Jussie Smollett Suffers Legal Setback, Special Prosecutor to Remain on the Case
A judge in Chicago denied a request from Jussie Smollett's lawyers to overturn the decision to appoint a special prosecutor to review his case, meaning the "Empire" star could still be recharged.
Judge Michael Toomin made the decision during a hearing on Wednesday, dismissing the motion for a new judge and denying a motion by Smollett's attorneys to intervene and argue for their other motions in the case.
That means that Smollett's request to have the grand jury testimony of the Osundairo brothers released to the public was automatically denied.
Smollett's lawyers had hoped to use the testimony to point out inconsistencies in their case.
The special prosecutor has yet to be named and there is no timeline for when that will occur. The role of the special prosecutor is to review the decision by State's Attorney Kim Foxx's office to dismiss the 16 felony charges against Smollett.
Following the hearing, Smollett's lawyer, Tina Glandian, said Smollett's legal team will appeal the judge's decisions.
As The Blast first reported, Smollett's lawyers filed a request earlier this month in an effort to get the Osundairo brothers' grand jury testimony released to the public.
Smollett claims he needs to be able to use their testimony in his legal defense because "other than the Osundairo brothers' self-serving statements which resulted in their release from custody with no criminal charges being filed against them, not a single piece of evidence independently corroborates their claim that the attack was a hoax."
He claims the police have not released the videos of the interviews done with Osundairo brothers on February 15, 2019 while they were in custody. As a result, he argued the "public disclosure of the grand jury transcripts of the Osundairo brothers' testimony is therefore necessary to level the playing field and inform the public of the actual evidence in this case."
His attorneys argue that Smollett has "demonstrated a sufficiently particularized and compelling need for disclosure because the Osundairo brothers' grand jury testimony is material and necessary to the ongoing investigation of this matter as well as to two pending civil lawsuits, one of which was brought by the Osundairo brothers themselves."
