Rap on Trial: Race, Lyrics, and Guilt in America

by Erik Nielson

A groundbreaking exposé about the alarming use of rap lyrics as criminal evidence to convict and incarcerate young men of color

Should Johnny Cash have been charged with murder after he sang, "I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die"? Few would seriously subscribe to this notion of justice. Yet in 2001, a rapper named Mac whose music had gained national recognition was convicted of manslaughter after the prosecutor quoted liberally from his album Shell Shocked. Mac was sentenced to thirty years in prison, where he remains. And his case is just one of many nationwide.

Over the last three decades, as rap became increasingly popular, prosecutors saw an they could present the sometimes violent, crime-laden lyrics of amateur rappers as confessions to crimes, threats of violence, evidence of gang affiliation, or revelations of criminal motive—and judges and juries would go along with it. Detectives have reopened cold cases on account of rap lyrics and videos alone, and prosecutors have secured convictions by presenting such lyrics and videos of rappers as autobiography. Now, an alarming number of aspiring rappers are imprisoned. No other form of creative expression is treated this way in the courts.

Rap on Trial places this disturbing practice in the context of hip hop history and exposes what's at stake. It's a gripping, timely exploration at the crossroads of contemporary hip hop and mass incarceration.

Genres: Nonfiction, Music, Race, Politics, Law, Sociology, True Crime

202 pages, Kindle Edition

First published November 12, 2019

About the author

Erik Nielson is Professor of Liberal Arts at the University of Richmond, where he teaches courses on African American literature, hip hop culture, and advanced writing. He received his M.A. in English from University College London and his Ph.D., also in English, from the University of Sheffield. He lectures widely and has published articles in several peer reviewed journals, including African American Review, MELUS, Race and Justice, International Journal of Cultural Studies, and Journal of Popular Music Studies. He also writes regularly for popular outlets, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Guardian, The Atlantic, and Rolling Stone and has been interviewed by a wide range of national media organizations. He has been lead author on three amicus briefs for the U.S. Supreme Court, which included support from artists such as Killer Mike, Chance the Rapper, Meek Mill, T.I., Big Boi, and Luther Campbell. He is co-editor (with Travis Gosa) of the Hip Hop & Obama Reader (Oxford, 2015) and co-author (with Andrea Dennis) of Rap on Trial (New Press, 2019).

Reviews

[Eve · Rating 4 out of 5]

Erik Nielson's and Andrea Dennis's book Rap on Trial exposes the bias against people of color in the justice system through the lens of the music industry. As the publisher's synopsis states, "Should Johnny Cash have been charged with murder after he sang, “I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die”? Few would seriously subscribe to this notion of justice. Yet in 2001, a rapper named Mac whose music had gained national recognition was convicted of manslaughter after the prosecutor quoted liberally from his album Shell Shocked." This synopsis perfectly encapsulates the injustice you gain to learn about from reading this book.

This book provides analysis of this practice, including how prosecutors have found loopholes to rules prohibiting the use of an art form to characterize defendants. It was an enlightening but infuriating read. I highly recommend this book, but caution you that you may come away with extremely high-blood pressure afterwards.

Thank you to Erik Nielson, Andrea Dennis, The New Press, and NetGalley for allowing me access to an electronic advanced reader copy of this book for me to read and review. As always, all opinions are my own.

[Traci Thomas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Super interesting topic. An in-depth look at a very niche part of the criminal justice system that is racist. I appreciated all the examples and context giving without throwing too much info the readers way. The book gets redundant. Luckily it’s not too long. Great advice at the end go hold elected officials accountable.

