Texas man set to be executed or rap lyrics, put it up full mass. This is a sad reality that we're living in inside of the justice system. It also speaks to a larger narrative. Now [00:00:17] I want you to keep the picture up. You're looking at 37 year old James Brodnax. He was a teenager when a jury convicted him of capital murder. They convicted him using his rap lyrics because [00:00:34] his rap lyrics were presented as evidence that he posed a threat to be a future danger. He is scheduled to be executed on April 30th in Huntsville, Texas. Now, I want to say this [00:00:55] for those who may have some kind of affinity for this kind of action in a courtroom. I want to remind you that rap is protected art, is protected speech, protected art. How many [00:01:17] rock music stars or country music artists have had their lyrics used against them for a drug prosecution or a domestic violence prosecution? None of them, not one. This law is so egregious [00:01:42] that you have to be reminded as to what rap lyrics are. If you remember back in the day when we purchased CDs and we would open those CDs and we'll open up the promotion inside of the CD and it told you the titles of the song. Sometimes I had lyrics of the song. When [00:02:00] you look under all of that, it tells you who wrote the song. Usually either A, the rapper didn't write it or B, the rapper has multiple writers in addition to the person rapping it. Number two, it also has a producer who produced it. They're in the studio, they're co-creating [00:02:19] the art. Then you have a production manager, production editor, and a production publisher. So you have about five people involved in the creation of this art called rap. But the only person who gets prosecuted for the art is the rapper. But the rapper isn't the only one creating [00:02:41] the art. It's very simple. There's more. Rod Nax is set to enter the execution chamber in Huntsville, Texas on the 30th of April. He will be strapped to a gurney according to According [00:03:00] to the process and injected with a lethal dose of drugs, his life snuffed out in small part because of the prosecutorial use or misuse of his poetry. [00:03:17] 2009. James, who is African American, was convicted alongside his cousin, murdering two white men, Matthew Butler and Stephen Swan, during a robbery in Garland, Texas. He was found guilty by a [00:03:35] jury from which Dallas County prosecutors had initially excluded all black jurors, until the trial judge stepped in and reinstated one black jury member. During the sentencing phase of James capital trial, prosecutors presented the jury with 40 pages of the defendant's notebooks [00:03:55] found in a suitcase after his arrest. The state carefully selected rap lyrics infused with violent images of murder, robbery and drugs to make the case that Brodnax should be sentenced to death. His lawyers skirted over lyrics addressing peaceful narratives such as redemption and [00:04:16] love. for the ultimate punishment to be secured under Texas law, jurors would have to be persuaded that the defendant posed a threat of future dangerousness. So once they secured a conviction, they said, okay, we're now going to make sure you get killed. And in order to convince the [00:04:35] jury that the state needs to kill you, we will utilize your protected speech to do so. It's a written play. It's protected speech. How many celebrities? have been violent characters [00:04:58] on television? Many. How many of them had a script or two inside of their home when they ran into some trouble at a bar? Or maybe with a domestic partner? What's the script that [00:05:15] they co-wrote utilized against them in a court of law? Even though it was violent? Even though it poised them as a killer or corrupt? No. Not one, it was unheard of, not even considered. Judge would have kicked it out immediately. But if it's rap lyrics. There's Quote, fade [00:05:39] them, fade them, tape them up. I hit them later. I'm so high up and cloud proof like a skyscraper. Those lyrics were among several read out lyrics in court from his notebooks as critical evidence, prosecutors argued, of James gang mentality. In closing arguments, the state said that his [00:05:58] gangster rap writings proved just that. That he was a member of a criminal gang and a psychopathic killer, whose lyrics were literal homicide or homicidal master plans to seal the deal. James [00:06:15] was labeled quote, the worst kind of predator, like those we watch on Animal Planet is what the prosecution argued. By leaning heavily on rap lyrics and racist dog whistles, Texas [00:06:30] prosecutors managed to drown out mitigating evidence. that might have spared James' life. His defense lawyers emphasized that he was just 19 years old when