Jussie Smollett, the Empire star who was attacked in Chicago late last January, has had his case run into some snags, according to recent reports.
You may recall that Smollett allegedly had bleach poured on him and a noose put around his neck in a 2 a.m. attack on Tuesday, January 29.
Just last week, Chicago Police stated that Smollett had refused to turn over his phone so investigators could download and examine its data for clues.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
“We have no reason to doubt the statements, but for a criminal investigation, we need to independently confirm the phone records,” Chicago police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said.
“We offered to take the phone to download the data and he expressed he couldn’t be without his phone for several hours.”
Chicago Police Superintendent Eddie Johnson has said that Smollett, 36, was being treated as a crime victim, but would be held accountable if cops learn he filed a false report.
The Post found a hot sauce bottle filled with clear, bleach-scented liquid near the location of Smollett’s alleged attack and had authorities collect it as potential evidence.
Smollett did eventually turn over his phone. However, The Chicago Tribune reports, “A spokesman for police Superintendent Eddie Johnson by late evening said that the records ‘are not sufficient and do not meet the burden of a criminal investigation,’ and that police may require more assistance from the actor.”
Smollett was allegedly talking to his manager on his phone at the time of the attack.
Although there were also reports of threatening hate mail being sent to the TV actor, the FBI is investigating the hate mail and the police are investigating the attack as separate incidents, The Chicago Tribune says.
Related: Chilling new details emerge in Jussie Smollett attack, including surveillance photos
CNN anchor Don Lemon recently said he “knew everyone would be picking Smollett’s story apart,” but says he’s mostly concerned about Smollett’s well-being.
Bob LaBlah
You know, for some reason or other I seem to translate Don Lemon’s statement as: “The kid has problems and I am going to stick with him and encourage him to seek counseling.” Don is a REPORTER first, TV news anchor second. A reporter’s job is to always as who, what, why, when, where and how. And by the way, it seems a little hard to believe that Jussie wouldn’t have TWO phones in the event one was lost. Unimportant people carry two cell phones, one for pleasure and one for business. Why wouldn’t he? I’m hoping for a Don Lemon interview but I doubt it.
Vince
At the very least he could go to the phone store and have everything transferred to a new phone and that would only take a few minutes.
Bob LaBlah
My sincerest hope is he didn’t say that face to face to a seasoned detective (why he couldn’t part with his phone) but I bet he did. I can see him avoiding eye contact, staring at the floor and fishing for answers as he was being questioned. His next interview will be more on the line of an interrogation with multiple detectives and him in tears by the times its all over.
Matt1961
why in the world would we doubt Jussie, and why would we assume he should have had 2 phones? If we hold him to the same standard we hold a white woman who claims sexual assault, where would we be in this discussion? I think it disingenuous that we would discount his account of the matter until there is proof that he is not telling the truth about it, until then he is still the victim.
Bob LaBlah
@Matt1961……………In Union, SC around 1995 or so Susan Smith claimed she was carjacked by a black man and her two sons were still inside the car he drove off in. By all accounts one would think that since it was SC every young black male would be suspect in the entire state. But there were too many things that simply didn’t make sense for the sheriff and police departments to start corralling black males. Surveillance cameras were not everywhere back then but the corner where she said it happened was a high traffic corner where considering the time of day she claims it happened at too many people would have been out on the street for someone to not have seen something. Everyone questioned said they never saw a car or anything else that Susan described. Next, she didn’t notice if the guy was tall, short, long hair, short hair, braided hair, a weight approximation, skin color (as in dark, light). It was in July so surely the guy wasn’t wearing a ski mask or a hoodie. The police never believed her story so they sat her down and told her there was a security camera pointed at the very spot she claimed (there wasn’t) and this was her last chance to tell the truth. She then admitted she had driven the car off into a lake with her boys inside. She wanted to marry a guy she met but he did not want to take care of some one elses kids so she decided the kids had to go. Instead of giving her the death penalty she got thirty years before the possibility of parole and she has served twenty-four of those years.
What I’m getting at is this: when there are holes in the story that the accuser refuses to fill it is up to the investigators to start looking closer at the accuser. Imagine if the detectives had confronted a deranged man with a house full of guns trying to arrest him because he was in the area at the time and fit the description given by Smollet and he starts shooting and possibly kill someone. And afterward it turns out the guy was in the area but had nothing to do with it because it turned out to be a lie. A similar situation happened in Boston where a guy killed his wife, claimed a black guy did it, a lynch mob of police officers set out upon all black males in that neighborhood, an arrest and charges were brought against a black male and only a week later it was discovered it was all a lie. the husband had killed his wife. Yes, in most cases the police now question suspects more when doubt is present and in the case of Smollet ‘s story doubt leaps off of the screen.
Brian
The fact that virtually Jussie’s entire trip is documented on video from the huge network of security cameras in the area, while there isn’t a single frame of video of the attackers isn’t proof enough for you? How do you explain that then? People can’t defy the laws of physics.
Vince
Yeah he finally gave it to them yesterday. I’m sure it was only when he deleted everything. Factory reset and all.
The next part of this will be concern for poor jussies mental Health. Count on it.
