Jussie Smollett attacked

[Anonymous]

If you were the victim of a crime and the police said they'd like to examine your phone, would you say yes?

I would hope not! The police can easily get those records from the service provider. Is it faster to see the phone? Sure, but he's under no obligation to comply to that request.

Police departments are notoriously leaky. Think of everything on your phone at the moment... do you want that in the hands of the police? Because they aren't going to do a quick looky-loo at the phone; they're going to physically process the phone using software. That software is going to pull everything from the phone... all of the WiFi spots you've connected to, your GPS data, all of your SMS and MMS (including deleted), and if you're on an iPhone, it's going to pull your cloud keychain data (that's all your passwords and cc info if you have it saved to your phone). They'll have every password you've used for every site and can then log in. How do I know this? Because I'm in digital forensics and that's what I do.

Not turning over his phone to the police is not even on the list of reasons why this story is odd.

[Anonymous]

Hell no I wouldn't turn my phone over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn people, it isn’t racist, sexist or victim shaming to say someone’s story sounds off. That’s called critical thinking.

That’s so bizarre bc whenever I hear a horrific story, I always be believe it. I don’t sit there and look for clues that they are lying. If they are, then so be it. But to spend my time reading gossip sites and finding “evidence” the victim has made it up is like going not “critical thinking” sorry!

You always believe it? In this day and age? Ok. But it sounds like you’re the sucker.

Yep! Who cares if I’m a sucker? If I disbelieve each story that has something odd about it, then I’m disbelieving a lot of victims’ stories.
I believe victims who get attacked in deserted places at 2am.
I believe victims whose crimes aren’t captured on camera.
I believe victims who get assaulted on frigid nights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn people, it isn’t racist, sexist or victim shaming to say someone’s story sounds off. That’s called critical thinking.

That’s so bizarre bc whenever I hear a horrific story, I always be believe it. I don’t sit there and look for clues that they are lying. If they are, then so be it. But to spend my time reading gossip sites and finding “evidence” the victim has made it up is like going not “critical thinking” sorry!

You always believe it? In this day and age? Ok. But it sounds like you’re the sucker.

Yep! Who cares if I’m a sucker? If I disbelieve each story that has something odd about it, then I’m disbelieving a lot of victims’ stories.
I believe victims who get attacked in deserted places at 2am.
I believe victims whose crimes aren’t captured on camera.
I believe victims who get assaulted on frigid nights.

And you can believe what you want, however you should start thinking critically when these things are politicized. THAT'S why everybody is so skeptical. And also, the story sounds very made up/ unrealistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn people, it isn’t racist, sexist or victim shaming to say someone’s story sounds off. That’s called critical thinking.

That’s so bizarre bc whenever I hear a horrific story, I always be believe it. I don’t sit there and look for clues that they are lying. If they are, then so be it. But to spend my time reading gossip sites and finding “evidence” the victim has made it up is like going not “critical thinking” sorry!

You always believe it? In this day and age? Ok. But it sounds like you’re the sucker.

Yep! Who cares if I’m a sucker? If I disbelieve each story that has something odd about it, then I’m disbelieving a lot of victims’ stories.
I believe victims who get attacked in deserted places at 2am.
I believe victims whose crimes aren’t captured on camera.
I believe victims who get assaulted on frigid nights.

It's great to believe things. But it's dangerous not to have ANY critical thinking skills whatsoever. You're the type of person that will easily fall for scams or get yourself in bad situations because you want to believe every person who is in need is 100 percent truthful. You see your attitude as this amazing thing. I see it as naive and gullible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn people, it isn’t racist, sexist or victim shaming to say someone’s story sounds off. That’s called critical thinking.

That’s so bizarre bc whenever I hear a horrific story, I always be believe it. I don’t sit there and look for clues that they are lying. If they are, then so be it. But to spend my time reading gossip sites and finding “evidence” the victim has made it up is like going not “critical thinking” sorry!

You always believe it? In this day and age? Ok. But it sounds like you’re the sucker.

