# 8 Stunning Revelations in Tupac Murder Trial So Far

An episode of [2pac Murder Files Unsealed](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/1895560568), 24 Sep 2026, 42 min.

Audio: https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/api.spreaker.com/download/episode/75335647/the_tupac_shakur_murder_trial.mp3

The episode details the ongoing murder trial of Dwayne "Keffe D" Davis, who is currently the only individual criminally charged in the 1996 killing of hip-hop legend Tupac Shakur. Prosecutors allege that Davis orchestrated the drive-by shooting as an act of gang retaliation following a physical altercation involving his nephew at a Las Vegas hotel. Much of the state's case relies on Davis's own historical statements found in police interviews, media appearances, and a memoir, where he seemingly admitted to his involvement. Conversely, the defense argues that these admissions were merely unreliable exaggerations intended for financial gain or to protect others, while also highlighting the sloppy investigative work conducted decades ago. The sources further document emotional testimony from Tupac’s family and former associates, emphasizing the long-delayed search for accountability. Overall, the trial seeks to determine if Davis acted as the mastermind behind the assassination that remains a pivotal moment in music history. This episode includes AI-generated content.

## Transcript

[0:00] Speaker 1: So imagine imagine you're sitting in a courtroom. The room
[0:03] Speaker 1: goes completely quiet.
[0:05] Speaker 2: Right.
[0:05] Speaker 1: And the prosecutor stands up, looks directly at the jury.
[0:10] Speaker 1: And says, you know, ladies and gentlemen, the man on
[0:13] Speaker 1: trial for murder today did not pull the trigger.
[0:15] Speaker 2: Which is just an incredible way to start a murder trial.
[0:18] Speaker 2: I mean, really.
[0:19] Speaker 1: It is. That is exactly how the trial for the
[0:21] Speaker 1: murder of hip hop icon Tupac Shakur began. We aren't,
[0:25] Speaker 1: you know, waiting for a verdict yet or closing arguments
[0:29] Speaker 1: or anything.
[0:29] Speaker 2: We're just at the very beginning.
[0:30] Speaker 1: Exactly. We are looking at the very first chapter of
[0:34] Speaker 1: a trial that took place. What, 30 years to even
[0:37] Speaker 1: make it to a courtroom?
[0:38] Speaker 2: Yeah, three decades.
[0:39] Speaker 1: Decades of rumors, endless conspiracy theories, documentaries on top of documentaries.
[0:45] Speaker 1: And it's all finally funneled into this one room in
[0:48] Speaker 1: Las Vegas.
[0:49] Speaker 2: It's an incredible scene to visualize. You have these 16
[0:52] Speaker 2: people sitting in that jury box.
[0:54] Speaker 1: Right.
[0:54] Speaker 2: Ten women, six men, and that includes the four alternates. And, like,
[0:58] Speaker 2: the weight on those 16 ordinary citizens is just staggering.
[1:02] Speaker 1: I can't even imagine. Right.
[1:04] Speaker 2: Because they are being asked to parse through the memories
[1:07] Speaker 2: of witnesses that have aged three decades. Plus physical evidence
[1:12] Speaker 2: that was gathered when cell phones barely even existed.
[1:16] Speaker 1: Yeah. The technology gap alone is wild.
[1:19] Speaker 2: It really is. And all of this is wrapped in
[1:21] Speaker 2: a cultural mythology that is so thick you could cut
[1:24] Speaker 2: it with a knife.
[1:25] Speaker 1: And that is exactly what we are tearing into today.
[1:27] Speaker 1: We are unpacking the first days of this deeply surreal
[1:31] Speaker 1: murder trial of Dwayne Davis. who also goes by Keef D.
[1:34] Speaker 2: He's the first one, right?
[1:35] Speaker 1: Yeah, he is the first, and actually the only person
[1:37] Speaker 1: ever criminally charged in connection with this case. So for
[1:40] Speaker 1: this deep dive, we've got our hands on incredibly detailed
[1:44] Speaker 1: source material from a Legal Network's daily blow-by-blow recap of
[1:48] Speaker 1: the trial.
[1:49] Speaker 2: Which is just a goldmine for us.
[1:50] Speaker 1: It really is. And our mission here is to extract
[1:53] Speaker 1: the mechanics of how you even begin to prosecute a
[1:55] Speaker 1: case like this. Because, like you said, the central paradox
[1:58] Speaker 1: here is totally mind-bending.
[2:00] Speaker 2: Yeah, the prosecution... openly acknowledges that Davis didn't hold the
[2:04] Speaker 2: smoking gun.
[2:05] Speaker 1: Right. And legally, that sets up a massive hurdle from
[2:08] Speaker 1: minute one. So what are they actually charging him with?
[2:11] Speaker 2: Well, the state has charged him with murder, with a
[2:13] Speaker 2: deadly weapon, but with the specific intent to promote, further,
[2:19] Speaker 2: or assist a criminal gang.
[2:21] Speaker 1: Okay. So a gang enhancement.
[2:23] Speaker 2: Exactly. So this isn't, you know, a traditional hooge in it.
[2:26] Speaker 2: We aren't looking for his fingerprints on a trigger.
[2:28] Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.
[2:29] Speaker 2: The prosecution's entire theory rests on proving Davis was the
[2:32] Speaker 2: architect of the violence.
[2:34] Speaker 1: Hold on, let me stop you there because I want
[2:35] Speaker 1: to make sure I understand the actual legal reality of
[2:37] Speaker 1: this for our listeners. If I hand my buddy a
[2:39] Speaker 1: gun and he decides to shoot someone, am I on
[2:42] Speaker 1: the hook for murder just for passing it to him? Like,
[2:45] Speaker 1: how does the prosecution legally bridge that gap to charge
[2:49] Speaker 1: the guy in the passenger seat with the actual murder?
[2:51] Speaker 2: That is basically the multi-million dollar question of this entire trial.
[2:55] Speaker 1: Right.
[2:55] Speaker 2: Under the legal theory of aiding and abetting, especially when
[2:59] Speaker 2: you tie it to gang enhancements, the law looks at
[3:02] Speaker 2: the whole picture. If you procure the weapon, if you
[3:04] Speaker 2: organize the vehicle, if you hunt down the target and
[3:08] Speaker 2: you provide that weapon with the explicit intent that it
[3:13] Speaker 2: be used to kill, well, the law does not care
[3:15] Speaker 2: that your finger wasn't on the trigger. Wow. Yeah. In
[3:18] Speaker 2: the eyes of the state, you didn't just pass a
[3:20] Speaker 2: hot potato, right?
[3:20] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[3:21] Speaker 2: You built the factory, loaded the weapon, and gave the order.
[3:24] Speaker 2: You are legally indistinguishable from the shooter.
[3:27] Speaker 1: So the prosecution has to prove he built the factory.
[3:29] Speaker 1: And the wildest part of this source material, to me
[3:32] Speaker 1: at least, is how they plan to prove it.
[3:35] Speaker 2: Oh, it's fascinating.
[3:36] Speaker 1: They are attempting to build this massive, complex murder case
[3:41] Speaker 1: almost entirely out of the defendant's own words.
[3:44] Speaker 2: Yes, words he voluntarily spoke.
[3:46] Speaker 1: Right, on podcasts, in television interviews, and like in books
[3:50] Speaker 1: over the course of decades. Exactly.
[3:51] Speaker 2: Exactly. And I want you, the listener, to keep that
[3:53] Speaker 2: in mind as we go through all this evidence today.
[3:55] Speaker 2: Quit yourself right there in the jury box.
[3:57] Speaker 1: It's a crazy position to be in.
[3:58] Speaker 2: It is. You're watching the prosecution try to use a
[4:01] Speaker 2: man's own boasting against him. Meanwhile, the defense has the
[4:05] Speaker 2: incredibly difficult job of trying to convince you that their
[4:08] Speaker 2: client is essentially just a massive liar.
[4:11] Speaker 1: A liar who made it all up for street cred
[4:13] Speaker 1: and survival.
[4:14] Speaker 2: Exactly. That's their whole angle.
[4:16] Speaker 1: So to understand how we got to a podcast confession,
[4:19] Speaker 1: we have to start at the physical catalyst, right? The
[4:21] Speaker 1: inciting incident. September 7th, 1996, Las Vegas, Nevada.
[4:26] Speaker 2: Right. The night of the massive Mike Tyson heavyweight fight.