those killings took place. [00:06:50] He had in fact endured an abusive childhood at the hands of a grandmother who locked him up in his room without food and would frequently beat him. And despite such a traumatic background, He had no previous criminal record other than a single conviction for a nonviolent marijuana [00:07:09] possession charge. Broadnecks lawyers filed a petition to the Supreme Court arguing that Texas use of his lyrics was a violation of due process and equal protection enshrined in the 8th and 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. To support the appeal, Kevin Lyles, President [00:07:31] of Deaf Jam Recordings, assembled a group of 16 prominent creative artists that included Young Thug, who also faced the case where his own lyrics were used as evidence against them. And other top rappers such as Travis Scott, Killer Mike, T.I., and Fat Joe, as well as [00:07:53] the Blackish actor Anthony Anderson. Funny guy, but smart, okay? Brilliant individual. They joined what's called an amicus brief of the petition. eh Here's more on that amicus [00:08:08] brief. The Supreme Court just got a brief that could change how music is used in court. It centers on James Brodnecks, a man sentenced to death after prosecutors used 40 pages of his rap lyrics against him. I know you're thinking rap lyrics as evidence, isn't that protected [00:08:26] art? Well, that's the argument that a group of amicus brief writers, including Grammy-winning rapper Killer Mike, is arguing that the state of Texas used those lyrics to stoke racial bias. They say prosecutors didn't use the lyrics to prove he committed the crime. Instead, they [00:08:42] introduced them during the sentencing phase to convince a nearly all-white jury that Brodnax was, a super predator. Now, the brief highlights what supporters are calling a massive double standard. When Johnny Cash sang, shot a man in Reno just to watch him die, he won a Grammy. [00:08:59] But when a young black man writes rap lyrics, prosecutors, well, they're calling it a confession or even a master plan. Now, supporters argue that that's weaponizing cultural expression. According to the filing, the jury, they asked to review the lyrics not once, but twice before [00:09:19] ultimately deciding on the death penalty. And now you got scholars and artists and legal advocates that are all urging the Supreme Court of the United States to look closer. They're arguing that rap is art, not a rap sheet. And they say using lyrics this way could violate [00:09:37] the Eighth and the Fourteenth Amendments. You know, rap is poetry. RAP stands for rhythm in poetry. Because you put rhythm with it, your poetry becomes usable in the court of law. [00:09:55] You're writing out a play. It's a script. If you really believe that rappers are doing everything they say they are doing. do the real work of a prosecutor and apply the US Constitution and the standards of statutory law to prosecute. That's what you do. If you believe they're [00:10:14] doing it, that means there's a trail of evidence. Unless they happen to be the smartest criminals on the planet Earth and leave absolutely no evidence and there's no other way to prosecute individuals who are doing crime. You utilize the same standard of law that you utilize for everybody else. That's what you do. Yet another key figure behind the amicus brief. Eric Nielsen [00:10:36] told The Guardian. Rap has from inception been treated differently. Quote, this only happens to rap music. No other fictional form, musical or otherwise, has been targeted and criminalized in this way. He added, quote, you have to work really hard not to see race as a central factor [00:10:54] in all this. End quote. Nielsen maintains the most comprehensive database of cases where rap lyrics have been used as evidence usually in criminal courts. The database records 826 cases from the late 1980s to today. Among them are 33 cases in which rap lyrics were admitted [00:11:15] in capital trials into capital trials that ended in death sentences. Though some were later reversed on appeal. Of the 33 death sentences, 10 of those came from one state, Texas. That [00:11:31] is where Mr. Broadnax is on death row today. I want to pause a moment to remind everyone that Congressman Hank Johnson and our former Congress, Cory Booker, they co-sponsored legislation, [00:11:48] the RAP Act. Look it up. I was fortunate to take part in a discussion in DC. I moderated this discussion at the legislative caucus. conference in DC and Booker came, even though he was [00:12:05] no longer member of Congress, he's still a Still a leader, show it up. Congressman Hank Johnson held this remarkable opportunity for us to engage with people in the industry and Howard University School of