Yep! Who cares if I’m a sucker? If I disbelieve each story that has something odd about it, then I’m disbelieving a lot of victims’ stories.
I believe victims who get attacked in deserted places at 2am.
I believe victims whose crimes aren’t captured on camera.
I believe victims who get assaulted on frigid nights.

Do you believe that he had a rope around his neck for 40 minutes after the attack? (on the video)
Do you believe that his sandwich managed to get through the attack intact? (on the video)
Do you believe the substance thrown on him was any big deal since he apparently didn't need to visit the ER (choosing instead to visit a doctor)?
Do you believe he could call his manager during an attack when the two alleged assailants were yelling "MAGA?"
Do you believe he could sing and dance that well shortly after the attack with bruised ribs?

just some things to consider before labeling yourself a sucker . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn people, it isn’t racist, sexist or victim shaming to say someone’s story sounds off. That’s called critical thinking.

That’s so bizarre bc whenever I hear a horrific story, I always be believe it. I don’t sit there and look for clues that they are lying. If they are, then so be it. But to spend my time reading gossip sites and finding “evidence” the victim has made it up is like going not “critical thinking” sorry!

You always believe it? In this day and age? Ok. But it sounds like you’re the sucker.

Yep! Who cares if I’m a sucker? If I disbelieve each story that has something odd about it, then I’m disbelieving a lot of victims’ stories.
I believe victims who get attacked in deserted places at 2am.
I believe victims whose crimes aren’t captured on camera.
I believe victims who get assaulted on frigid nights.

Do you believe that he had a rope around his neck for 40 minutes after the attack? (on the video)
Do you believe that his sandwich managed to get through the attack intact? (on the video)
Do you believe the substance thrown on him was any big deal since he apparently didn't need to visit the ER (choosing instead to visit a doctor)?
Do you believe he could call his manager during an attack when the two alleged assailants were yelling "MAGA?"
Do you believe he could sing and dance that well shortly after the attack with bruised ribs?

just some things to consider before labeling yourself a sucker . . .

Eh pps the reason affluent beggars exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Damn people, it isn’t racist, sexist or victim shaming to say someone’s story sounds off. That’s called critical thinking.

That’s so bizarre bc whenever I hear a horrific story, I always be believe it. I don’t sit there and look for clues that they are lying. If they are, then so be it. But to spend my time reading gossip sites and finding “evidence” the victim has made it up is like going not “critical thinking” sorry!

You always believe it? In this day and age? Ok. But it sounds like you’re the sucker.

Yep! Who cares if I’m a sucker? If I disbelieve each story that has something odd about it, then I’m disbelieving a lot of victims’ stories.
I believe victims who get attacked in deserted places at 2am.
I believe victims whose crimes aren’t captured on camera.
I believe victims who get assaulted on frigid nights.

Do you believe that he had a rope around his neck for 40 minutes after the attack? (on the video)
Do you believe that his sandwich managed to get through the attack intact? (on the video)
Do you believe the substance thrown on him was any big deal since he apparently didn't need to visit the ER (choosing instead to visit a doctor)?
Do you believe he could call his manager during an attack when the two alleged assailants were yelling "MAGA?"
Do you believe he could sing and dance that well shortly after the attack with bruised ribs?

just some things to consider before labeling yourself a sucker . . .

Eh pps the reason affluent beggars exist.

Good point

[Anonymous]

I'm confused. Are people suggesting the attack never happened/that he made the whole thing up? Or is it just uncertainty about the nature of/impetus for the attack?

If the latter, does it really matter if it was random, a stalker, or a hookup gone wrong? It's not like any of those situations make it ok to assault someone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are people suggesting the attack never happened/that he made the whole thing up? Or is it just uncertainty about the nature of/impetus for the attack?

If the latter, does it really matter if it was random, a stalker, or a hookup gone wrong? It's not like any of those situations make it ok to assault someone.

People are questioning motive & MAGA. Or, did he put himself in an "awkward" position & lie to cover it up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you were the victim of a crime and the police said they'd like to examine your phone, would you say yes?

I would hope not! The police can easily get those records from the service provider. Is it faster to see the phone? Sure, but he's under no obligation to comply to that request.