[4:29] Speaker 1: Yeah. This is Ground Zero. So during opening statements, prosecutor
[4:33] Speaker 1: Binu Pal laid out this inciting incident. After the fight, Tupac,
[4:38] Speaker 1: Death Row Records CEO Suge Knight, a guy named Trayvon Lane,
[4:41] Speaker 1: and several others from their entourage are just walking through
[4:44] Speaker 1: the MGM Grand Casino.
[4:45] Speaker 2: And sitting there by himself is Orlando Anderson.
[4:48] Speaker 1: Right. And the sources make a huge point to highlight
[4:51] Speaker 1: that Anderson is Dwayne Davis's nephew.
[4:53] Speaker 2: Yes, that familial tie is crucial. And within moments of
[4:56] Speaker 2: them spotting him, a brutal brawl breaks out.
[4:59] Speaker 1: It's just chaos.
[5:00] Speaker 2: Absolutely chaos. Tupac, Suge and their crew attack Anderson. They
[5:05] Speaker 2: beat him down right there on the casino floor.
[5:07] Speaker 1: And crucially, this is where the 1996 reality crashes into
[5:11] Speaker 1: the 2024 courtroom. This isn't just some street rumor.
[5:14] Speaker 2: No, not at all.
[5:15] Speaker 1: The entire beating is captured on the MGM Grandaz surveillance video.
[5:19] Speaker 1: So the jury doesn't have to imagine this. They are
[5:22] Speaker 1: sitting in court literally watching a grainy tape of one
[5:25] Speaker 1: of the most famous musicians in the world participating in
[5:28] Speaker 1: a gang beatdown.
[5:30] Speaker 2: Yeah, it's undeniable evidence. You can see it with your
[5:32] Speaker 2: own eyes.
[5:33] Speaker 1: Okay, so you have the inciting incident on tape, a
[5:35] Speaker 1: brutal beatdown. But the prosecution has to explain the massive
[5:39] Speaker 1: escalation here.
[5:40] Speaker 2: Right, how we get from point A to point B.
[5:42] Speaker 1: Exactly. How does a fistfight in a casino lobby turn
[5:45] Speaker 1: into a drive-by shooting with a. 40 caliber handgun just
[5:49] Speaker 1: like a couple of hours later? I mean, most casino
[5:51] Speaker 1: fights end with security and an ice pack, not a murder.
[5:55] Speaker 2: And that is where the gang culture element becomes the
[5:57] Speaker 2: absolute glue of the prosecution's case.
[6:00] Speaker 1: How so?
[6:01] Speaker 2: Well, Prosecutor Powell explained to the jury that in this
[6:04] Speaker 2: specific world, an attack on a beloved nephew by a
[6:07] Speaker 2: rival faction, it just cannot go unanswered.
[6:09] Speaker 1: So it's about pride.
[6:11] Speaker 2: It's deeper than that. It isn't just about anger. It's
[6:14] Speaker 2: about the structural integrity of the gang itself. If you
[6:18] Speaker 2: let your nephew get beaten down on camera by a
[6:21] Speaker 2: rival without an immediate overwhelming and violent response, your faction
[6:27] Speaker 2: loses its power.
[6:29] Speaker 1: So retaliation is essentially mandatory.
[6:31] Speaker 2: Exactly. It's mandatory. And according to the state, Dwayne Davis
[6:35] Speaker 2: was the one who orchestrated that mandatory retaliation.
[6:38] Speaker 1: And the timeline they lay out in the sources is
[6:40] Speaker 1: incredibly specific, which is wild after 30 years.
[6:42] Speaker 2: It really is. They claim Davis immediately went out and
[6:46] Speaker 2: procured a. 40 caliber handgun from a man named Eric Martin,
[6:50] Speaker 2: who went by the name Von Zipp.
[6:51] Speaker 1: Okay, Von Zipp. And then they placed Davis and three
[6:54] Speaker 1: others into the infamous White Cadillac. Right.
[6:57] Speaker 2: And the prosecution claims to know the exact seating logistics, which,
[7:00] Speaker 2: as we discussed, is crucial for their aiding and abetting theory.
[7:04] Speaker 1: Okay, break down the seating for us.
[7:05] Speaker 2: So you have Terrence T. Brown behind the wheel. Sitting
[7:08] Speaker 2: behind him, rear driver's side, is DeAndre Big Dre Smith.
[7:11] Speaker 2: In the rear passenger side is the nephew who was
[7:14] Speaker 2: just beaten up, Orlando Baby Lane Anderson. And in the
[7:17] Speaker 2: front passenger seat, allegedly calling the shots, is the defendant,
[7:21] Speaker 2: Dwayne Davis.
[7:22] Speaker 1: So they roll up on the Vegas Strip. They spot
[7:24] Speaker 1: the BMW with Tupac and Suge Knight. And this is
[7:26] Speaker 1: where the sequence of events gets almost, I don't know,
[7:29] Speaker 1: cinematic in its detail.
[7:30] Speaker 2: Yeah, the state paints a very vivid picture here.
[7:33] Speaker 1: The prosecution alleges that Davis, sitting in that front passenger seat,
[7:37] Speaker 1: realizes he doesn't have a clear line of sight to
[7:40] Speaker 1: shoot across his own driver and hit the BMW.
[7:43] Speaker 2: Right. He can't get a clean shot.
[7:44] Speaker 1: So he hands the weapon into the back seat.
[7:47] Speaker 2: And here is a totally fascinating detail from the state's narrative.
[7:52] Speaker 2: Davis allegedly hands the. 40 caliber to DeAndre Smith first. Okay.
[7:57] Speaker 2: But Smith hesitates. For whatever reason in that split second,
[8:01] Speaker 2: he just doesn't want to pull the trigger. Wow. So
[8:04] Speaker 2: Orlando Anderson reaches over, takes the gun from Smith, leans
[8:07] Speaker 2: out the window, and opens fire.
[8:09] Speaker 1: See, this is exactly what I meant by the hot
[8:11] Speaker 1: potato defense. Like, put yourself in the shoes of the
[8:14] Speaker 1: defense attorney for a second. If the prosecution is flat
[8:17] Speaker 1: out admitting that the gun passed from Davis to Smith
[8:20] Speaker 1: to Anderson, I mean, doesn't that introduction of a middleman,
[8:24] Speaker 1: someone who actually refused to shoot, shatter the idea that
[8:27] Speaker 1: Davis was in total control?
[8:29] Speaker 2: That's certainly what the defense wants the jury to think.
[8:31] Speaker 1: Right. Can't the defense argue, look, my client handed it back,
[8:35] Speaker 1: someone else rejected it, and a third guy made a
[8:37] Speaker 1: spontaneous choice to fire? You can't put that spontaneous choice
[8:41] Speaker 1: on my client.
[8:42] Speaker 2: It's a very sharp, very logical defense strategy, and it's
[8:45] Speaker 2: exactly where they are focusing a lot of their energy.
[8:48] Speaker 2: But the prosecution counters that by zooming out, right?
[8:51] Speaker 1: Zoom me out how?
[8:53] Speaker 2: They argue the intent was baked in the very moment
[8:56] Speaker 2: Davis sourced the gun from Zip Martin and loaded those
[8:59] Speaker 2: men into the Cadillac. The fact that the physical weapon
[9:02] Speaker 2: fumbled between hands in the backseat, that doesn't negate the
[9:05] Speaker 2: fact that Davis allegedly designed the entire encounter for the
[9:09] Speaker 2: sole purpose of murder.
[9:10] Speaker 1: So the prosecution says he's the architect no matter who
[9:13] Speaker 1: finally pulled the trigger. But the source material reveals that
[9:16] Speaker 1: this wasn't just like a localized street level retaliation over
[9:21] Speaker 1: a casino fight. The violence on the Vegas Strip was
[9:24] Speaker 1: being fueled by a massive corporate escalation operating in the background.
[9:28] Speaker 2: Yes, and this is where the context gets huge. We
[9:31] Speaker 2: are talking about the East Coast versus West Coast hip-hop
[9:34] Speaker 2: rivalry operating with just staggering amounts of money.
[9:38] Speaker 1: This is the part of the trial that really transforms
[9:41] Speaker 1: it from a local gang shooting into this massive historical
[9:44] Speaker 1: pop culture event. The prosecution introduced allegations regarding Davis's connections
[9:49] Speaker 1: to Sean Puffy Combs, the CEO of Bad Boy Entertainment
[9:52] Speaker 1: out in New York. Right.
