Jussie Smollett charges dropped

User avatar
Sugar Magnolia
Posts: 10430
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#51

Post by Sugar Magnolia » Fri Mar 29, 2019 10:48 am

Bill_G wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:43 am
Have any agencies ever sent a bill for their investigation and prosecution efforts to the accused in any case anyone is aware of?
It seems that I remember a kidnapping case that was bogus and the cost of the investigation was charged back to the perpetrators but the details elude me to the point I can't even find it on google. I may have imagined it.

At one time, our city charged for burglar alarms they had to respond to more than twice in one month if the alarm was unfounded. It took several months but the faulty alarms that were going off multiple times a day were eventually fixed. I'm not sure they charge for false alarms any more though. (And yeah, I realize that isn't the same thing, but my mind wandered off.)

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5691
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#52

Post by Maybenaut » Fri Mar 29, 2019 11:07 am

Bill_G wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 8:43 am
Have any agencies ever sent a bill for their investigation and prosecution efforts to the accused in any case anyone is aware of?
I think this is a very interesting issue. My thoughts on Smollett are pretty clear (he's a piece of shit), but I'm not sure the city ought to be able to recoup the cost of the investigation. My concern, as always, is the effect that such a thing would have on the process. Suing people who make false reports for the cost of investigation (especially those who are still saying through their lawyers that they didn't make a false report) would likely have the undesired effect of discouraging real crime victims from reporting real crimes.

It's true that real crime victims are already under a threat of prosecution for filing a false police report if the cops later decide the report is false, but I think the different burdens of proof justify the distinction. If the cops don't believe the report but can't prove its falsity beyond a reasonable doubt, that really ought to be the end of it.
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Whip
Posts: 3959
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:31 pm

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#53

Post by Whip » Fri Mar 29, 2019 12:18 pm

Maybenaut wrote:
Fri Mar 29, 2019 11:07 am
If the cops don't believe the report but can't prove its falsity beyond a reasonable doubt, that really ought to be the end of it.
while it should be, it wouldn't stop a smear campaign for not automatically believing. the cops were getting bashed on another forum during the investigation because they had issues in the past which wasn't fair because they believed him.

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 14268
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#54

Post by Kendra » Sat Mar 30, 2019 7:09 pm

A bit of a mix up with video of Smollett in front of Judge Judy.
Sekrit Stuffs!

User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 14241
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#55

Post by Dolly » Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:13 pm

Smollett declines to pay city of Chicago $130K for investigation costs

Jussie Smollett is refusing to reimburse Chicago for the money spent on investigating what authorities say was a hate crime hoax. The city now plans to pursue a civil complaint against the actor.

The city had requested $130,000 for the law enforcement resources spent after Smollett claimed he was beaten in a racially motivated attack by supporters of President Trump, which city officials have claimed was false. The deadline for Smollett to comply was Thursday.

The city's Department of Law said Thursday in a statement obtained by CLTV that prosecutors were in the process of drafting a lawsuit that would be filed in Cook County Circuit Court in an attempt to force Smollett to reimburse the police department.

"Mr. Smollett has refused to reimburse the City of Chicago for the cost of police overtime spent investigating his false police report on January 29, 2019," said city official Bill McCaffrey.

"The Law Department is now drafting a civil complaint that will be filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County. Once it is filed, the Law Department will send a courtesy copy of the complaint to Mr. Smollett’s Los Angeles-based legal team," he added.
<SNIP>
https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/i ... estigation
Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5691
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#56

Post by Maybenaut » Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:14 am

According to The Washington Post, the city is suing Smollett to recover the $130,000 it cost to investigate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-ent ... 84351aac19
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
fierceredpanda
Posts: 2063
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 3:04 pm
Location: BAR Headquarters - Turn left past the picture of King George III

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#57

Post by fierceredpanda » Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:23 am

Maybenaut wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:14 am
According to The Washington Post, the city is suing Smollett to recover the $130,000 it cost to investigate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-ent ... 84351aac19
This whole situation is highly unusual, but I have a huge philosophical problem with the precedent this would set. Government coming after people who have had charges against them dismissed (whether by a judge or on the prosecutor's motion), or who have been acquitted, or who have been the beneficiary of a hopelessly deadlocked jury, strikes me as a way to apply even more pressure to coerce criminal defendants into accepting bad plea bargains in order to avoid a financially disastrous lawsuit. It's essentially taking advantage of the lower burden of proof in civil court and presenting a "heads, I win; tails, you lose" dilemma to defendants, the vast, vast, vast majority of whom are not in Smollett's privileged financial position.

I actually had a city prosecutor try to extract financial restitution from a client of mine for the time spent by police conducting part of an investigation that the prosecutor thought could have been better spent doing something else. (The details are really neither here nor there.) It was a truly egregious abuse, and fortunately the city prosecutor thought better of it before we ended up in front of the municipal court judge and resolved the case by other means.

When there is already a widespread problem of a defendants taking bad deals or pleading to crimes they did not commit to avoid more catastrophic consequences (yes, it happens), this is precisely the last thing we need as a society right now.
"There's no play here. There's no angle. There's no champagne room. I'm not a miracle worker, I'm a janitor. The math on this is simple; the smaller the mess, the easier it is for me to clean up." -Michael Clayton

User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 5691
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#58

Post by Maybenaut » Fri Apr 12, 2019 9:52 am

I agree. And as I said previously, it would discourage real crime victims who may have credibility problems from reporting real crimes. And the difference in burdens of proof between civil and criminal prosecutions is sufficient, in my view. It provides victims the assurance that they can come forward with a report and will be held accountable only if that report is found to be false beyond a reasonable doubt on the one hand, while protecting society by discouraging false reports with severe sanctions on the other.

