Source? I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and aren't reading some crazy ass conspiracy theory sites
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Jussie Smollett Breaks His Silence After Vicious Attack: 'I'm OK'
- Thread starter Saya
- Start date
- Status
Source? I want to give you the benefit of the doubt and aren't reading some crazy ass conspiracy theory sites
Are you an investigator working the case? You are not, so I don't understand how or why that would concern you, you know? Unless you're looking for a reason to doubt, and what good does that do, how does it help Jussie or any investigation?
You're sarcastically trolling the thread. Of course people don't really dig that.
User warned: inappropriate joke in a sensitive topic
I'll be impressed if Jussie managed to hold his own after getting jumped by these guys
I'd rather respond to personal attacks with a cheeky hip hop gif, sue me.
it's kinda disappointing that you are calling me out rather than the poster jumping to the nastiest conclusion over a simple preference in how the thread is moving...
yo im actually done
Again that police blog/Tumbler that was the source of that "information" was proven false yesterday. These two suspects were tracked down by cameras.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...llett-persons-of-interest-20190215-story.html
I'm not sure homophobia should be classified as "having a problem" with someone.
Hope that clarifies.
Yo, you gotta source shit like this. And a lot of y'all ain't shit.
Err what? That's like...yeah it definitely falls in line with it. Especially if it's what prompted the attack.
Still a hate crime
As a logical skeptic, I am sure El D noticed that this information seemed fishy. I wonder what was different here.
Yup. All I'll say for now is it's very interesting comparing this threads to threads like say this one for instance:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/bu...s-shot-and-killed-by-california-police.99403/
Wherein, people clearly have no problem believing official accounts from the police and eat that stuff up like it's nothing. Oh sure, it's definitely strange that someone would just fall asleep in the drive-through of a fast-food restaurant with a gun just sitting in their lap, but not strange enough to make them wonder just how truthful the police is really being there when they say they absolutely had to shoot that man, and there was no way around it. Very few people commenting on how weird it is and proposing alternative explanations there and what if, say, the gun was actually in the glovebox or something and the police only moved it to his lap afterwords and went with that as the story to justify a homicide. Just takin' it all wholesale there, despite comments of how how weird it is, nonetheless very little "just asking questions" stuff and just accepting it all more or less at face value anyway.
But here, this is when people start asking questions? About a victim of a racist attack? That's when people suddenly feel like asking questions? What motive would he even have to lie about this stuff? And "I don't know" is not an acceptable answer, if people are so much as going to imply that's where they're leaning on this. You can't be all "I don't know" on one of the most important parts, if you're going to make that kind of implication or even pose it as an equal possibility. Because, like, people are sayin' this is fishy, but if that's the case, isn't it "fishy" as people say that they can't come up with a believable motive as to why he would stage a hoax or lie about this, or anything of the sort, and suddenly STOP asking questions, and all those questions that were oh-so-important beforehand suddenly stop being important at all and are just waved off.
The motive for why someone would do something such as the alleged attack is easy: racism, homophobia, etc. The motive for fakin'? When the best people could come up with was stuff like "he's totally being written off the show and was enraged by that" when that was such nonsense that Fox themselves came out and said what garbage that was in no uncertain terms, well, that just demonstrates to me how weak that case looks right now (and that the same people that were "just asking questions" were suddenly oh-so-happy to jump over that particular rumor, not even stopping to wonder why that made just as little sense, that they suddenly stopped asking questions and were suddenly satisfied by that regardless despite the questions that itself would raise, really shows how hollow that is. If you're indeed just asking questions and just confused or whatever, why would you suddenly stop when something like that's posted? Why would that suddenly get you to stop asking questions, if that's where you're coming from, despite the questions it itself raises).
That people say there just asking questions, but yet they're willing to overlook one of the most important things, motive, and just treat that like it's no big deal and just keep going down that road about things not sounding right or adding up, while trying at the same time to just kick that whole motive can down the road and out of their minds, is what really gets me about all this.
^^^ I need a lot more thumbs to give this the amount of thumbs up it deserves.
Saying homophobia is "having a problem" with someone is like categorizing a decapitation as a flesh wound. What I'm saying is that it's a reductive way of describing the situation, as though it falls into the same category as being mad at the guy at work who eats other people's lunches.
People's need to post random shit and not back it up in the guise of just asking questions is why I'm giving the side eye to most people in here trying to do the same thing
People just refuse to admit to their inherent biases or to even consider that it is clouding what they would normally think.
Fucking hell we have two people arrested and people are still saying "doesn't mean he didn't make it up" in a non-ironic manner
People just refuse to admit to their inherent biases or to even consider that it is clouding what they would normally think.
Fucking hell we have two people arrested and people are still saying "doesn't mean he didn't make it up" in a non-ironic manner
I'm posting while also at work. Sorry for the lack of instant gratification. I updated my original post to include the following:
Here's the source for his phone records being insufficient.
Here's the source for Smollett being considered as involved in orchestrating the event.
Here's the source for the subpoena. This site doesn't look as reliable as the others, but I'm seeing ABC7 reporters referencing a subpoena on Twitter.
Again, as I mentioned in my original post, I'd be perfectly happy to concede that he is innocent if evidence points towards otherwise.
