Legal
Prosecutors are firing back at efforts by Sean “Diddy” Combs to bar an infamous 2016 surveillance video from his upcoming sex trafficking trial, calling it a “desperate” attempt to avoid “crushing” evidence.
With his trial looming next month, Diddy’s attorneys argued last week that the clip — showing him assaulting his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura in the hallway of a Los Angeles hotel — has been deceptively edited and would “unfairly confuse and mislead the jury.”
But in a response filing Friday, prosecutors say those arguments are “overblown” and are merely a pretext to prevent jurors from seeing “some of the most damning evidence of his sex trafficking.”
“The defendant has been overwhelmingly concerned with the existence of the video surveillance since the assault occurred and has taken great measures to ensure it was not released,” prosecutors write. “Now facing trial, the defendant attempts to keep this devastating proof from the jury. His grasping arguments to preclude this crushing evidence should be quickly dismissed.”
Combs was indicted in September, charged with running a sprawling criminal operation that aimed to “fulfill his sexual desires.” The case centers on elaborate “freak off” parties in which Combs and others would allegedly ply victims with drugs and then coerce them into having sex, as well as on alleged acts of violence to keep victims silent.
Jury selection is currently set to start on May 5, with opening statements scheduled for May 12. If convicted on all of the charges, which include sex trafficking and racketeering, Combs faces a potential life prison sentence.
The Cassie video, which aired on CNN in May, showed him attacking her at the Intercontinental Hotel in March 2016. The clip drew far more public attention to the accusations against the star — who was then only facing civil lawsuits — and prompted an apology from Combs shortly after it aired.
“My behavior on that video is inexcusable,” Combs said at the time. “I take full responsibility for my actions in that video. I was disgusted then when I did it. I’m disgusted now. I went and I sought out professional help. I got into going to therapy, going to rehab. I had to ask God for his mercy and grace. I’m so sorry.”
In the lead up to the trial, Combs’ lawyers have repeatedly targeted the Cassie tape, accusing prosecutors of unfairly leaking it and alleging that CNN had unfairly edited it. Last week, they formally moved to ban it from the trial, calling it “inaccurate” and “unreliable” because of edits that were “specifically designed to inflame the passions” of viewers.
But in Friday’s response, the feds said those issues were quibbles that could easily be fixed at trial, not valid reasons to withhold the tape from jurors entirely. They pointed out that Combs himself had apologized over the clip and had not disputed its content; and they said that any problems with finding the original footage were caused by Diddy’s own efforts to destroy it.
“It is by the defendant’s own hand that the original version of this damning footage no longer exists: it was deleted and given to the defendant as part of a cover-up orchestrated by the defendant and his co-conspirators,” prosecutors write. “The Court must not reward the defendant for his actions by precluding the video that remains available despite the defendant’s obstructive efforts.”
50 Cent has filed a lawsuit aimed at blocking the release of an upcoming horror movie in which he plays the starring role, claiming he never signed a final agreement and has not been paid.
In a complaint filed Friday against producer Ryan Kavanaugh and others, the rapper (Curtis Jackson) says he filmed the entirety of SkillHouse because he trusted that he would eventually reach a deal covering his compensation for the movie.
“That trust was misplaced. No final agreement was ever signed,” 50’s lawyers write. “Nevertheless, defendants have billed Jackson as the star and producer of the film [and] have shamelessly and deceptively marketed the film as a ‘50 Cent Movie’ and ‘produced by 50 Cent,’ when it is nothing of the sort.”
Trending on Billboard
Despite being listed as a producer, 50 says he was given “no creative input into the film” – an arrangement he says he “never would have agreed to” because it might harm his “carefully curated and award-winning reputation as a film and television producer.” Adding “insult to injury,” the rapper’s attorneys say the producers “have not paid Jackson a dime” to date.
“Despite plaintiffs’ repeated objections and demands to cease and desist, defendants continue to infringe and misappropriate plaintiffs’ intellectual property rights and intend to release the film in the coming weeks (if not days),” 50’s attorneys write. “Should the film be released publicly, Jackson faces irreparable harm to his valuable brand and reputation.”
