The Hammer Comes Down On Smollett’s Prosecutor
Image credit: Fox News

Letting Jussie Smollett walk is going to have some major repercussions.

In a blistering condemnation of the dismissal of all 16 felony charges against “Empire” star Jussie Smollett, the Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association (IPBA) has accused State’s Attorney Kim Foxx and her office of having “fundamentally misled” the public about the circumstances surrounding the dismissal of the case.

The backlash against the decision Tuesday by Foxx’s office to suddenly drop all charges in the high-profile “hoax hate crime” case continues to mount. On Wednesday, the National District Attorneys Association (NDAA), which represents prosecutors across the country, released a statement detailing what Foxx’s office did wrong. On Thursday, the IPBA, which “serves as the voice for nearly 1,000 front line prosecutors across the state,” issued its own, even more directly accusatory statement.

“The events of the past few days regarding the Cook County State’s Attorney’s handling of the Jussie Smollett case is not condoned by the IPBA, nor is it representative of the honest ethical work prosecutors provide to the citizens of the State of Illinois on a daily basis,” the statement reads.

“The manner in which this case was dismissed was abnormal and unfamiliar to those who practice law in criminal courthouses across the State,” the association continues. “Prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges alike do not recognize the arrangement Mr. Smollett received. Even more problematic, the State’s Attorney and her representatives have fundamentally misled the public on the law and circumstances surrounding the dismissal.”

Among the “fundamentally” misleading statements Foxx and her office have made to the public: falsely claiming that she had recused herself, which would require appointing a special prosecutor, which she failed to do, keeping the decision in-house and thus still influenced by her. She has also “falsely informed the public that the uncontested sealing of the criminal court case was ‘mandatory’ under Illinois law,” a claim which “is not accurate.” The prosecutors also point to the still unexplained “emergency” hearing that resulted in the decision, which has “compounded” the appearance of “impropriety.”

“Lastly, the State’s Attorney has claimed this arrangement is ‘available to all defendants’ and ‘not a new or unusual practice,'” the prosecutors state. “There has even been an implication it was done in accordance with a statutory diversion program. These statements are plainly misleading and inaccurate.”

Read the full statement below:

The Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association serves as the voice for nearly 1,000 front line prosecutors across the State who work tirelessly towards the pursuit of justice. The events of the past few days regarding the Cook County State’s Attorney’s handling of the Jussie Smollett case is not condoned by the IPBA, nor is it representative of the honest ethical work prosecutors provide to the citizens of the State of Illinois on a daily basis.

The manner in which this case was dismissed was abnormal and unfamiliar to those who practice law in criminal courthouses across the State. Prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges alike do not recognize the arrangement Mr. Smollett received. Even more problematic, the State’s Attorney and her representatives have fundamentally misled the public on the law and circumstances surrounding the dismissal.

The public has the right to know the truth, and we set out to do that here.

When an elected State’s Attorney recuses herself from a prosecution, Illinois law provides that the court shall appoint a special prosecutor. See 55 ILCS 5/3-9008(a-15). Typically, the special prosecutor is a neighboring State’s Attorney, the Attorney General, or the State Appellate Prosecutor. Here, the State’s Attorney kept the case within her office and thus never actually recused herself as a matter of law.

Additionally, the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office falsely informed the public that the uncontested sealing of the criminal court case was “mandatory” under Illinois law. This statement is not accurate. To the extent the case was even eligible for an immediate seal, that action was discretionary, not mandatory, and only upon the proper filing of a petition to seal. See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(g)(2). For seals not subject to Section 5.2(g)(2), the process employed in this case by the State’s Attorney effectively denied law enforcement agencies of legally required Notice (See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(d)(4)) and the legal opportunity to object to the sealing of the file (See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(d)(5)). The State’s Attorney not only declined to fight the sealing of this case in court, but then provided false information to the public regarding it.

The appearance of impropriety here is compounded by the fact that this case was not on the regularly scheduled court call, the public had no reasonable notice or opportunity to view these proceedings, and the dismissal was done abruptly at what has been called an “emergency” hearing. To date, the nature of the purported emergency has not been publicly disclosed. The sealing of a court case immediately following a hearing where there was no reasonable notice or opportunity for the public to attend is a matter of grave public concern and undermines the very foundation of our public court system.

Lastly, the State’s Attorney has claimed this arrangement is “available to all defendants” and “not a new or unusual practice.” There has even been an implication it was done in accordance with a statutory diversion program. These statements are plainly misleading and inaccurate. This action was highly unusual, not a statutory diversion program, and not in accordance with well accepted practices of State’s Attorney initiated diversionary programs. The IPBA supports diversion programs, and recognizes the many benefits they provide to the community, the defendant and to the prosecuting agency. Central to any diversion program, however, is that the defendant must accept responsibility. To be clear here, this simply was not a deferred prosecution.

