Legal News
Page: 91
The Rolling Stones members Mick Jagger and Keith Richards were hit with a copyright lawsuit on Friday (March 10) claiming their 2020 single “Living in a Ghost Town” — a rare new song from the rock legends — lifted material from a pair of little-known earlier tracks.
In a lawsuit filed in New Orleans federal court, songwriter Sergio Garcia Fernandez (stage name Angelslang) is claiming that Jagger and Richards “misappropriated many of the recognizable and key protected elements” from his 2006 song “So Sorry” as well as his 2007 tune “Seed of God.”
How would members of the iconic band have heard those songs, which have less than 1,000 spins on Spotify? Fernandez claims he gave a demo CD to “an immediate family member” of Jagger.
“The immediate family member … confirmed receipt … to the plaintiff via e-mail, and expressed that the musical works of the plaintiff and its style was a sound The Rolling Stones would be interested in using,” Fernandez’s lawyers wrote in Friday’s complaint.
A copy of the alleged email from Jagger’s relative was not included in public filings.
Released at the peak of the COVID-19 shutdowns in April 2020, “Living in a Ghost Town” was the first original material released by the Stones since 2012. The song, a blues-rock tune with reggae influences accompanied by a COVID-themed video, reached No. 3 on the Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart in May 2020.
But Fernandez says the new song was created by borrowing key features from his songs, including the “vocal melodies, the chord progressions, the drum beat patterns, the harmonica parts, the electric bass line parts, the tempos, and other key signatures” from “So Sorry” and the “harmonic and chord progression and melody” from “Seed of God.”
“Defendants never paid plaintiff, nor secured the authorization for the use of ‘So Sorry’ and ‘Seed of God,’ his lawyers wrote.
A rep for The Rolling Stones did not immediately return a request for comment on Friday evening.
A year after Morris Day accused the Prince estate of trying to “rewrite history” by “taking my name away,” it appears that the ugly dispute over his band name has been worked out. But Day’s attorney tells Billboard that other key issues with the estate remain unresolved.
Last year’s outcry was prompted by a threat letter in which attorneys for the estate complained about Day’s efforts to own the trademark registration “Morris Day and The Time” — the name of the Prince-affiliated band he’s led for years. In it, they told him he had “no right” to use the name “in any form.”
That dispute now appears to be in the rearview mirror. In December, the federal trademark office formally published Day’s application for such a trademark registration. At that point, the Prince estate had 30 days to file an opposition case against him, but records show it did not do so.
The progress is perhaps unsurprising, given the change in the control of the Prince estate that has taken place in the year since Day’s complaints.
Last year’s threat letter came from Comerica, a court-appointed bank that administered the estate during a years-long legal battle. With that case finally closed, the Prince estate is now in the hands of its permanent stewards: industry bigwig Primary Wave on the one hand, and a group of heirs and advisors led by longtime Prince attorney Londell McMillan on the other in what amounts to a 50-50 split. And during last year’s fracas, both Primary Wave and McMillan voiced public support for Day.
Day and Prince were frequent collaborators in the early 1980s. Day was the lead singer of The Time, a group known for their high-octane funk; Prince wrote and produced much of their music under an alias. They toured together, and The Time appeared prominently as Prince’s rival band in the 1984 film Purple Rain. In a 1990 interview, Prince said The Time was “the only band I’ve ever been afraid of.”
In December 2021, attorneys for the estate sent a letter to Day over the trademark registration on “Morris Day and The Time,” a name he had continued to use on tours for decades. They warned him that it violated a 1982 written agreement in which Day allegedly agreed that Prince’s company would retain all rights to the band’s name. Unless Day reached a deal with the estate, the attorneys said they would file a formal case against him at the federal trademark office.
A few months later, Day spoke out publicly about the dispute, saying he had “spent 40 years of my life” building the name and that Prince had had “no problem” with him using it. “Now that Prince is no longer with us, suddenly, the people who control his multi million dollar estate want to rewrite history by taking my name away from me, thus impacting how I feed my family,” Day wrote in a social media post.