[Sarah D Bunting · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fast, and infuriating, read.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thank you NetGalley for the ARC of Rap on Trial by Erik Nielson that I read and reviewed.
This is on of those books that is a slap in the face of reality that a lot of people are not going to want to read or want to believe but it is what is going on in our country and it has been for a long time. I fell in love with Gangster Rap when I was a young girl in Sunday School and the teacher told us if we listened to that music we would go to hell. I hated Sunday School so I figured I was already on my way there so I talked my mom into taking my to the record store and I bought some N.W.A., Public Enemy and anything else I could find with that “bad lyrics” sticker on it. I was hooked. A young white girl from the country blasting rap music got some strange looks so I could just imagine how life was for the men and women who get targeted for their music taste.
Just reading this book makes me so mad on so many levels. As a former journalist I hate how people freedom of speech is violated in so many cases this book talks about. It makes me sick that no one sees how stupid they are for using music as a way to convict men of crimes. It makes me wonder when the day will come when an actor or an author will be jailed for what they have done? Has society become that narrow minded that they can’t see beyond someone’s music taste?
This book is a book that should be read by all jurors in big cities who sit on trials that may have a case that will get introduced rap into it. Society should be educated about and how weak and flawed it is. I was not aware how often rap was put on trial until I read this book. I knew they tried to bane it. Education is the key and this book is a great start.
Rap on Trial gets four out of five stars from me.

[Marin Gamboa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderfully insightful case study of a book. Highlighting how prosecutors get around the prohibition of offering rap lyrics as character evidence and how rap has been denigrated from a work of art to an indication of a faulty character. Artistic expression should not used in court proceedings to indicate bad character, even if offered for motive, intent, or knowledge.

My favorite part of the book are the solutions it proposes for combating the use of an art form to characterize defendants as evil and violent. The gatekeepers should check for the evidence once presented at the gate; and I believe that this is the best solution, informing judges about the prejudicial nature of rap lyrics and how they have very little probative value. There are existing mechanisms to prevent rap lyrics from getting to trial, but judges aren't doing their job. Whether their failure comes from ignorance or prejudice is a judge-by-judge determination; but judges need to be educated in this topic all the same.

Absent the rectification of judicial oversight, legislation to protect rap lyrics is a good alternative solution. This isn't my favorite solution, but at the same time this solution is proposed SPECIFICALLY because of a lack of proper judicial oversight.

This book is a fantastic information piece, and in the interest of justice it should be widely read and distributed.

[Samson · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book doesn't release for a few months, so I won't quote, but I did get an early copy, and it's unreal. I hope people will be as disturbed as I was to learn that "rap on trial" is happening everywhere and that young men (most of them black/Latino) are being thrown in prison because of their songs. After all of the recent books that have exposed the (in)justice system for what it is, maybe I shouldn't be surprised, but I repeatedly found myself shocked at how blatantly unfair, and devious, this is.

This book is well researched but includes many individual stories that make it hard to put down. Definitely recommend. Also, Killer Mike wrote the Foreword, so that's reason enough to give it a look :)

[Wes Taylor · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was lucky enough to read an advance copy. This is an illuminating analysis of the widespread use by law enforcement of rap lyrics to prosecute young black and brown men. Rap lyrics are treated as threats or confessions in ways that Johnny Cash's lyric, "I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die," never would be. The book should be of interest to those concerned about artistic freedom, racial justice, or mass incarceration -- or who just like rap music. It promises to be one of the most important books of the year.

[Celine · Rating 5 out of 5]

I became obsessed with this little book. The exceptions carved out in law for rap/hip hop - so clearly an art form - are maddening. As if we needed any new evidence that courts are systematically biased against black and brown people.

[Joheiv ☺deldos☺awol · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is very awesome.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

While this book did have some repetitive elements - perhaps it is best to see the chapters as different essays in part - it is meticulously researched and well cited in its presentation of cases and media coverage of some of the trials and proceedings that highlight how rap, as a form of music, is used differently than any other media form in the American court system. As a fan of music broadly, I was sold on reading this book based on this segment from the back of the book cover "Should Johnny Cash have been charged with murder after he sang, 'I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die'? Few would seriously subscribe to this notion of justice. Yet in 2001, a rapper named Mac whose music had gained national recognition was convicted of manslaughter after the prosecutor quoted liberally from his album Shell Shocked." This consideration is solid, and as the book shows, the murder ballad is seemingly as old as music itself, predating even Cash's use of it by several centuries, so why is it that when it is used in this one particular genre, it is given a heavier consideration in courts.

