The Criminalization of Rap Music
In recent years, we have seen some of the biggest rap artists of the generation like Young Thug, Gunna, Tay K, and others get arrested. In addition to the recent uptick in the connection between rap artists and prison, there is also a trend of utilizing the rapper’s lyrics against them during their trial. Courts have stayed out of the matter when it comes to deciding if utilizing the defendant’s art is legal or ethical, but it poses a question, nonetheless. Does the criminalization of rap music interfere with first amendment rights?
Historical Precedence: The Intersection of Rap Lyrics & Legal Proceedings
The first amendment allows for freedom of speech, religion, press, and to assemble; but recently it seems like artistic works are not included in these freedoms. One of the first instances where rap lyrics were used during a trial was during Snoop Dogg’s murder trial that took place in 1996 in Los Angeles. To persuade the jury, the prosecution utilized lyrics from Snoop Dogg’s hit single “Deep Cover” to indicate guilt and wrongdoing. However, it turns out that this song was created for a movie soundtrack where killing a police officer was the main storyline and plot point. Luckily, in this case, Snoop Dogg was acquitted. However, since then, “researchers estimate that more than 500 cases over the past 30 years have shown prosecutors using rap lyrics against defendants at trial” (Bellware, 2022).
In the present-day, this is still going on and is happening much more frequently. Taymor McIntyre, who is better known as Texas rapper Tay-K, found himself having the music video and lyrics to his hit song, “The Race,” used as a key piece of evidence in his capital murder trial. This song launched his career, but it also helped him to get sentenced to 55 years in prison. In the song, the rapper seems to rap about his motive for escaping house arrest and his participation in the crime. Tay K raps: “We was plottin', y'all was tryna get the pack in / Get the pack in, you get robbed for a fraction (McIntyre 0:54-1:00).” This also happened to Brooklyn rapper Ackquille Pollard, better known as Bobby Shmurda in 2014. He was arrested partly due to the lyrics in the rapper’s street anthem, “Hot N*gga.” In the song, one of the lyrics is “Mitch caught a body about a week ago, (Pollard 2:14-2:18)” which the prosecution claimed referred to an attempted murder allegedly carried out by Shmurda’s real-life accomplice Deshain “Mitch” Cockett prior to the release of the song (Dowd, 2019).
Racial Bias and Perceptions: Unpacking the Complex Relationship Between Rap Music & the Legal System
The recent history of the criminalization of rap music has been heavily influenced by the identities of the artists and defendants, specifically their race. Race and the legal system have always had a tumultuous relationship due to implicit bias and things of that nature. In particular, the reputation of rap music and its proximity to Black culture results in bias when interpreting the law because rap music is judged through the tainted lens of a Black stereotypes, there is a lack of artistic works aside from rap being used as evidence, and music is left up to interpretation with only the artist knowing the true meaning of the piece.
One may believe that there are racial implications in the use of lyrics in court due to the perception of rap music and the stereotypes associated with it. One standing problem within the court system is the biases that jurors hold and the influence that they have on the lives and freedom of the defendants. A social scientist named Carrie Fried conducted a study that asked participants to read lyrics and identify if they were from rap or country songs when they were folk songs. Through this study, Fried concluded that rap music is viewed and judged through the tainted lens of Black stereotypes, which include traits such as violence, hostility, and aggression. In both this study and courts, rap lyrics are significantly more likely to be perceived as dangerous and offensive because of their roots in Black culture (Vining 15).
A study by the University of California Irvine that took place in 2016 asked two groups of participants to read the same set of violent lyrics. One group was told that the lyrics were from a country song, and the other group was told that they were rap lyrics. The participants were asked to rate whether they found the lyrics offensive. They were also asked whether they thought the lyrics were fictional or based on the writer’s experience. When participants were told that the lyrics were rap, they judged the lyrics to be more offensive and true to life (Dunbar et al., 2016). It is biases like these that interfere with the interpretation of rap lyrics. Judges would not be able to infer the influence that the label of rap music, sometimes not even the lyrics themselves, has on the jurors’ decisions. The study also concluded that even describing the lyrics as rap music is enough to “induce negative evaluations.”
