Illinois Supreme Court Overturns Jussie Smollett’s Conviction For Hate Crime Hoax

The llinois Supreme Court has overturned Jussie Smollett’s conviction for an alleged fake attack in Chicago.

In a shocking decision, the Illinois Supreme Court has overturned Jussie Smollett’s conviction for an alleged fake attack in Chicago.

In December 2021, a jury convicted the Empire star of five felony charges that included a charge of lying to the police for reporting a false hate crime. Smollett, who has maintained his innocence, said he was assaulted on Jan. 29, 2019, by two men chanting “MAGA Country.” Smollett also claimed the two men shouted racist and homophobic slurs before placing a noose around his neck.

During the investigation, police later found the two men were personal trainers hired by the actor and determined Smollett had orchestrated the entire attack.

At first, prosecutors originally agreed to drop the charges against Smollett as part of an agreement that he would forfeit his $10,000 bond and perform community service, Deadline reports. After another review, a special prosecutor later charged Smollett with felony disorderly conduct for falsely reporting to the police that he was a victim of a hate crime.

Smollett Sentenced to Jail, Probation, and Tens of Thousands in Fines

Ultimately, a judge sentenced Smollett to 150 days in jail and 30 months of probation. The judge also ordered him to pay the city of Chicago $120,106 in restitution for the overtime police spent on his case, plus an additional $25,000 fine.

The decision by the Illinois Supreme Court to overturn Smollett’s conviction is a surprise.

According to the court’s opinion, the Illinois Supreme Court found that a special prosecutor’s decision to retry Smollett violated his rights, the Chicago Tribune reports.

“We are aware that this case has generated significant public interest and that many people were dissatisfied with the resolution of the original case and believed it to be unjust,” the court’s opinion reads. “Nevertheless, what would be more unjust than the resolution of any one criminal case would be a holding from this court that the State was not bound to honor agreements upon which people have detrimentally relied.”