> Smollett is an “innocent man” who was “unjustly smeared.” <
I just read the weaselly statement put out by Cook County DA Foxx. It seems like Smollett was given some sort of first-offender deal (thanks to FReeper PGR88 for previously pointing that out).
So evidently the DA thought Smollett was guilty. But her public statement sidestepped that part. So the only take-away most folks will have is that yes, Smollett was innocent the whole time.
He got busted before for providing false info to the cops.
Seems to me that there were a couple of things Jussie did that got him on the wrong side of the law.
Was there a meeting at an airport in Arizona?
It is NOT a first offender deal. That FReeper is wrong. Even Smolletts lawyer says it isn’t.
A first offender deal includes deferred prosecution, anotherwords if the first offender ever commits another crime this one could be re-prosecuted. In this case his case was forever dismissed and permanently sealed.
A first offender deal certainly wouldn’t include the offender immediately going out and stating he is innocent and falsely prosecuted.
A first offender deal would include community service served specifically for that offense, not some vague “he is already active in the community”.
There is no category for this other than a gross perversion of justice. Calling it an application of a program which actually makes some sense is misleading.
Real first offender situations involve conditions such as future law obedience, reimbursement to victims, related community service, and probation. Upon completion of those conditions the charges would be dismissed and expunged (which doesn’t mean eternally sealed btw).
In this case Smollett was let off Scot free except for forfeiture of $10k upfront bail.
seems like Smollett was given some sort of first-offender deal”””
What the dickens is that?
Rob a bank & get off?
Hit & run & get off?
Kill someone & get off?
Rape someone & get off?
Apparently it is wise to avoid Chicago altogether.