The lawsuit isn’t unexpected. Last week, the rapper warned on Instagram: “They can’t release this MOVIE SKILL HOUSE without my signature which they do not have. What kinda business are they doing? I’d hate to have to demonstrate.” In another post, he later added: “This guy Ryan Kavanaugh is doing everything in his power to make me kill this movie. This one is going in the trash can.”
In Thursday’s complaint, 50 says he only draft term sheets were exchanged, and that he believed a full contract would eventually be negotiated and signed. In order to “avoid unnecessary delay and based on a mistaken good-faith belief in Kavanaugh’s promises and reputation,” he says he filmed his scenes without that final paperwork signed.
Without such a deal, his lawyers say that releasing the movie would violate his intellectual property rights, including his trademarks and his likeness rights. And they say the producers are already infringing those rights by using his name and image to promote the movie and Kavanaugh’s GenTV streaming service.
“Defendants have made Jackson the centerpiece of their promotional and marketing efforts for the Film,” the star’s lawyers write. “Despite having raised concerns months ago, Jackson’s name, image, and trademarks still feature prominently across the GenTV platform.”
Kavanaugh did not immediately return a request for comment on Friday.
A songwriter who unsuccessfully sued Mariah Carey over “All I Want for Christmas is You” is pleading with a judge to reject demands that he repay her six-figure legal bill, warning it would push an “elderly man” to “the brink of a financial collapse.”
After beating Vince Vance’s copyright lawsuit over her holiday classic, Carey, Sony Music and other defendants told the judge earlier this month that they had paid nearly $186,000 to a team of lawyers to defeat “frivolous” motions advanced by Vance’s attorneys.
But in a response filing on Monday, Vance’s lawyers said that such a award was “simply not reasonable” and completely out of proportion for the amount of litigation at issue – and that it could bankrupt an an “elderly man now without vast resources.”
Trending on Billboard
“The plaintiff is elder and living off his music catalog and some touring,” the songwriter’s attorneys say. “One artist should not push another artist to the brink of a financial collapse.”
Vance (real name Andy Stone) first sued Carey in 2022, claiming “All I Want” infringed the copyrights to a 1989 song of the exact same name by his Vince Vance and the Valiants. He said his track had received “extensive airplay” during the 1993 holiday season — a year before Carey released her now-better-known hit.
The case was a big deal because Carey’s song is big business. The 1994 hit, which became even more popular after it appeared in the 2003 holiday rom-com Love Actually, has re-taken the top spot on the Hot 100 for six straight years and earned a whopping $8.5 million in revenue in 2022.
But in a ruling last month, Judge Mónica Ramírez Almadani said Vance had failed to show that the songs were similar enough to violate copyright law. She cited analysis by a musicologist who said the two tracks were “very different songs” that shared only “commonplace Christmas song clichés” that had been used in many earlier tracks.
The judge not only tossed out Vance’s case, but also ruled that he and his lawyers should be punished for advancing meritless arguments that the judge said were aimed to “cause unnecessary delay and needlessly increase the costs of litigation.”
Earlier this month, Carey and the other defendants told the judge they had paid a combined $185,602.30 for a total of 295 hours to defeat those motions. They said they spent a lot because Vance was demanding “drastic” thing, like $20 million in damages and the “destruction” of all copies of Carey’s song.
Carey, repped by Peter Anderson and others from the law firm Davis Wright Tremaine, asked for about $141,000; Walter Afanasieff, a co-writer on Carey’s track repped by Kenneth D. Freundlich, asked for $7,000; Sony Music, represented by Benjamin Akley, Donald Zakarin, Ilene Farkas and others from Pryor Cashman, asked for $32,000; and Kobalt, repped by Bert Deixler and others from Kendall Brill & Kelly LLP, asked for $5,000.
But in Tuesday’s response, Vance’s lawyer (Gerard P. Fox) said those demands were far too high for a case that he said had been filed with good intentions and sound legal reasoning.
“He heard something that to him seemed substantially similar and spent money that is sparse for him on two of the top musicologists in the country and asked them for their independent opinions, and they both gave him the same opinion: there was infringement,” Fox writes.
