Two men were convicted in federal court in Brooklyn for the murder of Jason “Jam Master Jay” Mizell from the hip hop group Run-DMC. The judge in this case did not allow the jury to hear rap lyrics suggesting the defendant's guilt. In contrast, in Atlanta, rap verses are being used as central evidence in a racketeering trial against hip-hop star Jeffery “Young Thug” Williams and five co-defendants.
The difference in allowing rap lyrics as evidence may be due to the amount of incriminating evidence present in each case. The Brooklyn trial had eyewitnesses and other evidence unrelated to rap lyrics, while the Atlanta trial had less direct evidence linking Young Thug to criminal activities.
In Atlanta, the prosecution is using a Hertz rental agreement in Williams' name for a vehicle used in a drive-by shooting as strong physical evidence. The case is based on criminal racketeering charges under Georgia’s RICO Act, which requires less direct evidence compared to federal statutes.
While rap lyrics were not admissible in the Brooklyn trial, the judge in Atlanta allowed them if relevant to proving intent or criminal activity. The judge emphasized that rap lyrics should not be used solely to show a defendant's character or propensity to commit crimes.
The Brooklyn trial focused on proving the defendant pulled the trigger in Mizell’s murder, without using rap lyrics. Witnesses who had remained silent for two decades testified, leading to the conviction of the defendants.
Despite the ban on rap lyrics in the Brooklyn trial, the prosecution was able to secure convictions based on witness testimony. In contrast, the Atlanta trial is ongoing, with rap lyrics playing a significant role in the case.
The use of rap lyrics as evidence in criminal trials raises questions about artistic expression and its admissibility in court. The outcome of these trials will have implications for how rap lyrics are treated as evidence in future cases.