Day’s post quickly sparked outrage against Comerica. Former Prince bassist Nik West took to Instagram to complain: “I don’t see how ‘randoms’ can tell you this! Morris Day and the Time forever … we ALL know what time it is!” Primary Wave, which at that point was not yet in control of the estate, quickly joined the chorus of critics, telling Comerica to “do the right thing here.”
Now, a year later, Day’s trademark application is advancing, and his attorney Richard Jefferson tells Billboard that he and his client are optimistic that “things will be amicable moving forward.” But despite the headway on the “Time” name, Jefferson says they’re still working to resolve broader issues with the Prince estate.
“All I can say at this point is that we are making progress,” he said in an email. “The trademark is only one of a few issues at play.”
Case in point: Public records show that Day is also currently seeking to regain his ownership rights to two of The Time’s biggest songs using copyright law’s so-called termination right — a provision that allows creators to win back control of works that they sold away decades earlier.
In June, Day’s attorneys submitted formal notice that he planned to terminate the estate’s control over his songwriting stakes in “Jungle Love,” which hit No. 20 on the Billboard Hot 100, and “The Bird,” which reached No. 36 on the chart. Both songs also appeared prominently in Purple Rain.
If the termination process is completed, Day would recover a 50% share of the “Jungle Love” composition and a 33 percent stake in “The Bird” composition, according to the filings. The remaining shares of those songs, originally owned by Prince, would still be owned by the estate. But in practice, such filings are often simply a starting point, leading to a renegotiation of rights deals rather than an outright termination.
Representatives for both halves of the Prince estate did not return requests for comment.
TikTok is facing a slew of class action lawsuits alleging it tracks and harvests troves of personal information on users through its in-app browser.
In the most recent suit filed on Wednesday, users allege TikTok has “secretly amassed massive amounts of highly invasive information and data by tracking their activities on third-party websites.” At least a dozen class actions have been filed since November alleging violations of the federal wiretap act, among other claims.
TikTok remains under fire by the government due to concerns that data it collects on American users can be leveraged by the Chinese government to advance its interests. The company could, for example, be forced to tweak its algorithm to boost content that undermines U.S. democratic institutions or muffles criticism of China and its allies, according to lawmakers. A bipartisan bill backed by the White House was introduced on Tuesday that would establish a unified process for reviewing and addressing technology that could be subject to foreign influence. Under the measure, Chinese parent company ByteDance could be forced to sell TikTok or the platform could be completely banned, though that would face significant hurdles.
The first suit, known as Recht v. TikTok, was filed in November. It was based on a report from Felix Krause, a software researcher who found that the company injects lines of code that commands the platform to copy user activity on external websites. Of the seven popular apps he tested — including Instagram, Snapchat, Amazon — he found that only TikTok monitored keystrokes.
The named plaintiff in the complaint, California resident Austin Recht, says he clicked on an ad to a third-party website, where he bought merchandise after he entered private data that included his credit card information. Tiktok “surreptitiously collected data associated” with his activity on the third-party site accessed through the platform’s in-app browser, according to the complaint.
The class actions detail how TikTok intercepts and harvests data. The in-app browser inserts code into the websites visited by users with the purpose of tracking “every detail about [their] activity,” Recht claims.
“In the case of online purchase transactions, this would include all of the details of the purchase, the name of the purchaser, their address, telephone number, credit card or bank information, usernames, passwords, dates of birth,” reads the complaint filed in California federal court.
The data isn’t limited to purchase information and extends to private information about users’ health, the suit alleges. When users click on a link to Planned Parenthood on TikTok, for example, their activity on the site is tracked and harvested. This could identify users looking for abortion services or those looking for information about gender identity, according to the suit.
TikTok has faced legal action for illegally harvesting user data. In 2020, it was sued for alleged violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, a state statute that prohibits private companies from collecting users biometric identifiers without first obtaining consent. It settled the litigation for $92 million.
