Janice R. Andrews
The presumed Democratic presidential contender, vice president Kamala Harris, previously referred to prominent hate crime hoaxer Jussie Smollett as the victim of an attempted “modern-day lynching.” Harris has not removed her 2019 social media post that repeated the false accusation, even after the “Empire” star was found guilty of a crime related to the staged incident in Illinois.
Smollett reported in January 2019 that two masked individuals had “put a rope around his neck, doused him in bleach, and said, ‘This is MAGA country!'” in the middle of the polar vortex in Chicago. “@JussieSmollett is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know,” wrote Senator Harris of California at the time on X, a platform that was once known as Twitter. I’m hoping for a speedy recovery for him. This was a contemporary attempt at lynching. Because of their sexual orientation or skin tone, no one should have to live in constant dread for their lives. We have to face this hatred.”
Shortly after learning that Smollett was the subject of a police investigation for submitting a fake complaint, Harris said he was “sad, frustrated, and disappointed” that the actor had made “false claims to police.” However, Eugene Roy, a former chief of detectives from the Chicago Police Department with over thirty years of experience on the field, claims that her initial remarks were condemned as a “rush to judgment” and a “hurried decision before all the facts are known.”
“Sending your support to a buddy is one thing. Roy, who was featured in the Fox Nation program “Jussie Smollett: Anatomy of a Hoax,” stated, “It’s another to use your platform as a government official to prejudge a case before it’s played out to all the facts.” A request for comment from Harris’s campaign and her White House office was not answered.
Prosecutors established the case’s facts in court by presenting evidence that Smollett enlisted the cooperation of two brothers, Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundairo, to help construct a fictitious hate crime. In January 2019, Smollett—a Black man who identifies as gay—falsely claimed to Chicago Police that he had been the target of a homophobic and racial attack by two men donning ski masks. The Osundairo brothers’ claim that the event was staged was supported by text messages, social media communications, GPS data, phone records, ride-share records, and video surveillance footage. Following a trial that lasted over two weeks in 2021, a jury convicted Smollett guilty on five of the six charges of disorderly behavior.
Following his conviction, Smollett received a sentence of 150 days in prison. In addition, he was given a 30-month felony probationary term, mandated to pay a $25,000 fine, and $120,106 in reparations to the city of Chicago. The Illinois Supreme Court accepted Smollett’s appeal of his conviction in March and decided to take up the case. Smollett’s lawyers stated in a February court statement that “what should have been a straightforward case has been complicated by the intersection of politics and public outrage.” They reiterated a previous appeal’s argument, arguing that he was not entitled to a double jeopardy trial in 2021 because he had already completed community service and given up a $10,000 bond as part of a 2019 agreement with the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office to drop the first 16 counts of disorderly conduct.
Harris, a former state attorney general of California, wasn’t the only Democrat tricked by Smollett’s false narrative. Her opponent in the Democratic primary at the time, President Biden, also tweeted his condemnation of the alleged hate crime that is still accessible on the internet. On January 29, 2019, Biden commented, “What happened to @JussieSmollett today must never be tolerated in this country.” “We need to take a stance and insist that racism and homophobia have no place in our communities or in our hearts, and that we stop providing this hate with a safe haven. Jussie, you have our support.”
In addition to stressing that society frequently values “a quick sound bite” more than a “thorough, impartial investigation,” Roy issued a caution that spontaneous responses to well-publicized court issues might “cast a shadow” over the public’s opinion of the judicial system. “As a government official, you can express support for your friends and supporters, but you should do it in a judicious and appropriate manner that doesn’t call into question the integrity of the judicial process,” Roy stated. “People see who has made hasty judgments about controversial issues and, hopefully, they keep that in mind when they evaluate the merits of the candidates.”
Harris’ earlier remarks on the Smollett case may come under further scrutiny as the 2024 presidential contest heats up, particularly from people who are leery of politicians making snap decisions in prominent judicial cases. When voting their ballots, voters will have to choose how much importance to place on these instances.