[9:54] Speaker 2: And according to the documents, Combs allegedly wanted heavily armed
[9:57] Speaker 2: security whenever he or his artist visited the West Coast.
[9:59] Speaker 1: Because he was scared, right?
[10:01] Speaker 2: Yeah, he was genuinely terrified of the Mob Peru gang,
[10:04] Speaker 2: which was intimately affiliated with Suge Night and Death Row Records.
[10:08] Speaker 1: And Dwayne Davis allegedly stepped into that void, basically agreeing
[10:12] Speaker 1: to act as an unofficial, heavily armed security force for Combs.
[10:16] Speaker 2: What you really have to understand here is the sheer
[10:18] Speaker 2: scale of it all.
[10:19] Speaker 1: Yeah, tell me about that.
[10:21] Speaker 2: It took a hyper-local, block-by-block rivalry between the Mob Peru
[10:25] Speaker 2: gang and the Southside Compton Crips and suddenly attached it
[10:29] Speaker 2: to two massive, incredibly wealthy corporate record labels.
[10:34] Speaker 1: And the money involved here is mind-boggling. The sources highlight
[10:37] Speaker 1: a claim from a 2008 interview Davis gave to law enforcement.
[10:41] Speaker 2: Ah, yes, a 2008 interview.
[10:43] Speaker 1: In that interview, Davis supposedly alleged that Puffy actually gave
[10:46] Speaker 1: a massive sum of money, like a million dollar bounty
[10:49] Speaker 1: to that guy we mentioned earlier, Zip Martin, to pay
[10:51] Speaker 1: Davis for the hit on Tupac.
[10:53] Speaker 2: Though it's important to note Davis made a point to
[10:55] Speaker 2: claim he never actually received the money from Zip.
[10:58] Speaker 1: Right. Which is an explosive claim to introduce to a jury.
[11:02] Speaker 1: The prosecution isn't necessarily putting Sean Combs on trial, obviously,
[11:06] Speaker 1: but they are using this to paint a picture of
[11:08] Speaker 1: an environment where local gang violence was being heavily subsidized
[11:11] Speaker 1: by corporate music money.
[11:12] Speaker 2: Exactly. It gives Davis a dual motive, right? You have
[11:16] Speaker 2: the street-level revenge for his nephew getting beaten up, combined
[11:19] Speaker 2: with this massive corporate bounty.
[11:21] Speaker 1: And that corporate gang synergy wasn't just happening on the
[11:24] Speaker 1: East Coast with Bad Boy. The sources reference an FBI
[11:27] Speaker 1: proffer interview that Davis gave back in 1998, where he
[11:31] Speaker 1: broke down the origins of death row records itself.
[11:33] Speaker 2: Yes, that 1998 FBI interview is fascinating. He claimed the
[11:37] Speaker 2: label was quite literally birthed from drug money.
[11:41] Speaker 1: He claimed that an individual named Harry O and another man,
[11:44] Speaker 1: Patrick Johnson, were moving drugs.
[11:47] Speaker 2: Right. And Davis stated that $ 80, 000 he owed to Johnson
[11:51] Speaker 2: for past drug deals was strategically redirected to Johnson's girlfriend.
[11:55] Speaker 1: And that specific $ 80, 000 was allegedly used as the seed
[11:58] Speaker 1: money to help start Death Row Records.
[12:00] Speaker 2: Okay, let's pause on the actual mechanics of that for
[12:02] Speaker 2: a second. How does illicit street cash actually fund a
[12:05] Speaker 2: legitimate record label in the early 90s?
[12:07] Speaker 1: Well, it's classic money laundering, right? but adapted for the
[12:11] Speaker 1: entertainment industry. You take $ 80, 000 in dirty street cash and
[12:14] Speaker 1: you use it to book studio time in cash, pay
[12:17] Speaker 1: producers under the table, press vinyl, manufacture merchandise.
[12:20] Speaker 2: Oh, wow.
[12:21] Speaker 1: Yeah, and once you sell those legitimate albums and concert tickets,
[12:24] Speaker 1: the money coming back into the corporate bank account is
[12:27] Speaker 1: completely clean. It's revenue.
[12:29] Speaker 2: So Davis was outlining to the FBI how the entire
[12:33] Speaker 2: infrastructure of Death Row was allegedly built on a foundation
[12:36] Speaker 2: of narcotics. Exactly.
[12:38] Speaker 1: Exactly. And he also claimed that Suge Knight basically operated
[12:42] Speaker 1: as a warlord in North Compton, right? Controlling the drug
[12:45] Speaker 1: trade and using mob Peru gang members as his literal
[12:49] Speaker 1: foot soldiers. Right.
[12:51] Speaker 2: The source specifically mentions Suge using the label's money to
[12:55] Speaker 2: bail these guys out of jail.
[12:57] Speaker 1: Which is wild. And bailing them out wasn't charity, was it?
[13:01] Speaker 2: Not at all. It was a very calculated move to
[13:03] Speaker 2: secure absolute violent loyalty. If the CEO of a multimillion-dollar
[13:08] Speaker 2: company pays your $ 50, 000 bail, you are now an indentured
[13:12] Speaker 2: soldier for that company.
[13:13] Speaker 1: You owe them your life, basically.
[13:14] Speaker 2: Exactly. It completely blurs the line between a legitimate entertainment
[13:17] Speaker 2: business and an organized criminal syndicate.
[13:20] Speaker 1: Which brings me to a major question about courtroom strategy. Like,
[13:23] Speaker 1: you are a prosecutor. You have a jury of 16
[13:25] Speaker 1: everyday people. How on earth do you keep them focused
[13:29] Speaker 1: on Dwayne Davis, a guy sitting quietly at the defense
[13:32] Speaker 1: table in a suit, When you are throwing around names
[13:36] Speaker 1: of global billionaires, famous artists, and alleged million-dollar bounties, doesn't
[13:41] Speaker 1: the actual defendant just get lost in the Hollywood spectacle
[13:44] Speaker 1: of it all?
[13:44] Speaker 2: That is the greatest risk for the state in a
[13:47] Speaker 2: trial like this. We call it the shiny object problem.
[13:50] Speaker 1: The shiny object problem. I like that.
[13:52] Speaker 2: Yeah, when you introduce names like Sean Combs or Suge Knight,
[13:56] Speaker 2: the jury can get so distracted by the glamorous, terrifying
[13:59] Speaker 2: mythology that they just forget to look at the guy
[14:02] Speaker 2: in trial.
[14:02] Speaker 1: Right. They're waiting for Diddy to walk through the door.
[14:05] Speaker 2: Exactly. So to combat this, the prosecutor has to violently
[14:08] Speaker 2: snap the jury back to reality. They have to say, look, yes,
[14:11] Speaker 2: the corporate war is the backdrop, but the actual physical murder,
[14:16] Speaker 2: the blood on the concrete that was caused by the
[14:18] Speaker 2: specific actions of this man in this car on this night.
[14:22] Speaker 1: And snapping the jury back to the physical reality of
[14:24] Speaker 1: the blood on the concrete is exactly what the prosecution
[14:27] Speaker 1: did next.
[14:27] Speaker 2: It was a very deliberate shift.
[14:29] Speaker 1: They moved away from the billionaire CEOs. and took the
[14:32] Speaker 1: jury straight to the autopsy table. They introduced the medical evidence.
[14:36] Speaker 2: And this is where the trial gets incredibly grim, but
[14:39] Speaker 2: it's legally necessary.
[14:40] Speaker 1: Right. The prosecution called Dr. Lisa Gavin to the stand.
[14:44] Speaker 1: She was a forensic pathologist.
[14:45] Speaker 2: No, she didn't perform the original autopsy in 1996, right?
[14:49] Speaker 1: Right. That was done by a Dr. Jordan, who has
[14:50] Speaker 1: since passed away. So Dr. Gavin was brought in to
[14:54] Speaker 1: review all the 30-year-old records, the original photographs, the handwritten reports,
[14:58] Speaker 1: basically to formulate an expert conclusion for this current jury.
[15:02] Speaker 2: And the details from the source material are just sobering.
[15:05] Speaker 1: Truly. Dr. Gavin testified that the official cause of death
[15:08] Speaker 1: was gunshot wounds to the chest and abdomen, and the
[15:11] Speaker 1: manner of death was homicide.
[15:14] Speaker 2: She walked the jury through the exact devastating paths of
[15:17] Speaker 2: the bullets.
