Legal
Page: 4
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.
Jingle Punks and Audio Up Media founder Jared Gutstadt has been accused of sexual assault in a new lawsuit filed by singer-songwriter and actor Mary Koons (known professionally as Scarlett Burke), who alleges that the influential executive “trapped” her “in a cycle of manipulation, abuse and exploitation” for years.
Filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Tuesday (Dec. 31), the complaint alleges that Gutstadt “manipulated” Koons “into a sexual relationship under the guise of advancing her career”; repeatedly sexually and physically assaulted her; “isolated” her from professional opportunities “unless she complied with his sexual and logistical demands”; and “engaged in stalking, harassment, intimidation and retaliation” when she tried to escape his control — in the process “causing her significant and irreparable financial and professional harm.”
Audio Up and Anthem Entertainment — the former parent company of creative music agency Jingle Punks, which Gutstadt founded in 2008 — are also named as defendants in the lawsuit for allegedly facilitating Guststadt’s grip over Koons “by exerting substantial financial control and decision-making power over [her] professional opportunities and working conditions, particularly through her employment and contractual relationships with Jingle Punks.”
The allegations were first reported by the Los Angeles Times.
Gutstadt is best known for founding Jingle Punks and Audio Up, a podcast network he launched in 2020. Anthem (then known as ole Music Publishing) acquired Jingle Punks in 2015, ultimately leading to Gutstadt’s exit four years later. In July, Anthem and Gutstadt struck a joint venture enabling Audio Up to develop scripted podcasts from some of the publishing and intellectual property assets he created at Jingle Punks. In October, Jingle Punks was acquired by music licensing company Slipstream along with Anthem’s other production music businesses. (Slipstream is not named as a defendant in the lawsuit.)
According to the complaint — filed by L.A.-based attorney Samuel Brown at Hennig Kramer along with Parisis Filippatos, Tanvir Rahman and Gabrielle Rosen Harvey at New York firm Filippatos — Koons met Gutstadt in 2017, when she was 27 and he was 39. Over the next several years, she alleges she endured “psychological manipulation, physical violence and sexual abuse, leading to severe emotional and psychological trauma,” according to the complaint. “The relentless pattern of abuse culminated in an environment where Ms. Koons felt she had no choice but to comply with Mr. Gutstadt’s sexual demands, to avoid the horrifying consequences of refusing him.”
In the lawsuit, Koons claims she met Gutstadt in May 2017 at the Peppermint Club in West Hollywood, where Gustadt’s band, The Jingle Punks Hipster Orchestra, had a residency. That night, she says, Gutstadt “fixated” on her immediately and later had his assistant contact Koons’ then-manager to arrange a meeting. Over the next several weeks, Koons claims Gutstadt “launched a calculated campaign to groom” her, “bombarding her with messages about prestigious career opportunities designed to captivate and overwhelm her,” inviting her to dinners with high-profile music and TV executives, and bringing her along on trips to Nashville and Lake Tahoe “under the guise of collaborating on music projects” for Jingle Punks’ then-parent company ole Music (later Anthem).
Koons says that within a week of meeting Gutstadt, he requested that she record “Let the Dice Roll,” a song he was planning to pitch as the theme for the Netflix series Girls Incarcerated. “This marked the start of her employment with Jingle Punks and her entrapment in his manipulative control,” according to the suit. After Netflix acquired the song, Koons claims Gutstadt paid her only $500 (“a glaring underpayment that disregarded the value of her work and contribution”) and kept the rights to the song for himself.
According to the lawsuit, the first flash of Koons’ alleged abuse occurred “in or around” June 2017 after Gutstadt invited Koons to a dinner that had “several prominent music executives” in attendance. After driving her back to her Studio City apartment, Koons says Gustadt “began incessantly pressuring” her to kiss him, and, when she obliged by agreeing to kiss him on the cheek, he “turned his head at the last moment, tricking her into kissing him on the lips.”
The following month, Koons said that Gutstadt invited her to join him in Nashville for a week of writing sessions with him and his team, during which she says she was put up in a seedy “motel along the interstate,” half an hour’s drive from the Thompson Hotel where Gutstadt was staying. Claiming she felt unsafe, she says she asked Gutstadt to move her to a different hotel and that, instead of providing her with her own room, he manipulated her into staying in his. Koons claims the first sexual assault happened that night, when she alleges Gutstadt “forcibly grabbed her hand and put it on his penis” and “ignored her pleas for him to stop.”