While the book makes suggestions of how to use this information, which is informative enough if one is in such a trial, the true value lies in its consideration of the broader judicial and media fueled landscapes and how racial and ethnic identities exist within these areas. For me, the book zings home points about how this cannot be removed from racial consideration by citing numerous studies where historic folks songs, such as studies that took lyrics from the folk group, the Kingston Trio, and presented them to subjects claiming they were violent rap lyrics and noted that the responses to the lyrics changed dramatically when that information was provided to test people's responses. The text's use of studies like these, merged with its exhaustive attempt to catalog and report on cases where rap lyrics were entered as evidence against people - despite this not happening in other genres - makes for a compelling argument. While there may be a few elements that are debatable, the overwhelming evidence this book presents means that we should be ready to have open and research based dialogues about elements of free speech, court proceedings, and how certain genres, notably rap, seem to be viewed as an exception to several areas of legal understandings - which frames this as a racial and oft socioeconomic issue that is not being addressed.

The book is compelling and engaging enough, but most importantly it is well researched, showing how even death metal - with its own legal problems - was held as separate as those legal issues were civil court trials, whereas rap seems to be more prone to criminal cases. Again, this work's detail oriented focus - which seeks to consider the aforementioned cases of Cash, death metal, and more - and how rap is treated differently than all others by the courts, is well within things we should all be aware of - and concerned about - if we wish to claim to have a fair legal system.

[Jacquelyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really fascinating and infuriating read on the use of rap lyrics in criminal trials. As a lawyer, I was especially curious about how prosecutors overcame evidentiary rules and how the courts rationalized the glaring impacts on First Amendment. Frustratingly, there seem to be a lot of bad lawyers (prosecutors grasping at straws to put on a case and defense counsel being ill equipped to fight against it) and even worse,
judges who fail to perform their gatekeeping function with respect to evidence and let the practice persist. The authors (shout out to Erik Nielsen - a professor at my alma mater. Go spiders!) did a great job of highlighting how problematic this practice is, particularly because of its disproportionate effect on Black men and the larger chilling effect on rap music as a genre.

The book got a little repetitive at the end, but otherwise a great, well researched, and educational read!

[Lauren Steis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another great book group selection, we had a lot of important conversations and it was eye opening for me to see just how unjust our justice system is (that’s a tongue twister!) I’ll definitely be recommending this one, especially for people who may not like or understand rap.

[Meredith · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eye-opening, quick and infuriating look at the growing trend of criminalizing rap lyrics.

[Julia · Rating 3 out of 5]

"For every rhyme I write, it's 25 to Life"- Havoc, Shook Ones Pt. II

I came into this book with much stronger opinions on how to solve the problem presented in Rap On Trial- ban the use of Rap lyrics in trials. Yet when I read the book my position softened.
In presenting examples, the authors show us the reasonableness of a prosecutor seeking to enter lyrics as evidence of criminality.

There is one example on pg. 63 where prosecutors admitted the lyrics of a gang member to establish gang affiliation. The lyrics aren't generic but specific. He rhymes his gang name along with the gang names of others in a way that reads like a diary. Prosecutors, sensibly, used this evidence to establish the writers gang affiliation so he would receive gang enhancements (we will get to this later).

When I saw this example, along with others, I immediately thought of diaries. Diaries are admissible in courts despite being written works with possible fictional elements (many people lie in their diaries because they lie to themselves).
If Rap lyrics can be in anyway considered autobiographical, then they can be considered along diaries as admissible for trial.

This was one of many areas the book broke down to me. Instead of anticipating objections and counterpoints and processing those arguments this book assumes that simply being exposed to the problem from the authors' pov is sufficient to bring you to their conclusions. Judging by the reviews and comments I think that was a safe bet. I also think many people who reviewed it didn't read it.

By refusing to digest the fullness of the argument the book functions less as a case and more as propaganda, manifesting most fully in the epilogue when the authors give us their solution- vote for progressive judges. They make no effort to describe what makes a judge "progressive" because they assume everyone reading this already is. This is what propaganda does. It doesn't persuade, it incites.

Let me return to the possible objections for a moment.

Instead of ever mentioning diaries as admissible and making a warranted comparison between Rap lyrics and diary entries the authors go the opposite route and try to argue that Rap has no basis in reality and describe entirely fictional personas. That Rap is not autobiographical in nature.