[15:17] Speaker 1: Yeah. She said the first bullet entered near Tupac's right armpit.
[15:21] Speaker 1: It traveled straight across his right chest cavity and completely
[15:24] Speaker 1: perforated his right lung.
[15:26] Speaker 2: Wow.
[15:26] Speaker 1: It eventually lodged near his collarbone in an area called
[15:29] Speaker 1: the sternal notch. And the physiological damage was just catastrophic.
[15:34] Speaker 2: I mean, a. 40 caliber bullet does a massive amount
[15:37] Speaker 2: of tissue damage.
[15:38] Speaker 1: The records indicate that the right lung collapsed almost instantly
[15:42] Speaker 1: and filled with two entire liters of blood.
[15:45] Speaker 2: Two liters.
[15:46] Speaker 1: Two liters. The surgeons at the hospital actually had to
[15:49] Speaker 1: physically remove his right lung in a desperate attempt to
[15:52] Speaker 1: stop the hemorrhaging.
[15:53] Speaker 2: But his body had simply suffered too much trauma.
[15:56] Speaker 1: Exactly. And that was only the damage from the first bullet.
[15:59] Speaker 1: The second bullet entered his right thigh on the lateral side,
[16:03] Speaker 1: and the trajectory traveled upwards into his abdomen, tearing through
[16:07] Speaker 1: his intestines.
[16:08] Speaker 2: Oh, my God. Yeah.
[16:09] Speaker 1: The medical team had to surgically remove a portion of
[16:12] Speaker 1: his intestines just to retrieve that projectile.
[16:15] Speaker 2: It really strips away all the coolness of the music
[16:17] Speaker 2: and the gang posturing, doesn't it?
[16:19] Speaker 1: It really does. It leaves you with the brutal reality
[16:21] Speaker 1: of a human body being destroyed by a weapon.
[16:23] Speaker 2: But the defense team... led by attorney Michael Samp, they
[16:27] Speaker 2: didn't just let that horrific medical testimony sit there and
[16:30] Speaker 2: generate sympathy for the victim.
[16:32] Speaker 1: No, they didn't. They used Dr. Gavin's presence on the
[16:35] Speaker 1: stand to launch a massive attack on the integrity of
[16:38] Speaker 1: the entire investigation.
[16:40] Speaker 2: It was a fascinating, highly calculated cross-examination. Samp didn't waste
[16:44] Speaker 2: time arguing that Tupac wasn't shot, because that would just
[16:47] Speaker 2: insult the jury's intelligence.
[16:48] Speaker 1: Obviously he was shot.
[16:50] Speaker 2: Exactly. Instead, he zeroed in on the nature of the
[16:52] Speaker 2: evidence Dr. Gavin was using. He painted the entire 1996
[16:56] Speaker 2: investigative process as sloppy, botched, and just fundamentally unreliable.
[17:03] Speaker 1: He really hammered on the fact that Dr. Gavin was
[17:06] Speaker 1: relying on decades-old Polaroid photographs. He wanted to make sure
[17:10] Speaker 1: the jury fully internalized that she was basically reading a
[17:13] Speaker 1: dead man's notes taken with outdated technology from a crime
[17:17] Speaker 1: scene in an autopsy room she never personally stepped foot in.
[17:20] Speaker 2: And this is a brilliant defense tactic regarding the fragility
[17:23] Speaker 2: of memory versus the permanence of bad paperwork.
[17:26] Speaker 1: How do you mean?
[17:27] Speaker 2: Well, in a cold case, the paperwork is really all
[17:28] Speaker 2: you have. If the defense can make the jury believe
[17:31] Speaker 2: that the police and the medical examiners didn't do their
[17:34] Speaker 2: jobs properly back in 1996, that the Polaroids are blurry,
[17:37] Speaker 2: that the notes are incomplete, it casts a shadow of
[17:40] Speaker 2: reasonable doubt over every other piece of physical evidence the
[17:43] Speaker 2: prosecution might present.
[17:44] Speaker 1: It is a psychological domino effect.
[17:46] Speaker 2: Exactly.
[17:47] Speaker 1: The defense doesn't need to prove Keith D. is innocent.
[17:50] Speaker 1: They just need you, the juror, to doubt the paperwork.
[17:54] Speaker 1: If you think the medical Polaroids are sloppy, you start
[17:56] Speaker 1: to think the police reports are sloppy, you think the
[17:58] Speaker 1: chain of custody for the bullets is sloppy, and suddenly
[18:01] Speaker 1: the entire foundation of the state's case feels flimsy.
[18:04] Speaker 2: It also is all about eroding confidence in the state's authority.
[18:08] Speaker 2: But the prosecution knew they had to plug that hole immediately.
[18:12] Speaker 1: Right. On redirect, they asked Dr. Gavin point blank if
[18:15] Speaker 1: there was actually anything crucial missing from those 1996 records.
[18:20] Speaker 2: And she testified no.
[18:21] Speaker 1: She said the data was completely sufficient for her to
[18:24] Speaker 1: formulate her own independent medical opinion. And she emphasized that
[18:27] Speaker 1: this is standard, peer-reviewed practice in cold cases where the
[18:31] Speaker 1: original investigators are deceased.
[18:33] Speaker 2: So the defense argues the 1996 investigation was sloppy. But
[18:37] Speaker 2: the prosecution counters with witnesses who reveal exactly why investigating
[18:42] Speaker 2: this crime was nearly impossible from the very first minute.
[18:45] Speaker 1: It wasn't just bad police work. It was a literal
[18:48] Speaker 1: brick wall of silence. Right.
[18:50] Speaker 2: And that introduces us to a legal and cultural roadblock
[18:55] Speaker 2: the police call the silent victim.
[18:57] Speaker 1: Which is such a critical piece of the puzzle for
[19:00] Speaker 1: understanding why this took 30 years. The prosecution brought Sergeant
[19:04] Speaker 1: Kenneth Rios to the stand. He was one of the
[19:07] Speaker 1: first officers to respond to the MGM Grand Casino floor
[19:10] Speaker 1: right after Orlando Anderson was brutally beaten up.
[19:14] Speaker 2: The beating that allegedly sparked the whole murder.
[19:16] Speaker 1: Exactly. Exactly. Sergeant Rios finds Anderson on the ground, likely
[19:20] Speaker 1: bleeding and bruised, and asks if he needs an ambulance.
[19:24] Speaker 1: And Anderson completely refuses.
[19:26] Speaker 2: He refuses medical help. He refuses to identify the very
[19:30] Speaker 2: famous men who just jumped him on camera. And he
[19:33] Speaker 2: absolutely refuses to file a police report.
[19:35] Speaker 1: And Sergeant Rios explained the legal reality of that moment
[19:38] Speaker 1: to the jury. He said, if you don't have a victim,
[19:40] Speaker 1: you don't have a crime.
[19:41] Speaker 2: Let's unpack that because it sounds counterintuitive to a lot
[19:44] Speaker 2: of people.
[19:45] Speaker 1: Yeah, if the police have a casino video showing a
[19:47] Speaker 1: guy getting beaten up, why do they need the guy
[19:48] Speaker 1: on the ground to cooperate? Can't the state just press
[19:51] Speaker 1: charges based on the tape?
[19:52] Speaker 2: In theory, yes, the state can press charges without a
[19:55] Speaker 2: cooperative victim. But practically, in 1996, for a misdemeanor battery,
[20:01] Speaker 2: which is what a fistfight usually is, if the victim
[20:03] Speaker 2: won't testify, won't allow photos of his injuries and won't
[20:07] Speaker 2: point the finger, Prosecutors almost never take that to court.
[20:11] Speaker 1: Why not?
[20:11] Speaker 2: Because the defense would just argue it was a consensual fight.
[20:15] Speaker 2: So without Anderson's cooperation, the police couldn't arrest Tupac or
[20:18] Speaker 2: Sujanite at the casino.
[20:19] Speaker 1: Which left the conflict to be handled outside the bounds
[20:22] Speaker 1: of the law in the streets.
[20:23] Speaker 2: Exactly. And that absolute, deeply ingrained refusal to cooperate with
[20:28] Speaker 2: law enforcement was on full explosive display... when a man
[20:32] Speaker 2: named Mob James McDonald took the witness stand later in
[20:35] Speaker 2: the trial.
[20:36] Speaker 1: Oh, man, Mob James. If you are sitting in the
[20:38] Speaker 1: jury box, this was arguably the most intense, unpredictable moment
[20:41] Speaker 1: of the trial so far.