Over the next several months, Koons says Gustadt “overwhelmed” her with “lavish gifts and gestures,” including freelance work opportunities, and “deliberately isolated” her from supportive people in her life, including her manager, “who, like many others, recognized that something was wrong and tried to separate” her from Gutstadt.
In a pattern of alleged abusive behavior that Koons says occurred over the next seven and a half years, she says Gutstadt’s “manipulative tactics paved the way for his coercive sexual relationship” with her. “In or around” August 2017, she says Koons invited her to a Jingle Punks company retreat in Lake Tahoe, only to again deceive her into sharing a hotel room with him and failing to include her in any of the “team building activities.” It was around this time that Koons says she became aware of a “misogynistic” culture at Jingle Punks and Anthem, including an alleged incident at the Tahoe retreat in which a male Jingle Punks music supervisor attempted to assault a female Jingle Punks composer in her hotel room. Koons claims that despite the company being aware of the alleged incident, “no action was taken” to address it.
Koons says she was subsequently “lured into an intermittent extramarital affair” with Gutstadt, who she says “would also constantly resort to coercion and manipulation to convince Ms. Koons she had to stay with him in order to advance her career” — all while being denied the opportunity to “reap the benefits of her work” as a songwriter for the company and being cut off from outside work opportunities. In one account, she says that when the Deutsch advertising agency reached out to her with an offer of work, Gutstadt “became enraged” and verbally abused her before compelling her to tell the Deutsch executive that any future offers needed to be run through Gutstadt and Jingle Punks.
According to the lawsuit, Koons says that Gutstadt, in a bid at “entrenching his dominance over her,” eventually left her completely financially dependent on him, after which she says “the abuse escalated significantly.” Each time she says she tried to release his grip on her, he would allegedly lure her back with lucrative work opportunities on high-profile projects, including paid writing sessions for the movie Trolls and an opportunity to write for country star Chris Stapleton.
In the fall of 2018, Koons says that after taking her to an Emmy Awards party, Gutstadt effectively forced her to have sex with him at his office after making her “feel indebted to him” for the invite. “This was not consensual sex,” the lawsuit reads. That same October, she says Gutstadt manipulated her into signing a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) “not tied to any specific project” with Gutstadt or his company. After signing it, she says Gustadt “warned her that if she ever spoke out, no one would believe her, and that breaching the NDA would not only destroy her career but allow him to ruin her entirely.” She claims that as a party to the NDA, ole Music (now Anthem) “exerted additional control over Ms. Koons by restricting her ability to speak out” about Gutstadt’s alleged abuse.
Koons claims the abuse further escalated after she signed the NDA and that she was forced to take jobs with Gustadt, Jingle Punks, ole Music and Audio Up, including through signing multiple agreements with the companies that served “to strip her of her creative ownership” and deny her adequate financial compensation. According to the lawsuit, one of these alleged agreements — a development deal with Jingle Punks and ole Music for Make It Up As We Go, a podcast series based around Koons’ original music — saw Koons effectively “signing away her creative rights” to the project and being paid just $10,000, described as “a paltry and insulting amount that grossly undervalued her contributions and highlighted the agreement’s exploitative nature.”
The lawsuit includes multiple allegations of physical abuse. In one April 2019 incident described in the complaint, Koons claims that after allegedly protesting when Gutstadt “took most of the money” she earned from participating in a two-day Deutsch songwriting session, he “became violent” and began hitting both her and her dog. In another alleged incident in October 2019, Koons claims that Gustadt “violently tackled her to the ground” after she attempted to read text messages between him and his wife.
In another account of alleged abuse, Koons claims that while recording two songs with him and another songwriter at Audio Up’s Audio Chateau in L.A. in January 2022, she awoke in the middle of the night to find Gutstadt “raping her in her sleep.” She claims Gutstadt raped her again in September 2023 — while they were staying at the Langham Hotel in Pasadena, Calif., during an Audio Up writing retreat — after Gutstadt became enraged when Koons “refused his sexual advances.”
