Kim Foxx meddled in Jussie Smollett case weeks after ‘recusing’ herself, texts present


New textual content messages reveal that Chicago State Legal professional Kim Foxx was meddling within the Jussie Smollett case weeks after she claimed she’d recused herself — complaining that the “washed-up celeb” confronted too many costs.

Foxx’s workplace issued a press release recusing her on Feb. 19, although they later claimed to Fox Information that she “informally separated herself from the decision-making over the case.”

However in March eight textual content messages launched Tuesday below a FOIA request, Foxx tells prosecutor Joe Magats, who took over the case for her, that “I’m recused” — then went on to complain that the “Empire” star had been charged with too many crimes.

“Sooo …… I’m recused, however when folks accuse us of overcharging circumstances … 16 counts on a category four turns into exhibit A,” Foxx wrote in the beginning of the change.

“Sure. I can see the place that may be seen as extreme,” Magats replied.

Foxx continued: “Pedophile with victims 10 counts. Washed up celeb who lied to cops, 16. On a case eligible for deferred prosecution I feel it’s indicative of one thing we needs to be taking a look at typically. Simply because we will cost one thing doesn’t imply we should always.”

“Agreed,” Magats answered.

“I’ll get with Risa and Jim. With him taking on we will take a tough take a look at how we cost the circumstances and get it to one thing that covers what must be lined with out being extreme and finally pointless,” Magats stated, probably referring to prosecutors Risa Lanier, although it was not instantly clear who Jim is.

Then Foxx responded: “Yeah…it’s not who we wish to be” — to which Magats replied, “For certain.”

Simply over two weeks later, Magats introduced he would drop all 16 costs in opposition to Smollett.

In a press release Tuesday night time, Foxx claimed she was talking typically and never about Smollett’s case.

“After the indictment turned public, I reached out to Joe to debate reviewing workplace insurance policies to guarantee consistencies in our charging and our use of applicable charging authority,” she stated.

Spread the love

Facebook Comments