[20:42] Speaker 2: Without a doubt. You have to understand who Mob James
[20:44] Speaker 2: is to get why this was so crazy.
[20:45] Speaker 1: Give us the background.
[20:47] Speaker 2: He is a former high-ranking member of the Mob Peru gang.
[20:51] Speaker 2: He actually used to work security for Suge Knight. Historically,
[20:55] Speaker 2: his gang and Dwayne Davis' gang were engaged in a bitter, bloody,
[20:59] Speaker 2: decades-long war.
[21:00] Speaker 1: Right.
[21:01] Speaker 2: But when Mobb James took the stand, he made it
[21:03] Speaker 2: aggressively clear he did not want to be helping the government.
[21:06] Speaker 1: He actually demanded to be treated as a hostile witness.
[21:09] Speaker 1: Think about the scene here, right? He is sitting on
[21:11] Speaker 1: the stand, making eye contact with Dwayne Davis, a man
[21:15] Speaker 1: from a rival gang accused of murdering his boss's star artist.
[21:19] Speaker 1: And Mobb James openly tells the courtroom that he doesn't
[21:22] Speaker 1: want to send Keef D to prison.
[21:24] Speaker 2: It was a moment of just shocking candor. He's a
[21:27] Speaker 2: 61-year-old grandfather now.
[21:29] Speaker 1: Right.
[21:29] Speaker 2: He told the jury... That he has changed his life,
[21:32] Speaker 2: he isn't proud of the violence in his past, and
[21:34] Speaker 2: he has tried to teach his grandkids not to make
[21:36] Speaker 2: the same mistakes. He essentially said, yes, we were enemies,
[21:39] Speaker 2: but I am not going to be the tool the
[21:41] Speaker 2: state uses to lock another black man in a cage.
[21:44] Speaker 1: The tension in that room must have been suffocating. When
[21:47] Speaker 1: the defense attorney tried to cross-examine him, trying to pin
[21:50] Speaker 1: him down on specific names and locations of who was
[21:53] Speaker 1: in Las Vegas that night, Mob James just completely stonewalled him.
[21:57] Speaker 2: He wasn't having any of it.
[21:58] Speaker 1: At one point, he looked directly at the defense lawyer,
[22:01] Speaker 1: pointed at him and said, talk to your lawyer, man.
[22:04] Speaker 1: This dude is tripping. He absolutely refused to play by
[22:07] Speaker 1: the rules of the court.
[22:08] Speaker 2: And that exchange highlights a massive cultural chasm in that courtroom.
[22:13] Speaker 2: You have a judge and lawyers who operate on the
[22:16] Speaker 2: assumption that the judicial process is legitimate and necessary.
[22:20] Speaker 1: Right.
[22:20] Speaker 2: And sitting on the stand, you have a witness who
[22:23] Speaker 2: views the entire system as inherently illegitimate. to the point
[22:27] Speaker 2: where he will protect a former rival rather than cooperate
[22:30] Speaker 2: with a lawyer.
[22:31] Speaker 1: The friction was so high that it even spilled over
[22:33] Speaker 1: to the jury. Now, in Nevada, the rules are slightly
[22:37] Speaker 1: different than other states. Jurors are actually allowed to submit
[22:40] Speaker 1: written questions for the witnesses.
[22:42] Speaker 2: Which I love. It adds such an interesting dynamic.
[22:44] Speaker 1: Me too. And one juror had a very specific question
[22:47] Speaker 1: for Mob James. They wanted to know if the head
[22:50] Speaker 1: of security for Death Row, a guy named Reggie Wright Jr.,
[22:53] Speaker 1: had instructed his security team not to carry weapons on
[22:57] Speaker 1: the night of the Tyson fight.
[22:58] Speaker 2: That's a great question from the jury.
[23:00] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[23:00] Speaker 2: They're trying to figure out if there was a conspiracy
[23:02] Speaker 2: to leave Tupac unprotected.
[23:03] Speaker 1: Exactly. And Mob James gave a brutally blunt street-level reply.
[23:08] Speaker 1: He looked at the jury and said he didn't know
[23:10] Speaker 1: if Wright had instructed the off-duty police officers on the
[23:13] Speaker 1: payroll to leave their guns behind, but, quote, he sure
[23:16] Speaker 1: didn't tell us because we had ours.
[23:18] Speaker 2: It's an incredible moment. Like, put yourself back in that
[23:21] Speaker 2: jury box.
[23:21] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[23:22] Speaker 2: You're a regular citizen. You pay your taxes. You trust
[23:25] Speaker 2: the police. You watch legal dramas where witnesses cry on
[23:28] Speaker 2: the stand and beg for justice.
[23:29] Speaker 1: Right. Law and order stuff.
[23:31] Speaker 2: Yeah. And here is a man apologizing to the courtroom,
[23:34] Speaker 2: actively refusing to help the prosecutors, and casually admitting he
[23:37] Speaker 2: was carrying illegal weapons in a casino.
[23:40] Speaker 1: How does a jury even process a witness who hates
[23:43] Speaker 1: the victim's rivals but clearly hates the legal system even more?
[23:47] Speaker 2: It's deeply jarring. It forces the jury to realize... that
[23:51] Speaker 2: the moral framework they live by simply did not apply
[23:55] Speaker 2: to the world they are being asked to judge.
[23:58] Speaker 1: But from a strategic standpoint, the prosecution still gets massive
[24:01] Speaker 1: value from a hostile witness like Mob James, right?
[24:05] Speaker 2: Absolutely. Even if he refuses to point the finger at
[24:08] Speaker 2: Keefe D., his mere presence confirms the environment.
[24:12] Speaker 1: It confirms the gang war was real.
[24:14] Speaker 2: Yes. He confirms the rivalries, the presence of weapons, the
[24:17] Speaker 2: culture of retaliation. He paints the terrifying backdrop of the
[24:21] Speaker 2: crime perfectly, even while refusing to help them.
[24:24] Speaker 1: And Mob James casually bringing up the security presence or
[24:27] Speaker 1: the lack thereof leads us perfectly into the next major
[24:30] Speaker 1: phase of the trial.
[24:31] Speaker 2: The jury is now asking the exact same question millions
[24:34] Speaker 2: of people have asked for 30 years.
[24:36] Speaker 1: How was one of the most famous, recognizable musicians on
[24:39] Speaker 1: the planet left so utterly vulnerable to a drive-by shooting
[24:43] Speaker 1: in the middle of a crowded Las Vegas strip?
[24:45] Speaker 2: And that brings Reggie Wright Jr. to the stand.
[24:47] Speaker 1: Reggie Wright Jr. is a central figure in the mythology
[24:50] Speaker 1: of this case. He was the former head of security
[24:52] Speaker 1: for Death Row Records.
[24:54] Speaker 2: And his testimony is critical because for decades, the defense
[24:58] Speaker 2: and various conspiracy theorists have floated this idea that Wright
[25:02] Speaker 2: might have been involved in a setup, that he intentionally
[25:05] Speaker 2: orchestrated a scenario to leave Tupac unprotected.
[25:08] Speaker 1: Well, when Wright took the stand, he immediately tried to
[25:11] Speaker 1: dismantle that conspiracy theory. He testified that security protocols weren't
[25:15] Speaker 1: relaxed that weekend. They were actually increased leading up to
[25:18] Speaker 1: the Vegas trip.
[25:19] Speaker 2: And he pointed to a very specific cultural moment. The
[25:23] Speaker 2: release of the song Hit Em Up in May or
[25:26] Speaker 2: June of 1996.
[25:27] Speaker 1: For those who don't know, Hit Em Up isn't just
[25:29] Speaker 1: a song. It is arguably the most aggressive, venomous diss
[25:33] Speaker 1: track in the history of hip hop.
[25:34] Speaker 2: It really is. It was a direct, violently lyrical attack
[25:38] Speaker 2: on Bad Boy Records, Sean Combs, and Biggie Smalls.
[25:41] Speaker 1: Wright testified to the jury that after that song was
[25:44] Speaker 1: released to the public, everyone in their camp knew the
[25:46] Speaker 1: tensions had escalated to a dangerous life-or-death level.
[25:49] Speaker 2: Because of that, Wright claimed they assigned two dedicated armed
[25:53] Speaker 2: security officers specifically to Tupac instead of the usual one.
[25:57] Speaker 1: But the reality of that night didn't match the plan
[25:59] Speaker 1: at all. On the night of the Tyson fight, the
[26:02] Speaker 1: security apparatus completely failed.
