• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Deleted member 51266

User requested account closure
Banned
Dec 26, 2018
278
unknown.png




I didn't keep up with this news but I just saw this on discord and it got a laugh out of me.
 

Onebadlion

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,190
Took them over a year to "investigate" the murder of Laquan McDonald by one of their own, which was captured on video. They solved Jussie's bullshit in under a month though.

Amazing what pigs are capable of with the proper motivation.

Or maybe he's such a fucking idiot that it was kinda easy to solve? It doesn't take a crack team of detectives when you do dumb shit like pay your "attacker" by check.
 

Kreed

The Negro Historian
Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,116

This just means the brothers are claiming they weren't paid for the attack/Jussie Smollett is "slightly" lower on the stupid criminals list for writing a check if the TMZ story is true. Remember that CPD/prosecutors say that Smollett asked the brothers to do this as a "favor on the low" and paid them 100 dollars to buy the items.

In the TMZ article, it says they told the grand jury that they were paid $3500 for 5 weeks of physical training, which they felt was high, and promised additional payment for the attack.

Additional payment for the attack is not in this TMZ article:

A few days before the "attack," Jussie wrote the brothers a check for $3,500. The memo line read, "5 weeks training nutrition plan." Our sources say Ola and Abel told the grand jury they were paid for the 5-week program and not for the "attack." One source connected with the brothers did say Ola and Abel felt the amount was "a little high" but no one ever specifically said anything about any of the money being part of a scheme.

We've learned the brothers also told the grand jury that they had nothing to do with the threatening letter mailed to Jussie Smollett 8 days before the "attack."

There was a previous TMZ article/other articles mentioning a 500 dollar payment in addition to the 3500 payment however, but this new TMZ article would call that into question as well.
 

tk44

Member
Feb 23, 2019
4
The main problem that this whole case highlights is the acceptance and large scale participation in destructive mob mentality, and irrational group think. We are collectively more guilty than any of the involved parties in terms of what damage we are causing. For some reason we mostly all feel the need to pick a conclusive belief, with far from conclusive evidence. Based on mutually agreed upon jumps of logic, we immediately start persecution with verbal assault and wishes of harm, and it's socially acceptable. By now, history should have taught us to be more cautious. Religions and cults, scientific persecution, racism and slavery, genocide, the list goes on. Mob mentality, absolute presumption and narcissistic defense of our conclusions can lead to bad things. The fact is, none of us knew what really happened, and none of us (except the involved parties) really know for sure what happened still. People like to speculate, and follow their intuition. Why would x do y? etc. Shouldn't we stop to think that we don't really know what's in the minds of others, let alone strangers? Truth is very often stranger, and different than your imagination. Peoples gut feelings and intuition are constantly wrong, and that is not surprising, we are not super heroes like Dr. Strange who can evaluate every possible set of circumstances. Most people are reasoning about it based on some basic imagined scenarios that they piece together in their heads. Reality is often more complicated. There are many different possibilities.

There is now widespread presumption that he is guilty and mainstream consensus on motives. But I could easily come up with multiple plausible scenarios and sets of motivations that go against the mainstream. Surveys have shown that 98% of Nigerians are anti-gay. https://umsu.unimelb.edu.au/nigeria-the-most-homophobic-country-on-earth/ . As an outsider working with only stereotypes, this implies good chance that the Nigerians in question could have had a hate based motive. Even if the two Nigerians involved didn't appear homophobic, and seemed to be friends with Smollett, this appearance would have economic/career incentive anyway. Why would they yell MAGA and racist things? They don't want to be caught I assume. It's conceivable that they would choose a strategy like this to try and throw off suspicion. How could he have fought off two larger attackers without serious injury? They may have been afraid of getting caught (revealing identity) in a scuffle. Or maybe they could have been planning to scare Smollett so they could convince him to hire them as body guards or for further training? Maybe they had a change of heart? Why would Smollett wear the rope afterwards? I know people who I guess would do something like that, and others who I guess wouldn't. People are not that simple. Why go to Subway in the middle of the night in the cold instead of Uber eats? People walk outside in the cold sometimes. If you dress warm it's not a problem. Some people don't mind going for walks at night. To be honest, I would do it. What are the chances of the two brothers being out at night ready with bleach and a rope? It was planned. They would have needed some way to know he would be there and out at night. Maybe Smollett goes for walks at night, and they've devised a way to know he's left his apartment on foot? How can we know? Didn't Smollett get caught paying them to do it? Turns out, based on new reports that he payed them for training. Maybe some of the news reports that people have been taking for granted as fact are unreliable. It seems like the main evidence we have been presented with so far is testimony. The police believe the Nigerians, but they are not without bias and have limited intelligence just like you and me. If the Nigerians are guilty, what do you think they would say? Smollett seems like he is acting, but a lot of people act strange when confronted like he has been. I don't know him, so I couldn't be sure how he would act, or what types of things he would say/do in response. I do know some people who always seem like bad actors. If we presume Smollett is guilty, there are some other similar questions that we must speculate about. How would Smollett get the nerve to ask the two Nigerians to fake attack him? It would be an awkward thing to ask of a person wouldn't it?