“The loss of this case … is staggering enough for this plaintiff and saddling him with $185,000 of big law firm billing that is unreasonable and forcing him to sell parts of his catalogue of music will accomplish nothing,” the lawyer writes.
Jay-Z’s rape accuser wants a federal judge to dismiss his defamation lawsuit against her, arguing she cannot be sued over allegations she made in court – and that a headline-grabbing NBC News interview is protected under the same legal logic.
In a court motion filed Tuesday, attorneys for the Jane Doe accuser and her attorney, Tony Buzbee, argued that her shocking accusations against the rapper were covered by the “fair report privilege” – a legal doctrine that largely bars defamation cases over allegations made during legal proceedings.
Jay-Z’s lawsuit – filed in March after Doe dropped her case against him – claims that she also defamed him by making similar allegations during an interview with NBC News. But in her new motion, she says those statements are also covered by the “fair report” protections.
Trending on Billboard
“The average person watching the report, and indeed anyone watching the report, would certainly understand that the statements refer to allegations in the lawsuit,” her lawyers write.
The case against Jay-Z, filed in December, claimed that he and Sean “Diddy” Combs had drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl at an after-party following the 2000 MTV Video Music Awards. Jay-Z forcefully denied the allegations, calling them a “blackmail attempt.” After just two months of heated litigation, Doe dropped her case without a settlement payment.
Weeks after the case was dropped, Jay-Z sued both Doe and Buzbee for defamation, malicious prosecution and other wrongdoing, claiming they had carried out an “evil conspiracy” to extort a settlement from him by making the “false and malicious” rape allegations.
“Mr. Carter does not commence this action lightly,” his lawyers wrote in the lawsuit, filed in Alabama federal court. “But the extortion and abuse of Mr. Carter by Doe and her lawyers must stop.”
In Tuesday’s motion to dismiss that case, attorneys for Doe and Buzbee argued that they cannot be sued because they had made such statements in court. And they said the “fair report” privilege also clearly applies to the NBC interview, even if Doe gave statements that weren’t exactly the same as the claims she had raised in court.
“It is immaterial that the NBC News piece does not preface every statement with a reference to Doe’s amended complaint,” her lawyers write. “Doe’s statements in the NBC News piece are substantially the same as the allegations of her underlying amended complaint, even if they are not identical.”
Attorneys for Doe and Buzbee also argued that the other claims in Jay-Z’s case are similarly faulty, saying he has not “come close” to showing that he can sue for malicious prosecution. A representative for Jay-Z did not immediately return a request for comment.
The Alabama lawsuit is part of a sprawling legal battle between Jay-Z and Buzbee in the wake of the rape allegation. A separate case in California, in which Jay-Z is suing the lawyer for extortion and defamation, is awaiting an early-stage ruling by a judge. Buzbee has also filed his own cases against both Jay-Z’s Roc Nation and his longtime law firm, Quinn Emanuel, alleging they have harassed his clients and committed other wrongdoing.
Disgraced hip-hop mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs‘ precipitous fall from grace will be chronicled in the upcoming BBC investigative documentary P Diddy: The Rise and Fall. According to the BBC, the doc will examine the highs and lows of Combs, “whose influence and impact is undeniable, but whose legacy could not be indelibly tarnished.”
The doc — the latest in an increasingly long list of such films and series exploring Combs’ highs and lows — will be hosted by award-winning broadcaster Yinka Bokinni and air on the BBC Three and iPlayer on April 28. Combs has been in jail for nearly eight months as he awaits the May 5 start of his upcoming trial in a federal criminal case in which he is charged with racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution, with prosecutors alleging that he “abused, threatened and coerced women” in the furtherance of a “criminal enterprise” that allegedly involved kidnapping, arson, bribery and forced labor. Combs has pleaded not guilty to the charges and last week lost a bid to delay the start of the trial.
He is also facing dozens of other lawsuits accusing him of rape and assault, allegations he has denied.
The BBC said that Bokinni will explore how Combs “has gone from being the world’s biggest Hip-hop mogul, to hemorrhaging friends and fans in a matter of months,” mapping both his extraordinary success and influence in fashion, music and culture, “while meeting those close to him to understand what may have led to this very public disgrace… [and] unpack[ing] the interplay of power, money, moral corruption, and sexism, which underpins this story.”