In response to suits alleging violations of the Federal Wiretap Act, Tiktok has said that the purported class members are covered under the settlement for those who sued for violations of the Illinois privacy law because it “addressed all user data collected through the app.”
Though the plaintiffs in the suit don’t allege any injury, the Federal Wiretap Act doesn’t require proof of actual harm to recover monetary damages. The law prohibits the intentional interception of communications, which includes personal information.
Some of the suits also allege violations of state invasion of privacy and competition laws. A hearing has been set for March 30 on whether the litigation should be consolidated.
In California, TikTok could face massive damages if there’s a data leak. Under the California Consumer Privacy Act, companies that mishandle personal data face statutory damages ranging from $100 to $750 for each consumer per incident.
TikTok didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.
This article originally appeared on THR.com.
Jury deliberations began Wednesday (March 8) in the trial of three men accused of murdering rising rap star XXXTentacion during a 2018 robbery outside a Florida motorcycle shop after the alleged gunman’s attorney argued that DNA evidence proves his client and another man are innocent.
Attorney Joseph Kimok gave the final defense closing argument in the trial of three men accused of first-degree murder, telling jurors that while the artist struggled with his killers before being shot and DNA was found on the body and on a stolen necklace, it wasn’t from his client, 28-year-old Michael Boatwright. Nor was it from accused second gunman Trayvon Newsome, 24, or accused getaway driver and ringleader Dedrick Williams, 26.
“Whoever (XXXTentacion) struggled with is not in this courtroom,” Kimok told jurors as the four-week trial neared its conclusion. “The DNA proves that someone not named Michael Boatwright or Trayvon Newsome participated in this murder.”
A fourth man, Robert Allen, pleaded guilty last year to second-degree murder and testified against his former friends. Attorneys for all three men say he is lying about their clients’ involvement in the slaying and robbery, which netted $50,000. They also say Broward County sheriff’s detectives botched the investigation, failing to consider other possible suspects including Canadian rap star Drake, with whom XXXTentacion had an online feud.
Lead prosecutor Pascale Achille in her rebuttal argument Wednesday admitted that Allen is not a perfect witness, that he has previous felony convictions, but co-conspirators in murders rarely are.
“Plans hatched in hell do not have angels for witnesses,” she said.
Achille said that while detectives never found the guns, masks and money, only Williams was arrested within days of the shooting, giving the others time to hide any evidence. She said the lack of DNA evidence linking the defendants to the killing is irrelevant — that fact does not exclude them. She said much more importantly, cellphone data shows the defendants were together near the motorcycle shop at the time of the slaying and that Bluetooth data puts them in the SUV used by the shooters at that same time.
During her primary closing argument Tuesday, Achille played surveillance video from the motorcycle shop and elsewhere that she says backs up Allen’s testimony. She also played cellphone videos the defendants allegedly took hours after the killing that showed them smiling and dancing as they flashed handfuls of $100 bills.
Boatwright, Williams and Newsome all face mandatory life sentences if convicted. Prosecutors did not seek the death penalty. While the three are being tried together, the jury has to decide separately on each and could convict just one or two. The jurors deliberated for about an hour Wednesday before adjourning. They will resume Thursday.
XXXTentacion, whose real name was Jahseh Onfroy, had just left Riva Motorsports in suburban Fort Lauderdale on June 18, 2018, with a friend when his BMW was blocked by an SUV that swerved in front.
Surveillance video showed that two masked gunmen emerged and confronted the 20-year-old rapper at the driver’s window, and one shot him repeatedly after a 45-second struggle. They then grabbed a Louis Vuitton bag containing the $50,000, which XXXTentacion had just withdrawn from the bank. They then got back into the SUV and sped away. The friend was not harmed.
Prosecutors say the three defendants and Allen set out that day to commit robberies and went to the motorcycle shop to buy Williams a mask. There they spotted the rapper and decided to make him their target.