They went so far as to contrast Rap to narcocorridos, "which are songs specifically focused on drug trafficking and related offenses." While that genre of music is describing authentic crime (they don't argue for or against the admissibility of the genre), Rap is in line with other genres of music that have no relationship with autobiography.

This was the absolute wrong track to take. It is either profoundly and willfully ignorant to Hip-Hop culture or disingenuous. I can see why White people with no interest in Hip-Hop would buy that but as someone who is a student of it I call CAP.

Hip-Hop makes its bones by claiming to be autobiographical. I could go into example after example but I want to go to sleep so I will just say that it is one of the only forms of music that vigorously attempts to protect the appearance of authenticity in its lyrics.

As I was finishing the book I was listening to Meek Mill on his opening track to Dreams Are Worth More Than Money in which he is rapping about his ongoing court case, being denied bail and a very real judge that he didn't like. From there I listened to the opening track of Cardi B's Invasion of Privacy which was about her very real coming up from being a stripper to a rapper.

I thought about Rick Ross who was widely humiliated and tried denying his role as a corrections officer in an effort to maintain street credibility. From 2 Pacs bragging about sleeping with Faith Hill to Bobby Schmurda rapping about murder to Tay-K's hit about running from the police the list is endless.

Prosecutors didn't present Hip-Hop as being autobiographical, Hip-Hop has defined itself that way. No other genre aside from the aforementioned narcocorridos has done more to establish itself as documentarian than Rap music.

So if you're argument is "it's not real" then you aren't untangling the complexity of the Art form. So much of it either is or purports to be!

While the problem of Rap lyrics being used is indeed a problem for free speech, does indeed have racist elements, and is chilling to artistic expression this book presents the issue without properly analyzing it, evaluating both sides of it, and coming up with solutions to it.

Which leads me back to the start. My position softened so what are some real solutions.

1. Most free speech exemptions such as the ones noted on pg. 103 and extending from the United States v. Alvarez should be eliminated with those categories being protected especially and most obviously "obscenity". But including "advocacy to incite lawless action", "fighting words", and "speech integral to criminal conduct". When we get to "true threats" the government should have a much higher standard than someone simply saying they want to or, even, are going to hurt someone. Some of the most notable and egregious convictions in the book are threat cases that should not have even been considered criminal. Saying that a cop should die and then naming a cop should not be considered a threat even though it feels/appears threatening. Threats should have the force of action behind them and it is the action that should be punishable, even if thwarted, not the words.

The obscenity example is an important one because the book mentions 2 Live Crew being tried for obscenity for their vulgar lyrics. Unfortunately, their defense was an absurd response by the brilliant Henry Louis Gates Jr. that argued the sexual imagery was parody intending to satirize the cultural image of over sexual Black men.

Bullshit.

Anyone who has seen a 2 Live Crew live set and knows anything about Uncle Luke knows that they just love pussy.

The idea that they are master parodists worked in the short term by skirting the obscenity laws by attributing artistic merit to the work. In the long term, it furthered the classist, neo-fascist idea that the state has any right to determine what is artistic and what can be produced. Far more subversive than a supposed parody of racial imagery is a group of horny music makers making music in "bad taste" because they want to and without asking anyone for permission.

It is this academic logic that applies haunts every solution found in this book. Ultimately, they rely on "expert witnesses" aka professors who tell the world what is and is not appropriate. It disorients the argument, which should not be "2 Live Crew is not obscenity" but rather "The State has no business governing the obscene". It's soft fascism and should be discarded.

Ban the State from banning speech, especially obscenity.

Leading me to #

2. We should not give additional punishments for motives or associations. Whether this is hate crimes or gang enhancements. Motives, affiliations, associations should all be banned from determining sentencing. The punishment should be determined by the crime and the crime alone. How is a murder from a gang member worse than a murder from a non-gang member? It isn't. It's all murder. Treat it as such. This would eliminate the common use of Rap lyrics to show affiliation.

Connected to the above is

3. Ban character witnessing. Who cares if someone has good or bad character? This is one of the most racists aspects of sentencing. Prosecutors try to show the "do-rag" (an actual statement) to reveal the real character of the now suited up criminal.
Rap lyrics are often used to show bad character and add to sentencing. It works too, which is horrible.

