In my book it is worst than a hate crime in relation to its fabrication. The aim is to engender dissent in society, which is a lot more grave than just attacking an individual with a one liner. The punishment should be tenfold the one given for such offenses. Having been a prosecutor this would be my argument to the court.

Yes. Creating a hoax like this undermines the credibility of people who are real victims. Same with filing a false rape case.

Yes, giving false testimony to the authorities is plain wrong.

Of course because he was going in with the intention of sending someone else to jail for the same crime. Faking it should definitely be just as risky as the real action.

I am usually against mandatory minimum sentences, but for a hate crime hoax I believe it would be beneficial to discourage such stupidity. A thing like the Smollet situation could potentially cause further escalation. Mandatory 18 months would have folks think twice.

From a current legal perspective (disclaimer: not a lawyer), it can't be. Faking a crime report is a less serious offense in the eyes of the law than a hate crime. I've personally never agreed with the concept of augmenting crimes into 'hate' crimes', for many reasons. First, it interjects motivation/ personal leanings into the equation. While not totally unprecedented, this is a slippery slope. Second, it has the (now realized) potential of being wielded disproportionately/ exclusively on behalf of special, officially-oppressed victims. Furthermore, it is an unnecessary designation. Assault, lynching, etc. were already crimes, and punishments for these allowed for extenuating circumstances (i.e., AGGRAVATED assault). The only new avenues for prosecution adding the 'hate' badge might give, are for things that ought not be crimes in the first place, such as 'hate speech'. Lastly, it is inane. An assault or murder, by definition, involves an element of hate, even if it isn't hate based on protected-class status.

Yes, all fake accusations deserve the same time as a conviction for the crime in question.

They should get the same sentence that their fake persecuter would’ve received.

Yes!!!!!!! Hate crimes are heinous but hate crimes typically hurt one person or group. Fake hate crimes hurt the accused, people or groups affiliated with the accused, our society, and real victims of hate crime. i feel a faked rape is a slap in the face to everyone who was really raped. also the faker should have to back any money and also have to volunteer to help real victims!

“Fake” Hate Crimes I believe should be MORE “Prosecutable” than “Real” “Hate Crimes”.
#1. “Hate Crime” is a fabricated crime of nebulous definition. How does the Court PROVE the Latent Intent of the Transgressor? It’s essentially a “Crime” that can be thrown into ANY case no matter how tenuous to make the case that much tougher. It is yet another, fairly recent, form of “crime” that the Accused is required to Disprove (Guilty until Proven Innocent) where the definition of the “crime” can instantly be expanded at the Will of the Prosecution.
#2. “Fake” Hate Crime actually IS readily Prosecutable in that, Intent is easy to Prove AND the Accused has Self Admitted to agreeing that a certain action Qualifies as Hate Crime and is seeking to profit by Their Understanding of It.

My thought is that ANYONE Convicted of Perpetrating a “Fake” Hate Crime should receive (at minimum) 50% of the Sentence that the Actual “Hate Crime” would receive.
However, since “Hate Crime” is a made up “Crime” it might be hard to come up with a Real Sentence so perhaps one is required to be made.

They should spend just as much time in prison as they expected the accused to be there, plus they should pay all expenses from lawyers and court costs.

He should be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible for the crime of filing a false police report and any other crimes associated with that. I also think there is a federal crime for mailing fake threat. The term "Hate Crime" and it's little brother "Hate Speech" is just bullshit used by the left to make a person's opinion somehow a crime. You should be able to think whatever you want. If you attack someone it's a crime, doesn't matter what caused you to do it.

It fits the definition of terrorism. Using violence to attain ones political goals. False or fake version being a false flag level of terrorism.

First of all, there's no such thing as a "hate crime", as motive is entirely subjective and only accurately determined by the perpetrator. This has been universally accepted in law until only recently, when special classes of victims were created for bullshit political reasons. False reporting, or crimes staged by the victim in order to gain attention are serious violations which divert already stretched law enforcement assets from the pursuit and apprehension of actual criminals. The potential harm to the community is inestimable in cases like this especially in a crime-ridden city like Chicago. Yes, the punishment should be equal to the punishment given for commission of a similar actual crime.

Yes. But I no longer have confidence in our government to bring any true justice.

I believe a crime is a crime and a false crime is a false crime. I am not a fan of a seperate category for hate. I believe that the judge and/or jury should assess punishment within the guidelines provided by the law. Factors such as hate, passion, etc. should be used by the sentencing authority to determine the degree of punishment

Absolutely

Yes, because staging a hate crime is a hate crime in itself. Plus it indicts an innocent person or group.

There should be no special category of hate crimes. In reference to Smollett, he'll easily win a jury trial. There's already a well-orchestrated PR campaign to rehabilitate him. I haven't seen any polling but my instinct is that opinions will be sharply divided along racial and political lines. Now that he's elevated his brand he'll be much more marketable than beforehand. I can see him staring in a Spike Lee film. It will be a blockbuster.

If your referring to that actor who pulled the hate crime stunt, then yes. His crime does disservice to the victims of true crime and distracts law enforcement. The act of claiming victimhood has become a badge of honor in the current environment and will attract those who will try and take advantage. I don't generally like to make a example out of someone but if the message is not sent that this is a crime that seeks to destoy another's life and will be taken very seriously I'm afraid that this will continue.

Yes, at the very least you should be made to compensate whichever depts wasted their time investigating your nothing burger, instead of investigating real crimes.

Can only punish by the law., so cool all your jets with the Biblical as that will only open a can of worms no one will want to eat. As for False Statement , a class A misdemeanor there’s also Falsely Reporting an Incident, which doesn’t need a written statement, and that is a class A misdemeanor also, but if it concerns serious injury or death, or causes a large-scale response it’s a class D felony, and if it causes serious injury or death it’s a class C felony. At worst the bail money goes for hookers and hot tubs.

Yes.

most governments have enacted laws that prohibit filing a false report to police.

I think it should be given it's own category based upon what a reasonable person would derive as the intent behind it. For example, in the subject case, the intent appears to have to do with inciting violence and hatred in addition to enhancing his personal fame. Perhaps he should be charged with Sedition.

In the case of a so called "hate crime", I think those should be eliminated as actual crimes. Everyone should have a right to hate everyone else for any arbitrary reason. That said, faking a crime of any form where there is someone placed in the position of a victim of these false reports, it should absolutely carry a penalty. That penalty should be up to and including whatever punishment would have been metered out if the crime had actually taken place. In situations where there's no specific victim of a false accusation, some penalty in the mid-range of possible results should be considered.

Not to bring in a non-topical item, but I feel this should also be the case in false rape allegations as well. Though, those cases should probably carry a harsher penalty as the accused is likely to suffer simply because of the announcement that a case is being investigated. Just imagine college students being accused of sexual misconduct. They're often ostracized and even expelled from school based on nothing more than an unsubstantiated claim.

Hopefully, we'll return to the practice of "innocent until proven guilty", but I fear that may be a long way off.