From Rapper to Rap Sheet: How Song Lyrics are Leading to Criminal Charges
Threatening lyrics in music are nothing new. Images of violent criminal acts have been transmuted into catchy verse-and-choruses by song writers spanning multiple ages and genres. From Bob Dylan and The Beatles, AC/DC and Alice Cooper, to the seminal rap group NWA, violence has been a recurring theme in popular music. While in the past artists who used violent lyrics have been met with consumer criticism, pushback typically ended there.
Not so with online rapper Anthony Murillo, who is now facing criminal charges for a song he released in 2013. Murillo’s case represents a new push to make threatening lyrics a criminal act, one which falls outside of First Amendment protections. But blurring the line between free speech and illegal threats could have serious ramifications for how musicians and artists approach their work.
What Constitutes a Threat? (PC 140)
When Murillo’s friend Shane Villalpando was convicted of unlawful sex with two minors in early 2013, Murillo was angry. Like many artists, Murillo channeled his anger into his music, creating the song “Moment for Life Remix.” 1 In it he references the two alleged victims of Villalpando, at times using their real names. Among other explicit lyrics, he raps about how he is “hunting down” the alleged victims and “coming for [their] head.” 2
California Penal Code section 140 makes it a crime to threaten victims or witnesses of a crime, and Santa Barbara County prosecutors believed they could make the case that Murillo’s lyrics constituted such a threat.
The People vs. Anthony Murillo
Murillo, who had no previous criminal record, was arrested and charged with two counts of threatening violence against victims of a crime. When brought before a Santa Barbara County magistrate, however, Murillo’s two felony counts were discharged. In the magistrates opinion, the song lyrics did not constitute a threat to use force against the victims. 3
The prosecution then filed a motion to have the felony counts reinstated under California Penal Code 871.5, but again the trial court refused. As the judge put it, the court felt “that the rap song is closer to protected speech than non-protected speech.” 4
Undeterred, the prosecution appealed the trial court’s decision. Under review by the Second Appellate District Court, the motion to deny the reinstatement of the felony counts was reversed. The appellate court noted that PC 140, under which Murillo had been charged, does not require a threat to have been personally communicated to the victim. Nor does it require a specific intent to intimidate, only a general intent. With this is mind, the court felt Murillo may have in fact violated the law.
The case has now been returned to the trial court with an order to resume proceedings. While Murillo’s fate at this time is unknown, many will be watching this case as its outcome could have serious effects on protections afforded to artists. While it is still unclear whether Murillo’s lyrics constituted criminal behavior, the case raises questions as to whether alternative artistic mediums could also be construed in the same way.
“Medium” means a lot, but already this case has diminished its weight. As the appellate court argued, “the trier of fact determines the nature of the message whatever the medium”, making it increasingly important that artists have adequate legal representation. 5
Call the Criminal Defense Attorneys at Wallin & Klarich Today
If you are accused of making a criminal threat, you need to speak to an experienced criminal defense attorney at Wallin & Klarich immediately. At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have been successfully fighting for over 40 years to help our clients achieve the best possible outcomes in their cases.
With offices in Los Angeles, Sherman Oaks, Torrance, Orange County, San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, West Covina and Victorville, an experienced Wallin & Klarich attorney can help no matter where you work or live.
Call us at (877) 4-NO-JAIL or (877) 466-5245 for a free phone consultation. We will be there when you call.
1. [http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B257429.PDF]↩
2. [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/07/online-rapper-must-face-the-music-stand-trial-for-threatening-lyrics/]↩
3. [http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B257429.PDF]↩
4. [http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B257429.PDF]↩
5. [http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B257429.PDF]↩