Throughout Koons’ alleged relationship with Gutstadt, she says Anthem/ole Music “enabled” a culture of “harassment and coercion,” thereby “solidifying its complicity in the ongoing mistreatment” of Koons as well as multiple other female employees by Jingle Punks staffers.
“Mr. Gutstadt’s deliberate and vindictive behavior has marginalized Ms. Koons, stunting her professional growth and obstructing her visibility within the industry,” the complaint reads, adding that she “has suffered and continues to suffer from profound emotional distress,” including post-traumatic stress disorder.
Koons is seeking compensatory damages, lost wages and earnings, a money judgment for “mental pain and anguish and severe emotional distress,” and punitive and exemplary damages, among other relief.
Representatives for Gutstadt, Anthem and Audio Up had not responded to Billboard‘s request for comment at press time.
Joe Budden has been charged with lewdness in New Jersey, according to the Edgewater Police Department. The EPD released a statement on Monday (Dec. 30) confirming law enforcement was dispatched to an apartment complex in Edgewater on Dec. 4 for a report claiming a man was standing naked outside a residence around 7:21 a.m. ET […]
The woman who accused Jay-Z and Sean “Diddy” Combs of drugging and raping her when she was 13 years old can remain anonymous for now, a judge ruled Thursday (Dec. 26), citing the “highly sensitive” nature of her accusations.
According to court documents obtained by Billboard, Judge Annalisa Torres wrote that “the weight of the factors” in the case “tips in favor of allowing Plaintiff to remain anonymous” for now. In justifying the decision, the judge cited the Jane Doe’s assertion that she continues to suffer from depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and other health effects due to the alleged rape, as well as a claim by the woman’s attorneys that Combs has threatened other alleged victims who have filed suits against him for speaking out. However, the judge acknowledges that “because the balance of these factors will certainly shift” as the case moves forward, she plans to revisit the question of anonymity at a later date.
Also in Thursday’s ruling, the judge turned down a request by Jay-Z’s legal team to fast-track a hearing on their motion to dismiss the case against him and criticized the rap mogul’s lawyer, Alex Spiro, for his “relentless filing of combative motions containing inflammatory language and ad hominem attacks” against the plaintiff’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, calling them “inappropriate, a waste of judicial resources, and a tactic unlikely to benefit his client.” The motion to expedite the hearing was tied to a Dec. 13 NBC News interview in which the Jane Doe admitted to inconsistencies and “mistakes” in her narrative of the alleged assault and was contradicted by her own father.
In the woman’s complaint, filed earlier this month, she accused Combs and Jay-Z (born Shawn Carter) of drugging and sexually assaulting her following an MTV Video Music Awards after-party in 2000. The case was an updated version of a previous complaint the woman had filed against Combs alone.
Since the updated case including Carter was filed on Dec. 8, the rap mogul and his attorneys have forcefully denied the allegations, with Carter calling the lawsuit a “blackmail attempt” and characterizing Buzbee as a “fraud” with an aim “to exploit people for personal gain.” Buzbee has filed a host of lawsuits against Combs over the last several months and has said he represents dozens more victims who have yet to file their own complaints.
In a statement sent to Billboard in response to Thursday’s court ruling, Buzbee said that “the coordinated and desperate efforts to attack me as counsel for alleged victims are falling flat.”
An attorney for Carter did not immediately respond to Billboard‘s request for comment.
The latest decision in the case comes as part of a mounting legal war between Jay-Z and Buzbee. On Dec. 18, Buzbee filed a lawsuit against Jay-Z’s company, Roc Nation, and its attorneys (including Marcy Croft and law firm Quinn Emanuel) accusing them of “engaging shadowy operatives” to derail his case against the rapper, including by allegedly offering money to one of his former clients (Gerardo Garcia) to convince him to file bogus lawsuits against his firm — an incident Buzbee claims was caught on tape. “Defendants have conspired to obstruct justice by engaging shadowy operatives to illegally seek out more than two dozen current and former clients of The Buzbee Law Firm to convince those clients to bring frivolous cases against [the firm],” Buzbee wrote.
