5 Shocking Updates in the Lil Durk Case You Need to Know

Lil Durk's federal case just hit a whole. new level of chaos. So, authorities are. now requesting an anonymous jury after. alleged threats against a judge and. prosecutor. Prosecutors say the rapper. tried to destroy an Apple Watch in jail. to cover his tracks. And he's now being. accused of allegedly taking out hits on. his own Oblak associates. With his trial. currently set for January, the stakes. couldn't be higher. We are going to. break down all the latest updates in. this case with a former federal. prosecutor. Welcome to Sidebar,

presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse. Weber. [Music]. All right, the Little Dirt case just. took another wild turn. Maybe series of. turns is the best way to explain it. So, federal prosecutors are now saying that. the Chicago rapper a ordered hits on his. own Oblak associates for failing to. retaliate after the death of a fellow. artist, King Vaughn. They are pushing. for an anonymous jury, claiming that. threats have already been made against.

both the judge and a prosecutor. And you. add in the fact that Durk was allegedly. caught with an Apple Watch in jail and. tried to destroy it. So, this case is. now spiraling, right? What is going on. here? How do we break it down? How did. we get here? We're going to rewind for a. second before we break down the new. updates. Well, Lil Durk, whose real name. is Durk, Derek Banks, is still being. held in federal detention in Los Angeles. following his October 2024 arrest. Prosecutors claim that Durk orchestrated. a murder for hire plot back in 2022,

sending members of his crew from Chicago. to LA to target rapper Quando Rondo. That this was a form of retaliation, they say, for the 2020 killing of Durk's. close friend, King Vaugh. In the. shooting that followed though, Quando. wasn't the one who died. It was actually. his cousin, Savvia Robinson, who was. killed in what prosecutors are calling. this ambush style attack at a gas. station. Now, Durk isn't accused of. pulling the trigger himself. He is. accused of ordering the hit, allegedly.

funding it, and directing it. That is. what landed him a stack of federal. charges, including conspiracy, firearm. offenses, murder for hire, resulting in. death. His defense has been very. aggressive, though. One of the biggest. moments in this case came earlier this. year when Lil Durk's legal team filed a. motion to dismiss the federal indictment. entirely, or at the very least forced. prosecutors to turn over the grand jury. materials that led to the indictment. Remember, grand jury materials are. usually secret. But in that filing, Durk's attorneys argued that prosecutors.

misled the grand jury by presenting. false and misleading evidence. Specifically, they mention one of Durk's. songs, Wonderful Wayne and Jackie Boy, which they claim was wrongly used to. connect him to the 2022 murder for. higher plot. The thing is, the argument. they make, he had actually written the. lyrics that prosecutors were citing. months before the killing. The defense. wrote in that filing, the only open. question is how such patently false. information came to be within the grand.

jury's purview to begin with. One answer. is that the prosecutors who prepared and. presented the government's evidence knew. that the evidence was false. Another is. that the prosecutor who presented the. evidence did not know it to be false, but the witness who conveyed it did. And. the third answer is that the evidence. was obtained and presented with reckless. disregard for patent falsity. And really. the big picture here is that Durk's team. is bringing up a really important. argument early on that rap lyrics. shouldn't be used as evidence of. violence. This is a common theme we've. talked about in a lot of trials, right?

federal prosecutors, they ended up. filing a new superseding, you know, amended indictment, deleted the. contested lyrics, brought an end to that. motion or that issue. Now, we got to. talk about what's happening today. All. right, I know this is a 180, but I got. to tell you about this new sponsor we. have on Sidebar. It is a brand called. Wild Grain. This is the first bake from. Frozen subscription box for artisal. breads, seasonal pastries, fresh pastas, and Wild Grains products. They bake in. 25 minutes or less. Now, that doesn't.

mean that they're skimping on quality, okay? Because unlike store-bought items, like everything you see out there, wild. grain, they use a slow fermentation. process that is easier on your belly, and it's richer in nutrients and. antioxidants. Wild grain boxes are also. fully customizable with a big selection. of seasonal and limited time products. So, if you got dietary restrictions, it's not even a problem. They even have. gluten-free box and plant-based boxes. It's peak fall weather right now. In New. York, we're getting really into wild. grains autumn selection. the apple pie. bites, the pumpkin spice English.

