Alan Dershowitz Recommends Biblical Punishment for Jussie Smollett if He's Found Guilty
There are plenty of people who aren’t terribly thrilled with Jussie Smollett right now.
The police superintendent of Chicago, not exactly a man given to impassioned speeches, lambasted the “Empire” actor and the media coverage of his apparently faked attack during a Thursday news conference. Smollett has been written off of the last two episodes of this season of “Empire,” according to TMZ, and some of the cast members are reportedly demanding that he shouldn’t return and ought to be written out immediately.
However, the most creative punishment may have come from former Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who suggested during an appearance on Fox News that perhaps the most fitting punishment for Smollett might come from the Old Testament.
In a Thursday appearance on Laura Ingraham’s show on Fox News, Dershowitz agreed that Smollett likely wasn’t looking at serious jail time.
While ABC News noted that the charges Smollett faces could end up with a three-year sentence behind bars, Dershowitz argued that the actor would likely plea down and face community service.
However, when Ingraham said the punishment ought to be more strict, Dershowitz concurred.
“I agree with you, I think people who make false reports ought to go jail,” Dershowitz said.
“You know in the Bible, if you falsely accuse somebody you get the penalty that the person would have gotten had the accusation been true, so if in fact these people had attacked him in this racist way and put a noose around his neck, they would have gotten some years in jail,” he said.
“If you’re going to follow the Bible, this guy ought to get the same penalty that he falsely accused people of getting.”
Dershowitz was likely referring to Deuteronomy 19:18-19: “The judges shall inquire diligently, and if the witness is a false witness and has accused his brother falsely, then you shall do to him as he had meant to do to his brother. So you shall purge the evil from your midst.”
The law professor noted that we ought to treat Smollett the same way we ought to treat anyone charged with a crime in this country: as innocent until proven guilty. However, he also noted this would have been a very grave offense had it actually occurred.
“Look, we have to presume everybody innocent,” he said. “If the facts are as the police say they are, if actually payments were made, and a plan was hatched to put a rope around the neck, and a police report was filed, then we have a potential for a serious crime.”
Let’s pretend that the attack was, in fact, real. This isn’t just simple assault and battery. The use of racial and homophobic slurs would have prompted hate crime charges, as would the noose. Then there was the use of bleach. There’s no plea bargain in the world that would have limited that to community service.
Smollett, of course, won’t be subjected to the Old Testament standard found in Deuteronomy (which isn’t to say that there isn’t a stroke of brilliance behind it). However, allegedly orchestrating an attack on yourself by paying two of your associates $3,500 and then blaming the attack on Trump supporters who yelled “This is MAGA country” isn’t something that should be pled down so easily — especially as police say the motive was because Smollett was upset with his salary.
This was a case that divided America, that made scapegoats of Trump supporters and conservatives. This diverted the resources of the Chicago Police and the FBI. His punishment maybe shouldn’t be strictly out of the Old Testament, but it shouldn’t be a slap on the wrist, either. Given what he’s apparently subjected our polity to, it’s not unreasonable to suggest he himself be subjected to some of what his “assailants” would have faced.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