Again, sentencing for a crime should be on the basis of the crime and not be impacted by the supposed character of the criminal. Who cares if a murderer was also a scout leader? Who cares if a tax evader was a also a rapper? (See what I did there?) If it's a crime worth punishing then it should have a suitable sentence baked into it.
Character witnessing is just asking for racism and classicism.

4. Ban RICO laws. YSL is facing RICO charges right now. Young Thug is one of the biggest names in Rap and is being treated as though he is head of a genuine criminal enterprise. These laws allow prosecutors to cast a giant net and use lyrics to convict all YSL (which is a record label) associates for the supposed crimes of individuals.

5. Educate the general public, jurors and judges about the merit and characteristics of Rap music. Books like "Book of Rhymes: the poetics of hip-hop" are excellent primers and go far to establish the artistic merit of Hip-Hop which helps to reduce bias towards it. This goes along with the solution of "expert witness".

The more exposure Rap gets the more accepted it, and Black culture generally, will become. This is evidenced by the example of Eminem on pg. 111. Chief Justice Roberts quotes Eminem's Bonnie and Clyde and establishes it as entertainment given its concert setting. He said that the setting and ambiguity moved it from the realm of threat.

The strange thing about the example is that Eminem actually pistol whipped a guy (supposedly, he denies the pistol whipping) during a domestic dispute with his then-wife. He had direct violent behavior to correspond with his violent lyrics.

According to the standards set out by prosecutors, if anyone should have been charged with a threat it was Em. The fact that Robert's did not consider it such can be due to a number of factors including Em's talent, race and success. All of which contributed to his mainstream acceptance by key communities (his race, ironically, works against him in the community he longs for acceptance from the most- the Hip-Hop community). While seeing Roberts give a pass to Em while young Black rappers are being prosecuted for lesser lyrics is disheartening, there is an upside.

A hard-core rapper was treated seriously as an artist by the Chief Justice of the highest court in the land. Rap has never had more exposure than now and has never been more respected than now, despite being on trial.

If we keep elevating the Art of Rap and standing by it, it will become undeniable in all sectors of life. It will become normative and, therefore, accepted vs weaponized. We may not like the privilege he was granted, but Em took us years forward by pushing the envelope in a genius way. Now we gotta keep pushing.

The best part of this book is probably the forward by our Uncle, Killer Mike. He's the uncle of every down hip-hop fan and country folk. He's the truth. Articulate and well reasoned, he should be heard and weighed. Even when he's wrong he's more right than most.

He's pushed harder than anyone in the game and, in doing so, is redefining it.

[Fábio Shecaira · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book argues that rap lyrics have often been used unfairly by police and prosecutors in the American criminal justice system. The writing is very clear and the argument is very persuasive. If you have not read anything else on the subject, this is a great resource. But if you have read earlier papers by Nielson himself, Kubrin, Stoia and others on rap on trial, then I surmise this book will not seem very original to you.

[Adam · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a scathing indictment of the American justice system, especially in terms of the so-called "evidence" it uses to unjustly prosecute and find black men guilty. The authors conducted copious research into the law, critical race theory, and literary theory to make their case, including providing several excellent ideas for how the system can improve, specifically in regards to how it brings cases to trial and conducts those trials.

[Natasha Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

"For hip-hop and political buffs, this book keeps all sides covered. Should Johnny Cash have been charged with murder after he sang, “I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die”? Few would seriously subscribe to this notion of justice. Yet in 2001, a rapper named Mac whose music had gained national recognition was convicted of manslaughter after the prosecutor quoted liberally from his album Shell Shocked. Mac was sentenced to thirty years in prison, where he remains. And his case is just one of many nationwide."

This was a very heavy read. I spent the majority of it angry, yet not surprised. It's a tale as old as time, highlighting a gross reality for artist of color and their freedom of expression. This book especially highlights how dangerous it can be when free speech is manipulated to serve someone else's benefit. If you are into hip-hop and politics, If you have a chance to pick up this book, I recommend doing so.