I could easily put forward other perspectives, either in support of Smollett, or against him. None of these types of speculations should be sufficient to jump to conclusion and begin cries to harm the person. It's not specifically this case that stands out. There is a trend rising with social media and outrage culture. We are itching for something sufficient to give us the power to project the outrage. Projection of outrage based on isolated events is the new weapon in this stage. In this game, if Jussie is guilting then one side wins because they can exploit it to generate more outrage beneficial to their agendas than the other side can. Maybe what a few random people do isn't a grand sign of the times and representation of an entire population? It should be a lesson to the masses to be critical and independent thinkers, and to strive for the willpower to let the uncertain be uncertain. This is especially important now that we are in an era of professional trolling, bots, misinformation campaigns, advanced psychological understanding, and mass surveillance and data collection that allows machine learning algorithms to learn and exploit our triggers and bypass our good judgement.
 
Last edited:
Sep 14, 2018
4,632
There is now widespread presumption that he is guilty and mainstream consensus on motives. But I could easily come up with multiple plausible scenarios and sets of motivations that go against the mainstream.

I wish I had time right now to properly tear apart this nonsensical word vomit, but what makes you think your plausible scenarios are worth anything? Does your little thought exercise have any evidence to back it up? No? Then who cares, there is plenty of incriminating evidence against him, this widespread presumption didn't come from nowhere.

It should be a lesson to the masses to be critical and independent thinkers, and to strive for the willpower to let the uncertain be uncertain.

And the classic sheeple drivel where the unwashed masses are dumb and you're a bastion of enlightenment above it all. Sure.

How's this sound? People believed his initial account of an attack as it's not exactly uncommon, then evidence came up pointing to the attack being staged, which led to people being upset at being duped, this is not evidence of lack of critical thinking on anyone's part, but of a hoax blowing up.

But yes people should be wary of false information and jumping to conclusions, thanks for the fortune cookie advice.
 

tk44

Member
Feb 23, 2019
4
I wish I had time right now to properly tear apart this nonsensical word vomit, but what makes you think your plausible scenarios are worth anything? Does your little thought exercise have any evidence to back it up? No? Then who cares, there is plenty of incriminating evidence against him, this widespread presumption didn't come from nowhere.



And the classic sheeple drivel where the unwashed masses are dumb and you're a bastion of enlightenment above it all. Sure.

How's this sound? People believed his initial account of an attack as it's not exactly uncommon, then evidence came up pointing to the attack being staged, which led to people being upset at being duped, this is not evidence of lack of critical thinking on anyone's part, but of a hoax blowing up.

But yes people should be wary of false information and jumping to conclusions, thanks for the fortune cookie advice.

This was an example of a plausible scenario. It has some chance of being the truth. I am not arguing this one is the truth, the point is there are more, and we don't know which one is. That people believed his account, and now don't believe his account is the problem. Nobody knows the truth yet, so why believe at all. What happens now if it turns out he is innocent? Then we will all get angry that we were duped about being duped. One thing we should be concerned about is what we do based on false premises. Group thought offers some protection agains being wrong and emboldens us...

