Judge Bans Some Lil Durk Lyrics as Evidence in Murder-for-Hire Trial, Still Weighing Others

Federal Judge Excludes Some Rap Lyrics from Lil Durk's Murder-for-Hire Trial, Weighing Others' Admissibility

A federal judge has ruled that specific rap lyrics from Chicago-based rapper Lil Durk will be excluded as evidence in his upcoming murder-for-hire trial. The decision came after prosecutors and defense lawyers clashed over the admissibility of rap lyrics and music videos.

Prosecutors aim to admit 12 songs, claiming Durk used his money for violence as the alleged leader of an "OTF" gang. Defense lawyers, however, seek to bar all lyrics from the trial, arguing they are hyperbolic poetry that carry an "extraordinary risk" of being misunderstood by jurors.

Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald has ruled on one song, "Hanging with Wolves," excluding specific lyrics that prosecutors claimed bolstered their theory that Durk attempted to flee the country at the time of his arrest. The judge deemed these lyrics as inadmissible material attempting to show Durk's willingness to flee.

Durk, 33, is accused of hiring a group of hitmen to travel to Los Angeles and carry out an execution-style killing on August 19, 2022. Prosecutors say the intended target was Tyquian Terrel Bowman, aka Quando Rondo, whom Durk allegedly believed was involved in the 2020 shooting death of his friend and protégé Dayvon Bennett, known as King Von.

The trial is scheduled to begin April 21, but scheduling issues could delay its start. Durk's lawyers are pushing back against prosecutors' efforts to use rap lyrics, arguing that they can be prejudicial and create undue bias in the courtroom.

"This is art, this is music," defense lawyer Marissa Goldberg said during a hearing. "But there's no doubt it's prejudicial in criminal trials... The government wants to use it in extraordinary abundance."

Ugh, I'm like totally confused by this whole thing ... so the judge is excluding some of Lil Durk's lyrics but letting others in? Like, what even is the criteria here? Is it just a matter of how "prejudicial" they are to the case or does the prosecution have to provide more concrete evidence that these lyrics actually contribute to their theory? I mean, as someone who's all about layout and structure in my online content, I can appreciate the importance of presenting information in a clear and concise manner - but when it comes to court cases, things get super murky. Maybe the defense could try to present the lyrics themselves as part of their argument? Like, show how they're actually meant to be read as poetry rather than evidence? I'm all for defending artistic expression, btw.

omg I was like totally shocked when I heard about Lil Durk's trial and these rap lyrics being excluded from evidence... I mean, I get why the defense lawyers would want to keep them out, but at the same time, you'd think the prosecutors could prove what they're saying with some solid evidence. I've been a fan of Lil Durk for ages and his music is all about telling stories, so it feels weird that they can't use those lyrics to show how he's always talking about violence in his songs .

I remember when King Von passed away, it was like a huge shock to the whole hip hop community . And now Lil Durk's being accused of wanting him dead? It just seems so crazy. I guess that's why we have judges and lawyers who can figure all this out, right? But still, I'm curious to see how this trial goes down... will they be able to prove their case or is Lil Durk going to walk free?

omg I'm so done with these rap lyrics being used as 'evidence' it's like they're trying to paint Lil Durk as this monster without even understanding the context of his music. i mean, if the defense is saying that the lyrics are hyperbolic poetry then shouldn't prosecutors be able to handle them? shouldn't they know how to take a song with 100 different meanings and not get their hopes up on just one?

I'm all for defending Lil Durk's rights but I think this is a slippery slope. what's next, using Shakespearean sonnets as proof of guilt? at least in rap music, you can see the emotions and intentions behind the words... it's not like some random lyric out of nowhere is gonna make or break a case

I think its kinda crazy that they're trying to exclude whole songs from the trial Like what's gonna happen if they just play one song, is it gonna sway the jury or something? I mean, Lil Durk has a right to express himself through his music and all But at the same time, its like, if he's accused of doing some bad stuff, shouldn't we listen to what he says too?

