The Chicago Superintendent of Police was pretty confident in Smollett's guilt when speaking on Good Morning America February 25.

 

He claims Smollett's guilt is backed by "the facts, the evidence, and the witnesses."

Experts characterized the amount of evidence provided by the police upfront as "unprecedented." CPD Superintendent Eddie Johnson went on to say there is still a lot of evidence to be presented... physical evidence, video evidence, and testimony that doesn't support Jussie Smollett's version of the story.

 

Chicago police chief speaks out on Jussie Smollett case | GMA

 

Police chief does seem confident. I will say Jussie has one of the best defense attorneys in America so if there is way out this guy will find it.

Police chief does seem confident. I will say Jussie has one of the best defense attorneys in America so if there is way out this guy will find it.

 

So I guess Jussie's new defense is these two guys, he knew, came after him under the disguise of a hate crime. I mean, the two guys have admitted to "assaulting" him, so that is his only defense going forward, right? Or am I missing something? I can't remember in his PR blitz, but did he give any type description of the supposed assailants?

 

These guys have provided a motive. I am not sure what Jussie's rebuttal to their motive is?

So I guess Jussie's defense is these two guys he knew came after him under the disguise of a hate crime. I mean, the two guys have admitted to "assaulting" him, so that is his only defense going forward, right? Or am I missing something? I can't remember in his PR blitz, but did he give any type description of the supposed assailants?

 

These guys have provided a motive. I am not sure what Jussie's rebuttal to their motive is?

 

I could see a defense saying the brothers took casual conversation as direction to committ the act but Jussie was just joking. Not saying it will work but that or what you listed are the only plausible defenses I can see.

I could see a defense saying the brothers took casual conversation as direction to committ the act but Jussie was just joking. Not saying it will work but that or what you listed are the only plausible defenses I can see.

 

Seems like if they prove he paid them, that excuse goes out the window.

Seems like if they prove he paid them, that excuse goes out the window.

 

That's what I am thinking. Isn't the check the trump card in this story?

I could see a defense saying the brothers took casual conversation as direction to committ the act but Jussie was just joking. Not saying it will work but that or what you listed are the only plausible defenses I can see.

Yeah, I am not really sure what kind of defense he can go with.

 

Most crimes are committed by people we associate with. Family, friends, colleagues, etc. When Jussie described the story, there was too much going on for it to be a random assault; but, I think that was how he was trying to portray it which is what seem most dumb to me.

 

And I agree, we need to wait until all facts come out. But the more evidence publicly released, the worse it looks for him.

That's what I am thinking. Isn't the check the trump card in this story?

 

If they can prove he paid them, it's a wrap for any defense, IMO.

Seems like if they prove he paid them, that excuse goes out the window.

 

Agreed. But I believe Jussie wrote on the memo line of the check something about "Physical Training." I guess from there you have to prove is $3500 a reasonable amount for 5 weeks of training based on other clients the brothers had.

Agreed. But I believe Jussie wrote on the memo line of the check something about "Physical Training." I guess from there you have to prove is $3500 a reasonable amount for 5 weeks of training based on other clients the brothers had.

 

This.

If the FBI is contradicting the Chicago Police Department then Jussie’s lawyer is going to have a field day in court.

If the FBI is contradicting the Chicago Police Department then Jussie’s lawyer is going to have a field day in court.

 

Yep.

If the FBI is contradicting the Chicago Police Department then Jussie’s lawyer is going to have a field day in court.

 

I had seen yesterday the FBI was saying to pump the brakes on definitely saying the letter was sent by Smollet, but was there anything else? Is the FBI investigating any other element of the crime than that? Also read where even if the FBI determines he did self-generate the letter, it doesn't mean they will bother charging him with anything.

I had seen yesterday the FBI was saying to pump the brakes on definitely saying the letter was sent by Smollet, but was there anything else? Is the FBI investigating any other element of the crime than that? Also read where even if the FBI determines he did self-generate the letter, it doesn't mean they will bother charging him with anything.

 

Not sure. I just saw the reports about the FBI saying there isn’t any proof that Jussie wrote the letter to himself.

 

I’m just thinking as a lawyer and curious as to what other evidence the police department has. If they have released everything that they have(I’m thinking they haven’t) then Jussie’s lawyers are in a good spot. However, they have to disclose everything they have on Jussie don’t they?

Not sure. I just saw the reports about the FBI saying there isn’t any proof that Jussie wrote the letter to himself.

 

I’m just thinking as a lawyer and curious as to what other evidence the police department has. If they have released everything that they have(I’m thinking they haven’t) then Jussie’s lawyers are in a good spot. However, they have to disclose everything they have on Jussie don’t they?

Not sure on all of the specifics. I look at it in the same way as I do Robert Kraft. If agencies feel confident enough to go public with information, that generally does not bode well for the accused and they (PD) are coming from a position of strength. Most people charged with crimes are guilty.

 

As an aside, I do not get the need for the Chicago PD going on a public premature victory lap.

Are the two guys actually involved in a physical training/nutrition business?