The Use of Rap Lyrics as Criminal Evidence

Law-art intersections have been controversial because more and more courts have used rap lyrics as evidence within a court of law. Prosecutors claim lyrics can contain intent, motive, or confessions. However, defense attorneys and scholars assert that the practice is discriminatory toward artists, especially Black men, by treating fiction as crime-making. Those opposing this censure the risks of cultural misunderstanding, racial prejudice, and the chilling effect of artistic freedom when the courts confuse art with autobiography. Consent is building up among legal scholars that rap lyrics are being singled out, unlike other art forms, which casts doubt on their fairness and constitutionality. Rap lyrics should not be used as crime evidence since they encourage racial discrimination, make poor assumptions regarding the intent of the art, and violate the constitutional right to free expression.

Racial bigotry is a leading factor in the prosecution of rap lyrics. According to academics, courts are more likely to prosecute rap, a genre with a firm African American foundation, than other art forms. As shown by Quinn, the drill rap lyrics have been used by prosecutors to make racist conclusions and present young Black men as members of a gang or even criminals, no matter what their lives entail.^[1] The given practice is a symptom of the larger societal trend towards stereotyping Black artists as violent or dangerous, which supports the inequity in the justice system. Comparatively, violent lyrics in such genres as country or heavy metal are hardly ever presented as incriminating evidence. Such selective targeting of rap not only distorts the jury's perceptions but also presents the presence of implicit racial prejudices in the legal process.

The other significant issue is the misguided assumptions about the autobiographical content of rap lyrics. Rap, as any other art, is prone to exaggeration, using metaphors, and narrating imaginary stories. They are usually interpreted literally by prosecutors as confessions, even though the comments of rap lyrics are hyperbolic and performative^[2]. The assumption disregards artistic forms of rap. The rhyme lines are written to please or make one think, but not to document what is occurring. It may induce defendants' convictions, which have artistic quality but cannot be substantiated by being able to draw a line between artistic personality and real life. It sets a precedent, in which the question is whether art hates the standard of legal law, saying that guilt is founded on facts that have been known and never on art.

Using rap lyrics in court also infringes constitutional rights, primarily the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of expression. Rap lyrics being legalized in court is a chilling threat to suppress art because, as McGlynn et al. argue, it is used to punish artists for the content of their art by sending them to prison due to their expression of art^[3]. It sends a message that certain forms of expression are dangerous to the law. This type of discrimination suppression brings in a broader constitutional issue regarding viewpoint discrimination since rappers cannot speak more than other songsters or novelists. Court practices restricting free speech are a severe blow to the very principles of a democratic society, where freedom of expression needs to be ensured, despite the controversial and provocative statements.

The evidentiary value of rap lyrics is also highly questionable. The lyrics almost always come out against protest. They either convey or support some other evidence since their probative value is minimal compared to their prejudicial effects. Litt underlines that the lack of familiarity of judges with rap culture would lead to literally being read by jury members and then solidifying stereotypes and bias^[4]. Furthermore, the prosecutors are selective enough to pull out lines of songs and strip them of their contexts to construct fabricated stories to fit charges. Such manipulation is biased towards a fair hearing and may lead to wrongful convictions. As Quinn observes, using cultural expression as evidence inevitably becomes a proxy for hard evidence, with prosecutors filling evidential lacunae with artistic compositions never originally contemplated as testimonies about facts^[5].

 Revising the legal treatment of rappers' lyrics to restore justice to courtroom proceedings is essential. An academic recommendation is to adopt strict limitations or total bans to allow artistic expression to be used as evidence, except where an exceptional, direct, verifiable connection to a crime is found. McGlynn et al. suggest further scrutiny by the judiciary, in which prosecutors would like to introduce lyrics so that the probative worth would outweigh the prejudicial risk^[6]. Such gains would not be against constitutional protection but would take note of the special cultural position of rap music. Protection against unjust prosecution of artists must ensure that an individual's freedom is upheld, in addition to an overall rule that no form of expression through art would ever be subject to prosecution.

Rap lyrics prosecution is a boastful transgression where race, culture, and law converge. With the restatement of racial discrimination, the works of art as confessionals, the demeaning quality of free expressions, and low probative value, the practice is harmful to the integrity of the justice system. To curb damages caused by comparing rap lyrics with crimes, the courts take the initial measures to ensure artistic freedom in the same way as defendants' rights. The long-term protection of the artistic expression against court abuse is as much of a question of equal justice as the confirmation of certain basic constitutional principles.

1.E Quinn, ‘Racist Inferences and Flawed Data: Drill Rap Lyrics as Criminal Evidence in Group Prosecutions’ (2024) 65(4) Race & Class 3 ↑

2.LJ Litt, ‘From Rhyming Bars to Behind Bars: The Problematic Use of Rap Lyrics in Criminal Proceedings’ (2023) 92 UMKC Law Review 121 ↑

3.K McGlynn, J Schriner-Briggs and J Schell, ‘Lyrics in Limine: Rap Music and Criminal Prosecutions’ (2023) 38(2) Communications Lawyer 10 ↑

4.Litt (n 1). ↑

5.Quinn (n 3). ↑

6.McGlynn, Schriner-Briggs and Schell (n 2). ↑