In response, a Roc Nation spokesperson called Buzbee’s lawsuit “nothing but another sham” and “a pathetic attempt to distract and deflect attention,” while Croft reacted by calling the allegations in the lawsuit “false” and “a desperate attempt to distract from his mounting legal woes.”
Buzbee’s Dec. 18 lawsuit is actually the second he’s filed against Carter’s attorneys over the past month. The first, filed earlier in December, accused Quinn Emanuel of retaliatory behavior, including alleged harassment of Buzbee’s colleagues, clients and family. That came in response to a lawsuit Jay-Z secretly filed against Buzbee in November in which the rapper accused the Texas attorney of spearheading an effort to extract settlements from innocent celebrities after threatening to link them to Combs.
Southwest T is officially a free man. Terry Flenory is known in the hip-hop community for founding the organized crime organization Black Mafia Family alongside his brother Demetrius “Big Meech” Flenory in 1985 Detroit. He and his brother were sentenced to 30 years in 2008 for running a nationwide crime ring. Terry was released on […]
Daddy Yankee and his estranged wife Mireddys González reached a partial agreement in their first court hearing on Friday (Dec. 20) over his allegations that she withdrew $100 million in funds from two of his companies without authorization. Following private negotiations, both parties agreed that the artist born Ramón Luis Ayala Rodríguez will regain the […]
Spotify is firing back at Drake’s accusations that the streamer helped Universal Music Group artificially boost Kendrick Lamar’s “Not Like Us,” calling the allegations “false” and blasting the rapper’s legal action as a “subversion of the normal judicial process.”
The new filing is the first response to a petition filed last month in which Drake accused UMG and Spotify of an illegal “scheme” involving bots, payola and other methods to pump up Lamar’s song — a track that savagely attacked Drake amid an ongoing feud between the two stars.
In a motion filed Friday in Manhattan court, the streaming giant says it has found zero evidence to support the claims of a bot attack, and flatly denies that it struck any deal with UMG to support Lamar’s song.
Trending on Billboard
“The predicate of Petitioner’s entire request for discovery from Spotify is false,” the company’s lawyers write. “Spotify and UMG have never had any such arrangement.”
Beyond denying the allegations, the filing repeatedly criticizes Drake for going to court in the first place — calling his claims of a conspiracy “far-fetched” and “speculative,” and questioning why Spotify (a “stranger” to the “long-running fued” between Drake, Kendrick and UMG) is even involved.
Spotify also criticized Drake for the way in which he brought his claims to court — not as a full-fledged lawsuit, but as an unusual “pre-action” petition aimed at demanding information. The company accused Drake of using that “extraordinary” procedure because his allegations are too flimsy to pass muster in an actual lawsuit and would have been quickly dismissed.
“What petitioner is seeking to do here … is to bypass the normal pleading requirements … and obtain by way of pre-action discovery that which it would only be entitled to seek were it to survive a motion to dismiss,” Spotify’s lawyers write. “This subversion of the normal judicial process should be rejected.”
A spokesperson for Drake and his legal team did not immediately return a request for comment on Spotify’s filings.
Drake went to court last month, accusing UMG of violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the federal “RICO” statute often used against organized crime. He accused Spotify of participating in the scheme by charging reduced licensing fees in exchange for recommending the song to users. A day later, he filed a similar action in Texas, suggesting that UMG had legally defamed him by releasing a song that “falsely” accused him of being a “sex offender.”
The legal actions represent a remarkable twist in the high-profile beef between the two stars, which saw Drake and Lamar exchange stinging diss tracks over a period of months earlier this year. That a rapper would take such a dispute to court seemed almost unthinkable at the time, and Drake has been ridiculed in some corners of the hip-hop world for doing so.
The actions also represent a stunning rift between Drake and UMG, where the star has spent his entire career — first through signing a deal with Lil Wayne’s Young Money imprint, which was distributed by Republic Records, then by signing directly to Republic.
UMG has not yet filed a responded to the litigation in court. But in a statement issued at the time, the music giant called Drake’s allegations “offensive and untrue”: “No amount of contrived and absurd legal arguments in this pre-action submission can mask the fact that fans choose the music they want to hear.”
