It is impossible to reconcile the widely diverging statements made by Cook County prosecutors, who dropped all charges against Empire star, Jussie Smollett, on Tuesday morning with those made by the actor and his defense team.
Smollett and his lawyers maintain that the dismissal of all 16 felony counts should be viewed as proof that he did not, as police allege, stage his own hate crime on January 29th.
Prosecutors, on the other hand, claim the decision to drop the case was part of a deal to resolve a non-violent crime, requiring Smollett to forfeit his $10,000 bond to the City of Chicago and complete some community service. Additionally, the prosecutors’ office expressed full confidence in the final conclusion reached by Chicago Police Department’s investigation: Jussie Smollett enlisted the help of two acquaintances to fake a homophobic and racist attack perpetrated by “MAGA”-spouting, Trump supporters.
This is only the latest plot twist in a drama that has played out in the public eye since January. From the very beginning, the case captivated the country, not merely because of the celebrity angle, but also because it reflected, with eerie specificity, the culture war raging across the country right now. Smollett, a Black, gay man, vocal about LGBT and racial politics was supposedly attacked by two (presumably) white men, calling him hateful slurs and warning him that he was in “MAGA country.” Smollett’s initial account struck a chord with people ready to believe this was yet another example of violence inspired by intolerant, right wing rhetoric attributed in no small part to Donald Trump.
The narrative fit so perfectly, in fact, many immediately thought it was manufactured and the assailants were made up caricatures of racist, homophobic villains created by Smollett to hide the fact that he’d been assaulted while doing something he didn’t want to admit. A gay hookup and/or drug deal gone wrong were common theories based primarily on stereotypes about gay, black men – and shared mainly by gay, black men.
A significant number of people were skeptical from the start that the attack was real.. And, almost immediately, peculiar leaks to the media attributed to Chicago PD indicated that law enforcement didn’t believe Smollett and that he wasn’t cooperating. Intense and constant media coverage led to the dissemination of conflicting and often inaccurate information that only fanned the flames, dividing people into essentially two camps: People who believed Smollett completely and thought CPD, with its history of racial bias and mishandling cases with Black victims, should not and could not be trusted. And, people who believed CPD and found the admissions made by Smollett’s alleged collaborators convincing.
The sudden and secret resolution reached early Tuesday morning, just weeks after an indictment in a case where so many details were made public, on top of Smollett’s failure to address significant lingering questions, have left the court of public opinion in a frustrated hung jury.
Like most people, I was hoping this saga would end with some answers, but I have not found any in the resolution of the case.
For example, one need look no further than Chicago’s top cop to find reason to believe some level of bias and personal vendetta motivated law enforcement in this investigation. Superintendent Eddie Johnson took Smollett’s alleged falsehoods extremely personal in a way that was problematic. When Johnson spoke of the investigation publicly, he was often emotional to the point of melodrama and himself the source of misinformation. Specifically, he stated several times that brothers, Abel and Ona Osundairo, were paid with a $3500 check from Smollett to participate in the faked assault. This was not supported by their grand jury testimony, undermining Johnson’s credibility and the credibility of the investigation as a whole.
That perception was arguably solidified when prosecutors successfully sought a grand jury indictment for each individual lie Smollett allegedly told in several interviews and conversations with police. Sixteen charges for a single story told multiple times is arguably vindictive and makes clear that an example was being made of Smollett.
But, what changed? Some are speculating that perhaps connections of Smollett’s continued to advocate on his behalf even after DA Kim Foxx recused herself because she had contact with the family during the investigation. Others argue, not without basis, that the resolution is yet another example of the type of justice reserved for the rich and famous.
Suddenly (and strangely), in a case where so many details were provided to the media, both sides remain notably silent regarding how and when Tuesday’s agreement was reached.
They are, however, extremely vocal about what the public should make of this resolution.
The prosecution asserts that were it not for what is payment of what is essentially a $10,000 fine and proof of community service, the charges would not have been dropped. Smollett and his lawyers deny that any specific agreement existed. (Though it seems obvious that one did.)
Adding to the confusion are all the questions Smollett has left largely unanswered.
According to his version of events and what we now know to be facts, the assault was perpetrated, not by white strangers as he claimed, but by two African-American men who knew him pretty well.
It is now uncontroverted that the Osundairo brothers were the perpetrators of the January 29th assault. It is also agreed that Mr. Smollett communicated with the brothers hours before the alleged hate crime took place, perhaps letting them know his flight to Chicago had been delayed.
Given that, why was Mr. Smollett so adamant, once news broke that they were being detained, that they weren’t involved? Why did he, both to police and to Robin Roberts, state that at least one of the perpetrators was white? He tearfully proclaimed that he wanted the perpetrators brought to justice on Good Morning America, but has been completely silent about the Osundairo brothers and what must be a devastating betrayal.
With so many questions left unanswered on all sides, it is impossible to have any confidence that we know what happened or that the ultimate result was just.
I am wondering, in fact, if the ambiguity we are left with is the actual goal of this deal. It allows Smollett to continue claiming innocence and maintain his public status in a way that admitting guilt would not. Prosecutors achieve, again, the type of slap-on-the-wrist justice common for the famous without burning too much political capital.
And we are left, fuming, spent, with buttons pushed and no real answers. Again.