Law. Not only did we have professors, we had law students there. So at least the [00:12:24] future lawyers of America will be aware that this is part of the fight. This is part of the fight. There's um With the execution scheduled, now four weeks away on April 30th, his lawyers [00:12:39] are vesting great hope in their last minutes of Supreme Court appeals. In addition to the petition over rap lyrics, they are also objecting to the prosecutor's initial dismissal of all black candidates from the jury pool, which they say was blatantly unconstitutional. There was [00:12:56] a connection between these two forms of alleged prosecutorial misconduct. says Sherry Johnson, a law professor at Cornell University, quote, if you want to make a racist argument about a defendant based on their rap lyrics, then you want a white jury to listen to it, end [00:13:11] quote. On March 18th, Rodneyx pursued another last minute push for a stay of execution that addresses the question of innocence in his case. His legal team petitioned a state court seeking a new trial after his cousin and co-defendant. the Marius Cummings, who is serving a life [00:13:33] sentence, signed a sworn declaration saying that it was him alone who killed those two victims, not Mr. Broadneck. The petition argues that the jury would not have found Brodnik's [00:13:54] guilty of capital murder or have sentenced him to death had they known he was not the trigger man. It also points out that DNA recovered from the murder weapon and one of the victims clothing, [00:14:11] it matched Cummings genetic profile, but not Mr. Brodnik. I want to read to you the cousin statement. Statement reads, quote, when his lawyer told me on February 20 that James was [00:14:28] scheduled to be executed on April 30th, 2026, I decided it was time to come clean. And I told him that it was me and not James who shot the two victims. Cummings confession reads, Cummings says both of them were high on PCP and marijuana, and that he convinced his 19 [00:14:47] year old cousin to take the blame. His statement claims that he and Brodnecks agreed to tell the story that Brodnecks was to shoot him because he did not have a prior criminal record. Cummings did, so they lied to the police and the media. While it is so unfortunate that life was lost. [00:15:14] these very young individuals. these very young individuals. We're tempting. to be noble in responsibility, a 19 year old saying I will take double homicide [00:15:39] charges for you because the 19 year old has no criminal record. Assuming he'll get many, years. But if it goes to the cousin, the cousin gets the death penalty. He doesn't want his cousin to die. He doesn't want his cousin to die. So he takes the fall. And because we're [00:16:03] in Texas, it works out exactly opposite. And so the other cousin says I'm going to tell the truth and guess what the DNA, all the forensic evidence matches that Cummings is the one who was the trick of that. [00:16:19] The state had no case to. promote a death penalty except for the rap lyrics. Except for the rap lyrics. After hearing about the confession, the mother of one of the murdered men posted [00:16:37] online quote, the defense is trying their Hail Mary pass and it's all a lie. I don't believe that the latest fake confession after 17 years is going to change the cold blooded killers plan execution date. You can scan this QR code, let's put it up to send an email to the Texas [00:16:54] Board of Pardon. You can do that. This is the Board of Pardons and Paroles, as well as Governor Greg. Abbott, want you to scan that QR code and do exactly what you can do. In 2023, to prevent what happened to broad necks from happening to anyone else, Representative Hank Johnson [00:17:12] introduced the RAP Act, the Restoring Artistic Protection Act, which would change the rules of evidence for federal courtrooms making song lyrics inadmissible unless prosecutors can meet strict criteria, such as showing that the lyrics were meant to be taken literally. You [00:17:31] have to qualify the lyrics rather than just utilize them. Representative Johnson reintroduced this act July 2025 and it has not yet been put on the floor for a vote. You can thank his Republican colleagues for that. All right, Jamie thoughts here. Now, first, the white [00:17:52] people's war against rap music has been going on for 40 years. And it reminds me of the, I wasn't 1180s, but reminds me of learning about the satanic panic when Dungeons and Dragons was going to turn your kids to devil worshipers. and all that kind of stuff. And [00:18:08] it certainly is, there is a racial component to the, for sure. This is a racist movement. And I am also against the death penalty. Just full stop there. However, this case is a little more