Brian
Factory resetting your phone would not have any effect on your phone company having records of your calls
Kangol
The phone company will have records of all calls and texts. If the police and a prosecutor really want them, a judge will make sure the phone company hands them over.
truthseeker
@Kangol
Wrong. The phone company will have records of all calls and texts BUT the police cannot get a search warrant for those materials until Jussie becomes the target of the investigation. Being that he is still considered a “victim”, Jussie will have to cooperate and furnish those items himself from the original sources.
Instead Jussie submitted an edited and altered PDF print out of his calls.
truthseeker
Queerty’s headline to this story is false. Jussie did not “give his phone to police”. He gave a PDF print out of his phone records and they were heavily redacted. It was a print out that he printed from his computer which could easily be manipulated or changed.
Police want the phone records from the original source. Also, they want the phone so they can use the GPS to pinpoint his exact path during the entire incident. They also want to see what time he was chatting with his manager to confirm the timeline.
glennmcbride
I would not give up my phone to the Police under any circumstances.
Scout
They could easily check the records from his manager’s phone for the time they were talking when the attack happened. I’m sure they already have. Crickets.
Brian
Gotta love Queerty’s journalistic standards. They didn’t accidentally replace “phone records” with “phone”, they’re actively trying to spread false information so people will side with Jussie. That’s only gonna maybe work with Queerty readers though. Any other website where I’ve seen articles about this story, the comments are about 98% who don’t believe him.
truthseeker
@Scout
That would be true but the manager (who was not there that night) refuses to turn over his phone records as well. If I managed someone and was on the phone with them while they were being attacked (even if I was on the phone with a family member who was being attacked), I would immediately call the police. Strangely that did not happen in this case.
But as I said and as Brian said, Queerty is spreading fake news with this headline. Jussie did not turn over his phone. He submitted an edited and redacted print out of people he alleges he called. The police (just as the courts would too) want a document from the original source, meaning sent directly from the phone carrier or to see the actual phone
FunInTheSack
And the worst part is you censor comments.
Truth be told, you’re what you paint Trump as.
Queerty is a race baiting, hate-fueled, left wing propaganda machine.
When was the last time you reported on something positive from the right? There are great things on both sides. Balance your sources, and it won’t hurt to reflect a neutral position, every now and then.
Xzamilloh
What positive story is coming from the right?
Matt1961
actually, the worst part is we can see all of your comments, and they’re just as interesting on the screen as they are in the spam filter.
mlo88
WTF has any right wing politician done to advance LGBTQ people? I can’t even keep track of how many right wing politicians that have attacked our basic rights and get caught sleeping with some Grindr hook up. Seriously, can you please let me know what any right winger has done? There are countless examples of true bigotry and hatred that they come at us with constantly.
Scout
Indeed Queerty does. Several of mine have been, especially connected to this topic.
FunInTheSack
Stop censoring comments!! Pathetic. And beyond ignorant.
MarathonBoy
Reading the article above, it occurs to me that we haven’t heard anything from the police about the bleach. Did Smollett smell like bleach when they questioned him? Did he have burns or irritated skin? Was his shirt stained white from the bleach? He kept the rope on, so presumably he did not take a shower before the police came, so he should have stank of bleach.
Brian
From what I heard they said that he had an unknown liquid on him and they were testing it to determine what it was.
Brian
Is anyone surprised that he didn’t give them conclusive evidence that confirmed something that is so, so, so easy to prove?
FunInTheSack
2 of the 4 comments I’ve posted are still ‘awaiting moderation’.
Queerty, it’s quite pathetic.
Brian
The only times can remember getting the awaiting moderation message was when I tried to link to another article and when I quoted Christian Siriano’s “Hot Tr@nn y Mess” catchphrase. Was it one of these reasons? I’m pretty the posts their filter catches just stay in moderation mode for eternity.
And is it really necessary for you to make 4 different posts about this? We get it after one.
FunInTheSack
I’ve screen shot my comments, and them ‘awaiting moderation’.
Reaching out to a friend at GayStarNews to discuss writing an article on your comment censorship, and the damage that can lead to.
MISTERJETT
here in Chicago, we have two unsolved murders of two white men in the Rogers Park area and not once have the authorities questioned if they could be sexual hook-ups or drug deals gone bad – at least not publicly. with Mr. Smollet, who just happens to be a young, gay black man, the questions came up right away.
FunInTheSack
Where publicly have the CPD questioned Jussie potentially hooking up and/or drug deal gone wrong?
The authorities have maintained the statement: ‘we are treating Jussie as a victim’.
Please show otherwise.
richo87
I like Jussie and am inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt here. But, looking at the facts I would have to admit the account does have some issues:
1) This was likely a targeted attack given the similarities between the letters and attack. So this wasn’t a random racist/homophobic MAGA attack. They clearly sought him out.
2) There is no video evidence of anyone following him home, so the attackers were waiting for him. How did they just happen to know he was coming home via a dark back door at 2am? There must have been some sort of surveillance.
3) The attackers also managed to avoid any detection by the numerous cameras in the area while fleeing the scene.
This is either a targeted sophisticated special forces level operation or there is something more to the story. I don’t think a hook up makes sense given the pre-planning elements (rope,letters). But, based on the known facts I can see how people are skeptical.
MarathonBoy
The more basic question in the Smollett matter is whether anything happened at all or whether this is a hoax. The other 2 cases you mentioned are homicides, so obviously, crimes did occur.