Prosecutors must be held to the highest standard of legal ethics in the pursuit of justice. The actions of the Cook County State’s Attorney have fallen woefully short of this expectation. Through the repeated misleading and deceptive statements to the public on Illinois law and circumstances surrounding the Smollett dismissal, the State’s Attorney has failed in her most fundamental ethical obligations to the public. The IPBA condemns these actions.

This irregular arrangement was an affront to prosecutors across the State, the Chicago Police Department, victims of hate crimes, and the people of the City of Chicago and Cook County. We strongly encourage our members and the public to review the National District Attorneys Associations statement on prosecutorial best practices in high profile cases.

Src: The Daily Wire

20 comments
  1. The fix was in, is the only way it can be seen. If any of the Obama’s or their friends were involved, they should be prosecuted for interfering with justice, just as those who exonerated Hillary should be held accountable. None of this bods well for the country or our justice system.

    1. Trust me, Jussie Smollet doesn’t have a clue what he is in for, it would’ve been better for him had he received the punishment. He is not going free, not by a long shot, and he will be hounded and attacked verbally everywhere he goes. He will end up getting his JUSS dues!
      Yes, it is quite obvious that the woman and man who hates Whites and stand up for Blacks, even when they committed violent crimes, was in on this. The Obamas!

  2. So does she lose her law license? I think she should since she committed a crime by lying and not by following her own statement that she refused herself from the case. She is corrupt as they come look at who she did all of this for. Certainly not Trump. Hold her accountable and the former cos for Obama.

  3. I am embarrassed to point this out but Smollett is black, the two perpetrators he hired for the “hate crime” were black, the prosecutor is black, do we see a pattern here. I am not in any way racist, nor do I dislike any ethnicity or color. But, when something like this happens I have to look to Jesus to keep my mouth shut and my opinions to myself. She should be barred from practicing law in any state.

  4. Did she not realize she would get herself in hot water? Or were her Obama connections enough for her to think she is above the law? This is so blatant a travesty, and a racially charged one at that, it cannot be ignored.

  5. Obama’s were involved and they need to get to the bottom of it. If they broke the law put them all in jail. I am so tired of plea deals. Why give them a reduced sentence if you know they did it? If they don’t cooperate then add years.

  6. Just more examples of black privilege. Smollett doesnt have to go jail becuase his black and the prosecutor got into law school and into her job becuase shes black. Black privilege. The only institutional racism in the United states is against white males and that racism is proven by the affirmative action laws.

  7. This arrogant action by the prosecutors office clearly comes from people used to doing such favors for their criminal friends. It makes the prosecutors everywhere smell as bad as Comeys FBI and Mueller and his DOJ/DNC pals.

  8. The prosecutor falls in the same category as Smollett. Minority, democrat, rich – totally exempt from the laws and regulations that the common ref-raf live under. They are so corrupt and they counterparts are so spineless they have a free reign within their own sphere of influence. Sewer rats.

  9. Jussie Smollet arranged and staged a fake racist and homophobic ‘attack’ on himself to further his career? I wonder if he really wanted to start a race war with this fakery, which would add inciting to riot to his crimes. Even if he did not intend that, his actions could have caused a race war. These are very serious potential consequences of this incendiary fakery, which he reported to police and still insists is true, despite all evidence to the contrary reported by the police investigators. His actions are like yelling “FIRE!” In a crowded theater, but with potential nationwide riots resulting. Dismissal of charges (if upheld) will not protect him against reinstatement of local charges or from federal charges. He was not tried and was not acquitted by a court of law, so he cannot claim ‘double jeopardy’ The state prosecutor (Ms Foxx) should be disbarred for her misleading and underhanded recusal- (“but not really”) and for subverting the police investigation and prosecution of this case.

  10. BOTH Jussie (what the hell kind of a name is that, anyway) and this Jamala fem should be thrown into the slammer.

    The “Jus” should be dragged back in and charged again. Where the hell is the FBI? This was supposedly a hate crime. Forget Jamala, get the FBI in there to take care of this as a FEDERAL, then disbar her @s$.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sign Up for Our Newsletters

You May Also Like

The Conspiracy AOC Just Made Up

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is getting more out of control with each…

Pentagon Decision Aids Trump’s Wall

The Department of Defense made a new declaration regarding future plans for…

BOMBSHELL: HARD Evidence Found Of Hillary Corruption

The day has finally come…

DNC Plan Backfires Spectacularly

President Donald Trump has reacted to a plan from the DNC that’s…