Lil Durk’s Murder-for-Hire Trial Pushed Back Until October
Written by djfrosty on January 2, 2025
Lil Durk’s trial on federal murder-for-hire charges will be pushed back until October after both his lawyers and federal prosecutors agreed to a months-long delay.
The case against Durk — over an alleged plot to kill rival rapper Quando Rondo in a 2022 Los Angeles shooting that left another man dead — had been scheduled to go to trial next week because federal “speedy trial” rules require such cases to be quickly heard by a jury.
But in a motion on Tuesday (Dec. 31), both sides agreed to a request from Lil Durk (real name Durk Devontay Banks) and his co-defendants to postpone the courtroom showdown until Oct. 14 to give them more time to prepare for the trial — a request that prosecutors did not oppose.
“Due to the nature of the prosecution and the number of defendants, including the charges in the indictment and the voluminous discovery that will be produced to defendants, this case is so unusual and so complex that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself within the Speedy Trial Act time limits,” the parties told the judge in the new filing.
Durk was arrested in October on conspiracy, murder-for-hire and firearms charges for allegedly orchestrating the 2022 attack at a Los Angeles gas station, which left Rondo (Tyquian Bowman) unscathed but saw his friend Lul Pab (Saviay’a Robinson) killed in the crossfire. Durk allegedly ordered the shooting in retaliation for the 2020 killing of rapper King Von (Dayvon Bennett), a close friend and frequent collaborator.
In charging documents, prosecutors claim that Durk’s “Only The Family” (“OTF”) crew was not merely a well-publicized group of Chicago rappers, but a “hybrid organization” that also functioned as a criminal gang to carry out violent acts “at the direction” of Durk, including the Rondo attack.
“Banks put a monetary bounty out for an individual with whom Banks was feuding named T.B.,” prosecutors wrote in the charges last month, referring to Rondo by his initials. “Banks ordered T.B.’s murder and the hitmen used Banks and OTF-related finances to carry out the murder.”
Among other evidence, prosecutors say the assailants booked flights to Los Angeles using a credit card connected to Durk. The feds say the card was issued under a bank account that listed Durk’s one-time manager as an owner, and that another credit card was issued under the same account to Durk’s father. Charging documents also cite a text allegedly sent by Durk to another co-conspirator in the lead-up to the shooting: “Don’t book no flights under no names involved wit me.”
Durk has denied the allegations and pleaded not guilty to the charges. In addition to the star himself, prosecutors have also charged those who they say actually carried out the attack, including alleged OTF members Kavon London Grant, Deandre Dontrell Wilson and Asa Houston, as well as Keith Jones and David Brian Lindsey, two other alleged Chicago gang members.
With the rapper seeking release on pre-trial bond, prosecutors unsealed new documents in December linking him to another shooting that left Stephon Mack, an alleged Chicago gang leader, dead in 2022. The feds argued that the earlier slaying had also been an act of revenge by Durk, ordered after the star’s brother was killed by a member of Mack’s gang.
Following those revelations, a federal magistrate judge denied Durk’s motion to be released on bond at a December hearing, leaving him in jail until his eventual trial. He’s currently being housed at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles, a federal prison frequently used to house defendants before and during trial.
In some cases, denial of bond might prompt defense attorneys to force prosecutors to stick to the speedy trial schedule and quickly present the case to a jury. But in Tuesday’s order, attorneys for Durk and the other defendants said the complexity of the Rondo shooting case would require more time to adequately prepare a defense — and that “the government does not object to the continuance.”
“Defense counsel represent that failure to grant the continuance would deny them reasonable time necessary for effective preparation,” the judge wrote, adding that defense lawyers needed plenty of time to “conduct and complete an independent investigation of the case” and “complete additional legal research” ahead of trial.