Prosecutors say Allen and Williams went inside the motorcycle shop to confirm it was him. They then went back to the SUV they had rented, waited for XXXTentacion to emerge and ambushed him, according to prosecutors.
The rapper was a platinum-selling rising star who tackled issues including prejudice and depression in his songs. He also drew criticism over bad behavior and multiple arrests, including charges that he severely beat and abused his girlfriend.
The license of a Rochester, New York, concert venue was revoked Wednesday (March 8) while authorities investigate the circumstances of a stampede after a rap concert that left two women dead and injured several other concertgoers.
“It is one step we can immediately take to ensure that the events of Sunday night are not repeated,” Police Chief David M. Smith said at a news conference. He said he denied the Main Street Armory’s application to renew its one-year entertainment license after the venue’s owner did not attend a scheduled meeting with police and other city officials.
Rhondesia Belton, 33, of Buffalo and Brandy Miller, 35, of Rochester were fatally injured when audience members surged dangerously toward the exits following a Sunday evening performance by Memphis, Tennessee, rap stars GloRilla and Finesse2tymes. Police on Monday said the stampede may have been triggered by unfounded fears of gunfire. But police found no immediate evidence of gunshots.
One woman remained hospitalized in critical condition Wednesday.
Smith said the city planned to meet with the venue’s owner Wednesday to ask him to choose between voluntarily halting events or having the pending renewal of the entertainment license denied. When the owner did not attend, the chief signed an order prohibiting the armory from hosting “any public entertainment, which includes concerts, amplified music, and athletic events or games, including volleyball or cheerleading.”
There was no response to an email requesting comment sent to the Main Street Armory.
“Your contracted event security guards were unable to control the crowd as they were running, which in turn caused a human stampede,” according to the city’s letter to Scott Donaldson, which said he had violated a licensing requirement to maintain order at the site.
The city’s deputy corporation counsel, Patrick Beath, said criminal and regulatory investigations are under way.
“In addition to the police investigation, the Rochester Fire Department and code enforcement teams are inspecting the building and reviewing photographic and video evidence of the concert to determine if there were any fire code or building code violations at the property,” Beath said at the news conference.
The fortress-like armory was built from 1905 to 1907 and was initially used by the U.S. Army. It hosted sporting events throughout the 20th century before being shut down for several years starting in the late 1990s, partly because it lacked a fire-suppression system at the time. It began hosting concerts and other events in 2005 after undergoing extensive renovations.
Smith said its main arena is meant to have a capacity of about 5,000 people.
“The bottom line is, lives were lost, and we need to take steps to make sure that no lives are lost in the future if this was indeed something that was preventable,” he said.
Fatal crowd surges at large events have turned deadly before, including one at a 2021 concert by rapper Travis Scott in which 10 people died.
Famed funk act Earth, Wind & Fire is suing a rival group that’s been performing under the name “Earth Wind & Fire Legacy Reunion,” calling them imposters who are infringing the band’s trademarks to “mislead the ticket-buying public.”
In a lawsuit filed Tuesday (March 7) in Florida federal court, the company that owns the band’s intellectual property argued that Legacy Reunion’s only claim to the name is a few “side musicians” who briefly played with Earth, Wind & Fire many years ago.
Despite that allegedly spurious link, the lawsuit says the rival group’s organizers “hatched a scheme to falsely imply in advertising that this new group was the real Earth, Wind & Fire.”
“Defendants did this to benefit from the commercial magnetism and immense goodwill the public has for plaintiff’s ‘Earth, Wind & Fire’ marks and logos, thereby misleading consumers and selling more tickets at higher prices,” the group’s lawyers wrote.
According to the lawsuit, the allegedly phony group is directly competing with the “real” Earth Wind & Fire, which has continued to tour since founder Maurice White died in 2016. Led by longtime members Philip Bailey, White’s brother Verdine and Ralph Johnson, the band operates under a license from Earth Wind & Fire IP LLC, a holding company owned by White’s sons.
