Wednesday, March 27, 2019

An Editorial From The Chicago Tribune - Updated

At 6.10 p.m. this evening, the Chicago Tribune posted the following editorial about the Jussie Smollett case, titled "The Jussie Smollett Fiasco: Kim Foxx Digs A Deeper Hole":

Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Chicago police Superintendent Eddie Johnson welled up with outrage over the decision by the Cook County state’s attorney’s office to drop felony charges against TV actor Jussie Smollett, who had been facing trial for concocting a hate crime to benefit his career. Smollett’s penalty: two days of community service and forfeiture of the $10,000 in bond money he’d put up. And then there was Smollett himself, hands shaking as he insisted he was innocent, that he really was a victim.

But in the first-day tumult, one voice wasn’t heard. State’s Attorney Kim Foxx, step up. Try to explain the indefensible.

On Wednesday, Foxx tried to explain the indefensible, and failed. Instead she dug herself a deeper hole.

In essence, she said there’s public confusion about all this because the public just doesn’t understand the intricacies of the legal system.

“Every single day,” Foxx told WBEZ, “… there are people who get similar arrangements … people who get sentences that are probably not what some people would want. Every single day.” As if to say: Trust us. You critics don’t understand.

That doesn’t come close to explaining why Foxx’s office brought the case this far, then let a celebrity walk, even though his alleged crimes consumed thousands of police man-hours in a city pummeled by violent crime. Foxx may think she has calmed the storm, but she hasn’t.

Three urgent questions remain for the state’s attorney:
  • First, do Chicagoans have the full story of Foxx’s conduct in this case? Foxx’s office disclosed that she’d had contact with Smollett’s representatives during the early stages of the investigation. That contact included an email from a politically connected lawyer acting on behalf of Smollett and his family. The Tribune has reported that the lawyer told Foxx the family had “concerns about the investigation” and wanted Superintendent Johnson to turn over the investigation to the FBI. Foxx asked Johnson to do exactly that, the Tribune reported. Johnson refused. Foxx also had exchanged texts with a Smollett relative. Foxx’s office said that, “out of an abundance of caution … State’s Attorney Foxx decided to remove herself from the decision-making.” Is that everything there is to know about these communications between Foxx and Smollett’s allies?

  • Second, what’s the rationale for cutting a secret deal without making Smollett reimburse the city for the costs his alleged actions inflicted on taxpayers? Without making him take responsibility for those alleged actions? To Chicagoans, to the rest of the country for that matter, it appears there was more to the decision to drop the charges and sandblast Smollett’s record than what Foxx’s office has disclosed so far.

  • Third, why the sealed case file? Specifically, is there any linkage between the answers to the first two questions — between Foxx’s stumbles at the start of the case and her office’s decision to abandon it? Sealing this file deprives Chicagoans of any insight into what may have led to this bizarre outcome. There occasionally are good reasons to expunge records and seal case files, but shielding prosecutors’ actions from public scrutiny isn’t one of them.
On Wednesday, the Chicago Police Department released its investigative file in the Smollett case. We appreciate that transparency, and if police have records of all their contacts with prosecutors in the early days of this case — including any efforts by Foxx or her prosecutors to influence the trajectory of the investigation — we hope CPD will release those records too.

Ms. Foxx, CPD’s actions should inspire you to be just as transparent — now.

 In other (related) news, ABC News says the FBI is investigating why the charges against Smollett were dropped: 

Fuming from the stunning decision by prosecutors to drop charges in the "hoax" attack case against "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel blasted the move Wednesday, saying all the evidence police collected against the TV star should be unsealed as the FBI opened a review of the disposition of the case.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is reviewing the circumstances surrounding the dismissal of the criminal charges against Smollett, two law enforcement sources briefed on the matter told ABC News on Wednesday. The sources insisted it is not an investigation, but a "review."

"He's saying he's innocent and his words aren't true," Emanuel told ABC News chief anchor George Stephanopoulos on "Good Morning America." "They better get their story straight. This is actually making a fool of all of us."

