California set to be 1st state to limit prosecutors' ability to use rap lyrics as evidence

KTVU ^

[jdsteel]

So, if the lyric says you are gonna bust a cap in a fellow rappers ass, and you do, it’s not premeditated….right?

[Chode]

“they”, can kiss my azz...

[Steve_Seattle]

Rap music is inherently insolent, misogynist, and mind-polluting. It encourages anti-social attitudes and has been a major factor in the decline of the black community over the last thirty years. It has reached a crisis point, with constant car-jackings, mob looting, and gun violence. Almost every day we see video of one or more of these things, and the participants are usually 80-100% black.

[Steve_Seattle]

I think you are splitting hairs. The courts would never allow such fine distinctions if the person on trial was a white-supremacist. They would introduce evidence of certain literature he had read and use it against him even if it did not encourage any crime whatsoever.

[mmichaels1970]

I think you are splitting hairs.

Oh, I'm pretty sure I am as well. I enjoy doing it with regard to forming an opinion on legislation specifically, since so much of our legal system revolves around "splitting hairs" and "technicalities".

The courts would never allow such fine distinctions if the person on trial was a white-supremacist.

I think you're right regarding the eventual RESULT. Just not with the process that this bill is creating.

I think it is HIGHLY likely the white-supremacist would get an adverse ruling (ie WOULD be admitted as evidence) during the pretrial hearing (created by AB 2799), but otherwise would fall within the confines of this bill. The bill just adds the layer of a "pretrial ruling" before the prosecution can just lay it out before a jury. Would a judge be biased in how he rules? Almost certainly.

(sorry for continuing to split hairs with what follows...it's how I learn)

Hypothetical Case #1: Rap song about killing police.

Before going before a jury as "evidence", AB 2799 requires it to go before a judge during a pretrial hearing. CA judge likely to rule that these rap lyrics could be prejudicial to the case and would introduce a racial bias to a jury. CA judge likely to rule that these lyrics CANNOT be presented as evidence.

Hypothetical Case #2: Thrash song praising Mein Kampf

Before going before a jury as "evidence", AB 2799 requires it to go before a judge during a pretrial hearing. CA judge likely to rule that these white-supremacist lyrics absolutely have a bearing on the character and potential motive of the accused and would not introduce a racial bias to a jury. CA judge therefore is likely to rule that these lyrics CAN be presented as evidence.

So, to me, BOTH cases fall within the confines of AB 2799. However, the issue isn't with the bill itself, it's with the judge's selective application of the bill.

Did they generally understand this when crafting the bill? Probably.

[minnesota_bound]

#14 Snoop Dogg drove a car and hunted down the victim who was shot dead by his buddy.