Law&Crime Sidebar - Johnny Depp’s Lawyer Reacts to Lil Durk's Murder-for-Hire Case

Episode Date: October 31, 2024

Lil Durk, whose real name is Durk Banks, is accused of offering a bounty in the death of his rap rival Quando Rando. Prosecutors say Durk helped orchestrate and fund an attack on Rondo that ended up killing his cousin. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber questions celebrity criminal defense attorney Ben Chew about the evidence against Durk and what he could do to fight it.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Kalshi: Bet on the election! Get a free $20 bonus with a $100+ deposit at https://kalshi.com/SidebarHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger and Christina FalconeScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that

will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. As we talk about the celebrity murder for hire case of rapper Lil Dirk, it is time to get the perspective of an attorney who knows about high-profile clients and trials, Ben Chu, the man who famously represented Johnny Depp. We're going to get his perspective on the details and evidence. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. We're still breaking down the legal developments for rapper Lil Durk, real name Durk Banks. The 32-year-old Grammy Award-winning Chicago hip-hop star has been arrested on a federal charge out of

California of conspiracy to murder a rap rival named Cuando Rondo, because it was back in August of 2022 out in Los Angeles when a shooting took place at a gas station near the Beverly Center shopping mall. And while Rondo, who prosecutors say was the intended target of this hit, he wasn't injured. But sadly, his cousin, Savaya Robinson, was gunned down. Now, prosecutors allege that Banks is the leader of a rap collective known as only the family or OTF, but really they say it's a criminal organization. It's a criminal organization that engages in murder and assault and that he was the one who put into motion this attempted assassination by putting a bounty on Rondo's life. Now, you might be saying why? Well, because prosecutors

say this all stemmed from the 2020 murder of Banks' friend and fellow rapper King Vaughn, who was gunned down outside of a hookah shop in Atlanta. And prosecutors say that it was Banks who blamed Cuando Rondo for this. Banks allegedly not only ordered this hit, but the hit men were reportedly or allegedly funded through banks and OTF-related finances. They say that an OTF member and close associate of Mr. Banks coordinated and paid for five co-conspirators to travel from Chicago to California for this murder. In fact, prosecutors say, we have a message from banks to a co-conspirator that reads, don't book no flights under no names involved with me. We're going to talk about that.

And prosecutors also say that the hitmen, they traveled to California, that Banks also took a private jet to California, too, that he himself was accompanied by co-conspirator Kavan London Grant. And by the way, when we talk about Grant, prosecutors say he was the one that bought the ski masks for the attack, that he used Banks credit card to pay for the team's hotel room in California. And prosecutors allege that several OTF members and associates, they used cars to track and follow Cuando Rondo on the day of the shooting, which prosecutors say, guess what? We have this captured on traffic camera and surveillance footage. Now, in addition to Grant,

four other men have been indicted in this murder for hire plot. There's DeAndre Dantrault Wilson, Keith Jones, David Brian Lindsay, and Asa Houston. They have been. have been hit with conspiracy, murder for hire, and firearms charges. And after these arrests, the feds say they arrested Mr. Banks. After they learned, he had booked three international flights scheduled to leave the United States, that they took him into custody near the Miami airport. And I should tell you, if convicted, Banks and the five defendants charged in this separate indictment, they each would face a statutory maximum sentence of life in federal prison.

So the stakes couldn't be higher with what we're talking about. By the way, what do I talk about all the time here on Sidebar? I talk about the law, right? Makes sense. Law and Crime Sidebar. I talk about legal rulings. I talk about legal decisions. But I have one for you right now.

That is a landmark one. That has changed things in a very big way. Why? Because you can now legally trade on who will win the 2024 election. Yes, this is legal. And that's because our sponsor of Sidebar, Kalshi, went to court and won legal approval for election trading for the first time in over a hundred years. So not only can you essentially bet on the 2024 presidential election,

but with Kalshi, you can bet on who will control the House and Senate, who will win the swing states. Pretty timely. What's happening next week, right? And it's not just politics. You can bet on other future events, too, like, will Taylor Swift win top artists on Spotify this year? What's going to be the rotten tomato scores for upcoming movies like Gladiator 2? I actually think it's going to be above 85% personally. I think it's going to do great. But there's so much more and you're going to be like, wow, I can trade on that. This is the only place to trade on events like this in all 50 states. And you can see. sign up right now using our link, caulshee.com slash sidebar or scan the QR code on the screen.

