EXCLUSIVE JUSSIE SMOLLETT TELLS COPS ATTACKERS SHOUTED 'MAGA COUNTRY' ... 'EMPIRE' CALLS IN ARMED SE

And the investigation indicates that the allegations are a crock.

 

In what way, shape, or form?

 

How about "no evidence" for starters?

 

No they just harassed and grabbed up innocent black men.

 

They have surveillance video of Mr. Smollet, but nowhere does this video show the supposed assailants or any possible vehicle they presumably used.

 

What's a "Jussie"?

 

Follow up after he talked to the press? Never mentioned during the hours he was with the police.

 

Recap:

What we know as fact:

1. He has injuries.

2. He has injuries.

3. He has injuries.

4. He has injuries.

5. He has injuries.

 

No it isn't. You're really bad at this.

 

First rule of holes, when you find yourself in one, QUIT DIGGING!

Kevin Hart, Get This, Attacked by Social Justice Warriors for Telling "Jussie" Smolett to "Stay Strong"

There's no rest for the triggered, as that Chris Raygun parody says.

Meanwhile, of course, doubt grows as to whether there was an attack in the first place. Police have canvased the areas for security cameras that might have caught the attack on tape, but... um... so far they just have video of Smollett walking around. No attack and no attackers.

CBS News reports that surveillance video, obtained by police, shows Smollett walking around but doesn’t show an attack/assault.
Chicago police tell CBS News that they don’t yet physical evidence proving the crime happened

Meanwhile, here is a truly savage possibly-racially-motivated beating that will probably leave the victim brain-damaged.

The media isn't talking about this beating. Why is that?

Is it just that some lives don't matter? Are some savage attacks excusable or even laudatory?

"Jussie" didn't make the "MAGA country" claim in his first statement to police, but then did add it in later ones.

That really adds loads of credibility to this, as far as I'm concerned.

 

And you think that means the attack is bogus?

 

If you'd prefer that I said sworn testimony is evidence, that's fine. But understand that evidence and proof are synonymous.

I am perfectly comfortable in my position as are the two states from which I obtained my bar license.

 

I haven't read all 23 pages of the thread but has anyone provided any evidence of injuries?

 

No evidence of an attack other than his word.

 

There's a photo of facial injury(s).

 

No evidences and proof aren't synonymous. Evidences can be dismissed, a proof can't.

 

You can not possibly explain that distinction with any degree of seriousness.

 

This was after TMZ reported it. The police then contacted him and asked about it. Why would he leave that detail out in the intial report?

 

The sticking point isn't if he was mugged or not. Any attack is tragic.
The point of contention is that the aggressors where MAGA fans, in chicago, at 2am at -20/30 degree with bleach and a noose targetting him.

 

Comprehension isn't your forte either.
Proof isn't in the definition of evidence. It's in an example where proof is used colloquialy.
You're really bad at this.

Sorry, missed a part of your post.

Evidences becomes proof after being investigated and demonstrated as being true. Many things can be include as evidences in a trial and not all of it is true.

 

I think this is like the Covington Catholic kids incident. A meme emerges, outrage is expressed, inaccurate charges (i.e. lies) are uttered. Then the videos and facts emerge telling what REALLY happened. OOOPSIE!!!!

 

In short evidences are used to build a proof but they aren't the proof by themselves.
Many evidences are rejected during a hearing especially if no coroborrated.

 

Shock. Relevance. The interview process.

There are several reasons why such a quote might not appear in the first interview.

 

Like I said, proof is synonymous with evidence. If you don't want to believe that they are synonymous or disagree with the "colloquial" acceptance that they are synonymous, that is fine.

 

Not in ANY state.