Smollett Lawyer Reportedly Demands Mistrial After Accusing Judge of Lunging At Her

If you thought that Smollett case could not get more bizarre, think again. CBS 2 Legal Analyst Irv Miller is reporting that defense attorney Tamara Walker had a sidebar conversation with attorneys from both sides and Cook County Judge James Linn. She reportedly accused Judge Linn of some improper comment and then said that he lunged at her in the courtroom.  She was crying during the sidebar.  Another Smollett attorney accused Linn of snarling and making faces during the trial. In thirty years of practice as a criminal defense attorney, I have never heard of such allegations in a criminal trial.

The demand for a mistrial was rejected.

In a case where the defendant is accused of manufacturing a bizarre alleged attack, the allegation of a judge lunging at his counsel seems weirdly consistent.  There is no indication if there is proof of such threatening act or the alleged faces being made from the bench.

The case itself is a train wreck of a defense. Counsel seems to be throwing out unsubstantiated claims or suggestions in cross examination, including affairs with Smollett. The evidence is overwhelming against Smollett who is alleged to have hired two Nigerian brothers to stage the attack. This allegedly included a “dry run” with the men.

From the outset, the attack was facially unbelievable in many of its details.

The unbelievable elements of the original allegation did not stop the media and many politicians from immediately denouncing the racist attack as a fact. Harris described what happened to Jussie Smollett as an “attempted modern-day lynching.” Nancy Pelosi said it was a “homophobic attack and an affront to our humanity.”

He was given a fawning interview by Robin Roberts of ABC, which ended with her calling his comments “beautiful.”

ROBERTS: It’s been two weeks since that night left actor Jussie Smollett bruised but not broken.

SMOLLETT: I still want to believe, with everything that has happened, that there’s something called justice. Because if I stop believing that, then what was it all for?

ROBERTS: Beautiful, thank you, Jussie.

 

89 thoughts on “Smollett Lawyer Reportedly Demands Mistrial After Accusing Judge of Lunging At Her”

  1. Mr. Smollet’s presentation of what happened doesn’t seem credible. But, that’s for the jury to decide. Never presume on what verdict a jury will reach. Remember how some of the legal ‘experts’ were ridiculing Jose Baez defence of Caaey Anthony. Trial by jury may not be perfect, but it’s the best available option.

  2. Minorities create racism whenever the commit crimes against whites. If they want to eradicate racism, the onus is on them not to do the things that cause whites to have negative opinions of them. Freedom of conscience means that they have a right to. This is fair and reasonable.

  3. Juice has to be prosecuted and serve some jail time. He’s like a little kid that craves attention.

    1. Independent: “He’s like a little kid that craves attention.”

      +++

      He will get it in jail. Brer Rabbit into the briar patch for him.

  4. @pbinca,

    Yes its a fair question.
    He got off light thanks to his political connections and Kim Foxx being an idjit.

    The police wanted reimbursement for his wasting their time, efforts and making them look like the keystone cops on national TV while chasing a BS story.

    Had he paid, saying its not an admission of wrong doing, but to put this horrible event behind him so he can move on… he would have come out ahead.

    The lying to police, filing a false police report… that’s a class 4 felony in IL.
    Max sentence would be 1-3yrs in jail/prison. Plus fines.

    When you consider the police were looking for what? 130K to cover their costs?
    He could have paid that and the PR team to help spin it.

    Instead… he’s paying much more in a legal defense… He’ll have a felony on his record… possible jail time… and still paying the 130K plus the cost to the city.

    Much more expensive and no upside to his career.

    -G

  5. @Ralph…
    Life in prison?

    That implies Smollet’s crime warrants life in prison.

    I think you meant to say or imply prison life assuming he gets jail time.

    He could, get some jail time for filing a false police report.
    In IL its a class 4 felony with up to 1-3 yrs of jail time.

    In this case… he will most likely be found guilty. (IMHO)
    The fact that he could have reimbursed the police and called it a day, yet continued this farce on the national stage…
    He should get some jail time.

    I’m sure he wants it to help embellish his ‘bad boy’ persona.
    If he just paid the fine, he’d look like more of a loser than he already is.

  6. If minorities aren’t very good at wielding political power, then maybe there’s a case to be made for white supremacy.

  7. Wow.
    During a side bar, the judge is still separated by his bench from the jurists.
    In chambers… there are no witnesses. No cameras. Just the jurists, maybe a court reporter… but if what was claimed to be true… the prosecutor would have backed this story.