In its lawsuit on Tuesday, attorneys for that company claimed that the organizers of Legacy Reunion (Substantial Music Group LLC and Stellar Communications, Inc.) have misled not only ticket buyers but resale websites like StubHub.
“The [Stubhub] ticket listing combines concerts by the real Earth, Wind & Fire with the band defendants’ promote, and the tickets offered for concerts by the band Defendants promote have nothing to do with the real Earth, Wind & Fire.”
Tribute acts – groups that exclusively cover the music of a particular band — are legally allowed to operate, and they often adopt names that allude to the original. But they can get into legal hot water if they make it appear that they are affiliated with the original. In 2021, ABBA filed a similar trademark lawsuit against a band that had been touring under the name ABBA Mania, calling it “parasitic.”
In the current case, Substantial Music Group allegedly used “Legacy Reunion” in listings (seemingly a reference to the former EWF members) but often in a separate font or in a different part of a logo. The group later allegedly changed the name to “Legacy Reunion of Earth Wind & Fire Alumni,” but the lawsuit claims the changes weren’t enough to avoid confusion.
Among other things, the lawsuit cited alleged examples of angry consumers who mistakenly bought tickets for the wrong band, including one that read, “This was not Earth Wind and Fire. NO Philip Bailey or Verdine White. It was just a band playing Earth Wind and Fire music. I purchased 3 tickets and I was very disappointed. It was truly false advertisement. I want my money back!!!!!”
In a statement to Billboard on Wednesday in response to the lawsuit, Substantial Music Group founder Richard Smith called the trademark complaint “disappointing.”
“It is sad that a greedy corporation has chosen to use trademark law to attempt to pass judgment on which historic members of Earth, Wind & Fire are worthy of being called alumni of the band,” Smith said. “I was personally a member of the band for five years and performed on two tours and one album. I’m proud to be an alumnus of the musical group and the corporation’s dismissiveness of my and others’ contributions Earth, Wind & Fire is hurtful. We will not be erased.”
Read the entire lawsuit here:
A Los Angeles judge has handed The Offspring a victory in its long legal battle with former drummer Ron Welty, who claimed he was owed millions more in profits from the veteran punk band’s $35 million catalog sale.
Welty, the band’s drummer from 1987 to 2003, claimed that lead singer Dexter Holland tried to “erase” his contributions to the Offspring’s golden era, including by failing to pay him his rightful cut of the sale of the band’s rights to Round Hill Music in 2015.
But Judge William F. Fahey largely rejected his accusations after a bench trial last fall, calling some of Welty’s allegations “completely illogical.” And in a final ruling on Monday, the judge sided with the Offspring on all remaining claims.
“Judgement is entered in favor of defendants Offspring Inc.,” the judge wrote. “Plaintiff Ron Welty shall take nothing.”
In a statement to Billboard on Wednesday, Welty’s attorney Jordanna G. Thigpen vowed to continue the fight: “In the few months I have been working with my deserving client and attempting to resolve this matter, it has become clear that the lower court was not the place where justice will be done. We are absolutely appealing, and look forward to higher authorities’ review of this court’s several decisions and its ultimate judgment.”
An attorney for the Offspring declined to comment on the decision.
Come Out and Pay
Welty joined the Offspring in 1987 and served as the band’s drummer across its heyday, including on its breakout 1994 album Smash and its 1998 peak with Americana, which reached No. 2 on the Billboard 200 and spent more than a year on the chart. When he left the band in 2003, no reasons were reported at the time.
But 17 years on, Welty filed a sweeping lawsuit in September 2020, claiming Holland and the other members had “forced him out of the band without cause” despite his “significant contributions to The Offspring’s success.” His lawyers claimed he was owed millions of dollars, and that the band was trying to “erase Mr. Welty and his achievements from the band’s history.”