muffins. You pop them in the oven on a. cool fall evening, your whole apartment. is going to smell amazing. Just real. flavors in a few minutes. So, this fall, treat yourself and your loved ones to. warm sourdough breads and seasonal baked. goods from Wild Grain. And by the way, rumor has it they have apple cider. donuts and pumpkin cinnamon biscuits. So, get them before these seasonal items. sell out. For a limited time, Wildgrain. is offering our listeners $30 off of the. first box, plus free croissants in every. box when you go to wildgrain.com/sidebar. to start your subscription. Yep, you.

heard me. Free cissants in every box. $30 off of your first box when you go to. wildgrain.com/sidebar. That's wildgrain.com/sidebar. Or you can use promo code sidebar at. checkout. Don't miss their seasonal. products. Durk's team is doubling down. with yet another motion to dismiss. That. is where we left off. Things have. escalated. We got a lot of developments. to talk about. I want to bring on friend. of the show, former federal prosecutor. Nema Romani. Nema, thank you so much for. taking the time. Always love having you. on here. Okay, let's start here from big.

picture of the case. How common is it. for someone to face federal charges for. ordering a hit, ordering an. assassination, right? Even if they. didn't pull the trigger themselves. Is. it common, >> Jesse? Always good being on. It's. usually not common. Usually they'll. throw that in with the actual murder or. some sort of RICO charge, but here the. feds apparently believe that little Durk. is the one who's the shot caller even. though he's not pulling the trigger. We. do see these murder for hire cases state.

side more, but the feds are really. interested in this case for some reason. Maybe because of who Durk is. >> Do you think that there is strong. evidence that he directed this in some. way, was funding it in some way, was the. mastermind behind it in some way? I. think there's evidence. Is it a lock? Not necessarily. A lot of these federal. cases, as you know, by the time they go. to the grand jury and get an indictment, Jesse, it's a done deal, right? I mean, it's just a matter of whether they're. going to plead or be convicted at trial.

But here, it's a little bit more. attenuated. Obviously, we'll see what. evidence comes out. Look, you're relying. on cooperator testimony. You and I have. talked about it a lot, right? Those are. people that are often criminals. You got. to corroborate that. Now they have text. messages, but some of them are pretty. cryptic. And you know, to the extent. that Little Durk's credit card was used. for ski masks, hotels, and so forth, that's certainly enough. But for the. conspiracy, for the solicitation, you.

usually need something more than, you. know, just some credit card charges. >> And it leads into something the defense. is doing where they're challenging this. indictment. my understanding is saying. it's impermissibly impermissibly vague. Um, what does that mean to you? Is that. a common defense? Does usually work, Jesse? It's not a common defense at all. And usually it doesn't work because. really the remedy is for the prosecution. to cure and be more specific in the. indictment. When you're talking about a. conspiracy, when you're talking about.

solicitation, you really need to. identify those overt acts and. furtherance of the conspiracy, the. evidence of the solicitation for the. murder for hire. And in this particular. case, I think the defense's theory. really is the best defense is a good. offense. They're trying to file these. motions, not because they necessarily. think the indictment's actually going to. be dismissed, but to put the prosecution. on its heels a bit. >> And the pendulum swinging, right? Cuz. now let's talk about what the feds are. doing. This is the new allegations. This. is what I wanted to bring you on for. So, the feds have allegedly quietly.

introduced this new explosive claim into. Durk's legal case that he didn't just. order a hit onWando Rondo that he also. put out hits on members of his own Oblak. crew who apparently failed to retaliate. after King Vaughn's 2020 death. This was. a friend of his. That's according to. reporting from Hot New Hip Hop. the. source. According to those reports, federal prosecutors, they plan to. present testimony from a witness who. claims that Durk personally gave those.

orders to Oblak associates. Now, this. new theory, it frames this case even. more broadly. So, not just a revenge. plot, but kind of like this possible. internal purge, an effort to maintain. control, demand loyalty, punish descent. within his own inner circle. Now, that. being said, none of these additional. claims have yet led to new formal. charges against him, but Nemo, let's. talk about it. Can you explain what it. means legally if prosecutors allege that.