[26:05] Speaker 2: It fell apart.
[26:06] Speaker 1: Yeah, one of Tupac's main bodyguards, a man named Kevin Hackey,
[26:10] Speaker 1: didn't even show up to the fight.
[26:11] Speaker 2: Wright testified that Hackie had a late arrest earlier that
[26:14] Speaker 2: day and was stuck at a hospital, leaving them shorthanded.
[26:17] Speaker 1: And crucially, Wright himself wasn't anywhere near Tupac when the
[26:20] Speaker 1: shooting went down. Wright testified that instead of attending the
[26:24] Speaker 1: Tyson fight and managing the principal client, he went ahead
[26:27] Speaker 1: to Club 662, the venue they were supposed to party
[26:30] Speaker 1: at later, to handle logistics.
[26:32] Speaker 2: Which meant Tupac was left totally exposed, riding shotgun in
[26:36] Speaker 2: a BMW, driven by Suge Knight, with zero armed security
[26:41] Speaker 2: in the car.
[26:42] Speaker 1: And if the missing security wasn't enough drama, Wright's testimony
[26:45] Speaker 1: introduced an absolutely wild revelation about a $ 60, 000 bribe involving
[26:50] Speaker 1: Sujanite and the man they beat up, Orlando Anderson.
[26:53] Speaker 2: This detail really illuminates the legal jeopardy Sujanite was facing,
[26:57] Speaker 2: independent of the murder.
[26:59] Speaker 1: Break that down for us.
[27:00] Speaker 2: Well, at the time of the MGM grand fight, Sujanite
[27:04] Speaker 2: was on federal probation. The terms of that probation were
[27:07] Speaker 2: incredibly strict. If he was caught associating with known gang
[27:11] Speaker 2: members or participating in any violence, his probation would be
[27:14] Speaker 2: revoked and he would go straight to prison.
[27:16] Speaker 1: So getting caught on casino surveillance cameras stomping a man
[27:19] Speaker 1: with a group of gang members is literally a one-way
[27:22] Speaker 1: ticket to a cell.
[27:23] Speaker 2: Exactly. Which leads to this secret meeting Wright testified about.
[27:27] Speaker 1: Well.
[27:28] Speaker 2: According to Wright, there was a clandestine meeting at an
[27:30] Speaker 2: attorney's office in Seal Beach, California.
[27:32] Speaker 1: Okay.
[27:33] Speaker 2: And an agreement was drawn up to pay Orlando Anderson,
[27:36] Speaker 2: the man's soosh. And Tupac had just viciously beaten on
[27:40] Speaker 2: camera $ 60, 000.
[27:42] Speaker 1: How does that even work logically? I mean, you are
[27:45] Speaker 1: paying the victim of your assault.
[27:47] Speaker 2: Yeah.
[27:47] Speaker 1: To do what exactly?
[27:48] Speaker 2: To act as a character witness.
[27:50] Speaker 1: You're kidding. No.
[27:51] Speaker 2: The alleged goal of the payment was to buy Anderson's perjury.
[27:55] Speaker 2: They wanted Anderson to take the stand at Suge Knight's
[27:57] Speaker 2: provocation hearing and lie to the judge.
[28:00] Speaker 1: Lie and say what?
[28:01] Speaker 2: They wanted him to testify that Suge Knight wasn't participating
[28:04] Speaker 2: in the beatdown, but was actually acting as a peacemaker
[28:07] Speaker 2: against trying to stop the fight.
[28:09] Speaker 1: It is stunning. Paying the guy you just beat up
[28:12] Speaker 1: to tell a judge you were actually saving his life?
[28:14] Speaker 2: Yeah, the source notes point out that the judge at
[28:16] Speaker 2: the probation hearing didn't buy the story for a single second,
[28:20] Speaker 2: and Suge Knight ended up getting sentenced to nine years
[28:22] Speaker 2: in prison anyway.
[28:23] Speaker 1: But the fact that this bribe was even attempted shows
[28:27] Speaker 1: the jury the staggering lengths the syndicate would go to
[28:30] Speaker 1: in order to control the narrative and subvert the justice system.
[28:34] Speaker 2: And the defense team seized on every single bit of
[28:37] Speaker 2: this chaos. They used all of it to aggressively attack
[28:41] Speaker 2: Reggie Wright Jr. 's credibility on cross-examination.
[28:44] Speaker 1: Right. They didn't just question his memory. They accused him
[28:46] Speaker 1: of monetizing the tragedy.
[28:49] Speaker 2: They pointed out to the jury that Wright currently runs
[28:51] Speaker 2: a YouTube channel where he discusses the murders and the
[28:54] Speaker 2: death row days, pulling in $ 2, 500 to $ 3, 000 an episode.
[28:59] Speaker 1: They hammered him on his convenient absence on the night
[29:01] Speaker 1: of the shooting, too. The defense attorney was just relentless,
[29:04] Speaker 1: essentially asking, you knew Suge was on probation. You knew
[29:08] Speaker 1: he was the most important asset at the label. You
[29:10] Speaker 1: knew tensions were at an all-time high because of the
[29:12] Speaker 1: diss tracks.
[29:13] Speaker 2: Right.
[29:13] Speaker 1: And on the most volatile night of his life, in
[29:16] Speaker 1: a crowded casino, you just happened to be doing logistics
[29:20] Speaker 1: at an empty club.
[29:21] Speaker 2: It's an incredibly powerful insinuation for a defense attorney to make.
[29:26] Speaker 2: They are purposefully trying to shift the jury's focus away
[29:30] Speaker 2: from Dwayne Davis and the Cadillac, and onto the chaotic,
[29:33] Speaker 2: highly conspiratorial world of Death Row Records' inner circle.
[29:38] Speaker 1: They want the jury to ask if Wright's absence was
[29:40] Speaker 1: a catastrophic coincidence or a calculated setup.
[29:43] Speaker 2: Exactly.
[29:44] Speaker 1: To put an analogy on it, Wright is basically sitting
[29:46] Speaker 1: on the witness stand acting like the CEO of a company,
[29:49] Speaker 1: looking the jury in the eye, and claiming he wrote
[29:51] Speaker 1: a fantastic fire safety manual all while the building burned
[29:55] Speaker 1: down to the ground.
[29:56] Speaker 2: That's a great way to put it.
[29:57] Speaker 1: He's shifting all the blame to a missing guard and
[30:00] Speaker 1: logistical club issues. But the defense is staring right through
[30:03] Speaker 1: him asking, were you missing on purpose to let the
[30:06] Speaker 1: fire start?
[30:07] Speaker 2: It's a great analogy. But here is the reality check
[30:10] Speaker 2: for the prosecution.
[30:11] Speaker 1: Yeah.
[30:11] Speaker 2: Even if the defense proves that death row security was
[30:14] Speaker 2: disorganized or even corrupt, that doesn't actually acquit Dwayne Davis. Right.
[30:19] Speaker 1: They're two separate issues.
[30:20] Speaker 2: The prosecution knows they can't convict Davis immediately. simply by
[30:23] Speaker 2: proving Reggie Wright was a bad security director. They still
[30:26] Speaker 2: have to prove Davis organized the hit squad.
[30:28] Speaker 1: And to do that, they are finally deploying their absolute
[30:31] Speaker 1: trump card.
[30:31] Speaker 2: The confessions. Yes.
[30:33] Speaker 1: We have explored the hospital witnesses, the missing bodyguards, the
[30:36] Speaker 1: chaotic forensics. But this entire trial, the whole reason everyone
[30:41] Speaker 1: is in that courtroom 30 years later, rests on the
[30:45] Speaker 1: undeniable fact that over the last few decades, Keith D.
[30:48] Speaker 1: seemingly could not stop talking about this crime.
[30:50] Speaker 2: It is the defining, almost inexplicable feature of this case.
[30:54] Speaker 2: And the prosecution is meticulously walking the jury through a
[30:58] Speaker 2: very specific timeline of his statements, showing how his story
[31:01] Speaker 2: evolved over the years.
[31:03] Speaker 1: They start all the way back in 1998 with a
[31:05] Speaker 1: complete denial.
[31:06] Speaker 2: Right. In 1998, two years after the murder, Davis sat
[31:10] Speaker 2: down with an FBI agent named Lee for what is
[31:12] Speaker 2: called a proffer interview.