I'm not trying to say I'm better. I fell for it too. I think it's human nature. But after reading so many comments and social media posts about this and other cases in recent times, I believe that I have become a little bit disillusioned. What if he actually isn't lying? And in general, on many different topics, of the so many people who are emotionally invested, what if they are wrong?
 
Last edited:

travisbickle

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,953
Outrage isn't a weapon, outrage is a tool for profit. Unfortunately we're all to invested in the gossip machine of the internet to not constantly post our outrage for the profit of social media. We don't resolve anything as individuals, if studies are to be believed it make us all unhappy but we feel the need to post, link, and like our own and others outrage.
 

MIMIC

Member
Dec 18, 2017
8,350
Has there been a new revelation to this story? I saw a TMZ headline saying that Jussie never paid anyone, and at this point, I'm honestly just sick of these twists and turns.
 
Sep 14, 2018
4,632
That people believed his account, and now don't believe his account is the problem.

People believed his account because an attack on him was believable, then changed their minds when a LOT of evidence came up indicating it had been staged, explain to me the problem in this specific case, where evidence refutes the whole thing. What exactly is wrong here?

Nobody knows the truth yet, so why believe at all.

The public doesn't know 100% everything about this case but is that reason to not believe the evidence against him? He's literally been indicted, do you think the charges against him are false?

You seem to want people to not have an opinion or discuss the issue until absolutely everything about the case is known, this is never going to happen, when the story broke people were ready to either believe him or not, maybe your problem is with human nature?

The "wait for all the information" talking point is usually used to discredit and stonewall victims, not jumping to conclusions is good, critical thinking is good, believing victims is better.

Has there been a new revelation to this story? I saw a TMZ headline saying that Jussie never paid anyone, and at this point, I'm honestly just sick of these twists and turns.

I think he didn't directly pay them, just asked as a favor or something, so at least he thought that one through.
 

Ichthyosaurus

Banned
Dec 26, 2018
9,375
What happens now if it turns out he is innocent? Then we will all get angry that we were duped about being duped. One thing we should additionally be concerned about is what we do based on false premises.

The dude's fucked, either way. Maybe he might recover after a few years with a low profile and a successful comeback. Which is a big maybe. This taints is life and career from here on out.

edit: That said, it's going to take a lot to convince me he was innocent from all this.
 

Sony

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
565
Took them over a year to "investigate" the murder of Laquan McDonald by one of their own, which was captured on video. They solved Jussie's bullshit in under a month though.

Amazing what pigs are capable of with the proper motivation.

This is a disingenuous AF comment with a clear agenda. Even outspoken voices in the black community questioned Jussie's 'attack'. And dumbass Jussie made the whole thing worse.

The USA has to deal with corruption in the police force, but equating all police with pigs? Pathetic.
 
Sep 14, 2018
4,632
What happens now if it turns out he is innocent? Then we will all get angry that we were duped about being duped. One thing we should be concerned about is what we do based on false premises. Group thought offers some protection agains being wrong and emboldens us...

I'm not trying to say I'm better. I fell for it too. I think it's human nature. But after reading so many comments and social media posts about this and other cases in recent times, I believe that I have become a little bit disillusioned. What if he actually isn't lying? And in general, on many different topics, of the so many people who are emotionally invested, what if they are wrong?

Stop worrying about all these hypotheticals, it's ok to have feelings and opinions about something you don't know every detail of, if it turns out he's innocent that would be even more ridiculous. You seem to have tuned out around the time the story first blew up, it would really be something if it turns out the police faked evidence and testimony against him, it would be OK to be wrong then. You're overthinking this.
 

tk44

Member
Feb 23, 2019
4
People believed his account because an attack on him was believable, then changed their minds when a LOT of evidence came up indicating it had been staged, explain to me the problem in this specific case, where evidence refutes the whole thing. What exactly is wrong here?