But Cook County State Attorney Kimberly Foxx, whose office dismissed the charges against Smollett, insisted that the actor did not receive any special treatment. She said Smollett was allowed to dispose of his case through an alternative prosecution program, just like 5,700 other people her office has charged with low-level felonies over the past two years.

In an interview with ABC News, Foxx said Smollett qualified for alternative prosecution because he doesn't have a history of violence, lacks a criminal record and was charged with a class four felony, which is one step above a misdemeanor. She said her office would rather put resources towards prosecuting violent criminals.

Foxx said in a separate interview with ABC station WLS-TV that while Smollett was not found guilty in a court of law, "I believe, based on the facts and the evidence presented in the charging decision made by this office, this office believes that they could prove him guilty." "I think this office, based on the charging decision, believes he is culpable of doing that," Foxx said. (Read more here.) 

As I'm writing late on Wednesday night, I'd say this story is a long way from being over. 

 Thursday morning update: Jussie and his case are still in the news and honestly I'm almost beginning to feel sorry for the man. (Almost...) As I've said here before, he's not a rocket scientist and he had no idea what he was setting in motion when he decided he needed to be more famous. He now finds himself in the land of unintended consequences, only partly because of his own choices. He's caught in the "This is Chicago" political crossfire as the various stakeholders point their fingers, deflect blame and jockey for advantage. Even Jussie's lawyers may have served him badly. Yes, it's great (for Jussie) that they got the charges against him dismissed but they clearly didn't anticipate how controversial that decision would be. When they put Jussie in front of the microphones to say, once again, that he's innocent, they didn't anticipate how loudly the Mayor, the Police Superintendent and the Assistant State's Attorney would holler back: "No, you're not." 

 Back when it still appeared that there would in fact be a trial, Jussie's lawyers insisted they wanted cameras in the courtroom so all of America could see the evidence that proves Jussie is innocent. If they really have such evidence, they should make it public, sooner rather than later. Jussie's career hangs in the balance.   

This story has taken on a life of its own and you bet I'll be watching to how it all plays out. 



Toni Preckwinkle is one of the two candidates in the run-off election for Mayor of Chicago. This case came up in a debate last night:



"... causes minimum harm to the defendant in the long term." Is that what's driving all this:



Update #2. The first time I ever mentioned Jussie Smollett in this blog, in a Guessing Game post dated February 18 (read it here,) I said that the story was spiraling out control. It's still true. Ponder this, from ABC Legal Reporter Dan Abrams' website Law And Crime:

An Illinois lawmaker said he wants to introduce a bill that would punish film productions that hire actor Jussie Smollett. Currently, the state provides tax breaks to movies and television shows that film there, but State Rep. Michael McAuliffe (R-Chicago) is looking to pass a law that would strip such benefits from any production that includes Smollett. The actor is currently a cast member of the show Empire, which films in Chicago.

“Smollett should not be able to get anything more from the City of Chicago or Illinois,” McCauliffe said in a statement, adding that “a lot of valuable Chicago Police Department man hours and resources were wasted chasing down a bogus crime arranged by Smollett.” Smollett forfeited $10,000 in bond money as part of the arrangement that led to his case being dismissed, but McCauliffe does not believe that’s enough. After the Empire actor’s case was dismissed with little explanation, McCauliffe wants a stronger message to be sent against Smollett, who had been accused of staging what he claimed was a racist, homophobic assault.

McCauliffe said the alleged hoax cost the city of Chicago “a lot more than a $10,000 bond.”

Nine television shows currently shoot in Chicago, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. Tax benefits include a 30 percent credit for in-state purchases and for hiring Illinois residents (those hired who live in areas with high unemployment can yield an addition 15 percent credit for the production). If a film or TV show uses a hotel room for at least 30 days for someone involved in the production, they won’t have to pay the hotel occupancy tax either.

