Smollett gets all charges dropped

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Farr Be It said:
Jrry, you’re a lawyer, tell me this: Is “zealous defense” the only charge of a defense lawyer, truth be damned?
Click to expand...

There are some limitations, but you also can't tie their arms behind their backs. They have to represent their client, guilty or not.

Forgive me for invoking “one party town”. Let’s go with “corrupt town”. What I said is absolutely correct. Maybe this thread will be deemed political, and I respect that, but I merely stated the facts reported in the news.
Click to expand...

Okay, post the news article. The one I read from the NY Post painted a completely different picture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Farr Be It
LesBaker said:
Somewhere along the line something happened and people need to be held accountable. At this point other people should be going to jail with that freaking turd Smollett.
Click to expand...

I'd bet he was going to roll over on someone and that someone couldn't risk the bad press.
 
jrry32 said:
There are some limitations, but you also can't tie their arms behind their backs. They have to represent their client, guilty or not.



Okay, post the news article. The one I read from the NY Post painted a completely different picture.
Click to expand...
Ok. What was the NY Post article, by the way? Did I miss your posting of that article?


https://apple.news/AI5ZM2pwSN72gnak3Lnwl-w
 
Last edited:
LesBaker said:
Seriously? Breitbart? Wow.
Click to expand...
Les, are you the guy that quotes Huffpo and CNN?

You’ve been right on this issue until now, by why attack the source? Why not the truth of the assertions in the article?

Usually that is the classic fallacy in debate, when you are conceding the point.
 
Farr Be It said:
Les, are you the guy that quotes Huffpo and CNN?

You’ve been right on this issue until now, by why attack the source? Why not the truth of the assertions in the article?

Usually that is the classic fallacy in debate, when you are conceding the point.
Click to expand...

I've probably quoted CNN, it's a solid news source for the most part. I've never really read or quoted Huffington. Brietbart is WAY to alt-right for me to consider worth my time. I'm not going any further than that, we both know their track record.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jrry32
LesBaker said:
I've probably quoted CNN, it's a solid news source for the most part. :blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah:
Click to expand...

This is how I read your response. Embarrassing.

Again, Address the assertions. Facts matter. You are right about one thing: Track record matters. CNN is not just nearly always wrong, they are culpable in perpetrating wicked lies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VegasRam and Ramhusker
Farr Be It said:
Ok. What was the NY Post article, by the way? Did I miss your posting of that article?


https://apple.news/AI5ZM2pwSN72gnak3Lnwl-w
Click to expand...

Didn't post it. Basic gist is:
1. Isn't a BO rep. She was former MO staff.

2. She called Foxx right after the supposed crime happened (3 days, iirc). This was before anybody knew Smollett lied.

3. She didn't make any requests with regard to charges. She asked that the FBI handle the investigation to lessen the chances of leaks.

That's why I called your post inaccurate. All that went down when people still thought it was a hate crime. It is not accurate to claim she called to tell Foxx to drop charges against Smollett or imply that BO was behind it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LesBaker
jrry32 said:
Didn't post it. Basic gist is:
1. Isn't a BO rep. She was former MO staff.

2. She called Foxx right after the supposed crime happened (3 days, iirc). This was before anybody knew Smollett lied.

3. She didn't make any requests with regard to charges. She asked that the FBI handle the investigation to lessen the chances of leaks.

That's why I called your post inaccurate. All that went down when people still thought it was a hate crime. It is not accurate to claim she called to tell Foxx to drop charges against Smollett or imply that BO was behind it.
Click to expand...
I understand the nuances. Thanks for listing. Pretty much what is in the article I posted. All except the reasons for getting involved, and the “before anyone knew he lied” part.

1. Why were MO people concerning themselves with this matter to begin with?

2. What sane person didn’t know this was a laughable hoax day one, much less day 3?
 
jrry32 said:
Didn't post it. Basic gist is:
1. Isn't a BO rep. She was former MO staff.

