Hold prosecutors accountable for travesty

Whitewash: Yes. Cover-Up? No doubt. A Fix - You Bet. It doesn't take a legal scholar to dissect this travesty of justice.

A prosecutor should dismiss charges only if there's not sufficient evidence to reasonably expect a conviction of the crime(s). In the Smollett case (the grand jury unanimously agreeing), there was overwhelming evidence.

If Smollett says he's not guilty, while the evidence shows he is guilty and a liar, then bring the case to trial and let a jury decide if he should be "exonerated" or not. Since when does the state's attorney have the authority to make such a determination?.

After a trial, if he would be found guilty, then and only then should the prosecution consider leniency in a sentence recommendation, whether and how long the jail time (Smollett's were felony charges, after all.), probation and/or a substantial fine and community service (of "grunt-work" variety, not celebrity p.r. for the city).

Since Smollett obviously is not a minor, to have evidence of his crimes suppressed and sealed from the public also evidences a cover-up and perhaps even a conspiracy.

If the state's attorney prosecutors really believe their conclusion of this case to be "a just disposition and appropriate resolution" and they "stand behind the investigation and the facts," they should disclose what their office's existing policy was that allowed for their shocking pretrial action, then change it (if there ever was such a policy.),

Censure and/or disbarment of those prosecutors involved in and agreeing to this travesty should also be considered. In addition to Chicago being insulted, the whole legal profession should be offended at this injustice, which actually smacks of illegality.

Ken Anderson

St. Charles