Bokinni said, “My job is to tell stories — but never did I imagine I’d be telling this one. Investigating the alleged actions of Diddy has forced a spotlight onto the darker side of an industry so many of us dream of belonging to. We sang his songs, bought into the lifestyle, watched the shows and wanted more. This has been an emotional, sometimes difficult experience. And with a trial on the horizon, what happens next will no doubt be gripping — in the most sobering way.”
The BBC effort is one of a raft of docs exploring Combs’ undoing, including Max’s The Fall of Diddy, TMZ’s The Downfall of Diddy, as well as Prime Video’s Diddy: Monster’s Fall, Diddy: Summit to Plummet and an upcoming Netflix doc from 50 Cent’s G-Unit Films whose release date has not yet been announced.
The Tennessee Board of Parole recommended on Tuesday (April 22) that the state’s Governor consider pardoning Jelly Roll for his past convictions. According to the Associated Press, the board issued its nonbonding recommendation after voting unanimously on the move following a nearly two hour session that included testimony from Nashville Sheriff Daron Hall and several others.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Jelly Roll has long talked about the his remorse for the multiple arrests in his youth and the long road he’s taken to make amends, including frequently visiting jails and rehab centers before his shows. Following the board’s action, it is now up to Gov. Bill Lee to decide if the singer (born Jason DeFord) will be pardoned. The move could pave the way for the singer to travel internationally to perform, something he has not been able to do to date.
Trending on Billboard
“This was incredible,” Jelly Roll said of the board’s decision. “I pray this goes through. But today was special for me, regardless.” During the board meeting, Jelly Roll described falling in love with songwriting while in detention, explaining, “It started as a passion project that felt therapeutic and would end up changing my life in ways that I never dreamed imaginable and opened doors that I’ve never thought possible.”
Jelly Roll, 40, was convicted on robbery charges at 17, when a female friend helped him and two other young men enter a house in 2002; both of the other men were armed, though Jelly Roll was not. They demanded money and got $350 and an empty wallet. Because the victims knew the woman and Jelly Roll, they were both arrested right away and he was sentenced to a year in prison. Then, in 2008, police found marijuana and crack cocaine in his car, which resulted in a sentence of eight years of court-ordered supervision. He has been jailed more than 40 times over the years for a variety of drug charges dating back to when he was 14.
Due to those incidents, and a number of other brushes with the law, until last year Jelly was unable to secure a passport in order to book shows outside of the U.S. due to legal restrictions on travel by former felons.
The parole board began considering Jelly Roll’s pardon application since Oct. 2024, which marked at least five years since his sentence expired.
Following Tuesday’s recommendation, Republican Gov. Lee told reporters that “the reporting on Jelly Roll, that’s encouraging for his situation, but there are steps yet to happen in that case.” A number of friends and civic leaders wrote to the board about Jelly Roll’s generosity and transformation to bolster his case, according to the AP.
Sheriff Hall — who runs Nashville’s jail — wrote in a note that Jelly Roll had an “awakening” in one of the jails he managed, while Live Nation Entertainment CEO Michael Rapino wrote about the generous donations the singer has given to charities for at-risk youth.
Among the reasons Jelly Roll gave for needing the pardon was the current difficulty he faces traveling to Canada to perform due to his criminal record. Last June, Jelly booked his first-ever international shows when he scheduled gigs in Ontario and Ottawa. A week before announcing the shows, Jelly told Howard Stern that he had just gotten off the phone with his lawyer about the travel ban. “We are working … it’s getting good, it’s starting to look promising. It didn’t look good even just six months ago, but it’s starting to look really promising,” he said at the time.
Jelly told the board that he needs the pardon to be able to play more shows in Canada because currently he needs to apply for a special permit to travel north, which can sometimes be a lengthy process. “I want to be an inspiration for people who are now where I used to be — to let them know that change is truly possible,” Jelly told the board. “One of the reasons I’m asking for your recommendation for this pardon is because I’m looking to take my message of redemption through the power of music and faith through the rest of the world.”