Durk ordered hits on his own associates, even if no new charges have been filed. as of yet? >> So, Jesse, there's a couple reasons why. you want to do this. Sometimes the feds. will pile on to try to gain leverage and. to force some sort of plea, but in this. particular case, it's probably to try to. dirty him up. If you remember, you know, the ' 80s movies where the villain turns. on his own crew. Really, that's. something that jurors are not going to. like. Now, look, I'm not saying this is. substantiated, but it may be part of the. bigger story here. This wasn't just a.

hit on Rondo, right, with Robinson being. the innocent target. This was, like you. said, a purge. Durk was upset because. his own crew didn't avenge the Vaughn. death. So, he wanted to kill even. members of his own inner circle. Again, not saying that the prosecution can. prove it, but if they can, I don't think. jurors are going to like Little Derk at. all. And by the way, just to be clear, Rondo has not been, you know, charged or. connected to the death of Vaughn. But it.

is interesting what this theory is. Um, I I do want to make it clear that what. is coming out right now is prosecutors. seem to say they plan to present witness. testimony that Durk gave these orders. If that's the case, how credible are. they? Especially if they're testifying. in this trial in federal court. >> Yeah, you know, I'm I'm kind of shaking. my head and this is me personally, Jesse. And look, I've prosecuted, you. know, cartels, organized crime. I really. don't like to rely exclusively on the.

testimony of cooperators, right? Look, they're always going to get torn up on. cross-examination that they have an axe. to grind, they're disgruntled, they're. lying to save themselves. It's fine if. you have corroborating testimony, right? So maybe they have text messages. Again, the messages seem a little bit cryptic. to me. So you got to be really careful. when you're just relying on cooperator. testimony. You got to butress it with. something more. And the last thing you. want to do in these types of cases, and. we've seen them, you know, like YSL, you.

know, when you overcharge, you know, it. adds confusion. The case drags out and. you end up getting nothing as well. So. hopefully the prosecution is going to. bring some evidence here to substantiate. what they're alleging. >> If they don't add new charges, and I'll. talk about what those could be in a. second, if they don't add new charges, this could be part of the case, though. This technically could be part of the. overall case against Durk, the federal. case. What the current what he's. currently facing? It could, right? It. could be the 404B, right? You know, part. of the motive, the plan, you know, so.

that could come. >> sentencing, sentencing, maybe. >> sentencing, of course, we know all that. relevant conduct comes in, right? We saw. that in the Diddy case. So, I think a. judge would allow it in u because it is. relevant to this scheme. Again, the. defense has to be provided notice. Obviously, any discovery related to it, but it's going to come in. But at the. end of the day, you're talking about a. federal murder for hire case, right? It. could carry, we know it carries a. potential life sentence, but even a. potential death sentence. Now,

obviously, the feds haven't filed notice. of intent to seek the death penalty. So, it's not going to add anything in terms. of the potential exposure, but it can. certainly bring more bad facts in the. case that they're substantiated. >> and support their case. Okay. Let's say. they decide to bring new charges with. respect to this. Is that something you. expect to see? And what could those. charges be? It'd probably be, you know, conspiracy or attempted murder, right? And, you know, we're talking about a. January trial date, so it's pretty late. in the game. I don't know if the judge. would allow it. If the judge did, the.

defense may ask for continuance, and I. think the judge should probably grant. it, right? If you're adding additional. counts 3 months before your trial, probably uh a little bit late in my. opinion to keep that trial date that. again, obviously, it's the defendant's. right to a speedy trial. Durk's team. wants to keep that date, they'll move. forward. But it may be a reason to kick. this out. >> But not a different trial, not a. different case, not a separate case. Like they wouldn't bring a separate. indictment. Had nothing to do with. Quando Rondo. Separate indictment uh.

regarding him allegedly taking out hits. on his own people. That's not something. you expect. >> No, not at all. It would be part of the. same case. >> Okay. Now, I want to talk about. something else. I want to talk about the. second motion to dismiss by the defense. So on October 6th, Lil Durk's legal team. filed a second motion to dismiss the. federal indictment, and they argued once. again that the case against him is too. vague to be fair. So, per reporting from. Hot New Hip Hop, Durk's attorney, Drew.