McCauliffe, who has served as an Illinois State Representative since 1997, reportedly plans on introducing the bill this week. (Check out the website here.)

I would say it's unlikely a bill like this would ever become law. I would also say that in spite of the charges against him being dropped, Jussie Smollett is having another bad day. As I said above, unintended consequences. 

 Update #3. ABC7 Chicago reporter Ross Weidner provides a Twitter "explainer" about what happened in court this morning:

















Meanwhile, back at City Hall:


From the Chicago Tribune article:

The mayor said Police Department brass are compiling the costs of the investigation into Smollett’s claim. City lawyers will then send Smollett a letter calling on him to pay the full amount, Emanuel said.

“The police are right now finalizing the cost that was used, police resources to come to the understanding this was a hoax and not a real hate crime,” Emanuel said. “What we spent. The corporation counsel, once they have the finalized and feel good about the numbers, will then send a letter to Jussie Smollett and his attorneys, trying to recoup those costs for the city.”

“It is a small way of both acknowledging, one, guilt, two, that we spent these resources and the taxpayers deserve, at minimum — because I think there’s a whole other level of ethical costs, because he’s still walking around, ‘Hey, I’m innocent, everything I said from day one is true’ — that actually we’re going to get the resources back. But come with those resources is, implicitly, if you pay it, that the city spent money to uncover what the grand jury discovered.” (Read more here.)

A little political grandstanding from the outgoing mayor? Possibly.

Update #4. The National District Attorneys Association released a statement on prosecutorial best practices in high profile cases:

The handling of cases by prosecutors nationwide has garnered national media attention and a greater focus on the role of the prosecutor in the criminal justice system. In each instance, the local prosecutors involved in the case must weigh all the facts and determine the best path forward to ensure justice is served. Prosecutors don’t always get it right, nor does the public necessarily get to see all the information available to prosecutors, particularly during an ongoing investigation. In these types of circumstances, it is easy for emotions to run high and finger pointing to ensue, but it is important not to allow investigations and charging decisions to be swayed by public sentiment and to follow best practices and guidelines in whatever situation may arise. 

 The recent incident in Chicago involving actor Jussie Smollett is no different and has garnered national attention as the case has made its way through various phases of the investigation and prosecution process. While details of the case remain sealed, several observations must be made in order to increase, not diminish, the public’s confidence in the criminal justice system. 

 First, when a chief prosecutor recuses him or herself, the recusal must apply to the entire office, not just the elected or appointed prosecutor. This is consistent with best practices for prosecutors’ offices around the country. 

 Second, prosecutors should not take advice from politically connected friends of the accused. Each case should be approached with the goal of justice for victims while protecting the rights of the defendant. 

 Third, when a prosecutor seeks to resolve a case through diversion or some other alternative to prosecution, it should be done so with an acknowledgement of culpability on the part of the defendant. A case with the consequential effects of Mr. Smollett’s should not be resolved without a finding of guilt or innocence.

 Fourth, expunging Mr. Smollett’s record at this immediate stage is counter to transparency. Law enforcement will now not be able to acknowledge that Mr. Smollett was indicted and charged with these horrible crimes and the full record of what occurred will be forever hidden from public view. 

 Finally, we believe strongly that hate crimes should be prosecuted vigorously but the burden of proof should not be artificially increased due to the misguided decisions of others. (Read the entire statement here.)

Finally, at least for now, could Jussie Smollett win an NAACP award Saturday night? He's nominated for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Drama Series and TMZ says he flew to LA last night to attend Saturday night's awards ceremony. (Read about it here.) Jussie's fellow nominees are Jesse Williams for Grey's Anatomy, Joe Morton for Scandal, Romany Malco for A Million Little Things and Wendell Pierce for Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan. Will Jussie win? It probably depends on when the voting took place.

Thursday afternoon, update #5. Mayor Emanuel has followed through on his threat:


And here's the letter:




Posted by at
Labels: ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)