He said that due to his criminal record, every time he travels it takes a “team of lawyers and a mountain of paperwork to secure my entry into those countries.” He noted last year’s inaugural Canadian shows, as well as his first trip to the U.K., where he traveled to speak about a rehab program.
Check out Hall’s post about the hearing below.
A year ago, I wrote @GovBillLee asking for a full Pardon for Jason “Jelly Roll” Deford…..today the Board unanimously recommended his Pardon. It’s now in the hands of our Governor. pic.twitter.com/NACZOGW2y0— Daron Hall (@DaronHall7) April 22, 2025
Eminem’s publisher is dropping a lawsuit that claimed a Detroit-area Ford dealership stole “Lose Yourself” for TikTok videos that warned viewers they “only get one shot” to buy a special edition truck.
Less than three months after Eight Mile Style sued LaFontaine Ford St. Clair for copyright infringement over the social media ads, the music company told a judge Tuesday (April 22) that it would voluntarily dismiss the case permanently.
Court documents did not offer any explanation for the move, giving no indication whether a settlement had been reached or if the case was simply being dropped. Neither side immediately returned requests for comment.
Trending on Billboard
Eight Mile, which owns the copyrights to “Lose Yourself” and other Eminem songs, filed the case in January, accusing LaFontaine Ford — which owns several dealerships near Eminem’s hometown — of blasting the song in the social media videos even though “at no time” did it get a license to do so.
“This is an action for willful copyright infringement … against LaFontaine for its unauthorized use of the composition in online advertisements for one or more car dealerships in blatant disregard of the exclusive rights vested in Eight Mile,” the company’s attorneys wrote.
The lawsuit claimed the videos, which allegedly appeared on TikTok, Instagram and Facebook in September and October, used “Lose Yourself” to boost a special Detroit Lions-themed Ford truck, telling viewers: “With only 800 produced, you only get one shot to own a Special Edition Detroit Lions 2024 PowerBoost Hybrid F-150.”
Eminem doesn’t own Eight Mile Style and was not involved in the lawsuit.
Social media platforms like TikTok and Instagram provide huge libraries of licensed music for users to easily add to their videos. But there’s a key exception: The songs can’t be used for commercial or promotional videos posted by brands. That kind of content requires a separate “synch” license, just like any conventional advertisement on TV.
That crucial distinction has led to numerous lawsuits in recent years. The restaurant chain Chili’s has been sued twice for using copyrighted songs in social videos, once by the Beastie Boys over “Sabotage” and again by Universal Music Group for allegedly using more than 60 songs from Ariana Grande, Justin Bieber and many others. The hotel chain Marriott and more than a dozen NBA teams have also recently faced copyright lawsuits over the same thing.
This is The Legal Beat, a weekly newsletter about music law from Billboard Pro, offering you a one-stop cheat sheet of big new cases, important rulings and all the fun stuff in between.
This week: A breakdown of the many lawyers working on the Sean “Diddy” Combs litigation; a motion by Lil Durk to dismiss his federal murder-for-hire charges; an updated version of Drake’s lawsuit against Universal Music Group focused on the Super Bowl; and much more.
THE BIG STORY: The Diddy Debacle’s Many, Many Lawyers
To lead off Billboard’s annual Top Music Lawyers list, I dove deep into the many attorneys involved in the litigation against Sean “Diddy” Combs over his alleged sexual abuse.
Trending on Billboard
Spread across a complex criminal case and dozens of civil lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions, the Combs litigation unsurprisingly involves a slew of high-powered lawyers, ranging from veteran defense attorneys to experienced sex-crimes prosecutors to a prolific plaintiff’s lawyer who says he represents more than 100 victims. And that’s not even mentioning the BigLaw attorneys hired to defend top industry players who have been dragged — they say wrongly — into the messy litigation.
For the whole story, which covers more than 20 lawyers in all, go read my full article here. And make sure not to miss the actual Top Lawyers list after that, detailing the top music industry attorneys who are making deals, guiding clients and watching out for AI.