“This lawsuit seeks, among other things, redress for The Offspring’s failure to pay Mr. Welty his rightful share of the band’s proceeds and a prohibition against their ongoing efforts to harm Mr. Welty, his legacy with the band, and his ongoing career,” his attorneys wrote at the time.
In particular, Welty’s lawsuit challenged the 2015 sale of the band’s music to Round Hill, which saw the company pay a reported $35 million for both the recorded masters for six studio albums and a greatest hits album, as well as the band’s music publishing rights covering its entire career.
But as revealed in later court filings, that deal was really structured as two separate deals: one $20 million payment split among the band’s key performers for the rights to the recorded masters, and another $15 million paid directly to Holland for the publishing rights, which he had retained exclusively.
In his lawsuit, Welty claimed he had not only been underpaid for his portion of the recordings, but that he was owed a portion of the $15 million Holland had earned from sale of his publishing rights.
But at a bench trial held in October, the other members of the Offspring’s best-known lineup testified that structure of the deal was fair. Both Kevin “Noodles” Wasserman and Gregory “Greg K.” Kriesel told the judge that Holland had written all of the band’s music, thus had rightly retained all publishing rights.
In a written decision in January citing that testimony, Judge Fahey ruled that the deal had been “structured in accordance with industry standards” and that Welty had failed to prove that he was entitled to a cut of Holland’s $15 million.
“It is hard even to envision a reason why these two other band members would agree to such a structure unless they believed that Holland was the creator and owner of the music compositions,” the judge wrote at the time.
“To adopt Welty’s theory would require this court to conclude that Wasserman and Kreisel knowingly walked away from a share of the additional $15 million … as part of some scheme to deprive Welty of additional compensation,” Judge Fahey wrote. “Such a conclusion is completely illogical as well as unsupported.”
The January ruling also rejected Welty’s separate accusations that he was owed hundreds of thousands in unpaid royalties.
Following that decision, other issues in the case remained technically unresolved, and the case might have proceeded to another trial at some point in the future. But in Monday’s decision, Judge Fahey made clear that his January decision had effectively ended the case and that “no issues remained to be tried.” All of Welty’s remaining claims against the band were “premised on the same allegations and present the same factual and legal issues on which the court already ruled in defendants’ favor,” he wrote.
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 deep-dive into the messy – and litigious – situation inside the iconic 80s rock band Journey; an update on YNW Melly’s death-penalty case at the Florida Supreme Court; a sudden dismissal of a copyright lawsuit against Benny Blanco, Ed Sheeran and others; and much more.
Want to get The Legal Beat newsletter in your email inbox every Tuesday? Subscribe here for free.
THE BIG STORY: Don’t Stop Litigatin’
If you read one thing this week, make it Steve Knopper’s long Billboard story about the simmering problems inside Journey — an epic tale of internal dysfunction among members of an iconic band that’s still printing money decades after its “Don’t Stop Believing” heyday.
The story has it all: dueling security guards in green rooms; a multi-million-dollar pay-per-view wedding; a trail of fired managers and staffers; and an absolute all-timer quote: “This is Neal. I am fucking your wife.” But above all else, it has lawsuits — ranging from divorce to defamation to intellectual property to assault.
Sure, there’s the current battle between lead guitarist Neal Schon and keyboardist Jonathan Cain over a disputed American Express card. But there’s also the lawsuit filed against Live Nation over an alleged assault on Schon’s wife, a case alleging a “coup” by former bandmates Steve Smith and bassist Ross Valory, a trademark dispute with former frontman Steve Perry and much more.
For the full breakdown of the crisis inside Journey, go read the entire story here.
Other top stories this week…
DEATH PENALTY DISPUTE – Prosecutors urged the Florida Supreme Court to reject an appeal by YNW Melly from a ruling last year that said he could face the death penalty if convicted at an upcoming murder trial. The rapper says the state forfeited the right to seek the death penalty by failing to give proper notice, but prosecutors say he “suffered no harm.”