In Friday’s filing, Spotify echoed that criticism — arguing that civil RICO cases are difficult to prove even with ample evidence, and that Drake hardly has any: “The Petition asserts no specific facts of any kind in support of these alleged RICO and deceptive practices violations,” the company wrote. “Instead, it relies exclusively on speculation … or the claims of anonymous individuals on the internet.”
Spotify’s attorneys seemed particularly focused on disputing the idea that swarms of bots had been able to flood the platforms to fraudulently boost Lamar’s track — a hot-button issue in the modern music industry. In an affidavit attached to Friday’s filing, Spotify’s vp of music offered sworn testimony that the company “invests heavily” in efforts to “mitigate the impact of artificial streaming on our platform.”
“When we identify attempted stream manipulation, we take action that may include removing streaming numbers, withholding royalties and charging penalty fees,” David Kaefer wrote in the filing. “Confirmed and suspected artificial streams are also removed from our chart calculations. This helps us to protect royalty payouts for honest, hardworking artists.”
Universal Music Group, the owner of Republic Records, has reached a settlement to resolve a trademark lawsuit the music giant filed against a music investment platform called Republic.
The deal will end a case in which UMG accused the smaller company of confusing consumers by expanding into music royalties investing – a move UMG warned could dupe people into thinking Republic Records was involved in the project. But a judge later ruled that the case would be difficult to win.
In an order last week (Dec. 13), the federal judge overseeing the lawsuit said that all claims had been “settled in principle” and ordered the case dismissed. Terms of the agreement were not disclosed, and neither side immediately returned requests for more details.
Trending on Billboard
Launched in 2016, OpenDeal Inc.’s Republic platform lets users buy into startups, cryptocurrency projects and other investments across a wide range of sectors. In October 2021, the company announced it would start allowing users to invest in music royalties by purchasing NFTs (non-fungible tokens), calling itself the first to “bring music investing to the masses.”
That quickly sparked the lawsuit from UMG, which acquired Republic Records in 2000 and now operates it as one of its top imprints, home to Taylor Swift, Ariana Grande, Drake, Post Malone and many others. In a November 2021 complaint seeking an immediate injunction, UMG called OpenDeal’s new service a “wanton effort to usurp plaintiff’s Republic name and trademarks for itself.”
“The artists, labels, managers, agents, and fans who currently know of plaintiff’s Republic label would be presented with two different companies offering identical services under identical names in the same industry,” UMG’s lawyers wrote at the time. “Confusion is inevitable.”
But in July 2022, Judge Analisa Torres ruled that that UMG was unlikely to be able to prove such allegations in court. She said the evidence of potential confusion was “extremely minimal,” since the services and consumers of the two companies “differ significantly” — and that a shared connection to the music industry was “not enough.”
“It is conceivable that there may ultimately be some overlap between the parties’ consumers—for instance, fans of a popular artist may both purchase that artist’s music through Republic Records, and make crowdfunded investments in recordings by that artist through the Republic Platform,” the judge wrote. “But, such scenarios remain hypothetical.”
That ruling – denying UMG’s request for a so-called preliminary injunction that would have forced OpenDeal to change its name while the case was litigated – was not a final decision on the case. But it indicated that UMG was unlikely to win, and such trademark cases often settle after such early skirmishes.
After that decision, UMG later filed an updated version of its allegations, and the case proceeded into discovery – the process of exchanging evidence in a civil lawsuit. But the lawsuit has largely been paused for more than a year as the two sides engaged in settlement talks that ultimately resulted in last week’s agreement.
LONDON (AP) — A teen charged with killing three girls and wounding 10 other people in a stabbing rampage at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in England this summer remained silent in court Wednesday as not guilty pleas were entered on his behalf.
Axel Rudakubana, 18, who has refused to speak in each court appearance, was read the charges of three counts of murder, 10 counts of attempted murder and additional charges related to possessing the poison ricin and for having an al-Qaida manual.
Justice Julian Goose ordered a clerk to enter the pleas in Liverpool Crown Court as Rudakubana stayed mum during a video appearance from a London prison where he is held.
Trending on Billboard
His trial is scheduled for Jan. 20.
It was the first time in a court appearance that the teen did not pull his sweatshirt collar over his nose to obscure his face.