Finling, lays out the problem that while. the indictment claims that. co-conspirators carried out acts at the. direction of Durk, flying to LA, tracking and stalking Quando Rondo, attempting to kill him by gunfire, procuring firearms and other equipment. that it fails to provide specifics about. what Durk himself allegedly did or said. As Finling writes, while the indictment. alleges that the co-conspirators carried. out various acts at the direction of Mr. Banks, flying to Los Angeles, tracking,

stalking, and attempting to kill TB by. gunfire, this is Quando Rondo. And. procuring the firearms and equipment. used to do so. It fails to give any. specifics. When, where, how, and to whom. did Mr. Banks give these alleged. directions to ensure the basic fairness. of this trial, the defense is entitled. to know. He adds, "What the indictment. fails to tell us are the very things the. defense is entitled to know, the. operative facts underlying the. government's theories of Mr. Banks. guilt. There is no allegation here that.

Mr. Banks physically participated in the. stalking and shooting at issue." And. Durk's legal team has also called the. indictment, as we mentioned, impermissibly vague, demanding. clarification on the government's. allegations. quote, "It leaves the. defense to guess as to the government's. theory of guilt, and it leaves the. government free to change that theory as. its cooperators stories morph over time. to meet the demands of a conviction.". Nema, do they have a point? How much do. prosecutors actually need to lay out for. the defense? This is again, you.

mentioned Diddy, big part that was. litigated leading up to his trial. How. much would they be made aware of what. the theory of the case was, what the. evidence was going to be presented? How. much do prosecutors need legally need to. lay out and tell the defense? >> Yeah, it's a due process issue. So, the. defense has to be given enough. information to be put on notice of the. nature of the allegations. But as far. as, you know, dates and times and. specific statements like the. indictment's not evidence, right? That's.

all witness testimony that's going to. come out at trial. So, I think the. prosecution, as long as they can allege. the unlawful agreement, the overt act. and furtherance of the conspiracy and. generally lay out the actions of the. co-conspirators, I think that's enough. And I don't think the judge is going to. dismiss based on vagueness. >> That idea of, hey, they could just. change their theory. They can change it. as cooperative stories change. That's. not going to persuade a judge. You don't. think? >> Well, that goes, in my opinion, that. goes to the weight of the evidence, not. the admissibility. Right. So, you're not.

going to get a new indictment, right? You can cross-examine folks if they. change their story, right? And again, none of this is evidence. Even if they. put a specific statement in that. indictment and the witness were to. testify something different, the. witness's testimony controls, right? You. can cross-examine on anything, right? You can allege that, well, you know, didn't you previously tell law. enforcement or prosecutors that it was. on such and such date? Now you're. telling us it's on a different date. I. mean, that's fertile grounds for cross.

in any case, but I don't think it's. grounds to dismiss the indictment. That's a pretty extraordinary remedy. >> Well, a hearing on this new motion is. scheduled for November 18th, so we'll. keep a careful eye out on that. But I do. want to move on to something that is. very troubling. Okay. Alleged threats. against prosecutors and judges and. request for an anonymous jury. Let's. talk about this. So, authorities. reporting that supporters of this rapper. have issued multiple threats targeting. key figures in the case. According to an. FBI report that was filed in the Central. District of California, fans of Lil Durk.

have allegedly vowed physical harm and. gun violence and even arson if the. Chicago rapper is convicted. The threats. have included four voicemails that were. apparently left on a US magistrate. judge's phone. One message reportedly. stating, "If they get life, I'm going to. burn this mother bleeper down." They. being Lil Durk and one of his. codefendants, DeAndre Wilson. Now, the. alleged intimidation extended apparently. to the prosecution team as well. Assistant US attorney Ian Yaniello, one.

of the lead prosecutors, reportedly. received a call from an unidentified. male who warned, "Free Durk or be shot.". Now, citing these incidents, the. government has requested an anonymous. jury. Writing in court filings, "Defendants supporters have already. attempted to intimidate individuals. connected to this case." Nema, let's I. have a few points about this. First of. all, have you seen something like this. before? If it's true, have you. experienced something like this before? Um, how common is it?