MARILYN MANSON UPDATE – A week after one of Marilyn Manson’s sexual assault accusers recanted her allegations, a judge ruled that the sudden reversal couldn’t be used as evidence in Manson’s defamation lawsuit against his ex-fiance Evan Rachel Wood. The move came after Wood’s lawyers argued the “eleventh hour” revelation was just a “bad-faith” effort to save Manson’s case.
COPYRIGHT CASE CLOSED – Two songwriters who sued Benny Blanco, Halsey, Khalid and Ed Sheeran for copyright infringement over their 2018 hit “Eastside” suddenly dropped the lawsuit. The accusers told Billboard that they decided that continuing the case would have been “too costly, challenging, and risky for us”; but Blanco’s lawyer said the accusations were “baseless” and “never should have been made” in the first place.
PODCAST POT CLASH – Chris “Kit” Gray, the president and co-founder of PodcastOne, was hit with a lawsuit claiming he fired his executive assistant because she refused to ship cannabis products from California (where they’re legal) to his home in Florida (where they aren’t).
TRAVIS SCOTT’S NIGHTCLUB SCUFFLE – Police in New York sought to question rapper Travis Scott after he was accused of assaulting a sound engineer and causing $12,000 worth of damage to sound equipment at Manhattan nightclub Nebula. His reps called it “a misunderstanding being blown out of proportion” and stressed that no charges had been filed. Scott is expected to sit for questioning this week.
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) — A Florida prosecutor told jurors during closing arguments Tuesday (March 7) that three men on trial for the 2018 slaying of rapper XXXTentacion were “predators” who waited outside a motorcycle shop to rob and shoot the rising star, escaping with $50,000.
Explore
Explore
See latest videos, charts and news
See latest videos, charts and news
Prosecutor Pascale Achille played cellphone videos the defendants allegedly took hours after the killing that showed them smiling and dancing as they flashed handfuls of $100 bills. Michael Boatwright, Dedrick Williams and Trayvon Newsome are all charged with first-degree murder and face mandatory life sentences if convicted.
“This is who they are. This is their real character. Killers that within 24 hours after shooting the victim dead and stealing $50,000 from him, this is what they do,” Achille told the jury as she played the video. “Look at how happy they look. Look at how excited they look.”
She also played surveillance video from the motorcycle shop and from where two of them allegedly stashed an SUV that she says link the men to the killing. And she recounted statements from a fourth man, Robert Allen, who pleaded guilty to second-degree murder last year and testified against his former friends.
George Reres, Newsome’s attorney, implored the jury not to convict his client based on Allen’s testimony or evidence implicating the other two defendants, saying, “He was not there.” He said that Allen, a 12-time convicted felon, should not be believed and that Newsome’s DNA was not found on any evidence.
He told jurors they should not believe Newsome is guilty simply because of the video showing him flashing money with the others, arguing he may not have even known where they got it.
“He did some stupid things — he posed with some money,” Reres said. “Guilt by association is not something the law permits.”
George Reres, Newsome’s attorney, implored the jury not to convict his client based on Allen’s testimony or evidence implicating the other two defendants – “he was not there.” He said Allen, a 12-time convicted felon, cannot be believed and that Newsome’s DNA is not found on any evidence.
He said they should not believe Newsome is guilty simply because there is a video showing him flashing money with the other defendants – he may not have even known where his friends got it.
“He did some stupid things – he posed with some money,” Reres said. “Guilt by association is not something the law permits.”
Mauricio Padilla, Williams’ attorney, called Allen a “liar.” He said the prosecution’s witnesses contradicted each other and Broward County sheriff’s detectives didn’t look at other possible suspects, including the Canadian star rapper Drake — he and XXXTentacion had an online feud. He said his client did tattooing and other work that paid him in cash, so the video of him flashing money means nothing.
Padilla also cast doubt on the value evidentiary value of the surveillance video, saying that while it may show his client in the store and walking back to the SUV, there are moments where the vehicle is blocked and Williams could have gotten out and left.