    The lawyer knows her case is going down faster than Kamel Toe on a political donor who could advance her career. (Or Hunter on a line of coke.)
    So this is her best way to give rise to a potential appeal.

    Smollet’s claim from the beginning was a joke. CPD and anyone who lived in the neighborhood knew it was all BS.

    To add to this… he could have just paid the costs admitting no guilt just to put this behind him.
    Would have been much cheaper than going to trial… and that should have been how to spin it.
    $150K for fines, no admission of guilt… vs 500K in legal fees, plus restitution, plus potential jail time.
    (Or more.) The point is that Smollett isn’t just a bad actor but not the sharpest tool in the shed.

    -G

  8. @Jeff,

    A bit of deflection?

    But I’ll play along…

    What do you call it when Democrats use ‘dark money’ or supposed non/not for profits which strongly favor the Dems in getting out the vote?
    (e.g. ballot boxes in heavy Dem districts only…)
    What do you call it when you have video evidence of intentional miscounting of ballots? Mysterious shutdowns in counting? Kicking out or refusing to allow GOP watchers access?
    What do you call it when you have adjudication which goes all to one side?
    Illegal changes to election laws in certain states?

    Anomalies?
    Now in a tight race, in certain states… too many anomalies to be discredited.

    You don’t need a lot of cheating to swing an election…

    And we haven’t even talked about the post election antics…

    So if Stacy Abrams can claim she was robbed… or the Dems claim the IOWA seat was stolen… maybe there’s an actual fire when someone says they smell smoke.

    -G

    1. G,

      All Trumpist election lies. You may or may not believe them; I don’t. Period. Enough said.

  9. @Richard Lowe…

    That’s easy…

    Can you say munchies?
    These Hollywood types never bother to plan ahead.

    Second…. he wanted to avoid the rush of ‘fans’ and paparazzi who constantly ‘stalk’ him because he is so ‘famous’.

    Third… In that neighborhood, at 2:00am … not much is open. He’d have had to get an Uber to get somewhere else near the clubs…

    Full disclosure…. I live in River North for 20 yrs…. about a click due west.
    The minute they news came out about this being an alleged MAGA attack… I knew it was fake. Anyone in the area knew it was fake.
    Most of the GOP leaning or GOP members who live in the area… are older, and settled down. Upper 2% types.
    We also know that its during the summer when violence is on the rise. And its not those who support the GOP that is causing it.

    -Gumby

  10. Blacks victimize whites more than whites victimize blacks. Police records and court documents will show this, but the not the liberal media that creates the illusion that whites victimize minorities more. I can remember a few off the top of my head: a white girl working in a Subway in Tampa shot by a black guy, two homeless white guys in St Petersburg shot and killed by a few black guys, a white guy named Ryan stabbed to death by black guy in Denver, white baby Antonio shot in the head by a black guy,
    In Tampa a black guy beat and bloodied a blind white guy. When you report facts like this, you start to sound like the Klan, and the liberal media would do anything to avoid that.

  11. What bothered me from the outset was that no one was asking why Jussie was out at 2 am to get food when it was 24 below zero, with windchills as low as 55 below.

  12. One lawyer alleged that the judge “lunged at her in the courtroom. She was crying during the sidebar.” The other accused the judge “of snarling and making faces during the trial.”

    So a hoaxer is defended by two hoaxers.

    This keeps getting better and better.

    (I wonder if there’s video of the lawyer rehearsing her crying? Perhaps with Smollett’s coaching: “Think of some tragic that happened to you . . .”)

  13. The article by Turkey is confusing. Who witnessed the judge assault? Moving forward while sitting at the bench is not an attack or lunge.
    Yak yak go back.
    Banana danna go back
    Fee Fi foe Mac.

  14. Jews did not need to resort to hate crime hoaxes during the Nazi Era. Blacks did not need to fabricate false racist allegations during slavery and Jim Crow. American Asians don’t need to make up stories of being discriminated against in high school or college admissions.

    When there is a real problem of racism or anti-semitism, there are so many real instances that there is simply no need to perpetrate a hoax. When you resort to hoaxes, you prove that institutional racism is not really a problem.

  15. Well, there would have been a lot of people there. If a deranged judge “snarled”, growled, turned into a werewolf, or launched himself or lunged at the defense lawyer, then there would be witnesses. Did the judge throw bleach on the lawyer? Pay a Nigerian man to lunge at the lawyer?

    If any of this happened, there would be witnesses.

    Smolett should be ashamed of himself, fabricating this entire story.

