> For years, he argued, Davis had been telling people "that he is responsible for Tupac Shakur's murder" through documentaries, his memoir, podcasts and a police interview.
> Throughout the trial, Davis' defence team tried to persuade jurors that his comments were fiction - bravado and exaggeration intended to sell books and make money.
I feel like there's a song about this... [1]
Gangsters telling on themselves can be almost funny from a distance, but that violence and lack of justice is real. It's hard not to feel sick to your stomach when you see a case like the Nathan Leigh shooting, where a Toronto gangster did broad daylight execution (attempted) on camera, beat the case, and has been rapping about the crime for years later [2].
People that commit fraud are more welcoming to the public but they are the ones that harm the most people.
Example: Brett Farve, a millionaire, is still likable while at the same time he stole from a welfare system that was designed to help the poorest in the state of Mississippi. He is directly responsible for harm enumerable number of people.
I am more disgusted by the fraudsters of the world than people like Luigi Mangione. I wish more people would realize that corrupt wealthy individuals cause the most harm against humanity than those that commit singular violent acts.
Like GunRack from K&P https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=EXPPSQhUVss
See https://techcrunch.com/2024/11/08/ben-horowitzs-cozy-relatio...
I wonder if they’ll find Biggie’s killer next.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3uoB8zvLdI
edit: just watched the youtube video in full, and it isn't an admission. It's just discussing the shooting in general, and he puts blame on others.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ny-supreme-court/1281054.h...
The prosecution obtained permission from the judge so that they could refer to the defendant throughout the trial, not by his legal name, but the name he took for himself: "Bloody Badass". The defense considered this a rather bad idea and attempted to overturn the case on appeal.
Now it seems that plenty of concrete evidence was provided, and a person's name does not directly convict of any crime at all, except against good taste. But can you imagine the mood in that courtroom as the jury and witnesses were repeatedly exposed, all day long, to the prosecution calling him by a name he wished to be known by?
Sit in the court and be their own star witness
"Do you see the perpetrator?" "Yeah, I'm right here"
Fuck around, get the whole label sent up for years
> For years, he argued, Davis had been telling people "that he is responsible for Tupac Shakur's murder" through documentaries, his memoir, podcasts and a police interview.
He'd fit quite well in Silicon Valley.
wardriving og
Having enough evidence to take to a grand jury, get an indictment, and convince a petit jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and survive appeals is another.
I've notice more people lack optics with one vs the other. One is easy to understand the other is hard, takes more time, and does more damage which takes more time to see the effects.
The only time whole communities are harm via violence is mainly during a war or ethnic cleansing.
It's not just the literal stealing, it is, as you point out, the ripple effects of destroying trust in society/government/etc.
Lets just cull the bottom 2% of offenders this decade, and see its long term effects.
When profits of insurance are more important than people being able to get care, that directly leads to the situations that lead to violence. Poor, desperate people commit crimes, especially violent ones at a higher rate.