Boatwright’s attorney is to give his closing argument later Tuesday. The trial began a month ago.
XXXTentacion, whose real name was Jahseh Onfroy, had just left Riva Motorsports in suburban Fort Lauderdale on June 18, 2018, with a friend when his BMW was blocked by an SUV that swerved in front.
Surveillance video showed that two masked gunmen emerged and confronted the 20-year-old singer at the driver’s window, and one shot him repeatedly. They then grabbed a Louis Vuitton bag containing cash that XXXTentacion had just withdrawn from the bank, got back into the SUV and sped away. The friend was not harmed.
Boatwright, 28, is accused of being the shooter, while Newsome, 24, is accused of being the other gunman. Williams, 26, is accused of being the driver.
Prosecutors say the men, along with Allen, set out that day to commit robberies and went to the motorcycle shop to buy Williams a mask. There they spotted the rapper and decided to make him their target. Allen and Williams went inside the motorcycle shop to confirm it was him. They then went back to the SUV they had rented and waited for XXXTentacion to emerge and ambushed him, according to prosecutors.
The rapper, who pronounced his name “Ex ex ex ten-ta-see-YAWN,” was a platinum-selling rising star who tackled issues including prejudice and depression in his songs. He also drew criticism over bad behavior and multiple arrests, including charges that he severely beat and abused his girlfriend.
Florida prosecutors are urging the state’s supreme court to reject an appeal by YNW Melly over whether the rapper should face the death penalty if convicted in his upcoming murder trial.
Last month, lawyers for Melly (real name Jamell Demons) asked the Florida Supreme Court to tackle his case, arguing that prosecutors had forfeited the right to seek the death penalty by failing to give proper notice that they planned to do so.
But in a response last week, Florida’s attorney general told the top court that it should steer clear of the rapper’s case.
“Demons has suffered no harm,” prosecutors wrote in the Feb. 27 brief. “He was on notice for three years that the State was seeking death and at no time had the State indicated it was altering its sentencing intent.”
In asking the state high court to take up his case, Melly has argued that it raises issues of “great public importance” for Florida law beyond his individual charges. But in their response, prosecutors said there was no such pressing need for such judicial review.
“No other district court has been faced with this issue, thus showing that the issue rarely arises,” the state wrote in its brief. “Should a death sentence be imposed, this Court will have the opportunity to resolve this unique matter on direct appeal.”
Melly has spent years awaiting trial on first-degree murder charges over accusations that he and another YNW rapper shot and killed Anthony “YNW Sakchaser” Williams and Christopher “YNW Juvy” Thomas Jr. in 2018.
A first-degree murder defendant in Florida would typically face the possibility of execution if convicted, but Melly’s attorneys argued last year that the state had failed to comply with strict laws on how they must warn defendants that they’ll seek the death penalty.
Florida requires prosecutors to give notice 45 days after arraignment if they plan to seek capital punishment. In Melly’s case, the state attorney filed such a notice when they originally indicted the rapper in 2019, but failed to do so when a so-called superseding indictment was handed down earlier this year.
In July, a trial judge sided with Melly’s attorneys and said prosecutors had forfeited the chance to seek death. But in November, an appeals court ruled the judge’s decision was incorrect. The court wrote that since prosecutors gave notice that they might seek death when they first charged Melly in 2019, they had complied with state rules: “Notice is notice.”
Melly appealed that ruling to the Florida Supreme Court last month, arguing it was important that the death penalty law have “precisely defined and easily understood rules.” But like the U.S. Supreme Court, Florida’s top court hears only a small percentage of the appeals it receives.
In its new brief, state prosecutors urged the court to refuse to do so in Melly’s case: “Demons attempts to find conflict were there is none.”
A decision on whether to take the case will be issued by the high court in the months ahead. If it takes the case, both sides will then present more in-depth arguments on the disputed issues. If not, the case will return to the lower court for a jury trial on the murder charges against Melly.