[31:14] Speaker 1: And let's explain the mechanics of a proffer because it's
[31:16] Speaker 1: crucial here.
[31:17] Speaker 2: A proffer agreement, sometimes called a queen-for-a-day letter, is essentially
[31:21] Speaker 2: a legal sandbox.
[31:23] Speaker 1: Okay, a sandbox.
[31:24] Speaker 2: A suspect sits down with federal agents and agrees to
[31:26] Speaker 2: tell them everything he knows about various crimes. In exchange,
[31:31] Speaker 2: the government promises that nothing the suspect says in that
[31:34] Speaker 2: specific room can be used against them in court.
[31:36] Speaker 1: So it signs an immunity shield used by the feds
[31:39] Speaker 1: to go fishing for information on bigger targets.
[31:41] Speaker 2: Exactly. And at the time of this 1998 proffer, Davis
[31:45] Speaker 2: was facing incredibly serious drug trafficking charges, and he was
[31:49] Speaker 2: desperate looking to make a deal to save himself.
[31:52] Speaker 1: But even with that immunity shield in that 1998 interview,
[31:55] Speaker 1: Davis completely denied any involvement in Tupac's death.
[31:59] Speaker 2: He told the FBI he wasn't in the Cadillac, he
[32:01] Speaker 2: didn't know who pulled the trigger, and he actually pointed
[32:03] Speaker 2: the finger at corrupt Compton police officers.
[32:06] Speaker 1: Wow, claiming they were moonlighting as assassins for Suge Knight.
[32:10] Speaker 2: Right. And he also gave the FBI a logical excuse
[32:13] Speaker 2: for why he wouldn't have done it. He said that
[32:16] Speaker 2: even though he was furious about his nephew getting jumped
[32:18] Speaker 2: at the MGM, he never would have ordered a retaliation
[32:21] Speaker 2: on the Las Vegas Strip because there was way too
[32:24] Speaker 2: much police presence for the Tyson fight.
[32:26] Speaker 1: He claimed a real street boss would have waited until
[32:29] Speaker 1: Tupac and Suge got back to their home turf in Compton.
[32:32] Speaker 2: And the defense had a total field day with this
[32:35] Speaker 2: 1998 interview. During cross-examination of Agent Lee, the defense highlighted
[32:40] Speaker 2: how incredibly sloppy the FBI was.
[32:43] Speaker 1: They pointed out that the feds never actually verified key
[32:46] Speaker 1: details of Davis's statements. They never bothered to check if
[32:49] Speaker 1: Terrence Brown, the alleged driver, was actually even in Las
[32:52] Speaker 1: Vegas that weekend.
[32:53] Speaker 2: They never checked if the crew really traveled in a
[32:55] Speaker 2: Land Cruiser like Davis claimed at the time.
[32:57] Speaker 1: So the defense used this to argue that the federal
[33:00] Speaker 1: government was just writing down whatever lies Davis spun without
[33:03] Speaker 1: doing actual police work.
[33:05] Speaker 2: But the narrative shifts dramatically a decade later. We move
[33:09] Speaker 2: forward to 2008. The sources detail a federal task force
[33:13] Speaker 2: that was actually investigating a completely different, equally famous crime.
[33:16] Speaker 1: The murder of the notorious B.I.G.
[33:19] Speaker 2: Exactly. This task force was led by Detective Greg Kading
[33:22] Speaker 2: and Detective Darren Dupree. And by 2008, Davis's circumstances had
[33:27] Speaker 2: changed drastically. He was in a deeply desperate legal situation. Right.
[33:31] Speaker 1: He had been caught up in a federal drug sting
[33:34] Speaker 1: and was facing life in prison for a two kilogram
[33:37] Speaker 1: cocaine trafficking case.
[33:38] Speaker 2: Now, you have to understand the federal sentencing guidelines in
[33:41] Speaker 2: the 2000s for a repeat offender with two kilos of cocaine.
[33:45] Speaker 1: That's bad. Right.
[33:46] Speaker 2: That is essentially a death sentence in a federal penitentiary.
[33:50] Speaker 2: The feds brought him in, hoping to use that massive
[33:52] Speaker 2: charge as leverage to squeeze him for information on the
[33:55] Speaker 2: Biggie Smalls murder.
[33:56] Speaker 1: And this leads to the absolute aha moment of the
[34:00] Speaker 1: entire 30-year investigation.
[34:02] Speaker 2: Yes.
[34:02] Speaker 1: According to Detective Dupree's testimony, they are in the interview
[34:06] Speaker 1: room pushing Davis on the Biggie murder. And Davis responds, no,
[34:10] Speaker 1: we didn't have anything to do with that one.
[34:11] Speaker 2: Which is a very specific phrasing. It immediately prompted the
[34:15] Speaker 2: detectives to stop and ask, wait, what do you mean,
[34:17] Speaker 2: that one?
[34:18] Speaker 1: And Davis replied, we did the other one.
[34:21] Speaker 2: It was an absolute bombshell. Without being explicitly prompted or
[34:25] Speaker 2: pressured about Tupac Shakur, Davis allegedly volunteered the confession to
[34:29] Speaker 2: one of the most famous unsolved murders in American history.
[34:33] Speaker 1: And this spontaneous admission led to a formal proffer agreement.
[34:37] Speaker 1: where Davis finally laid out the entire story the prosecution
[34:41] Speaker 1: is using today.
[34:42] Speaker 2: The white Cadillac sourcing the. 40 caliber from Zip Martin,
[34:46] Speaker 2: handing the gun to the backseat.
[34:47] Speaker 1: The hesitation from DeAndre Smith.
[34:49] Speaker 2: And Orlando Anderson finally pulling the trigger.
[34:52] Speaker 1: The sources say he became so cooperative after that confession
[34:55] Speaker 1: that in 2009 he actually worked undercover for the feds. Right.
[34:58] Speaker 2: They flew him to New York, wired him up, and
[35:01] Speaker 2: tried to get him to engage Zip Martin in a
[35:03] Speaker 2: recorded conversation. to implicate him regarding that million-dollar payout from
[35:07] Speaker 2: Sean Combs we discussed earlier.
[35:09] Speaker 1: Though that specific undercover mission ultimately failed, right, because Zip
[35:13] Speaker 1: Martin was dying of cancer and refused to engage in
[35:15] Speaker 1: the conversation.
[35:16] Speaker 2: But the fact that Davis was willing to wear a
[35:18] Speaker 2: federal wire against a major associate shows the jury just
[35:22] Speaker 2: how deeply he was cooperating with the government's narrative.
[35:25] Speaker 1: But this is where the defense introduces an incredibly powerful counter-narrative.
[35:30] Speaker 1: And it's a narrative that forces the jury to question
[35:33] Speaker 1: the very nature of truth in the criminal justice system.
[35:36] Speaker 2: Yeah, the defense argues that Dwayne Davis didn't confess in
[35:39] Speaker 2: 2008 because he suddenly found his conscience. They argue he
[35:43] Speaker 2: simply lied to save his own life.
[35:45] Speaker 1: And they actually got Detective Dupree to admit on the
[35:47] Speaker 1: stand that Davis had a massive, undeniable, ulterior motive to
[35:52] Speaker 1: invent a story.
[35:53] Speaker 2: Dupree acknowledged under cross-examination that Davis took the hit for
[35:57] Speaker 2: a lot of people in his family. If Davis didn't
[36:00] Speaker 2: give the feds a massive headline-grabbing story, his family members,
[36:04] Speaker 2: his wife, his kids, who were allegedly involved in the
[36:06] Speaker 2: drug ring, could have all gone to federal prison.
[36:09] Speaker 1: It presents a profound philosophical and legal question for you,
[36:12] Speaker 1: the listener, to consider. If someone has a two-kilo federal
[36:17] Speaker 1: cocaine charge hanging over their head, a charge that threatens
[36:20] Speaker 1: to destroy their life and lock up their entire family,
[36:24] Speaker 1: Aren't they highly motivated to tell the federal government exactly
[36:27] Speaker 1: the fairy tale they want to hear?
[36:28] Speaker 2: It is a battle between a spontaneous, truthful confession and
[36:33] Speaker 2: a desperate, calculated survival tactic.
[36:35] Speaker 1: It really is the fulcrum of the entire trial. The
[36:38] Speaker 1: defense is looking at the jury and asking, did this
[36:41] Speaker 1: man confess because it is the factual truth of what
[36:44] Speaker 1: happened in 1996? Or did he confess because he was
[36:47] Speaker 1: cornered by the federal government in 2008 and desperately needed
[36:50] Speaker 1: a get-out-of-jail-free card for his wife and kids?