I was very skeptical of Smollett from the start. When the new evidence came out, at first I thought it was conclusive. But after a little while, and after more reading, I started to feel like something is off. There was a sudden perspective shift, from evaluating the plausibility of MAGA supporters doing it, to finding out the Nigerians were the suspects. People started reasoning with a warped perspective, still in political mode, and went on to inflate the validity of arguments like "Nigerians aren't going to be racist MAGA supporters." It seems many people were just debating each other before about the idea that MAGA people are racist and committing hate crimes or not. After the case became irrelevant in that regard, the stakes changed.

But now, when I really think about it, I think it is plausible that the Nigerians attacked him, maybe even more so than random legit racist people seriously yelling "This is MAGA country" in Chicago.

The public doesn't know 100% everything about this case but is that reason to not believe the evidence against him? He's literally been indicted, do you think the charges against him are false?

I don't know. It's possible he could be not only charged, but convicted and still be innocent. The evidence so far is the Nigerian's testimony, and the rumor that Smollett redacted their contacts in his phone records and refused to hand over his phone. I've since heard that the Nigerians may have been selling him drugs. That could be an excuse for that. I'm not ruling out that there is more evidence we will learn about in the future, but as of now, I'm not sure.
 
Last edited:

Wamb0wneD

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
18,735
It's only severe if you think that this one man's behavior is somehow more impactful than the centuries old power structures designed to marginalize millions of people like him.
The very fact he tried to use these centuries to his own advantage in the most shameful way possible, shitting on every actual victim out there, with his disgusting acting in interviews and doubling down, make the actions of this individual pretty severe, yes. He also had no problem sending two innocent people to jail until he realized it was his two friends who where interrogated.

I also don't see the use of comparing the actions of an individual with the oppression of an entire race, because him being part of that race is irrelevant in light of how he acted, throwing everyone else under the bus. He didn't do it because he wanted to fight the good fight, he did it so he would earn more money and get more popularity.
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,018
The very fact he tried to use these centuries to his own advantage in the most shameful way possible, shitting on every actual victim out there, with his disgusting acting in interviews and doubling down, make the actions of this individual pretty severe, yes. He also had no problem sending two innocent people to jail until he realized it was his two friends who where interrogated.

I also don't see the use of comparing the actions of an individual with the oppression of an entire race, because him being part of that race is irrelevant in light of how he acted and threw everyone else under the bus.

I think the way people keep talking as if Jussie somehow set social progress back is actually helping to maintain the status quo because that conversation shifts responsibility away from actual perpetrators of oppression onto statistically irrelevant false accounts. This is one dude who did one thing and it keeps coming up that he's somehow now responsible for a cascade of future failures to appropriately respond to social injustice. One guy cried wolf and now everybody just kinda accepts that black and gay people's accounts of discrimination are going to be ignored for another hundred years because of people like him, as if that wasn't already going to happen anyway.

Meanwhile, the Coast Guard lieutenant who was planning a mass murder isn't being framed by the news media or the general public as setting white guys back on anything. The news coverage of what he was planning to do has actually been interrupted to talk more about what Jussie did. We're no closer to meaningfully addressing white nationalist domestic terrorism, no closer to addressing gun control, and everybody just continues to accept it.

Y'all love to say that you have the ability to care about more than one thing at a time, but this thread is thirty pages and the mass murder thread stalled on three.
 

Wamb0wneD

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
18,735
I think the way people keep talking as if Jussie somehow set social progress back is actually helping to maintain the status quo because that conversation shifts responsibility away from actual perpetrators of oppression onto statistically irrelevant false accounts. This is one dude who did one thing and it keeps coming up that he's somehow now responsible for a cascade of future failures to appropriately respond to social injustice. One guy cried wolf and now everybody just kinda accepts that black and gay people's accounts of discrimination are going to be ignored for another hundred years because of people like him, as if that wasn't already going to happen anyway.

Meanwhile, the Coast Guard lieutenant who was planning a mass murder isn't being framed by the news media or the general public as setting white guys back on anything. The news coverage of what he was planning to do has actually been interrupted to talk more about what Jussie did. We're no closer to meaningfully addressing white nationalist domestic terrorism, no closer to addressing gun control, and everybody just continues to accept it.

