not evidence of anything at all and absolutely irrelevant to the fact, which is the police and public prosecutor believe they have a case. You can try to play judge and jury from half a world away based on TMZ articles and your hunches, but it's not worth the cost of the electricity charging your phone.
Click to expand...
You say all that, while hanging on the words of two admitted liars, the brothers. And Johnson, who was recently caught lying and dismissed from the force. Great line up you have there.

Raise the bar, then lower it. To suit your gut feeling.
 
RegHickeyStand said:
You say all that, while hanging on the words of two admitted liars, the brothers. And Johnson, who was recently caught lying and dismissed from the force. Great line up you have there.

Raise the bar, then lower it. To suit your gut feeling.
Click to expand...
More claims, still no evidence. Smollett is on trial. See what happens.
 
ShanDog said:
Can you provide any links to support all these holes in the narrative? So far, we just have to trust you that it's right. Which has a delicious but of irony to it.
Click to expand...
kick butt .. but don't expect anything from it.. people are selfish.. that is my new mantra... love our work..
 
How much burden is put on the person making a false claim to substantiate their claim when they are being accused of lying to the police?

Having two black men roll up to court after claiming that white maga hat wearing people attack would be like two delicious chocolate torpedoes to sink the story
 
ShanDog said:
Do you honestly believe they would take this to a court with no evidence of it being a hoax? And do you honestly believe he is innocent?
Click to expand...
I don't believe anything. I have seen no compelling evidence to prove the initial accusations against him.


The evidence they have is the testimony of the two brothers. I have seen no other. And its not like the cops didn't leak to their media friends like a sieve when they thought they had something. We know all about how the brothers got the hats etc. We know about the cheque. We know about how Jussie's motivation was because he wasn't getting paid enough. And some of it was straight from police superintendent Johnson, a proven liar.
 
RegHickeyStand said:
I don't believe anything. I have seen no compelling evidence to prove the initial accusations against him.


The evidence they have is the testimony of the two brothers. I have seen no other. And its not like the cops didn't leak to their media friends like a sieve when they thought they had something. We know all about how the brothers got the hats etc. We know about the cheque. We know about how Jussie's motivation was because he wasn't getting paid enough. And some of it was straight from police superintendent Johnson, a proven liar.
Click to expand...
So basically, if it's not reported in the media, you work off the assumption it doesn't exist. There's a system of evidence, courts and rules for trial that exist specifically because justice isn't found in tabloid magazines.
 
ShanDog said:
So basically, if it's not reported in the media, you work off the assumption it doesn't exist. There's a system of evidence, courts and rules for trial that exist specifically because justice isn't found in tabloid magazines.
Click to expand...
After over a year, that is generally the case. New bits and pieces may surprise, but generally the compelling stuff is leaked out there by now.

Can you give an example of a case that dragged on publicly for 12 months of more, leaking like a sieve in the media. And finally when there is a trial, there is some absolutely NEW evidence that no-one knew about, and....SLAM DUNK!!!

Do you think there are text messages, or slam dunk videos, or some audio? The door opens, a surprise witness walks in. Smollett is dumbfoiunded, while Perry Mason tries not to smile.
 
Last edited:
RegHickeyStand said:
After over a year, that is generally the case. New bits and pieces may surprise, but generally the compelling stuff is leaked out there by now.

Can you give an example of a case that dragged on publicly for 12 months of more, leaking like a sieve in the media. And finally when there is a trial, there is some absolutely NEW evidence that no-one knew about, and....SLAM DUNK!!!

Do you think there are text messages, or slam dunk videos, or some audio?
Click to expand...
You've yet to convince me there is any need for new evidence of any kind. You have given us one link which - at most - casts doubt on one aspect of the relationship between the two Nigerians and Smollett, but doesn't discount the possibility the payment included "the job". Everything else you're dismissing is purely speculative without seeing any of the evidence, interviews, thousands of hours of investigation and discussions with people of interest first hand like the police have.

You can bust out as much rhetoric about flimsy evidence or claims of lies and slander as you want, but you haven't show any evidence of it reported anywhere and ultimately Smollett is going to trial for lying about it all. The story doesn't pass the sniff test at all, and the info that has been reported all points to it being a ridiculous hoax. That's all we know unless you can show otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top