Artistic Expression on Trial: Challenges & Unfairness in the Courtroom
One of the main reasons that utilizing rap lyrics in the courtroom is unfair due to the connection to race is the lack of use of lyrics from other genres in the courtroom. A researcher from the New York Times and Type Investigations named Jaeah Lee was able to investigate the rates of non-rap lyrics being used in the courtroom. Lee declares that she was only to find four examples of non-rap artistic works since 1950. Of these four cases, three of them were thrown out and the other ended in a conviction that was overturned (Lee). There is an obvious connection between rap and race due to its roots in Black culture.
A study held by the California State University: Los Angeles presented 134 students with one of four scenarios about a young man. They were then asked to rate their impressions of him across nine personality traits. These traits included: “caring-uncaring,” “gentle-rough” and “capable of murder-not capable of murder.” The first scenario described “an 18-year-old African American male high school senior, a track champion with a good academic record who made extra money by singing at local parties (Fischoff 4-5).” The second scenario described the same person but added that “he is on trial accused of murdering a former girlfriend who was still in love with him but has repeatedly declared that he is innocent of the charges (Fischoff 4-5).” The murder was not mentioned to the third cohort, but instead asked the subjects were asked to read a set of rap lyrics that the young man wrote. The fourth mentioned both the murder and the lyrics.
The study found that the participants who read only about the lyrics reacted more negatively to the young man than the group who had read only about the alleged murder. “Clearly,” he wrote, “participants were more put off by the rap lyrics than by the murder charges (Fischoff 8).” If learning simply that a person creates rap music and viewing their lyrics invokes a negative reaction, how can that not interfere with the decisions of the jurors?
Within art, there is always the overhanging issue of interpretation. Firstly, only the artist can know their true intentions in creating the artwork and the true meaning behind it. It is unfair to both the defendant and the juror to try to interpret what the artwork means when it is only known to the defendant. The jurors are forced to make decisions, and most of them happen without thinking; and because of this it allows unconscious bias to slip in. It is extremely common for jurors to deal with unconscious bias regarding race, gender, sexuality, etc. However, the lack of understanding that they might have for rap and art makes it more likely that the jurors would revert to biases that they hold related to race and rap music.
Sometimes there is quite literal misinterpretations due to the use of African American Vernacular English, or AAVE, which is common in rap music. In recent years especially, Black culture has created a vast amount of new vocabulary terms which are often used in rap songs. For example, in 2014, a 17-year-old Tommy Munsdwell Canady was charged with the first-degree intentional homicide and armed robbery of 19-year-old Sèmar McClain. Canady’s rap lyrics were used in his trial. The 17-year-old tried to inform his lawyer that the prosecution had misheard his song and that an isolated vocal track on his computer would prove he did not say the name of the victim. Investigators heard “catch Semar slipping.” However, Canady says that the actual lyrics were “catch a mawg slippin.” This is a slang reference to someone on the opposing side, also known as an “opp.” He had also used this phrase in at least one other song.
In many cases where rap lyrics are used to aid the prosecution, the lyrics often lack context and fairness. In the case of Canady, his attorney pointed out that many of the lyrics presented “did not match the facts of the murder.” This included a reference to blood on his sneakers, “a big Glock with 50 in it,” and an “opp car,” which means a car belonging to a rival. The court would later recognize that in the excerpts presented that there were “other lyrics that do not bear a resemblance to this crime (Lee).”
Another crucial piece of injustice in the use of rap lyrics in court is the misunderstanding of what character evidence is. In the US legal system, the rules of evidence are supposed to prohibit and prevent the presentation of “character evidence.” Character evidence is anything that reveals past wrongs of the defendant or that attacks them. This is done to prevent biasing jurors. Legal scholars have declared the use of rap lyrics in Mr. Canady’s case an example of racialized character evidence. Racialized character evidence is any “details or personal traits prosecutors can use in an insidious way, playing up racial stereotypes to imply guilt (Lee).”