Other top stories this week…
IF THE SONG DOESN’T FIT – Lil Durk asked a federal judge to dismiss murder-for-hire charges, claiming prosecutors are citing song lyrics as evidence even though he wrote them more than six months before the alleged crime. Prosecutors had claimed last year that the Chicago drill star rapped about ordering his “OTF” crew to murder rival Quando Rondo, but his lawyers said that claim was “demonstrably false” and that the feds used such evidence to mislead a grand jury: “Unless the government is prosecuting Banks on a theory of extra-sensory prescience, the lyrics could not have soundly informed the grand jury’s finding of probable cause,” Durks lawyers wrote.
DRAKE v. UMG UPDATE – Drake filed an amended complaint in his defamation lawsuit against Universal Music Group over Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” focusing heavily on the Super Bowl halftime show that took place after the original case was filed. Drake’s lawyers say the decision to censor the word “pedophile” during the broadcast had actually helped his case: “Kendrick Lamar would not have been permitted to perform during the Super Bowl Performance unless the word ‘pedophile’… was omitted from the lyrics — that is because nearly everyone understands that it is defamatory to falsely brand someone a ‘certified pedophile’,” the star’s lawyers wrote.
LEGAL R.I.P. – Music attorney Joel Katz, for decades one of the industry’s most powerful figures, died last week at the age of 80. A longtime practice group chair at the firm Greenberg Traurig, Katz represented a who’s who of top music executives over his career, as well as major artists (Willie Nelson, Jimmy Buffett, Tim McGraw) and industry groups (Recording Academy and Country Music Association). After Recording Academy head Deb Dugan accused Katz of sexual harassment in 2020 — an allegation he denied — he joined Barnes & Thornburg in 2021, where he spent the rest of his career. Go read Melinda Newman’s full obituary here, featuring reactions from around the industry.
DIDDY TRIAL DELAY DENIED – Judge Arun Subramanian denied a request by Diddy to delay his sex trafficking and racketeering trial by two months, ruling that the move was made too close to trial. The star’s lawyers had argued they didn’t have enough time to prepare for trial after prosecutors added new charges earlier this month. But the judge ruled that the new indictment largely overlapped with earlier charging papers, telling Diddy’s lawyers he found it “unclear why there isn’t sufficient time to prepare.”
SMOKING GUN OR ‘UNRELIABLE’? – Elsewhere in Diddy-world, his lawyers asked the judge to exclude the infamous 2016 surveillance video of him assaulting his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura from the trial, arguing it would “unfairly confuse and mislead the jury.” They claim the clip was edited by CNN and then the original was destroyed, leaving only an “inaccurate, unreliable video” to play for jurors: “The manipulation of the videos was specifically designed to inflame the passions of CNN’s viewing audience, and that is what the government is hoping to leverage in this case.”
DISASTER DEPOSITION – Megan Thee Stallion asked a federal judge to hold Tory Lanez in contempt of court over “disruptive” and “inflammatory” behavior during a recent deposition in a civil lawsuit. Lanez — currently serving a 10-year prison sentence for shooting Megan — made a “mockery of the proceedings” by harassing a female lawyer and demanding definitions of basic terms. The motion came in a defamation case Megan filed against gossip blogger Milagro Gramz, who she claims has waged a “coordinated campaign” with Lanez to “defame and delegitimize” the superstar rapper in the wake of the shooting and trial.
DANCE DANCE LITIGATION – A TikTok user named Kelley Heyer, who says she created last summer’s viral “Apple dance” to a Charli XCX song, is suing Roblox over allegations that the company violated copyright law by selling her dance moves as an “emote.” Heyer claims that other games paid her for a license, but that Roblox used her moves without a deal. The lawsuit is the latest in a long line of cases filed over viral dance moves that are used in video games.
Lil Durk wants a judge to dismiss murder-for-hire charges he’s facing over a 2022 shooting, claiming the feds gave “false evidence” to a grand jury by citing song lyrics that he wrote more than six months before the attack ever took place.
Prosecutors charged the Chicago drill star (Durk Banks) last year over allegations that ordered his “OTF” crew to murder rival Quando Rondo in – accusations they backed up by quoting lyrics from a song called “Wonderful Wayne & Jackie Boy” that allegedly referenced the shooting.