>> Look, I got threats when I was a federal. prosecutor. It's part of the job, Jesse. I mean, if you're going after the bad. guys, they're going to make threats. Now, a lot of these threats are not. substantiated. And look, it's easy for. me to say now that I'm out of the. Department of Justice to say it's not a. big deal. Don't worry about it. But if. you're a judge, if you're a prosecutor, this is this is what you sign up for. So, um I'm sure it's not fun uh to get. threats from fans or the defendant or, you know, his family, but this is not. unexpected. And I got threats all the.

time when I was a prosecutor. >> The idea of this justifying an anonymous. jury and a what is an anonymous jury? Don't we always have anonymous juries? Don't we not know the identities of. these people? So, what does it mean to. have an anonymous jury? And would this. justify it? So on lawn crime obviously. when we televise the trials they never. show the jurors right but the lawyers. they know the identity of the jurors. right that way they can do their. research on social media see what their. political affiliations are they've said. anything about the case truly anonymous.

jury that information is even withheld. from the lawyers again not very common. um it's really we talked about different. extraordinary remedies pretty. extraordinary obviously the judge in. these types of cases has a lot of. discretion on how to handle the jury, but I would be surprised if we get an. anonymous jury based on some, you know, voicemails and and that type of thing. Look, you know, this is social media. I'm sure there are folks who are. watching. They love me and you, Jesse, but people say all sorts of crazy. things. So, I don't think it's enough to.

get an anonymous jury just yet. >> Would it would they be in a separate. room if that were the case? Like, do. they hear the ca they hear the travel. from a separate room on a camera or. something? I mean, how how would the. defendant or everyone else not know who. they are? Yeah, I mean that's a. possibility. We've seen that sometimes. they'll have two juries for, you know, for different issues in the case. One. will be in another room. Um, it's. possible, but again, like if you're the. jury, think about it. I mean, you need. to assess the witnesses and their. credibility. You need to look look at.

them eye to eye. So, it really becomes. problematic when you start doing things. like this. Again, I would be very. surprised based on what we've heard some. voicemails if we do get an anonymous. jury. >> Okay, I want to now move on to the Apple. Watch situation. Now, this is another. dramatic twist in this little Durk saga. So, prosecutors, they revealed in a. filing from October 6th that the rapper. was allegedly caught with an Apple Watch. in jail. Now, this is a device with.

cellular capabilities and that he. allegedly tried to destroy it once it. was discovered. The motion that was. filed in support of request for that. anonymous jury reads, "In late August. 2025, BOP officials seized an Apple. Watch with cellular capability from. defendant." Even more troubling is. Bank's conduct after he was caught. Rather than accept responsibility for. this violation, defendant allegedly. obstructed the investigation, attempting. to damage and or destroy the. communications device. And authorities.

point out that this wasn't an isolated. incident. that Durk was accused last. December of making unregulated three-way. phone calls from the Metropolitan. Detention Center, the MDC, in Los. Angeles, where he's currently jailed. So, these repeated alleged violations. are being used to argue that there's a. real risk of witness tampering in this. case, especially given quote the. expansive reach of Durk's Only the. Family or Fetwork. Nema, how serious is. this allegation here? How are they do.

they know or they're alleging that he. tried to destroy it? Let's start there. and we'll talk about whether that. justifies taking some action. >> So, look, it's serious, but it's not. uncommon. We talked about this with Eric. and L. Menendez, right? And this is one. of the reasons they weren't granted. parole. You can't have a cell phone in. prison. Doesn't matter whether it's. state or federal, right? So, an Apple. Watch qualifies for that. Look, is it a. violation? Yes. Is it grounds for. something serious in terms of the remedy.

in the case like an anonymous jury? No, Jesse. It's just something that happens. and it's dealt with by BOP and other. prison officials and they deal with it. Shouldn't really affect the case unless. they charge, you know, obstruction or. something related to witness tampering. >> And. again, does it justify an anonymous. jury? Does it justify adding added. protection to witnesses in this case? I don't think so, Jesse. You know, you're talking about something that. again, even though it's a violation,

it's not uncommon. The three-way calls, we talked about that in the Diddy case, right? That was something that he was. doing as well. So, look, it's wrong. It's not right. But again, to completely. change how we handle the criminal. prosecution in this case doesn't make. sense to me. Should just proceed as. normal. >> So, Lil Durk remains in federal custody. in LA. His trial is expected to begin in. January of 2026. We will see if it stays. that way given all these developments. But Nema Romani, what a treasure. What a. what a gem. We love having him on. Thank. you so much for taking the time. Really.

appreciate it. >> Love being on, Jesse. I'm sure we'll. talk about this case real soon. >> And that is all we have for you right. now here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank. you so much for joining us. And as. always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you get. your podcast. You can follow me on X or. Instagram. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll see you. next time. [Music].