[Lawrence Lewis · Rating 3 out of 5]

(Not available on audible, so I had to sit down and actually read the book). This was the first book that I had to photocopy in its entirety, because the notes challenging what the authors wrote would not fit in the margins of the book. If you love the message blacks are being oppressed by the white man, you will enjoy this book. It mirrors The New Jim Crow and quotes from The New Jim Crow. However as a trial lawyer with more than 400 felony jury trials, the message runs counter to my experience in the courtroom and at the jail. Let’s review some of the ridiculousness:

(1) (page 8) Quote: Becoming a rapper is a legitimate professional goal, particularly for individuals who are otherwise shut out of the economic mobility game. I suspect that is why 4 out of 5 clients that I interview at the jail, who are charged with serious, violent felonies, aspire to be rap artists. I cannot imagine there will ever be enough hours in the day to listen to “I have the biggest dick” “all you niggas is jealous of me” and “I murder people for fun” to absorb all of the wanna be rap recording artists. So, when you promote becoming a rapper as a legitimate “professional” goal, what do the other 90% of folks that don’t make it do with their lives?

(2) (page 18) Quote: Crime novelists, radical poets and screenwriters of horror films would all be in serious trouble if we could be convinced that their “art” was a reflection of their real lives. (page 85-86) Johnny Cash had his fair share of run ins with law enforcement and wound up in jail on several occasions...no prosecutor would have attempted to use Cash’s music to show he committed homicide or had a violent demeanor. OK.

First, no dead bodies turned up around Johnny Cash, other than his great niece, and her perpetrator confessed to the murder. Cash had a drug and alcohol problem. He didn’t have a “people keep turning up dead around me” problem. Yet, almost every example used in the book involves supposed rap artists, whether famous or fledgling, where young black men are charged with murder, rape, aggravated assault, violent gang offenses or trafficking large amounts of drugs (page 69). For whatever reason, the educated authors don’t appear to see the stark difference between: (1) being charged with murder (because someone actually lost their life) and the repeated fascination with all the ways a bullet can tear a human face apart as “art”; and (2) being charged with non-violent crime, while singing about violence.

Second, if the screenwriters of horror films keep appearing on the scene where police find actual decapitated bodies and small children shot and skinned, I am sure the prosecutors would be showing part of their “art” to help you understand the mind/intent of the accused.

(3) My favorite depiction: Jamal Knox. (page 106-107). Quote: Growing up, Knox had negative views on the criminal justice system broadly and police in particular. He recalls being “hassled” by officers even before entering middle school.” OK. I understand, Jamal Knox hates police and the criminal justice system. Let’s see how can he avoid coming into contact with them at all. I suggest refrain from drugs and alcohol, get an education (including college), and find a partner who holds Jamal and herself to higher standards. Let’s see how Jamal conducts himself.

Quote: During questioning (in a traffic stop), Knox sped off. He crashed the car and both men ran from the scene. Police caught up with them and arrested them. A search of Knox turned up fifteen small baggies of heroin and cash. During the search of the car police found a loaded, stolen firearm on the driver’s side floorboard (closer to Knox, unless the crash moved the gun). Knox gave the arresting officer a fake name.

So, I hate the police and the criminal justice system (CJS), so I am going to flee during a routine traffic stop, put everyone at risk and give you a fake name if you manage to catch me. I am going to sell heroin and carry a stolen, loaded firearm.

The author is silent on how long the car chase transpired and whether the innocent public was placed at risk, but we know the car crashed. What else was damaged in the crash that Knox has no intention of paying for, we will never know. The author is silent in how the police brutalized the two young, black men when they caught them. Oh wait, that didn’t happen. OK.

The authors present Jamal Knox as a victim. His rap lyrics in his video “Fuck tha Police” is described as a means of protest. OK. Yet, the authors appear blind to the idea that maybe some young black men and other rappers intend to do what they want (maim, pillage, kill) and only say fuck the establishment because the establishment intends to hold them accountable for horrific acts.

What is a horrific act? That is easy. Big Lurch (rap artist) was convicted in 2002 of murder after killing his 21 year old roommate, and just to differentiate his homicide from others, he ate a piece of her lung.

