CHICAGO — A federal judge in Chicago has ruled that comments made by Jussie Smollett’s attorney on national television three years ago that two Black brothers might have attacked the actor while in “whiteface” could be construed as defamation.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Mary Rowland allows the defamation lawsuit filed by Abimbola and Olabinjo Osundairo to continue against Tina Glandian, Smollett’s Los Angeles-based attorney who made the controversial comments in an interview on the “Today” show on March 28, 2019, a few days after the initial charges against Smollett had been dropped.
In her ruling, made public Friday, Rowland dismissed all other counts brought against Glandian’s firm, Geragos & Geragos.
Meanwhile, Geragos & Geragos and its high-profile boss Mark Geragos sued the Osundairos in Cook County court this week, saying the defamation suit and its “baseless claims” amounted to malicious prosecution.
The Osundairos’ lawsuit alleged that in the aftermath of the controversial dismissal of Smollett’s criminal case by Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx’s office, which was garnering headlines around the world, the former “Empire” actor’s high-profile legal team continued to smear the Osundairo brothers on TV and in podcast interviews.
The concerted media blitz was a blatant effort to paint the brothers not only as homophobic, racist and violent, but guilty of the attack in the first place, the suit alleged.
The suit focused in particular on one exchange in Glandian’s “Today” show interview, when she was asked how it could be possible that Smollett believed his attackers were pale skinned given the Osundiaro brothers’ dark complexion.
“Well, you know, I mean, I think there’s — obviously, you can disguise that,” Glandian said in the interview. “You could put makeup on.”
Glandian went on to call out Chicago police for allegedly failing to investigate an online video showing one of the Osundairo brothers “in whiteface doing a Joker monologue with white makeup on.”
“And so it’s not — it’s not implausible,” Glandian said.
In her ruling, Rowland wrote that Glandian’s allegation could legally be construed as an attempt “to dispel the inconsistency in Smollett’s story (the attackers had light skin) and bolster her contention that the plaintiffs (who are not light skinned) were Smollett’s attackers.”
“Taken in context, Glandian was asserting plaintiffs’ involvement in a racially motivated attack,” Rowland wrote. “Explaining that the attackers were white, read in context, adds the implication that the attack was a hate crime.”
The ruling clears the defamation count against Glandian to possibly go to trial before a jury.
The Osundairos’ attorney, Gloria Rodriguez, said she talked to the brothers Friday morning and “they were very happy with the judge’s ruling.”
“They look forward to their day in court and will continue defending themselves against other defamatory remarks,” Rodriguez said.
She said the brothers in particular “are monitoring” recent comments made by some of Smollett’s relatives on social media calling them liars.
Glandian’s attorney, Brendan Healey, noted in an emailed statement that the court had “rejected” the “frivolous lawsuit against the Geragos firm and Mark Geragos.”
“We are confident that the single remaining allegation reflecting Ms. Glandian’s opinion will be dismissed in due course,” the statement read.
In their Cook County lawsuit filed on Thursday, Geragos & Geragos claimed the brothers “shamelessly used the federal court system as their vehicle for a bizarre, lawyer-driven publicity stunt designed to try to keep the Osundairo brothers relevant after the dismissal of (the first) criminal charges against Mr. Smollett and to draw media attention to relatively unknown lawyers and their law firms.”
In an apparent attempt to show the Osundairos’ drive for publicity, the suit notes that the brothers are planning to launch NFTs this year. Their website promises NFTs featuring hot sauce bottles, MAGA hats, ski masks and sandwiches — references to the circumstances of the allegedly phony attack on Smollett.
“The entire NFT collection is intended as some sort of twisted parody of an event which the Osundairo brothers claimed to have ‘tremendous regret’ over,” Geragos’s suit alleges.
Rodriguez, who is named as a defendant in the suit, said in a statement to the Tribune the complaint is “absurd.” Referencing that the federal court already rejected Geragos’ attempt at sanctions against her, Rodriguez said the suit was “nothing more than a second bite at the apple wanting a remedy that the federal court already denied.”
Smollett, meanwhile, was convicted of low-level felonies in December when a jury found that he had lied to police about being the victim of a hate crime attack. Prosecutors argued at sentencing that he denigrated real victims of hate crimes when he hired the Osundairo brothers to stage a phony assault on him involving racial slurs, homophobic epithets and a makeshift noose.
Smollett was sentenced last week to 30 months of probation, with the first 150 days to be served in Cook County Jail. In addition, he must pay a $25,000 fine as well as $120,106 in restitution — the amount of restitution the city sought to pay for its overtime costs investigating the case, minus the $10,000 Smollett forfeited to the city when his first case was dropped.
The Illinois Appellate Court has since granted Smollett’s motion to be released on bond pending appeal, and he walked out of Cook County Jail on Wednesday after spending about a week in custody.
____