    1. Karen says:

      “Smolett should be ashamed of himself, fabricating this entire story.”

      Really. What about you lying Trumpists who fabricated a story that the election was stolen on account of massive fraud? And what about you Q-Anon Trumpists who are “1/6 Truthers” who believe that it was a FBI false flag operation?

      Have you no shame, Karen?

      As for Smollett, let the chips fall where they may. I could not care less about this case.

      One wonders why Turley is more concerned with this trivial case than analyzing the legal merits of the Bannon contempt prosecution and the Constitutionality of the claims of Executive Privilege by those Trumpists trying to evade Congressional subpoenas. Apart from a single article weeks ago, all we hear from Turley is:

      Crickets….

      Instead, he brings up this Smollett case which garnered not even 40 comments! Proof positive that Turley is avoiding hot topics and distracting us with trivial ones. I concede that the MSM is shamefully ignoring Hunter Biden, but Turley is likewise ignoring the 1/6 investigation. He labeled the Capitol riot a “desecration” and even called for Trump’s Congressional censure for his “reckless” 1/6 speech! But now, seemingly, he could not care less who the 1/6 ringleaders were; rather, he apparently wants the gullible Trumpist rioters to take all the blame. I say “apparently,” for it is just as likely that he disagrees with the Trumpists’ claims of Executive Privilege, and he altogether approves of the subpoenas and the Committee’s 1/6 investigation. Who knows where he stands. I suspect that he self-censors on account of his allegiance to Fox News which dismisses the 1/6 investigation as a witch-hunt.

      However, lucky for us, we DO know where Turley stands on the far more consequential Smollett case…

        1. The Princess’s endless pas de deux with Trump should get a hook from the wings. And buy another tutu Princess.

        2. Young remarks:

          “The Princess is doing another little ballet number.”

          And I stuck the landing!

  16. OT:

    Stunning development on University of Florida saga re: 3 faculty & academic freedom. Board of Trustees step up….a rare thing

    University of Florida Board of Trustees Chairman Morteza “Mori” Hosseini:

    “We saw that some (faculty) have taken advantage of their positions. I am speaking here of faculty members taking second jobs using the university’s state resources for their own personal gain. I am speaking about faculty members who use their positions of authority to improperly advocate personal political viewpoints to the exclusion of others,… To this I say — enough. This behavior is unacceptable. It is disrespectful not only to the taxpayers of Florida, whose hard-earned dollars pay faculty salaries, but it is also disrespectful to these faculty members’ hard-working colleagues — the ones who are doing their jobs honestly and fulfilling their missions.”

    When Hosseini was done, other trustees thanked him.

    “Sharon Austin, Michael McDonald and Daniel Smith were stopped from giving paid expert testimony in a voting rights case against the state because it would be “adverse to the university’s interests as a state of Florida institution.”

    Gainesville Sun

    https://www.gainesville.com/story/news/education/campus/2021/12/03/uf-trustees-defend-administrations-stance-academic-freedom/8796426002/

            1. Hey, I have a great idea. Why don’t you start a new blog called Off Topic. That way you can post your comments on totally irrelevant subjects whenever you want.

              1. You’re welcome to petition Professor Turley for a refund of your subscription fees, start your own blog or just STFU

                1. I knew these responses were coming. Thanks for proving this adage,,
                  (Old Chinese Proverb.)
                  Is it better to keep your mouth shut and seem a fool, or to open your mouth and remove all doubt?

              2. (OT)

                EconIsEasy has anointed himself Blog Czar. His decrees shall be blindly obeyed — irrespective of the rules stated, or the traditions allowed, by the blog’s owner (JT) and its administrator (Darren).

                After all, isn’t it common practice for a dinner guest to decree which utensils the other dinner guests can and cannot use?

                1. I knew these responses were coming. Thanks for proving this adage,,
                  (Old Chinese Proverb.)
                  Is it better to keep your mouth shut and seem a fool, or to open your mouth and remove all doubt?

          1. “. . . stay on topic . . .”

            Who died and made you blog king?

            If that were a blog rule, it would have been stated and enforced long ago.

            If you don’t like “OT,’ scroll down. It isn’t that complicated.

            1. I knew these responses were coming. Thanks for proving this adage,,
              (Old Chinese Proverb.)
              Is it better to keep your mouth shut and seem a fool, or to open your mouth and remove all doubt?

          2. Econ: “Don’t you understand, stay on topic or go comment on the appropriate post. It really isn’t that complicated,,”

            +++

            That statement is off topic.

            Commenter, heal thyself.

Leave a Reply