Y'all love to say that you have the ability to care about more than one thing at a time, but this thread is thirty pages and the mass murder thread stalled on three.
I agree with you to some degree, but to just strip responsiblity away from him instead because of the circumstances PoC live in isn't the right way to go about it either, imo. The thing is his case didn't get ignored, quite the opposite in fact. Is that because he was some B-tier celebrity? Probably. Might as well have to do something with the fact the claims were so outlandish. Whatever is the case (maybe it's both), it did get attention. All the wrong attention.

I agree that it's not helping adressing more severe issues and that the media has their priorities twisted (way too often in general), but that was the case with the original story when most people assumed he was speaking the truth as well. It was a heavy race related issue when it popped up, got a lot of attention simply due to the craziness of it all, and then that attention spiraled out of control once the twists kept coming.

I don't know what ominous part of "y'all" you count me towards, but yeah, things get different attention on here. In this case the back and forth in terms of reporting and people getting back at each other every time the news shifted had some part in that I believe.

There was a very good thread about how rape jokes regarding males are something going across the entire spectrum of media, being normalized everywhere, even on Spongebob and other kids series. A prime example of toxic masculinity and something most people never paid attention to (me included). It got barely to 2 pages. It's disappointing at times, but it could also be a lot worse. I'm not sure whether we are making progress or not though.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,654
For some reason we mostly all feel the need to pick a conclusive belief, with far from conclusive evidence. Based on mutually agreed upon jumps of logic, we immediately start persecution with verbal assault and wishes of harm, and it's socially acceptable. By now, history should have taught us to be more cautious

On this forum, questioning the original story became a bannable offence. This is not the place for nuanced discussion.
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,018
I agree with you to some degree, but to just strip responsiblity away from him instead because of the circumstances PoC live in isn't the right way to go about it either, imo. The thing is his case didn't get ignored, quite the opposite in fact. Is that because he was some B-tier celebrity? Probably. Might as well have to do something with the fact the claims were so outlandish. Whatever is the case (maybe it's both), it did get attention. All the wrong attention.

I agree that it's not helping adressing more severe issues and that the media has their priorities twisted (way too often in general), but that was the case with the original story when most people assumed he was speaking the truth as well. It was a heavy race related issue when it popped up, got a lot of attention simply due to the craziness of it all, and then that attention spiraled out of control once the twists kept coming.

I don't know what ominous part of "y'all" you count me towards, but yeah, things get different attention on here. In this case the back and forth in terms of reporting and people getting back at each other every time the news shifted had some part in that I believe.

There was a very good thread about how rape jokes regarding males are something going across the entire spectrum of media, being normalized everywhere, even on Spongebob and other kids series. A prime example of toxic masculinity and something most people never paid attention to (me included). It got barely to 2 pages. It's disappointing at times, but it could also be a lot worse. I'm not sure whether we are making progress or not though.

He's probably going to jail and his career is probably going to be over. I feel like that's enough in terms of holding him accountable. What he did isn't representative of some epidemic that needs this kind of extreme scrutiny and admonishment.
 

Sweeney Swift

User Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,743
#IStandWithTaylor
Has there been a new revelation to this story? I saw a TMZ headline saying that Jussie never paid anyone, and at this point, I'm honestly just sick of these twists and turns.
https://www.tmz.com/2019/02/24/jussie-smollett-training-texts-payment-check-abel-attack/
Jussie Smollett has hard evidence to support his claim the Chicago Police Superintendent got it wrong when he told the media the actor paid $3,500 to Abel and Ola Osundairo to stage an attack.

TMZ has obtained documents that on the surface back his claim the $3,500 check he wrote to Abel was for training. The check was written to Abel on January 23, 2019, six days before the "attack." The memo line reads, "5 week Nutrition/Workout program Don't Go."

Sources connected to Jussie tell us, the reference to "Don't Go" is a song for which Jussie was going to shoot a music video ... featuring himself shirtless. The sources say Jussie had gained weight -- he was 192 lbs and needed to lose 20 pounds for the shoot, and that's why he hired Abel ... whom he says he calls "Bon."