One of the main reasons that the issue of the criminalization of rap music came to light was because of a book written by Andrea L. Dennis and Erik Nielson titled Rap on Trial: Race, Lyrics, and Guilt in America. The book was able to compile a list of 500 trials in which rap lyrics had been used as evidence. Following the release of the book in 2019, researchers were able to track down 200 court documents— including their race, how lyrics were used against them, and the outcomes of their cases. Of the group of defendants that were identified, and where their race and gender were accessible, “roughly three-quarters of the defendants were African American men (Lee).”
In that same study, researchers were able to discover that the number of people prosecuted using rap lyrics doubled. In the years between 1990 and 2005, the researchers were able to discover 50 people who were prosecuted using rap lyrics. However, in the 15 years that followed, the researchers were able to find 100 people (Lee). There is an obvious inequity in the use of these lyrics which can be associated which racial bias. The evidence of rap lyrics being used in court cases in some way could be linked to bias or prejudice.
Due to its connection to Black culture and the connotation of rap music, the use of rap lyrics in court results in bias when interpreting the law and a lack of equity across the legal system. Recent years have proven that there tends to be an unjust relationship between people of color and the U.S. system due to discrimination. The use of rap lyrics is just another sector of prejudice. Beyond blatant bias against rap and Black culture, there is also inequality in the rate of use of artist works in court cases for defendants who are not people of color.
Legislative Solutions: California's Decriminalizing Artistic Expression Act as a Turning Point
This issue is currently coming to light, once again, due to rap lyrics being used in a case more prominent than all the others. On May 9, 2022, Grammy Award-winning rapper Young Thug, whose real name is Jeffery Lamar Williams, was arrested on conspiracy and street gang activity charges. His indictment heavily leaned on his lyrics, music videos, and social media posts. Young Thug is “hip-hop superstar from Atlanta with three No. 1 albums on the Billboard 200, has been credited with shaping the contemporary sound of rap (Lang).” Williams wasnamed in an 88-page formal accusation along with 27 other people associated with his record label Young Stoner Life, or YSL Records. This also included his protégé— the rapper Gunna, whose real name Sergio Kitchens. The indictment included “56 counts of racketeering charges dating back to 2013 (Lang).” This included “accusations of possession of drugs and illegalfirearms, armed robbery, assault, and attempted murder (Lang).”
Williams, who has been denied bond twice, has personally spoken out about the use of rap lyrics in court cases. In June, at Hot 97’s Summer Jam, Williams made a pre-recorded audio statement where he thanked fans for their support and encouraged them to sign a Change.org petition. The petition was started by music industry executives Kevin Lilles and Julie Greenwald. The petition denounces the use of rap lyrics in criminal cases (Lang). Williams had the following to say in his statement: “You know, this isn’t about just me or YSL. I always use my music as a form of artistic expression, and I see now that Black artists and rappers don’t have that freedom. Everybody please sign the Protect Black Art petition and keep praying for us. I love you all (“Protect Black Art”).”
In the state where this issue first rose to prominence with the case of Snoop Dogg, California, steps are being taken against this injustice. California has recently become the first state to create barriers on including a party’s “creative output” in court evidence. This includes things like rapper’s lyrics and music videos. Judges in California must now ask, before allowing rap lyrics into evidence, “whether there is sufficient proof that the artistic expression is directly part of the criminal act on trial (Bellware).” On September 30, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom of California signed the Decriminalizing Artistic Expression Act into law. This took place during an online ceremony which was attended by many generations of hip-hop artists. This included: Killer Mike, Too Short, Meek Mill, Tyga, Saweetie, E-40, and Ty Dolla Sign (Bellware).
As California has set the trend, it is up to the other states to follow. This development is a major step for the landscape of hip-hop music and artistic expression in general. By signing acts like these, creatives can feel comfortable expressing themselves with the fear of unfair prosecution. At least two of the results of this act are that artists will get a new sense of freedom and the court system loses some of the possibility of bias being present. This is a win for both civilians and for the government, which should be looking to be functioning successfully. Developing legislation is the solution to this matter, but the action is left to the legislators. Hopefully, through unity and communal support rappers and other artists can join together to stop the unfair trials caused by artistic works being used in court.
