Woke Illinois Supreme Court rules that yes, you can make up bizarre conspiracy theories about white Trump supporters and file false police reports

[West]

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollett-conviction-overturned-illinois-supreme-court.amp

Bizarre overturn by the woke Illinois Supreme Court 

[Deluge]

31 minutes ago, West said:

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollett-conviction-overturned-illinois-supreme-court.amp

Bizarre overturn by the woke Illinois Supreme Court 

My vote is stick all registered democrats in the state of Illinois, and build a wall around it so they can't get out. 

Edited November 21, 2024 by Deluge

[robosmith]

21 minutes ago, Deluge said:

My vote is stick all registered democrats in the state of Illinois, and build a wall around it so that can't get out. 

^DELUGINAL believes his vote counts in court. LMAO

[Deluge]

7 minutes ago, robosmith said:

^DELUGINAL believes his vote counts in court. LMAO

robodeviant wants fascists running our legal system. 

[robosmith]

Just now, Deluge said:

robodeviant wants fascists running our legal system. 

That is Trump and his MAGA CULT. Of course you do and I DO NOT.

[BeaverFever]

7 minutes ago, Deluge said:

robodeviant wants fascists running our legal system. 

No you do which is why you voted for Trump the fascist in chief 

41 minutes ago, West said:

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollett-conviction-overturned-illinois-supreme-court.amp

Bizarre overturn by the woke Illinois Supreme Court 

Supreme Court decision was not woke, had nothing to do with woke ideology, and did jot at all say anything about what members of the public can or can’t legally do. As you usual you have no clue.  Don’t you get tired of being such an uneducated dumbass?

[Deluge]

19 minutes ago, robosmith said:

That is Trump and his MAGA CULT. Of course you do and I DO NOT.

Nope. It's those lawfare fascists in New York and Georgia, the f*cking cult degenerates.

Thank God a REAL President will be stepping back in next January.  

16 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

No you do which is why you voted for Trump the fascist in chief 

You don't even know what a fascist is, numbnuts, so why are you crying? 

[impartialobserver]

the folks on here are showing a lack of reading comprehension and knowledge of the law. 

[West]

28 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

No you do which is why you voted for Trump the fascist in chief 

Supreme Court decision was not woke, had nothing to do with woke ideology, and did jot at all say anything about what members of the public can or can’t legally do. As you usual you have no clue.  Don’t you get tired of being such an uneducated dumbass?

Yeah it did. 

This bullshit where you can just make up fictional stories about being robbed for your sub sandwich is about as vile as it comes..

And the woke court just laps it up. Truly a lawless society

[gatomontes99]

This is a little more complicated than the article lets on.

Quote

Defense attorneys had argued his trial violated his Fifth Amendment protections against double jeopardy, after Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx's office agreed to drop the original charges against him.

A special prosecutor was later assigned to reinvestigate the case, and brought a new indictment against him, but Smollett's attorneys have argued that the special prosecutor never should have been allowed to bring new charges.

"Today we resolve a question about the State's responsibility to honor the agreements it makes with defendants. Specifically, we address whether a dismissal of a case by nolle prosequi allows the State to bring a second prosecution when the dismissal was entered as part of an agreement with the defendant and the defendant has performed his part of the bargain. We hold that a second prosecution under these circumstances is a due process violation, and we therefore reverse defendant's conviction," Justice Elizabeth Rochford wrote in the court's ruling.

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/jussie-smollett-conviction-overturned-illinois-supreme-court/

Apparently, Smolet realized he was caught, copped a plea deal and some other prosecutor decided to prosecute him any way. According to the SC of IL, he had not violated the terms of his agreement so the second prosecution was unjustified.

I don't know the details of the plea deal, but they were probably far to lenient. That said, he followed his end so the second prosecution shouldn't have happened, even if the outcome was more preferable.

[User]

Read the verdict. In this instance, they are upholding the law. 

The former prosecutor is to blame. They agreed to a deal with him and he held up that deal. 

Its a simple part of our justice system, you can't be prosecuted for the same crime twice like this. 

[West]

3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

This is a little more complicated than the article lets on.

Apparently, Smolet realized he was caught, copped a plea deal and some other prosecutor decided to prosecute him any way. According to the SC of IL, he had not violated the terms of his agreement so the second prosecution was unjustified.

I don't know the details of the plea deal, but they were probably far to lenient. That said, he followed his end so the second prosecution shouldn't have happened, even if the outcome was more preferable.

So the original prosecutor was a wokey? Where's the accountability? 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

Nope. It's those lawfare fascists in New York and Georgia, the f*cking cult degenerates.

Thank God a REAL President will be stepping back in next January.  

Trump was CONVICTED with EVIDENCE by a JURY.

Only you MAGA CULT cannot tell the difference between that and lawfare. LMAO

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, West said:

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollett-conviction-overturned-illinois-supreme-court.amp

Bizarre overturn by the woke Illinois Supreme Court 

What's bizarre is your FAILURE to understand THE LAW and JUSTICE.