There are various texts starting from January 20 between Jussie and Bon. On January 28 -- the day before the "attack" -- Bon wrote, "I know you're traveling today, make sure you get at least 45 mins of cardio."

Another text on January 20 outlines a menu for the day, including chicken thigh, Starkist Tuna, Eggs and Smucker's peanut butter. And, a text on January 25 reads, "This is the meal plan and the breakdown of macronutrients. Also includes projected fat loss."

You also see a text showing a calendar where February 23 is marked "Don't Go." The sources say that's the date of the music video shoot.

There's another screenshot from Sept. 27, 2018, presumably showing Jussie has paid Ola in the past. It's a Venmo payment of $100 to Bola (Abimbola aka Abel) for "Training."

Sources connected to Jussie say the $3,500 breakdown is as follows -- $600 a week for the workout plan for 5 weeks, and $100 a week for the nutrition plan for 5 weeks.

As we reported, Ola and Abel also told the grand jury the payment was for training.
 

Stouffers

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,924
With this new info, I can see a "Throw momma from the train" scenario. It's possible Smollet and the brothers discussed a fake attack with both parties completely misunderstanding each other. Like Smollet thought they were joking or just talking hypothetically with the brothers taking it as a serious plan.
 

okay

Member
Oct 25, 2017
589
With this new info, I can see a "Throw momma from the train" scenario. It's possible Smollet and the brothers discussed a fake attack with both parties completely misunderstanding each other. Like Smollet thought they were joking or just talking hypothetically with the brothers taking it as a serious plan.
Why would he call the police and file a police report in this scenario?
 

rude

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,812
With this new info, I can see a "Throw momma from the train" scenario. It's possible Smollet and the brothers discussed a fake attack with both parties completely misunderstanding each other. Like Smollet thought they were joking or just talking hypothetically with the brothers taking it as a serious plan.
So they just all coincidentally met up at 2am in a polar vortex in Chicago even though Jussie actually wasn't in on it because he only texted the brothers and told them what to do to him hypothetically and then Jussie reported a hate crime to the police that includes events that didn't actually happen and white men that don't exist and then misled the public about the aforementioned hypothetical hate crime he didn't mean to plan...

Bruh...
 

mugurumakensei

Elizabeth, I’m coming to join you!
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,345
It's only severe if you think that this one man's behavior is somehow more impactful than the centuries old power structures designed to marginalize millions of people like him.

You seem to misunderstand. The joke is "jusssie made a hoax about racism existing for hundreds of years". That either makes it seem like they think racism is a lie or they think the indicment is a lie. If they don't think the indicment is a lie, they are downplaying the impact of false crimes on everyone. False crimes whether done by an individual or by cops is problematic. It can send innocent people to jail for a long time. Luckily, Chicago Police is familiar with planting false evidence for fake crimes so they quickly sniffed out this one.
 

neon_dream

Member
Dec 18, 2017
3,644
With this new info, I can see a "Throw momma from the train" scenario. It's possible Smollet and the brothers discussed a fake attack with both parties completely misunderstanding each other. Like Smollet thought they were joking or just talking hypothetically with the brothers taking it as a serious plan.

Come on.
 
Oct 27, 2017
12,374
The most Terrence Howard response imaginable.

With this new info, I can see a "Throw momma from the train" scenario. It's possible Smollet and the brothers discussed a fake attack with both parties completely misunderstanding each other. Like Smollet thought they were joking or just talking hypothetically with the brothers taking it as a serious plan.

Based on the facts, this is not possible.
 
Oct 27, 2017
42,779
So they just all coincidentally met up at 2am in a polar vortex in Chicago even though Jussie actually wasn't in on it because he only texted the brothers and told them what to do to him hypothetically and then Jussie reported a hate crime to the police that includes events that didn't actually happen and white men that don't exist and then misled the public about the aforementioned hypothetical hate crime he didn't mean to plan...

Bruh...

220px-If_I_Did_It.jpg

"Hypothetically"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.