At some point in time, the educated in America must stop pandering to broken cultural narratives, and provide real information, guidance and leadership. Rather than show how that is done, this book provides more proof of why it is urgently needed.

[Cristie Underwood · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author's painstaking research and attention to detail is obvious in the writing of this book. The author laid out the information in a manner that allowed the reader to form their own opinion.

[Grazyna Nawrocka · Rating 5 out of 5]

What an interesting book! I am not a big fun of rap.

The main point I took from reading this book is that the problem it illustrates is of racism with tinge of the First Amendment violation not the other way around. Some of cited cases, due to lack of evidence, were decided on the basis of creative expression. The authors bring to our attention fact that motive for creative impulse is not so much auto-biography, although the lyrics are based on common experience and culture, as just a desire to make money and get out of poverty. People who sing violent songs, or play criminal characters in the movies, are not necessary criminals themselves (it would seem obvious to most of us).

I recommend this book, especially to rappers, public in general and members of American justice system.

[Chloe · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is 80% case studies, which is not normally my style and the only reason I didn’t give it 3 stars. I read this book for work (I teach kids how to make music) and wanted to find ways to keep young rappers safe. While the case studies are informative about those specific events, they were not quite as helpful as I wanted for preventing history from repeating itself. The commentary in the introduction and conclusion were the most helpful and enjoyable parts of this book for me, and I would recommend it based on those parts alone for anyone looking to get more educated on how infuriatingly unjust and racist this system is for rap artists.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

A short read that took me a while because I'm not a voracious reader but it's fascinating. It covers rap as an art and how it's been weaponised over time by law enforcement and the state to incarcerate black and latino people. Specifically, it relates to the use of rap lyrics (ubiquitous, exaggerated and largely fictional) as evidence despite the very obvious issues with doing this. Johnny Cash certainly didn't kill a man in Reno but imagine if he was arrested on the grounds of that song - wild, right?

Anyway, highly recommend for fans of the music genre.

[Madison Florian · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting look into a specific area of the criminal justice system that is very unjust. It tells a very niche story but it is one that is obviously persistent in convicting black people of crimes they did not commit. This book is a good compliment to a more comprehensive book like The New Jim Crow.

It does get a little repetitive at times, but not in a way that made it drag or impossible to read.

[Luca Jalisco · Rating 2 out of 5]

What could be an important book is lost in lazy repetition coupled with narrow perspective and analysis.

I thought I was going crazy thinking I was constantly rereading the portions of the book until I saw the sentence “With the rules stacked in his favor, Jallepalli was able to depict Mitchell’s lyrics and videos without any regard for them as artistic creations.” printed from page 122-123 and then three paragraphs later on page 123.

[Vnunez-Ms_luv2read · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone, young,old, black,white,Asian,Latino, EVERYONE should read this book. Very enlightening on how quickly people are to judge in a court of law. I am telling all I know to grab this book. Thanks to Netgalley, the author and the publisher for the arc of this book in return for my honest review. Receiving the book in this manner had no bearing on this review.

[Terry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thought-provoking book highlighting the ways that rap lyrics have been used to unjustly convict many young men (overwhelmingly African-American men). The book makes the argument that rap is simply artistic expression and makes the comparison, e.g., that books and movie roles would not be cited as indicative of what the author or actor has or will do.

[Kevin Montes · Rating 5 out of 5]

Direct and filled with visceral emotion it felt like it spoke to the hip-hop head in me. We need a change; protect these young people from improper prosecutions for relaying hypotheticals as facts. This drives it potently and furthermore, motivates the reader to explore and learn about how they can push for change by lobbying one's local congressman to add protections on rap music.

[Gohar C · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really interesting dive into the legal battle over hip hop and how it is being used in court to wrongfully incriminate and incarcerate people of color. This book provided a unique legal and musical lens, and provides helpful action steps on what we can do about this issue. Highly recommend.

[Serenity · Rating 3 out of 5]

very good topic, but I think I would have rather read an article-length piece of writing with the same information. the end of the book has the author's goals and actionable items and those are very valuable. 

[Matthew Furman · Rating 5 out of 5]

They wouldn't pull that shit on Avenged Sevenfold, I can tell ya that much.