And if you're one of the first 500 traders who deposit $100, Kalshi will give you a free $20 credit. That's kalshaw.com slash sidebar. I've set the stage. I've talked about the players. Now I've got to bring in a special guest. I am joined by renowned trial attorney Ben Chu, who famously represented Johnny Depp in his case against Amber Heard. He knows a thing or two about high profile cases, high profile defendants. Ben, so good to see you. Thanks so much for coming on. We have this rapper. We have Lil Dirk, the Chicago rapper, top the Billboard 200 list, collaborated with artists like Drake, Jay Cole, Justin Bieber. He won a Grammy. Talk to me about the challenges of representing such a high

profile defendant like this. Jesse, great to be with you again. The challenges in this case in particular are going to be especially hard in light of the circumstantial and other evidence that you have described. But whenever you're representing somebody of Lil Durk's status, you're concerned primarily with the criminal charges, but you're also concerned with his brand, which also is at stake in such a high profile matter. Would this necessarily hurt his brand? Because if you, I did a separate sidebar episode about this, where I had a guest on who talked about, there was apparently or seemingly this ongoing feud between Cuando Rondo and there's Little Dirk and there's King Vaughn and there's NBA Young Boy and whether viewers and listeners of this music were kind

of egging this on in a way. That was the allegation or something that he had been suggesting. And I wonder if this kind of allegation about trying to carry out a hit, of your alleged rival would that hurt his brand so much i don't know you know jesse that's such a great question and in some corners it might help his reputation as being you know a tough guy but then as the representative you have to look at a higher concern which is his his personal liberty i mean i suppose in some ways the the best outcome for him is if he were to be completely acquitted, but he still had the patina of being, you know, involved in this kind of rivalry. But I think as the lawyer, as you pointed out, you have to be primarily concerned about keeping

his liberty. Would it be tough for you or is it tough for any defense attorney to represent a high-profile defendant? Because a spotlight gets put on the legal counsel, too. I mean, we're talking about the same thing in the Sean Diddy Combs case. So much has been talked about about his lawyers. And talk to me about if that's difficult for the lawyer in a situation like this. To keep his eyes on the prize, which is you have to think about your client.

You can't think about yourself. And there are some celebrity lawyers we've seen who like the limelight too much, some who have even gotten their clients sued based on what they've said publicly. because some people forget that lawyers can be sued for defamation as well. So you just have to think about your client's interests first, and yours should not enter into it. It's a good point. It's a good point. And by the way, and we're going to get into this about I question right now how strong the evidence is against Lil Durk. I'll talk about that in a second, but sometimes I think you would agree a celebrity can be in a little bit of a different position, right? do I say that? Because TMZ is reporting that while Lil Durk is currently locked up in Miami, he's awaiting extradition to California, he is, quote, in great spirits that he's getting along

well with not only the staff, but fellow detainees. Talk to me about that. You know, the idea of a celebrity, and we've talked about this with, you know, with Sean Combs being locked up in the Metropolitan Detention Center. He seems to be in that case. I think he's more under isolated containment. I don't think he has much interaction with the other inmates or the other detainees, I should say. But, you know, being a celebrity in this situation might be a little bit different. Yeah, it might be because they're in certain circles of celebrities are very popular. They tend to be popular in L.A. before L.A. juries, which is where this case is going to be tried. So that's significant. And he obviously is charismatic. And that can be something that

can be a quality if he does testify a trial that could be very much in his favor. The fact that he seems to be in a good mood suggests that you may well be right that the evidence against him is it may be weak. And we have to always remember as you do and your sophisticated viewers do that there's a presumption of innocence here and that the similarities with some other cases don't mean that he is necessarily responsible in this case. When we talk about the difference federal and state cases defending a client like this? What's the main difference? Is it more difficult to defend a client in a federal case than a state case? Generally speaking, I think it is because the profile is a bit higher. The resources the feds have at their disposal tend to be

higher. I think in this case, it's such a high profile case that even if it were a state prosecution, they would probably throw their best people and most resources into it. So this is going to be this is going to be a significant challenge to him and not i'm not making light of what happened i mean this was a shootout uh in broad daylight at a gas station i can't emphasize this enough when you're talking about gunfire near gas pumps what could have also resulted but it was a brazen attack and someone lost their life and it's a really sad situation and the last thing that you want to see is if this really was uh committed by a little dirk is this back and forth and beefs and people getting gunned down it's it's such a shame

because you're dealing with, you're dealing with human life, you're dealing with tragedy, and you're also dealing with incredible talent, who, you know, you just want them to continue making music and providing good for the culture and not, you know, allegedly engaging in this. But that's a side question. What do you think about the evidence against him specifically? I think I can make the argument that maybe the evidence of everything else, the surveillance, the records, might be pretty strong against his co-defendants.