Police departments are notoriously leaky. Think of everything on your phone at the moment... do you want that in the hands of the police? Because they aren't going to do a quick looky-loo at the phone; they're going to physically process the phone using software. That software is going to pull everything from the phone... all of the WiFi spots you've connected to, your GPS data, all of your SMS and MMS (including deleted), and if you're on an iPhone, it's going to pull your cloud keychain data (that's all your passwords and cc info if you have it saved to your phone). They'll have every password you've used for every site and can then log in. How do I know this? Because I'm in digital forensics and that's what I do.

Not turning over his phone to the police is not even on the list of reasons why this story is odd.

Smollett story aside, this is an excellent post and people should pay attention. If I knew nothing on my phone would help the police, no way would I give it over. And if I were a celebrity, a double triple no, even if it could help or back jump my story. Because you know leaks are happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you were the victim of a crime and the police said they'd like to examine your phone, would you say yes?

I would hope not! The police can easily get those records from the service provider. Is it faster to see the phone? Sure, but he's under no obligation to comply to that request.

Police departments are notoriously leaky. Think of everything on your phone at the moment... do you want that in the hands of the police? Because they aren't going to do a quick looky-loo at the phone; they're going to physically process the phone using software. That software is going to pull everything from the phone... all of the WiFi spots you've connected to, your GPS data, all of your SMS and MMS (including deleted), and if you're on an iPhone, it's going to pull your cloud keychain data (that's all your passwords and cc info if you have it saved to your phone). They'll have every password you've used for every site and can then log in. How do I know this? Because I'm in digital forensics and that's what I do.

Not turning over his phone to the police is not even on the list of reasons why this story is odd.

Smollett story aside, this is an excellent post and people should pay attention. If I knew nothing on my phone would help the police, no way would I give it over. And if I were a celebrity, a double triple no, even if it could help or back jump my story. Because you know leaks are happening.

so I might be in the minority but I could care less. I have nothing interesting on my phone and if it would help get my attackers, I would not hesitate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you were the victim of a crime and the police said they'd like to examine your phone, would you say yes?

I would hope not! The police can easily get those records from the service provider. Is it faster to see the phone? Sure, but he's under no obligation to comply to that request.

Police departments are notoriously leaky. Think of everything on your phone at the moment... do you want that in the hands of the police? Because they aren't going to do a quick looky-loo at the phone; they're going to physically process the phone using software. That software is going to pull everything from the phone... all of the WiFi spots you've connected to, your GPS data, all of your SMS and MMS (including deleted), and if you're on an iPhone, it's going to pull your cloud keychain data (that's all your passwords and cc info if you have it saved to your phone). They'll have every password you've used for every site and can then log in. How do I know this? Because I'm in digital forensics and that's what I do.

Not turning over his phone to the police is not even on the list of reasons why this story is odd.

Smollett story aside, this is an excellent post and people should pay attention. If I knew nothing on my phone would help the police, no way would I give it over. And if I were a celebrity, a double triple no, even if it could help or back jump my story. Because you know leaks are happening.

so I might be in the minority but I could care less. I have nothing interesting on my phone and if it would help get my attackers, I would not hesitate.

Agree
Nothing to hide

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. Are people suggesting the attack never happened/that he made the whole thing up? Or is it just uncertainty about the nature of/impetus for the attack?

If the latter, does it really matter if it was random, a stalker, or a hookup gone wrong? It's not like any of those situations make it ok to assault someone.

It's never ok to assault someone. But claiming the whole MAGA/racist part is ridiculous if not true. I get he would want to hide it if it was a hookup gone bad or drug deal or whatever. But don't bring race into it.

I would say the same thing about anyone whether MAGA, BLM,ALM...whatever. Because 2 things happen. 1. It causes people to get even more heated about the issue (MAGA people are racist evils) and 2. When it comes out as a lie...it discredits the actual issue at hand.

[Anonymous]

I think it's a terrible argument to give up your rights because you have nothing to hide. Even if you're not engaged in anything criminal, privacy should still be valued. And if you're a celebrity with anything on your phone, and you give it to the police, it is going to leak. There's plenty of past evidence of thar.