Jussie Smollett found guilty of fake hate crime.

Post Reply New Topic

He's been released pending an appeal
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60775521

He may not serve any time

Does he get his $130,000 back?

Would you like the same treatment for Sherri Pappini?

He may not ever get another acting job, either.

Total waste of time to try and appeal when the evidence is overwhelming. He's just dragging out his sentence. He'll be found guilty again and have to go back in to finish his 150 days. How can he sleep at night with this looming over his head. Might as well just get it over and done with.

I don't know about the fine, but he's a millionaire so $130K is a drop in the bucket for him.

I suspect the lawyers for both he and Pappini will plead mental illness to get their clients get off. I'm guessing the legal system will be a little more "freindly" to Pappini based on US legal history.

That is what I think.

You have a habit of not answering my questions.

I don't know from the link whether his fine has been reimbursed/lifted?

Pappini should face the same repurcussions as Smollet.

Not saying you're right or wrong, but you ought to address to obvious seeming contradiction in your concerns.

You remind me of the farm boy in the story attributed to Abraham Lincoln: the boy entered his parents's bedroom one night, and killed them both with a crowbar. And when the jury found him guilty...he dropped to his knees on the floor of the courtroom, and begged the judge to show him mercy "because I am an orphan".

I hope that you're aware of the contradiction.

you're saying that "This fake racial martyr will get it easier than that fake racial martyr because of ...race".

He faked a crime because he longed to be a racial martyr. And now you want to grant him the honor of being that thing he yearns for!

you're buying into Jussie's con job yourself! And seem to be doing his bidding for him by...striving to redefine his fake racial martyrdom into real racial martyrdom!

Not quite. I accept both were motivated by completely different reasons. Jussie deluded into thinking it would somehow boost his Holywood career and standing in the black community. Pappini was soley motivated for sexual reasons to have an affair.

The reason her fake story is more damaging is because its been done before by other white women perhaps thousands of times. When white american women were suspected of having an affair they concoct stories of being raped by black men or that a black man looked at them. This resulted in many men getting lynched. often they were motivated by purely selfish reasons on their part and total disregard for the consequences of their victims who would end up dying in the most horrific ways at the hands white vigilantes. It worked because a) nobody would believe a black person over a "virtuous white woman" and b) there was no way to trace the story back

While Pappini's story is slightly different it follows the same time honored recipe. By blaming Mexican human traffickers for her predicament she was tapping into a well developed experience in the American psyche, the "missing white woman". She knew they would never find the perpatrators because (of course) they didn't exist. But her timing coincides with an all time resentment against Mexican illegals and she obviously didn't care that her sexual trysts might as a consequence result in harsher treatment for Mexicans including vigilanteism.

No such consequence would happen from Jussie Smollet's poor acting, That's why Pappini's fake story had the potential for more damage than Smollet.

That is a stretch, but OK...

Watch Patrice O'Neil, he has a less serious and more funny take on this

I feel this case is so bizarre though, that they should make a movie out of it, but I guess it would go along the dark comedy route if they did.

But also, does anyone know where I can find this fraudulant video he made? I can't find it online because it seems no sight will air it, unless anyone has a link to it possibly?

What is this video you're talking about?

There were security cams, but pointed the wrong way- at the site of the alleged attack. I didnt know that Smollet filmed anything about it.

In fact (as I understand it) that was the part of the problem- the lack of either eye witness, or video, evidence.

Oh ok I thought he would have made it look like he was caught on video as part of his case.

But if there was no video or I witnesses at all, why even pay two people to beat you up? Why not just beat yourself up if no one's going to see it, and then report it?

Smollett's IQ might have something to do about that.