But in a motion to dismiss the case filed Friday, Durk’s attorneys said those lyrics could not possibly have made mention of the Rondo shooting because the rapper wrote them “seven months before the incident even happened.”
Trending on Billboard
“The government told the grand jury that Mr. Banks, through specific lyrics in his music, celebrated and profited from a revenge murder that he had ordered,” writes Durk’s lawyer Drew Findling. “That claim is demonstrably false.”
The allegedly incriminating lyrics came as a feature on a track released by Babyface Ray in December 2022 – three months after the Rondo shooting. But in their motion this week, Durk’s lawyer say he recorded his verses in January and had no subsequent involvement in the song. They cited sworn affidavits from two music producers who worked on “Wonderful Wayne,” who both said Durk made no edits to the lyrics after the shooting.
“Unless the government is prosecuting Banks on a theory of extra-sensory prescience, the lyrics could not have soundly informed the grand jury’s finding of probable cause,” Findling writes.
The use of rap music as evidence in criminal cases is controversial, as critics argue it threatens free speech and can sway juries by tapping into racial biases. Over the past few years, the practice has drawn backlash from the music industry and led to efforts by lawmakers to stop it. But it has continued largely unabated, most notably in the recent criminal case against Young Thug in Atlanta, in which prosecutors made extensive use of his music.
Durk was arrested in October on murder-for-hire and gun charges related to the September 2022 shooting at a Los Angeles gas station, which left Rondo (Tyquian Bowman) unscathed but saw friend Lul Pab (Saviay’a Robinson) killed in the crossfire.
Prosecutors say Durk’s Only The Family 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. One of them was the Rondo attack, the feds say, allegedly carried out in retaliation for the 2020 killing of rapper King Von (Dayvon Bennett), a close friend of Durk’s.
“Banks put a monetary bounty out for an individual with whom Banks was feuding named T.B.,” prosecutors wrote in the indictment, 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.”
In addition to Durk, prosecutors have also charged several alleged OTF members — Kavon London Grant, Deandre Dontrell Wilson and Asa Houston — as well as two other alleged Chicago gang members named Keith Jones and David Brian Lindsey.
To support those claims, prosecutors alleged that Durk “sought to commercialize” Lul Pub’s death by “rapping about his revenge” on Rondo: “Told me they got an addy (go, go)/ Got location (go, go)/ Green light (go, go, go, go, go),” Durk raps in the track. “Look on the news and see your son/You screamin’, “No, no” (pu–y).”
But in Friday’s motion to dismiss, Durk’s lawyers say that accusation is “patently false,” and that including them in the indictment is the kind of “egregious” prosecutorial conduct that requires the judge to toss the case entirely.
“A prosecutor who knowingly secures an indictment based upon false information, or who allows a falsely obtained indictment to persist, routs the grand jury from its central protective function,” Findling writes. “That is clearly what happened here.”
Durk’s indictment also alleged that “Wonderful Wayne” makes direct reference to a news clip filmed shortly after the shooting, in which Rondo can be heard screaming “no, no!” after seeing Lul Pab’s dead body. But his lawyers now say those were internet edits posted to YouTube, and that the audio from the news broadcast was not used in the original.
“Mr. Banks did not create these videos, and the government has failed to show any nexus between these manufactured video clips and Mr. Banks,” Finding says. “The internet users who posted the videos … are apparent ‘fan pages’ maintained by people with no affiliation to Mr. Banks.”
Dismissing criminal charges at the outset is a drastic step that courts rarely take. But Durks’ attorneys say the lyrics were the “linchpin” to the case against him, forming one of only two pieces of evidence that was presented to the grand jury that issued the indictment.
“For the grand jury not to have been substantially influenced by that evidence in its decision to indict is inconceivable,” Findling writes.
Post Malone’s ex-fiancée, Hee Sung “Jamie” Park, has filed a court petition seeking sole physical custody of their two-year-old daughter. Park is filing for primary physical custody of the ex-couple’s daughter — named in court documents as “DDP” with a birthdate of May 26, 2022 — while allowing Post visitation rights, in addition to joint […]