2. She called Foxx right after the supposed crime happened (3 days, iirc). This was before anybody knew Smollett lied.

3. She didn't make any requests with regard to charges. She asked that the FBI handle the investigation to lessen the chances of leaks.

That's why I called your post inaccurate. All that went down when people still thought it was a hate crime. It is not accurate to claim she called to tell Foxx to drop charges against Smollett or imply that BO was behind it.
Click to expand...
The police suspected from the very start he was lying. As in immediately upon hearing his story and meeting him. By Day 3 it was obvious to those well connected thus the phone call.

Chicago Police Union has just announced that they are asking for a federal investigation and The Chicago Police Dept. has just released the case file to the public.
 
Last edited:
Farr Be It said:
2. What sane person didn’t know this was a laughable hoax day one, much less day 3?
Click to expand...

It was fishy from the start, but one has to let these types of things unfold.

As info came out it was obvious. And the police had info after a couple of days that we have just been informed of..........which is what @jrry32 had pointed out to you.

coconut said:
The police suspected from the very start he was lying. As in immediately upon hearing his story and meeting him. By Day 3 it was obvious to those well connected thus the phone call.

Chicago Police Union has just announced that they are asking for a federal investigation and The Chicago Police Dept. has just released the case file to the public.
Click to expand...

Yeah if I am a cop and I show up to his place to get details and it's been 40 minutes and he's still wearing the noose around his neck red flags would be flying all over the place.

There should be an investigation, a complete dive into what happened, because something is as fishy as the original story. IMO he offered someone some money and they took it in exchange for getting the charges dropped. I suspect the deal that included community service (which I didn't know he actually did and haven't heard about) and letting the county keep his 100K bail isn't the whole story. First off did anyone hear about him doing community service? That was part of the statement, he had done enough.

There is more here than we know IMO. And I suspect his lawyers are involved in a dirty way considering their statement.

He should do some time, not 10 years, but 9 months maybe 12 and pay a hefty fine. And the party or parties that got the charges dropped needs to be held accountable. If they were paid off they need to be punished harshly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nighttrain and jrry32
Farr Be It said:
This is how I read your response. Embarrassing.

Again, Address the assertions. Facts matter. You are right about one thing: Track record matters. CNN is not just nearly always wrong, they are culpable in perpetrating wicked lies.
Click to expand...
Chill @LesBaker ?

Awe. Thanks! (y) I think you’re pretty chill, yourself!

:pillowfight:
 
LesBaker said:
and letting the county keep his 100K bail isn't the whole story.
Click to expand...
I believe he only forfeited $10K. I think he was bought off on the state charges. Bought off meaning his silence on co-conspirators. Thats why federal charges have to be pursued. I suspect no one will be surprised to learn the names and their connections.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RamFan503
coconut said:
The police suspected from the very start he was lying. As in immediately upon hearing his story and meeting him. By Day 3 it was obvious to those well connected thus the phone call.

Chicago Police Union has just announced that they are asking for a federal investigation and The Chicago Police Dept. has just released the case file to the public.
Click to expand...

BS. Even if the police suspected it, a lawyer in private practice has no way of knowing, unless you are arguing that lawyer was connected in the PD. Of course, you have nothing to support that, and it still doesn't change the fact that said lawyer never called about Smollett being charged.
 
Farr Be It said:
I understand the nuances. Thanks for listing. Pretty much what is in the article I posted. All except the reasons for getting involved, and the “before anyone knew he lied” part.

1. Why were MO people concerning themselves with this matter to begin with?

2. What sane person didn’t know this was a laughable hoax day one, much less day 3?
Click to expand...

1. She's not a MO person. She's a lawyer in private practice and is no longer working for MO. For all we know, she's acquainted with Smollett and his family (which is exactly what the story indicates).

2. Anyone who wasn't privy to the details. It was fishy, but without more, you can't just assume it's a hoax.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LesBaker and Farr Be It
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back