As much as a defense hack as I tend to be, I don’t want victims, even those with credibility problems, to fear coming forward.
"Hey! You know, we left this England place because it was bogus. So if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too." - Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
MsDaisy
Posts: 5034
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#59

Post by MsDaisy » Fri Apr 12, 2019 10:07 am

fierceredpanda wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:23 am
Maybenaut wrote:
Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:14 am
According to The Washington Post, the city is suing Smollett to recover the $130,000 it cost to investigate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-ent ... 84351aac19
When there is already a widespread problem of a defendants taking bad deals or pleading to crimes they did not commit to avoid more catastrophic consequences (yes, it happens), this is precisely the last thing we need as a society right now.
Agreed, but just look at the state society is in these days, torch carrying Nazi's killed a woman in VA, an anti-semite slaughtered Jews in PA, crazy fucks with weapons of war are slaughtering children in schools all across the country, and we have an un-touchable mob boss and his crime family doing business in the White House. Nothing is shocking or even the least bit surprising these days, nothing. :(
Birfers are toast

User avatar
tencats
Posts: 337
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:09 pm

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#60

Post by tencats » Fri Apr 12, 2019 11:04 am

City of Chicago Files Civil Complaint Against Jussie Smollett for Investigation Costs
April 12, 2019 9:09AM ET
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/cu ... tt-821432/
The city of Chicago previously gave Smollett seven days to repay $130,106.15 bill stemming from the 1,836 overtime hours the police spent investigating the January 29th attack, CNN reports; at the time, the city of Chicago claims in its civil complaint, Smollett misled investigators by saying his attackers were white and staging the incident as a hate crime.

When Smollett, as expected, declined to reimburse the police department, the city filed the civil complaint, with the city also asking for a jury trial to determine Smollett’s damages. Under a current city code, Smollett could face more than $390,000 in damages as well as a $1,000 penalty for every false claim he told police.

Smollett’s lawyer Mark Geragos previously called the city of Chicago’s $130,000 bill an attempt to “harass and irreparably injure Mr. Smollett,” adding that the actor “will not be intimidated into paying” the fee. “Jussie has paid enough,” the lawyer said.

User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 22094
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#61

Post by RTH10260 » Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:03 pm

In Texts, Chicago Prosecutor Suggests Jussie Smollett Was Overcharged

12:27 PM PDT, April 17, 2019 - Inside Edition Staff

There are new calls for the resignation of Chicago prosecutor Kim Foxx in the wake of just-released text messages that reveal she did not recuse herself from the Jussie Smollett case as she said she would.

In a text, sent to an underling, she calls the “Empire” actor a "washed-up celeb."

She writes that Smollett “lied to cops 16 [times],” but then makes the case that even if he did "just because we can charge something doesn't mean we should."

She points out, singer R. Kelly, whom she calls a "pedophile with 4 victims," was indicted on 10 counts, while Smollett faced 16. (Kelly denies all allegations against him.)

She also texted, “I'm recused but when people accuse us of overcharging cases, 16 counts becomes exhibit A.”

Foxx's decision to drop all charges against Smollett four weeks ago led to a firestorm of controversy and she was blasted by both Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and President Trump.


https://www.insideedition.com/texts-chi ... rged-52265

Jeffrey
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#62

Post by Jeffrey » Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:15 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... ate-latest
The suit alleges that Geragos and his firm continued to say publicly in widely reported statements that the brothers “led a criminally homophobic, racist and violent attack against Mr Smollett”, even though they knew that was not true.

User avatar
Res Ipsa
Posts: 2600
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:31 am

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#63

Post by Res Ipsa » Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:22 pm

Link to the referenced complaint here;

https://pmcdeadline2.files.wordpress.co ... uit-wm.pdf

I wish lawyers would stop pimping defamation cases as "someone said something about me which I don't like", because there is a fundamental silliness here.

These two are claiming that their reputations, earning prospects, etc. have been damaged by Smollett's lawyers going on TV and saying that the two of them attacked Smollett.

In some universe, that is more damaging than what they admit to be the case - that they were willing to get paid to fake a racist homophobic attack.

Oh boy, yes, I can see where that makes a huge difference about what I might think about them as cast members on my TV show! My goodness, these poor maligned boys are not freelance violent racist homophobes - nothing of the sort. They are a pair of wholesome pretend racist homophobes for hire. Well, alrighty then.

Idiots.

The one nice thing here is that perhaps it will give a lawyer some pause before they think about hitting the talk TV circuit to chat about their client's case, and make all of the "traditional lawyers" jealous that they are on TV.
Thanks pal.

Jeffrey
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#64

Post by Jeffrey » Sat Jun 22, 2019 12:57 pm

https://wbbm780.radio.com/articles/judg ... lett-probe
A veteran Cook County Judge decided Friday that a special prosecutor will be appointed to look at how the Jussie Smollett case was handled by State’s Attorney Kim Foxx. Jussie Smollett could still face criminal charges.
They’re just gonna keep :deadhorse:

Jeffrey
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Jussie Smollett charges dropped

#65

Post by Jeffrey » Sat Aug 24, 2019 4:02 pm

A special prosecutor will take a new look at the Jussie Smollett case, CBS Chicago reports. Former U.S. Attorney and Iran-Contra affair special counsel Dan Webb was tapped for the role, marking the sixth time he's been appointed special prosecutor in a case.

Webb said he plans on using a special grand jury to assist in the investigation and that grand jury could decide if new charges are warranted. "I'm starting this thing fresh today," Webb said.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jussie-smo ... 019-08-24/

Post Reply

Return to “Current Events”