[36:52] Speaker 2: But Detective Dupree had a deeply emotional response to that
[36:55] Speaker 2: theory while on the stand. He explained why he personally
[36:59] Speaker 2: believed Davis was telling the absolute truth back in 2008.
[37:02] Speaker 1: What did he say?
[37:03] Speaker 2: Dupree said, I didn't think Mr. Davis would put the
[37:05] Speaker 2: gun in his own nephew's hand unless it was true.
[37:08] Speaker 2: He argued that Orlando Anderson was beloved in that neighborhood
[37:12] Speaker 2: and Davis wouldn't have permanently smeared the legacy of a
[37:15] Speaker 2: dead relative just to save himself unless it was the
[37:18] Speaker 2: factual reality of what happened.
[37:20] Speaker 1: It's a compelling psychological argument from the detective. It appeals
[37:24] Speaker 1: to a sense of familial loyalty.
[37:27] Speaker 2: But legally, the jury has to decide if an unverified confession,
[37:31] Speaker 2: given under the extreme duress of a life sentence, combined
[37:35] Speaker 2: with decades of boastful podcast interviews, is enough to convict
[37:39] Speaker 2: a man of a murder he didn't physically commit 30
[37:41] Speaker 2: years after the fact.
[37:43] Speaker 1: And as we dive so deep into all this legal maneuvering,
[37:46] Speaker 1: the proffer agreements, the gang politics, the drug laundering, and
[37:49] Speaker 1: the corporate money, it's very easy to lose sight of
[37:53] Speaker 1: the emotional center of this entire story.
[37:55] Speaker 2: It really is.
[37:56] Speaker 1: We have to ground this deep dive by remembering the
[37:58] Speaker 1: real human life that was violently cut short.
[38:01] Speaker 2: Yes, the victim impact is profound, and it anchors the
[38:04] Speaker 2: reality of what this trial is actually about. The sources
[38:07] Speaker 2: provide a really moving perspective from a woman named Jamila Barnes.
[38:11] Speaker 1: She is Tupac Shakur's cousin, right? She serves as a
[38:14] Speaker 1: board member of the Tupac Amaru Shakur Foundation.
[38:17] Speaker 2: And she has been sitting in that courtroom. bearing witness
[38:20] Speaker 2: every single day of the trial.
[38:22] Speaker 1: Her experience in that room sounds agonizing. She described how
[38:25] Speaker 1: incredibly uncomfortable and unnerving it is to be in the
[38:28] Speaker 1: exact same room as Keith D.
[38:30] Speaker 2: At one point, she actually had to ask the court-martials
[38:32] Speaker 2: to intervene and physically forced the defendant to stop making
[38:36] Speaker 2: eye contact with the family. Oh, wow.
[38:39] Speaker 1: That is so tense.
[38:40] Speaker 2: And she spoke openly about the sheer visceral trauma of
[38:43] Speaker 2: the trial itself. When Dr. Gavin was on the stand
[38:46] Speaker 2: presenting those graphic autopsy photos... and detailing the bullet trajectories
[38:50] Speaker 2: we discussed earlier, Barnes and half of the family actually
[38:53] Speaker 2: had to get up and leave the courtroom.
[38:55] Speaker 1: It was simply too much to bear to see someone
[38:57] Speaker 1: they loved reduced to clinical evidence.
[39:00] Speaker 2: But what really stood out in her interview with the
[39:02] Speaker 2: reporters was how she chose to remember him. In a
[39:06] Speaker 2: trial dominated by billionaires, gang warlords, and hip-hop mythology, she
[39:10] Speaker 2: didn't talk about the rap icon or the platinum records.
[39:14] Speaker 1: She shared a specific, deeply poignant memory from her ninth
[39:17] Speaker 1: birthday party.
[39:19] Speaker 2: Yeah, she remembered being in her mom's basement. And Tupac
[39:22] Speaker 2: was in the center of a circle of his little cousins,
[39:24] Speaker 2: just leading them all in a joyful song and a dance.
[39:26] Speaker 1: It completely strips away all the posturing and mythology, doesn't it?
[39:30] Speaker 2: It does. Barnes articulated beautifully why his legacy has lasted
[39:34] Speaker 2: so long and why this trial matters to so many people.
[39:37] Speaker 1: She said he spoke from a place of deep empathy
[39:40] Speaker 1: about justice and equality for all of humankind. He connected
[39:44] Speaker 1: with people globally as an everyday human being who understood
[39:47] Speaker 1: struggle and rather than an untouchable, distant celebrity.
[39:51] Speaker 2: It gives you incredible whiplash. You hear a story about
[39:54] Speaker 2: a loving cousin dancing with nine-year-olds in a basement right
[39:57] Speaker 2: after spending an hour discussing gang hits,. 40 caliber weapons,
[40:01] Speaker 2: federal wiretaps, and $ 60, 000 bribes.
[40:04] Speaker 1: It forces you to reconcile the global icon and the
[40:06] Speaker 1: gang war casualty back into what he actually was on
[40:09] Speaker 1: that night in 1996. A 25-year-old human being who lost
[40:14] Speaker 1: his life.
[40:15] Speaker 2: And that, ultimately, is what the jury has to weigh.
[40:18] Speaker 2: They have to look past the documentaries, the conspiracy theories,
[40:22] Speaker 2: and the immense fame and decide if the state has
[40:24] Speaker 2: proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the 61-year-old man sitting
[40:28] Speaker 2: in front of them is legally responsible for ending that
[40:32] Speaker 2: 25-year-old's life.
[40:33] Speaker 1: So let's step back and look at the incredible journey
[40:35] Speaker 1: we've taken in this deep dive today.
[40:37] Speaker 2: We covered a lot of ground.
[40:39] Speaker 1: We started on a casino floor in 1996 with a
[40:43] Speaker 1: violent recorded brawl. We waited through 30 years of a strict...
[40:48] Speaker 1: street code of silence, a culture where even bitter rivals
[40:51] Speaker 1: refused to testify against each other.
[40:53] Speaker 2: We looked at federal task forces trying to leverage two
[40:56] Speaker 2: kilo cocaine charges into cold case murder confessions.
[41:00] Speaker 1: And finally, we arrived in a Las Vegas courtroom where
[41:03] Speaker 1: man's own boasts, podcast interviews and memoirs are being weaponized
[41:07] Speaker 1: by the state to put him away forever.
[41:10] Speaker 2: It is a case unlike any other in American judicial history.
[41:13] Speaker 2: And it leaves us with something really profound to ponder
[41:16] Speaker 2: as we watch this trial unfold. Well, if Dwayne Davis
[41:19] Speaker 2: is convicted at the end of this process, it won't
[41:21] Speaker 2: be because of a pristine DNA match. It won't be
[41:24] Speaker 2: because they dredged up the. 40 caliber murder weapon. And
[41:27] Speaker 2: it won't be because of eyewitnesses from 1996 pointing him
[41:30] Speaker 2: out from a lineup.
[41:31] Speaker 1: No, it won't be any of the traditional markers of justice.
[41:34] Speaker 2: If he is convicted, it will be because we live
[41:36] Speaker 2: in a culture that monetizes infamy. Through endless podcasts, documentaries,
[41:40] Speaker 2: television shows, and tell-all books, The desire for notoriety, relevance,
[41:45] Speaker 2: and a paycheck eventually became stronger than the strict street
[41:48] Speaker 2: code of silence he swore his life by.
[41:51] Speaker 1: It raises a fascinating question for the public. Does a
[41:54] Speaker 1: conviction based primarily on a defendant's own self-aggrandizing media interviews
[41:59] Speaker 1: feel like true justice, or is it just a delayed
[42:02] Speaker 1: consequence of fame?
[42:03] Speaker 2: It's a really tough question.
[42:04] Speaker 1: It's an incredible thought to leave on. We started this
[42:07] Speaker 1: conversation talking about waiting 30 years for the muddy waters
[42:10] Speaker 1: to clear, for the first chapter to finally begin. But
[42:13] Speaker 1: it turns out the water isn't clearing at all. We're
[42:16] Speaker 1: just finally learning exactly what's been hiding in the mud
[42:18] Speaker 1: all this time. We'll be keeping a very close eye
[42:21] Speaker 1: on this trial as it continues. Until next time, stay curious.

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.