What about him specifically? How strong is the evidence against him? From what I've read, they may be pulling some punches here, but a lot of it seems to be circumstantial, that things were charged to his credit card. Well, that doesn't necessarily mean, of course, that Little Dirk had any idea, A, that his credit card was being used,

B, for what purpose it was being used. It would not be unusual, I would think, for someone in his position to pay for somebody's, travel, to pay for certain expenses, to let a certain number of people in his entourage use his credit card. I don't think that's particularly unusual or incriminating. I think the challenge for the prosecutors will be to tie that specifically to this case. I mean, there was one mention where he apparently said, hey, you know, don't tie your travel. expenses to me. But it seems to me that that in and of itself is not, and I hate to use the

pun, a smoking gun. I think they need something more incriminating than that. So the message, the alleged message from Lil Dirk's phone to a co-conspirator was don't book no flights under no names involved with me. You could see how prosecutors would say, oh my gosh, he's attached to this. He's trying to make sure that he's not connected to this, that there's no evidence tying back to him. Isn't another way to look at it, hey, whatever you guys are about to do, I don't want to have any part of it whatsoever. That could be maybe an alternative explanation. No, Jesse, I think that's absolutely right. And unlike some other cases that we've discussed where in Diddy, for example, we've discussed whether Diddy really has to testify in light of the video, I don't see anything like that that necessarily would require him from what we know now to test.

testify. So that would mean that the government would really be put put to the proof. And that stray comment in and of itself, I don't think gets the government to beyond a reasonable doubt. I do wonder if there are cooperating co-conspirators that are working with the government. Why do I say that? Well, the indictment against those five individuals also lays out five unnamed co-conspirators. One of them, I believe, is Lil Durk. But the other was, I mean, unless you see, saw something different. We're not entirely sure who they are, but a part of me wonders if the information that the prosecutors are building their case on might have only come from the co-conspirators. For example, the indictment says that the defendants and co-conspirator 2 were at a hamburger

restaurant where they discussed the payment for the murder. How would you know that? I don't know if the surveillance cameras in this hamburger restaurant can pick up the audio conversation, but it makes me wonder if one of these people was cooperating with the government said, yeah, I'll tell you what this, what this conversation was about. Am I totally off? No, I think that's a great point, and that obviously changes the calculus. And then his lawyers would be left to argue, well, you got a deal only because you were willing to testify. You were unindicted because you were willing to give what his lawyers would say would be false witness against Lil Durk. But that's not as stronger position, obviously, as it would have been if there were not people on the inside

testifying against him. That puts him in a much more precarious position. And I think it's a very reasonable interpretation. Yeah, I mean, he's not connected to, he's not at that shooting. He's not at that gas station. There doesn't, there, there doesn't seem to be maybe as of yet records that he was actually making purchases, but that if he put the thing in motion, So I wonder how much the government needs a key witness to say, no, Lil Dirk directed us to do this. He said this. They need that kind of witness to put him at the top of this criminal organization, the mastermind behind this murder for hire plot, because even looking at the surveillance, even looking at the credit card statements, even looking at the travel records, and obviously the feds probably have a lot more evidence than they don't have to reveal in an indictment or a criminal complaint. but it just feels to me that they might need someone on the inside to connect him.