man thats wild that rap lyrics are like super unreliable evidence lol i feel for lil durk his team got some legit points tho about the lyrics being misunderstood by jurors or creating bias but at the same time prosecutors gotta prove their case somehow

omg i feel bad for lil durk his life is already on the line and now they're trying to take away an important part of who he is? that song "Hanging with Wolves" sounds super deep idk about the lyrics being misunderstood by jurors tho, like isn't that what rap is all about? expressing yourself and telling your story? anyway, hope durk gets a fair shake in court

I'm low-key impressed by Lil Durk's squad trying to get those rap lyrics excluded from his trial, but at the same time, I think prosecutors have a legit point about the importance of understanding what these songs are really saying. It's easy to take raps out of context and assume they're all about violence, but is that really the case? Defense lawyer Marissa Goldberg is right in saying it's art and music, and we should be careful not to let our biases get in the way of a fair trial.

But at the same time, if prosecutors can show how these lyrics are connected to Durk's alleged crimes, then why shouldn't they be used as evidence? It's like trying to have a conversation with someone who's speaking their native language and suddenly cutting them off mid-sentence. We need to listen carefully to both sides before making any judgments.

And let's not forget that this is just one more example of how the justice system has to navigate complex issues in the digital age. With social media and online platforms, it's easier than ever for artists like Lil Durk to express themselves, but it can also make it harder to separate fact from fiction...

So I think its crazy that the judge had to rule on whether or not Lil Durk's rap lyrics could be used as evidence . Like, isn't music just a form of self-expression? Can't his team figure out what he meant instead of just excluding all the lyrics? Its kinda wild that prosecutors and defense lawyers are fighting over this too . I mean, I get why they want to exclude it but at the same time its like a piece of Lil Durk's history being taken away from him . Maybe in the end its better for everyone if just some lyrics are excluded instead of none at all .

I'm kinda surprised by this ruling . I mean, Lil Durk is still denying any involvement in the murder-for-hire plot and his lawyers are saying these lyrics can be super misleading when you consider they're just a product of his creativity . Can't really argue with that . The gov's trying to prove some deep-seated intentions or something but rap lyrics can easily be taken out of context, right? This whole thing is gonna be super interesting...

I feel bad for Lil Durk and his team . They must be super stressed about the trial and trying to protect their artist's image. I get why the prosecutors want to include some of those lyrics, they can be seen as incriminating or evasive... but at the same time, you gotta wonder if they're being too aggressive with this whole rap lyric thing . It's a tricky situation, and the judge seems like a fair one . I hope it all works out and Lil Durk gets a good defense, whoever represents him .

I'm low-key shocked that Judge Fitzgerald excluded those specific lyrics from "Hanging with Wolves". I mean, can you even imagine if they let all the OTF rap into evidence? It'd be like trying to pin down a slippery fish . I get why Durk's team is pushing back, though - it's not exactly the kind of thing you want the jury hearing while deciding your fate. And Marissa Goldberg's right, this music isn't just random lyrics - it's an art form. Still, I'm curious to see how the trial plays out and if they can get those other 11 songs in

I feel so bad for Lil Durk's team, gotta be super worried about how these lyrics are gonna affect the trial . I mean, can you blame them for not wanting their artist's music being used as "evidence" tho? It's like taking a song that's meant to express feelings and emotions and twisting it into something else entirely . The government is trying to use these lyrics to prove Durk's involvement in the murder-for-hire, but isn't that kinda like assuming his whole personality based on one song?

Ugh, I'm so done with these forum rules . Anyway, back to Lil Durk's trial. Can you believe the prosecution thinks they can just swoop in and add a bunch of rap lyrics as "evidence"? It's like, come on, that's not how it works . They're basically trying to use his art against him, which is just not cool.

And what really gets me is that the judge had to rule out certain lyrics because they were deemed "hyperbolic poetry" . Like, isn't that just a fancy way of saying "I don't want to deal with this"? It's a total mess. And the defense lawyer's point about it being art and potentially biased? finally someone speaking up against these prosecutors' antics.

But what I really hate is how this whole thing is just going to delay the trial even further . Can we just have some actual justice already?