Lil Durk could win or lose his federal case on whether he knowingly joined an alleged murder plot he never personally carried out.
The 82-page August 12 filing presents 59 proposed instructions for Lil Durk, DeDe and Browneyez during the current Los Angeles trial.
Several critical instructions remain disputed, including the elements of stalking, murder-for-hire conspiracy and liability for crimes committed by an alleged co-conspirator.
The prosecution’s most important route appears in an agreed instruction explaining that personal participation in the shooting is unnecessary for conviction.
“A defendant may be found guilty of using interstate commerce facilities in the commission of a murder-for-hire resulting in death, as alleged in Count Five, even if the defendant personally did not commit the act or acts constituting the crime but aided and abetted in its or their commission.”
That language lets prosecutors focus on alleged orders, money, travel arrangements and assistance instead of proving Lil Durk fired a weapon.
Prosecutors claim Lil Durk financed revenge against Quando Rondo after King Von’s death, but the 2022 shooting killed Saviay’a “Lul Pab” Robinson.
The current trial covers stalking conspiracy, stalking Rondo with a dangerous weapon, stalking Robinson resulting in death, murder-for-hire conspiracy and murder-for-hire resulting in death.
Lil Durk’s strongest protection appears in another agreed instruction that separates criminal participation from mere knowledge of people involved in criminal conduct.
“Mere presence at the scene of a crime or mere knowledge that a crime is being committed is not sufficient to establish that the defendant committed the crimes charged. The defendant must be a participant and not merely a knowing spectator. The defendant’s presence may be considered by the jury along with other evidence in the case.”
That distinction supports Lil Durk’s earlier stalking defense, which asserts that OTF Vonni organized the operation while performing routine duties for the rapper.
Cooperating witnesses create another major dispute because OTF Vonni, OTF Jam and Flacka pleaded guilty before testifying against Lil Durk.
The joint filing identifies Instruction 32 as disputed but does not reproduce either side’s proposed wording.
“If you decide that a witness has deliberately testified untruthfully about something important, you may choose not to believe anything that witness said. On the other hand, if you think the witness testified untruthfully about some things but told the truth about others, you may accept the part you think is true and ignore the rest.”
That instruction could become central after defense lawyers confronted cooperating witnesses with changing accounts, prison calls and hopes for shorter sentences.
The wrong-target killing creates disputes over whether Lul Pab’s death legally counts against each defendant and whether co-conspirator liability applies.
The filing requires jurors to judge every defendant and count separately while demanding proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Lil Durk has pleaded not guilty and maintains OTF Vonni organized the violence before blaming his former employer to escape mandatory life imprisonment.
Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald must settle the disputed language before giving jurors the final instructions that will control their deliberations.
from AllHipHop https://ift.tt/rQUivxc
via IFTTT