complicated for me. Some of the things I think about is that the rap music lyrics [00:18:26] were not used in the trial for the conviction. So he got convicted without the use of the rap lyrics. And there are many rappers who rap about violent things that do not get charged with violent crimes. there are probably significantly more that write about that kind of stuff that [00:18:44] don't get charged than do. And this reminds me of a case in 2022, I believe, was Nancy Broughy. I don't know if you remember her from Oregon. She was the lady that wrote a novel called The Wrong Husband. And wrote a satirical essay. call how to kill your husband and she [00:19:04] got convicted of murdering her husband. And I believe they, well, now I believe, I know they use those pieces of what she called pieces of fiction and secure or conviction against [00:19:20] her. there are a couple things here that kind of get me a little less clear. I definitely think rap lyrics should be protected speech and they are protected speech. But there is protected speech that definitely be used to show a propensity for committing a crime. like I said, wouldn't wish to death penalty on anybody. think I'm against the death penalty. [00:19:41] But this case, he was not convicted based on that fact. So if he is a convicted murderer, I don't know. I don't know. But that's the argument. The argument is he should be serving life. That's not being dismissed by the defense, okay? But he should not be getting the death penalty [00:20:02] because the death penalty phase was based on the lyrics, not based on just the conviction. Yeah, I intend to find the agree with you there, especially if they secured the death penalty exclusively because the lyrics. ah But if it's like the case of Nancy writing, look, I'm going [00:20:18] to chop them up and poison them. I don't blame the prosecution for at least looking at that. And I want you to see the WRAP Act. So when you look at WRAP Act, this was part of the discussion with Howard University and DC and Congressman Hank Johnson and Booker and everybody else. It doesn't eliminate the use of it. So the WRAP Act specifically says that under strict [00:20:38] requirements, you can qualify protected speech or lyrics or poetry or book. You have to qualify. So, Jamie, let me put it this way. It's the difference between making a motion to provide [00:20:54] this kind of evidence, right? Making a motion to say this evidence should be admissible. Well, if you have a law that governs the admissibility of this evidence, because for example, hearsay, hearsay is typically not allowed as evidence. However, hearsay can be allowed under very [00:21:14] strict rules. You can make a motion to allow for hearsay. If it's your last utterance before you die and other people hear it, that overcomes the hearsay rule. If hearsay is of an excited [00:21:30] nature, it's called excited utterance hearsay. Excited utterance means the first thing that came to your mind when somebody says something and all of a sudden that becomes admissible. But in order to put it into evidence, you must make a motion to consider based on the restrictive [00:21:47] rules of hearsay. And that is what Congress is asking for through Hank Johnson and others, that we're not saying you can't use protected speech or artistic expression. There should be qualifiers to it if you do. I think you would agree on that. I can get behind that. I'm going [00:22:03] to to review that with the proposed law. I can get behind that for sure. To me, sequester it. Is this person a murderer? Yes or no? Once that's established to me, then I can look at, because they've pulled like a school shooter. They've definitely pulled diary entries and [00:22:20] those kind of things to see what their mind was at the time. I can't remember a specific case whether or not there was used to secure conviction or sentencing, but it's definitely been in the media that, okay, they were writing about this kind of things at Google. That's the media. But brother, a lot of times that never makes it to a court. You're right, the [00:22:37] media will talk about it, but when you go to the actual court of killers who have done that, it doesn't make it to a court because their defense attorney successfully argues it unfairly by a sister jury. the conviction purposes. Maybe not for sentencing, but I don't know where I've landed on it yet. But read the actually will read that. Because remember, the act is [00:22:58] written by a whole bunch of attorneys too, So it's not as if they eliminate it. It's still qualified. It just has a strict qualification rule. All right, we'll talk about it next time. But I am in agreement with the WRAP Act. I encourage everyone to look it up when they get a moment. Okay.