Quote

"Specifically, we address whether a dismissal of a case by nolle prosequi allows the State to bring a second prosecution when the dismissal was entered as part of an agreement with the defendant and the defendant has performed his part of the bargain. We hold that a second prosecution under these circumstances is a due process violation, and we therefore reverse defendant’s conviction."

The state made an agreement and reneged. That IS NOT JUSTICE, and the court said so; your amateur OPINION NOTWITHSTANDING.

[West]

5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

What's bizarre is your FAILURE to understand THE LAW and JUSTICE.

The state made an agreement and reneged. That IS NOT JUSTICE, and the court said so; your amateur OPINION NOTWITHSTANDING.

The woke prosecutor made a bogus agreement with him. The woke Supreme Court honored this woke prosecutor's deal. 

The people who were wrongfully smeared, white Trump supporters, had their rights violated to adequate justice. Going and bathing puppies isn't really a punishment for a false hate crime and police report. 

 

[Deluge]

10 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Trump was CONVICTED with EVIDENCE by a JURY.

Only you MAGA CULT cannot tell the difference between that and lawfare. LMAO

WRONG! He was hauled in by a bunch of tree bashing banana cultists. They don't practice law, they practice lawFARE. 

The hope, of course, is that Trump & Co. finds a way to throw those idol worshippers out with the rest of the trash.  

[impartialobserver]

Just now, West said:

The woke prosecutor made a bogus agreement with him. The woke Supreme Court honored this woke prosecutor's deal. 

The people who were wrongfully smeared, white Trump supporters, had their rights violated to adequate justice. Going and bathing puppies isn't really a punishment for a false hate crime and police report. 

 

if you actually read the article.. you would know that the decision was overturned due to legal mishaps not woke politics.

 

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

the folks on here are showing a lack of reading comprehension and knowledge of the law. 

partialobserver helped write all of the laws. 

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

partialobserver helped write all of the laws. 

yes, I am partial because I know the law far better than most. Had to become a paralegal of sorts when the dept was wrongfully sued. User (conservative poster) explains it pretty well. Are you going to come after him as well? 

[Deluge]

3 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

yes, I am partial because I know the law far better than most. Had to become a paralegal of sorts when the dept was wrongfully sued. User (conservative poster) explains it pretty well. Are you going to come after him as well? 

I know that most laws are needlessly complicated, like tax law, for example.

The simplest explanation is usually the best, and law typically has nothing to do with Occam's Razor. 

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

I know that most laws are needlessly complicated, like tax law, for example.

The simplest explanation is usually the best, and law typically has nothing to do with Occam's Razor. 

to quote user (look below). this is purely legal. 

 

The former prosecutor is to blame. They agreed to a deal with him and he held up that deal. 

Its a simple part of our justice system, you can't be prosecuted for the same crime twice like this. 

[Nationalist]

This is just more disgusting sh1t from Libbies.

[West]

32 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

if you actually read the article.. you would know that the decision was overturned due to legal mishaps not woke politics.

 

The deal struck by Foxx was because she was a wokey.  I've followed this case since Smollett wrongfully accused the two white dudes of beating him up for his subway and they attempted to sweep it under the rug.

The Supreme Court upheld a very questionable plea deal which is a denial of justice to those wrongfully accused

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, West said:

So the original prosecutor was a wokey? Where's the accountability? 

Just a wokey, a friend of michelle obama who intervened 

Tina Tchen: Some want texts from Michelle Obama’s ex-top aide to the Jussie Smollett prosecutor investigated | CNN

it was widely reported at the time that she interfered and got Smollett a severely reduced penalty

That's why the second prosecutor wanted to go after him for more.

Sadly the judge is probably right in this case, as much as the original deal was almost certainly a result of interference by the Obamas and was inappropriately light, sadly that prosecutor had the right to make that deal and they did.

So yea he got away with it a little because of the obama's but sadly that's just the way it works in the states. 

5 minutes ago, West said:

The deal struck by Foxx was because she was a wokey.  I've followed this case since Smollett wrongfully accused the two white dudes of beating him up for his subway and they attempted to sweep it under the rug.

The Supreme Court upheld a very questionable plea deal which is a denial of justice to those wrongfully accused

while you're right the fact is that prosecutor had the legal right to make that deal and as sucky as it is  it would be wrong for a judge now to pretend they didn't. 

[Deluge]

28 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

to quote user (look below). this is purely legal. 

 

The former prosecutor is to blame. They agreed to a deal with him and he held up that deal. 

Its a simple part of our justice system, you can't be prosecuted for the same crime twice like this. 

You're off in the weeds, buddy. lol 

The OP states: Illinois Supreme Court rules that yes, you can make up bizarre conspiracy theories about white Trump supporters and file false police reports. 

Do you agree or disagree with this statement? If so, why? 

Edited November 21, 2024 by Deluge