Jussie Smollett juror says they were convinced he lied about hate crime after he gave poor testimony
A juror who tried the Jussie Smollett trial said she and the other 11 members of the panel were immediately convinced of his guilt – and that the actor’s poor testimony sealed his fate.
The jury of six men and six women took nine hours to deliberate, the female anonymous juror said: ‘it was not evenly split, but there were some doubters.’
But, the juror said, they didn’t have any major disagreements. Rather, they wanted to be sure that they carefully reviewed the spate of evidence presented during the one-week trial.
In the end, she said, the jury ‘all thought [they] were doing Jussie a favor when they chose to convict the actor of five, rather than six, counts of disorderly conduct.
Jussie Smollett, 39 (pictured), is pictured leaving the Leighton Criminal Courthouse with his siblings following his conviction on five of six counts of felony disorderly conduct for making what prosecutors say was a false police report about the alleged attack – one count for each time he gave a report – to three different officers
The female juror, who declined to be named, said that Special Prosecutor Dan Webb was ‘methodical’ and ‘plodding’ in his arguments, making the case against Smollett seem ‘seamless.’
In comparison, Smollett’s attorney Nenye Uche seemed to be ‘just shooting from the hip,’ and left her unsatisfied with unsubstantiated claims, like the assertion that Nigerian brothers Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundairo demanded $1 million each from the Empire actor to change their story.
The female juror, who declined to be named, said that Special Prosecutor Dan Webb (pictured left in a court sketch) was ‘methodical’ and ‘plodding’ in his arguments, making the case against Jussie Smollett (pictured righr) seem ‘seamless’
Smollett’s attorney Nenye Uche (pictured) seemed to be ‘just shooting from the hip,’ the juror said, left her unsatisfied with unsubstantiated claims, like the assertion that Nigerian brothers Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundairo demanded $1 million each from the Empire actor to change their story
The brothers’ testimonies, she said, were more convincing than Smollett – although neither brother was entirely honest, in the jury’s estimation.
Smollett’s argument could have been bolstered by the testimony of Frank Gatson, who was on the defense team’s list of potential witnesses but never took the stand.
Gatson reported the incident against Smollett’s wishes, the openly-gay actor claimed during his day of testimony on Monday, saying that he didn’t do so because he is a ‘Black man in America’ and therefore ‘doesn’t trust police,’ and that he didn’t want to be portrayed as the ‘f***** who just got his ass beat.’
‘We all wanted to hear from Frank,’ the juror told the Chicago Sun-Tribune.
Smollett’s defense consisted of character witnesses and three and a half hours of direct examination.
But, although Smollett detailed his involvement with the brothers, including a sexual encounters at a gay bath house with Abimbola Osundairo, a visit to a strip club with Olabinjo Osundairo, Abel’s paid role as his nutritionist and that brothers’ offers to become his security guard, he could why two brothers were in his neighborhood that night, if not to commit a staged attack as he’d instructed them to do.
Brothers Abimbola (left) and Olabinjo Osundairo (right) were more convincing in their testimony, the juror said
Although Smollett detailed his involvement with the brothers, including a sexual encounters at a gay bath house with Abimbola Osundairo (pictured left), a visit to a strip club with Olabinjo Osundairo, Abel’s paid role as his nutritionist and that brothers’ offers to become his security guard, he could why two brothers were in his neighborhood that night, if not to commit a staged attack as he’d instructed them to do
Smollett raised his fist as he entered the courthouse. Smollett maintains that the attack was not a hoax and was an actual, homophobic hate crime
His attorney failed to offer a motive for why the brothers might have lied, suggesting that it could have been because Abel was pretending not to be gay and Ola was a homophobe, or also that they wanted him to hire them as security guards so scared him into thinking that he needed them.
But the brothers’ testimony clicked, the juror said. Their story was unchanging – Smollett had paid them to carry out the attack, they said, told them to buy red hats to resemble Donald Trump supporters and even walked them through a ‘dry run’ of the attack days before it was committed.
Smollett, 39, is was convicted on five of six counts of felony disorderly conduct for making what prosecutors say was a false police report about the alleged attack – one count for each time he gave a report – to three different officers.
Each class 4 felony carries a prison sentence of up to three years, but experts have said he will likely be placed on probation and ordered to perform community service.
Smollett told the three officers that unknown assailants doused him in bleach and slung a noose around his neck near his Chicago apartment building on January 29, 2019 while proclaiming that ‘this is MAGA country, n****.’
Cops began to doubt this story after 26 officers spent 3,000 hours and more than $100,000 investigating his claims.
The decision on that sixth count was the one that the jury struggled with, she said.
On February 14, the count alleged, the actor lied to police in an interview when he reported that he was the victim of an aggravated battery. The other five counts stemmed from his false reports to police in the hours after the attack.
The jury, she said, was confused about the last charge and why it was different than the others.
Jussie Smollett’s attorney failed to offer a motive for why the brothers might have lied, suggesting that it could have been because Abel was pretending not to be gay and Ola was a homophobe, or also that they wanted him to hire them as security guards so scared him into thinking that he needed them
‘We were told it was an aggravated battery because he said they were wearing a mask,’ the juror said.
But ‘in all [of Smollett’s] accounts of what happened, he mentioned a mask.’
If prosecutors had charged each of the counts ‘the same,’ she said, she thinks ‘we would have found him guilty on all six.’
Despite Smollett’s unconvincing testimony, the decision to convict him was still a difficult one, she said.
‘It wasn’t an easy decision. You’ve got the mother sitting there. You feel bad. We didn’t know what the penalty would be. Are we sending this guy to jail?’ she said.
‘I just hope that [Smollett and his attorneys] know that we went in there with an open mind,’ the juror said.
‘I listened to both sides. We wanted to make sure that those who had doubts didn’t feel pressured.’
Uche said after the Thursday conviction that she would be appealing due to the jury’s ‘inconsistent’ verdict, saying that they ‘cannot say Jussie is not lying for the same exact incident.’