I think you're exactly right. And maybe they have that person because the fact that they've indicted them in a him in a very high profile case, they have to know that careers are on the line and they're being watched. So I think your theory makes a lot of sense. It probably makes the most sense. Well, one of the things that's getting a lot of attention and one of the things that prosecutors will use, A, probably to say he doesn't deserve bail and he shouldn't get a pretrial release, but B, what they would say builds up their case against him is that he allegedly was fleeing

the country. So in Lil Durk's criminal complaint, it says that the FBI received notifications from U.S. Customs and Border Protection, CBP, showing that banks had been booked as a passenger on two international flights, a one-way flight from Miami to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, connecting through Doha Cutter, scheduled to depart the evening of October 24th, and a one-way flight from Fort Lauderdale to Switzerland connecting via New Jersey also scheduled to depart the evening of October 24th. They say banks did not board either flight, but at approximately 6.40 p.m., the FBI received an additional CBP notification that banks had been booked as a passenger

on a private plane departing Miami and scheduled for Italy, and that was scheduled to apart at approximately 9 p.m. And at approximately 8 p.m. So the hour before that was supposed to take off, Banks was arrested by law enforcement in the vicinity of the departing airport. Talk to me about the multiple ways, the different ways you can look at that. Yeah, I mean, the different ways are the fact that the first two tickets were one way suggested he wasn't planning on coming back.

Now the explanation for that is he's a wealthy guy. His plans change. He's not like the rest of us who need to. book um round trip tickets to make it less expensive he has access to private uh aircraft um but it is you know it's circumstantial evidence consciousness of guilt intent to flee and that's something that would be argued by by both sides radford cohen i don't know if you're familiar with him but he's a renowned criminal defense attorney he had such an interesting explanation for this he said well what a lot of times you'll see clients do is they might know that they're about to be arrested. I mean,

he knew maybe his co-conspirators, his co-defendants, his co-defendants were about to be arrested. And sometimes what people will do when they think the feds are on to them or authorities are onto them, they will book flights to see if they're flagged. And if they're flagged and they're red flag, they know, something's going on. You know, I'm about to be arrested. I'm about to be indicted. Doesn't mean that they're going to take the flights. Doesn't mean that he was going to flee, but there could be another explanation of that. I thought that was fascinating, Ben. That that is fascinating. I've never heard that, but it does make sense. Yeah, yeah, because the government's not going to say, usually, right? The government's not going to say, hey,

we're going to arrest you at eight o'clock, you know, I mean, there could be situations where you surrender. You might have an understanding of it, but that might be a way that he was trying to figure it out. I wanted to ask you. Yeah. Yeah, I'm sorry. No, no, Ben, please continue. No, I was going to saying and it there could be reasons other than his being uh having consciousness of guilt for being concerned about being arrested because obviously these are his associates and uh it's not necessarily as incriminating as it might first appear yeah yeah or look the other way hey my gosh i'm innocent they're going to come after me this isn't good i'm completely innocent i'm taken off i don't know it's another explanation anyway i wanted to ask you about this so coded

language I think is really, really interesting in criminal cases. I think it's really interesting in conspiracy cases or murder for hire cases. In the indictment, it reads, after the murder, co-conspirator 1 made clear and coded language that co-conspirator 1 would pay a bounty or monetary reward and or make payment to anyone who took part in killing TB. So let me ask you about that. It's interesting. They say it's clear, but it's also coded language. How clear is coded language? Well, that's going to be, that's going to be up for debate and coded language by definition requires some kind of mechanism to decipher the code. And that would seem to open the way for reasonable doubt that it could have meant any number of alternative things.

And it's a government's responsibility and burden to show that it that it is in fact clear. Ben, before I let you go, one final thing, whenever this case, if it goes to trial, when it goes to trial, you represent a celebrity at trial. What kind of jury do you want? Is it tough, the jury selection process in a celebrity trial? The jury selection process is always extremely important. There are many lawyers, and you may be one who thinks that the case is winner lost at Fordier. I'm not, I'm not sure that's always true, but it's certainly important. I think in this case, he would want, I mean, I think Los Angeles is not a bad venue for him. It tends to be pretty pro-ce celebrity. So I know he was arrested in Broward County, but I think

he's in a much better spot. Of course, California tends to be more lenient than Florida anyway, But I think he's not in a bad spot. I think he's going to want jurors of color. I think he's going to want people, to the extent that he can divine this, people who like his music and people who follow popular culture generally. So I think that's what he's going to be looking for. And that trial might not happen for a year, year and a half, two years. So we shall see. But Ben Chu, so good seeing you.

Thank you so much for coming on, my friend. Really appreciate it. Anytime, Jesse. Thank you so much. All right, everybody. That's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar. Thank you so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on Apple Podcast, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts.

I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. can binge all episodes of this law and crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.