Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Jussie Smollett has conviction overturned
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 15:08:30 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <vhq6pd$17d85$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vho8lb$ntt3$1@dont-email.me> <vhp118$11jdm$3@dont-email.me> <vhp1lu$sqgs$3@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 16:08:32 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e027f71d13c2ec9345350f529fc3ddad";
	logging-data="1291525"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ufSE5c6RvRHzuC21PenwBp5ZmI36AOy0="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:GKo+sTniYPpD9stFoRfLpQPja9s=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Bytes: 2732

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>On 2024-11-21 11:24 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>>>I see that Jussie Smollett has had his second conviction over his hate
>>>crime hoax overturned:

>>I know. BTR1701 will say "I told you so."

>>>https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollett-conviction-overturned-illinois-supreme-court

>>>Of course this doesn't overturn his FIRST conviction.

>>There was no first conviction. There was no trial. It was pretrial
>>diversion, BTR1701 said I was wrong and that jeopardy attached. The
>>state supreme court agrees with him and not me.

>So a pretrial diversion ISN'T a conviction? I thought it counted as a 
>conviction that just had a very mild sentence. So Smollett now has no 
>criminal record at all (assuming he hasn't committed other crimes before 
>or since the hoax)?

Conviction can occur only upon completion of trial. Smollett went
through various pre-trial stages -- arrest, charges, arraignment --
and then entered into diversion. After completion of diversion, the
prosector asks that charges be dismissed.

The judge has no role to play beyond accepting the prosecution's motion
to dismiss all charges. He must accept the motion.

This is not a plea bargain in which the defendant pleads guilty to all
undismissed charges and allocutes in open court.

I think pre-trial diversion includes expungement of the arrest record.

The appeal was about whether the special prosecutor was able to try him
on charges for the second arrest that weren't covered by the diversion
agreement but the state supreme court ruled that the diversion agreement
precluded any additional charges for the same crime.

Double jeopardy was not being argued here as there was no trial in the
first instance.