@Bullmindes The President called him out over a song about cops, and he’s now been playing a cop on TV for over 25 years. You couldn’t write that ending.
Lil Durk was acquitted of murder-for-hire in September. He is still in jail. To get out, he is now offering a federal judge his royalties, his publishing rights, his name and likeness, and his touring income.
In the video below, the Breakfast Club goes through the package.
Durk was arrested on October 24, 2024, near a Florida airport. Prosecutors said he had booked a one-way flight from Miami to Dubai.
They accused him of ordering the 2022 shooting that targeted Quando Rondo. Rondo survived. His cousin, Saviay'a Robinson, was killed.
In June 2025, the judge turned down a $4.5 million bond package. The court said it didn't cover the lion's share of his net worth. Prosecutors argued that with his music rights he could "earn a handsome living abroad."
In September, a jury cleared him. He stayed locked up anyway. A racketeering trial is set for August 2027.
So on October 27 his lawyers came back with the music itself. Sony Music offered to guarantee up to $1 million. His mother's home is in it too. A breach, his lawyers wrote, would leave his family "destitute indefinitely."
Jay-Z, J. Cole and Michael Rubin wrote letters for him. So did Robinson's mother. Her family does not object to bond.
The hearing is November 4.
So should a man a jury already acquitted have to sign over his catalog to go home, or is the judge right to hold him until the second trial?
@Quietquant_x Splitting it only looks smart because both made it. If that fourth launch fails, this is the story of a guy who lost everything because he couldn’t let go
@justlunacy Paying back the advance is fair. Paying back every dress and limo ride the label booked for you, before you see a cent of 20 million albums, is a deal built so the artist stays in the red
@0xMavian both can be true. the credits paid the bills while the cars got good enough to sell on their own. the real question is what happens when the rivals build enough EVs and stop buying
Napoleon Dynamite cost $400,000 to make and grossed $46.1 million worldwide. Jon Heder, who played Napoleon, was paid $1,000.
He had no agent and no share of the profits.
In the video below, he confirms the number people keep asking him about. "But yes, it's true." His reasoning at the time: the production had no money to pay anybody, so "I'll take $1,000. Sure."
The film premiered at Sundance in January 2004, and Fox Searchlight picked it up there. It went wide that August.
Heder wasn't in the actors' union, SAG. The union actors had profit points written into their contracts. He didn't.
The producers stepped in. "No, we have to give Jon something," he recalls them saying. Most of what he earned from the film came as gift checks from Fox, sent because he was out promoting it. "Throw him something."
He did get a better deal once the film took off. No figure has been reported.
The producers had their own fight with Fox. Their company said Fox owed it 31.66% of home video profits and paid 9.66%. In 2011 it sued for $10 million. In 2012 the court sided with Fox on most points and awarded $150,000.
Asked if most of the cast made more than him, Heder says: "I would say so."
So was $1,000 a fair deal for an unknown with no agent, or did Fox owe Napoleon a real cut?
@0xNaoris Funny how the $6M a month number went everywhere and her saying it’s insane went nowhere. Nobody fact checks a number that big if it makes a good headline
@RumiMirage Going from feeling like “Mr. Mariah Carey” to having 10 more kids to prove you can provide sounds less like fixing the ego problem and more like moving it somewhere else
@FinRetv A jury that sat through 28 days of trial and came back in under 3 hours had clearly made up its mind, and the money evidence is the part his lawyers will keep pointing at on appeal
@devb332 Hard to keep it out when the state’s whole motive was that his money problems were about to come out that same day, but 28 days of financial crimes can also make a jury convict the thief instead of the killer.
Stevie Wonder let his fiancée move into his Los Angeles house in July 1988. No written lease. Rent was $0.
They never married. She stayed 38 years. On October 22, he sued to get the house back.
The video below is "Get It," his 1988 duet with Michael Jackson. Billboard's archive lists Carmen Efferson as one of its producers.
The fight started with an insurance check. In July, his team scheduled an inspection of the three-bedroom home. She refused, said she felt "harassed" and warned she would call law enforcement if anyone came in.
On August 4 the policy was canceled, his lawyers say. She was told to leave by August 27. She didn't. A three-day notice followed on October 6.
In one email now in the court file, she accused his lawyer of a "racist cold-blooded 'white male privilege'" tone. His attorney David Huff replied that the lawyer who first contacted her is neither white nor male.
Her side, per a source who spoke to TMZ: Wonder promised her the home was hers. Her mother lived there until she died. The deed was never put in her name.
His side: the suit is about keeping the property insured, not about punishing her.
He is asking the court for the house, his legal fees and up to $600 in damages.
So did Stevie Wonder break a promise, or did 38 rent-free years turn a favor into a claim?