Charging them with battery doesn't really indicate anything specifically. It can mean:
1- The police are done and have decided for whatever reason these guys decided to target and attack their co-worker/friend. The fact that they charged the two brothers and made no statement makes this option seem less likely.
2 - they needed a reason to hold these guys further while they continued to dig into what went down, so they charged them with battery since they were proven to be in the location when the event occurred and there's a victim saying two men attacked him at that time and at that location.
1- The police are done and have decided for whatever reason these guys decided to target and attack their co-worker/friend. The fact that they charged the two brothers and made no statement makes this option seem less likely.
2 - they needed a reason to hold these guys further while they continued to dig into what went down, so they charged them with battery since they were proven to be in the location when the event occurred and there's a victim saying two men attacked him at that time and at that location.
Go through my post history if you need to, I was infuriated during the initial phases of this story and happy to call those doubting people out.
However, I'm now so worried about the potential repercussions a hoax would bring about that I am 100% ok with people now trying their best to ascertain the truth. Even if that means they're " asking questions", being that they're doing so in good faith. Does that make sense? What a mess this is
However, I'm now so worried about the potential repercussions a hoax would bring about that I am 100% ok with people now trying their best to ascertain the truth. Even if that means they're " asking questions", being that they're doing so in good faith. Does that make sense? What a mess this is
I've never understood this line of thought. The people that don't believe victims are not going to start anytime soon, and I would hope those that do believe victims wouldn't stop doing so on the rare occasion of a high profile hoax.
I only see three possibilities at this point:
-The police are wrong, through incompetence or malice
-He was attacked by the two guys, and either purposefully embellished the attack or unwittingly gave a false report of a traumatic event
-He was working with the two guys
I guess it's better to wait for more information?
-The police are wrong, through incompetence or malice
-He was attacked by the two guys, and either purposefully embellished the attack or unwittingly gave a false report of a traumatic event
-He was working with the two guys
I guess it's better to wait for more information?
What repercussions would those be? I mean, I know what you mean to say here: that people won't believe anyone the next time. But the fact that we're already playing that game in the first place, that people are already doing that before all the facts have been, and really, people have been trying that from the beginning in regards to this incident... what would be the difference in the end, exactly, considering that? That people already have such doubts regardless show that those type of beliefs already are here, they already do exist, people already do have them. That's the tragic reality. The fact that people are doubting regardless shows the damage has already been done regardless of how this turns out. Nothing will change either way, that's the thing. That has been, and still is the status quo, so even in the event this all ends up somehow being a hoax, what will actually changed when clearly there were many people that never believed it regardless? What would have changed? Nothing, because that's where we already were, at least that's my take, and why stuff like this comes off as strange to me because the fact that we're even having discussions such as this shows we're already there regardless.
There was an account of a neighbor of Smollett's who described seeing a strange man, white
Those are big dudes. Smollett sustained minor physical injuries.
They may have been trying to scare him more than hurt him.
Those are big dudes. Smollett sustained minor physical injuries.
They may have been trying to scare him more than hurt him.
My post was honestly just trying to diffuse some of the back and forth in here by trying to see where some people are coming from. People are rightly heated. I don't think every person confused by this story had a nefarious motive. To be 10000% clear, even if this turns out to be a hoax I'll never not side with the victim of an attack like this.
Nigga you said that those 2 men were amongst the phone records Jussie removed for privacy reasons! Source that please.
Did you just compare a story with a bunch of eyewitnesses to one with none? That makes a shit load of sense.
That second source was debunked by police yesterday and reiterated today. The third source is garbage. Where is the source that Smollett had contacted the brothers and redacted the numbers?
I think the most we can definitively say at the moment is that there are conflicting reports.
The third source is the same blog/Tumblr nonsense that was proven false yesterday. The second source's "insider information" was not only proven false yesterday since it was also based on the third source, but within the same article they say there is no evidence that this is a hoax/are treating Smollett as a victim.
Yeah sure. We have unconfirmed reports and we have the police making actual statements. I guess those are conflicting reports.
This seems like a pretty reasonable and non-inflammatory post. I am not sure why this has gotten a permanent ban.
Why would he "be in on it" or try to make this up in any way? How does that make literally any sense? I find like 99.9% of "blame the victim" skepticism falls apart on the simplest shit like "motivation."
Playing a victim for sympathy points is obviously a much better hustle than being the rich, trailblazing headliner of a popular television show. /s
It's not, it's local ABC/CBS reporters who are getting accurate info on other stuff that's lining up 1:1, but there's major discrepancies between other stuff they are being leaked and what the official HQ line is elsewhere that are completely contradicting each other. Combined with the public developments yesterday and today w/ the raid/arrests, the whole situation is a complete mess where there is no obvious "correct" answer and the best thing for anyone observing this from afar to do is to just wait for further information to be put out there.
Unconfirmed reports, sure, but it's not like it's from "some rando" as another poster claimed. It's from an investigative reporter over at CBS 2 in Chicago who claims to have sources with "intimate knowledge of the investigation" that claim Smollett was potentially involved. That would be a pretty big fuck up for a journalist to put his name on the line like that.
https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/02/15/suspects-arrested-in-jussie-smollett-case/
Meanwhile the cops are saying that any claims of a hoax are "unconfirmed" and that any alleged sources are basically full of shit.
- Status