He appeared to smile as an officer confirmed that the court proceeding could be heard at the prison. The judge noted that Rudakubana was not responding. He swayed from side to side as the charges were read and bent forward at one point.
Rudakubana was charged in August with murdering three girls — Alice Dasilva Aguiar, 9, Elsie Dot Stancombe, 7, and Bebe King, 6 — and stabbing 10 other people on July 29 in the seaside town of Southport in northern England.
The attack at a small dance and yoga studio on the first day of summer vacation sparked rioting across England and Northern Ireland fueled by far-right activists that lasted a week.
The violence, which injured more than 300 police officers and led to fiery attacks on hotels housing migrants, began after Rudakubana — then unnamed –- was falsely identified as an asylum seeker who had recently arrived in Britain by boat.
Rudakubana was born in Wales to Rwandan immigrants.
More than 1,200 people were arrested for the disorder that lasted a week and hundreds have been jailed for up to nine years in prison.
A report released Wednesday was critical of police for failing to recognize the threat of violent disorder after a number of smaller incidents across the U.K. in the previous two years.
The report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services said there were also lapses in gathering intelligence from social media and the dark web.
Rudakubana was charged in October with additional counts for production of a biological toxin, ricin, and possession of information likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing to commit an act of terrorism for having the manual in a document on his computer.
Police have said the stabbings have not been classified as acts of terrorism because the motive is not yet known.
Megan Thee Stallion is demanding a restraining order against Tory Lanez, claiming he has continued to “terrorize her” with a “campaign of harassment” even as he sits behind bars on a ten-year prison sentence for shooting her.
In a petition filed Tuesday (Dec. 17) in Los Angeles court, attorneys for the superstar (real name Megan Pete) claim that Lanez (Daystar Peterson) has conspired with people outside prison to “harass, bully, and antagonize” her with misinformation amid his “desperate” appeal of his 2022 felony convictions.
“Mr. Peterson’s attempts to retraumatize and revictimize Ms. Pete recognize no limits — indeed, they continue even while he is behind bars,” Megan’s lawyers write. “While Mr. Peterson distorts and recklessly disregards the truth in his desperate attempt to appeal his conviction, his false assertions have reignited a slew of negative, harmful, and defamatory comments directed to Ms. Pete.”
Trending on Billboard
Monday’s petition cited a separate lawsuit Megan filed in October against YouTuber and social media personality Milagro Gramz, who she claims has served as a “mouthpiece and puppet” for the convicted singer. In an updated version of that case filed last week, Megan alleged that discovery in the case had revealed prison phone calls in which Lanez coordinated payments to Gramz.
“Mr. Peterson’s father—when he thought no one was listening—asked his son about payments to Ms. Cooper for her harassment of Ms. Pete,” Megan’s attorneys write in the new filing. “Instead of denying that Ms. Cooper has been paid, they question how Ms. Pete uncovered their conspiracy.”
If granted by a California judge, the restraining order would immediately bar Lanez from any harassing conduct. In the filing, Megan’s lawyers ask the judge that Lanez be “ordered not to contact Ms. Pete, directly or indirectly, or harass or intimidate her, directly or indirectly, online.”
The exact contours of such an order — what constitutes harassment of Megan versus Lanez simply speaking about his own defense — could be further clarified by the judge. Lanez would later have a chance to respond, and the judge would then decide whether to issue a longer-term restraining order.
Attorneys for Lanez did not immediately return a request for comment.
Lanez was convicted in December 2022 on three felony counts over the violent 2020 incident, in which he shot at the feet of Megan during an argument following a pool party at Kylie Jenner’s house in the Hollywood Hills. In August 2023, he was sentenced to 10 years in prison. He has filed an appeal, which remains pending.
In the new petition, Megan’s attorneys also directly accused Lanez of orchestrating a high-profile false story that circulated on social media earlier this year, claiming incorrectly that an appeals court had declared him “innocent” in the shooting.
“Mr. Peterson, through third parties, disseminated a rumor which falsely suggested that an appellate court declared his innocence,” Megan’s lawyers write. “Mr. Peterson’s interpretation underscores his desire to spread misinformation in an effort to save his public image.”