Story

Sheriff’s Deputy Thought Raptors’ Masai Ujiri Could’ve Been A Terrorist

Toronto Raptors president Masai Ujiri had an extremely bittersweet moment last year during Game 7 of the NBA Finals.

As the Raptors secured the first NBA championship in the franchise’s history, Ujiri attempted to make his way onto the court to celebrate with his team, where he became involved in an altercation with Alameda County sheriff’s deputy Alan Strickland.

The officer first claimed that Ujiri had been the aggressor, leaving the officer concussed and with a “serious jaw injury.”

Of course, body cam footage released in the months since has contradicted the officer’s laughable claims, namely that Ujiri did not make any sort of attempt to identify himself. The footage clearly shows Ujiri pulling out his identification and that the officer aggressively pushed him twice without the Raptors president getting physical before bystanders jumped in to separate the men.

Ujiri released a statement addressing the incident in which he asserted his belief that the incident was a clear-cut example of anti-Black racism.

Ujiri has since filed a counterclaim in response to the officer filing a lawsuit against him. The deputy recently asked the court to dismiss the Raptors president’s counterclaim, citing his belief that he was “trying to stop a potentially serious threat.”

“Had Deputy Strickland not employed force, he would have risked having the suspect not only trespass onto the court, he would have risked the suspect quickly getting lost amid the growing crowd of folks authorized to be on the court, and potentially committing any number of possibly serious crimes,” legal documents asking to dismiss the counterclaim read. “After all, this was a high-profile sporting event, which entailed a risk of crimes ranging from vandalism to assaults on players…assaults on coaches… player-fan brawls… and even mass murder or terrorism. The same threats persisted when Mr. Ujiri continued to attempt to barge past the second time, still without showing his (invalid) credential, even after being shoved and ordered to back up.”

Um…

[via]

Tweet LinkedIn PinShares0

Story

DJ Akademiks questions if Lil Durk will get bond as the racketeering case goes on

Lil Durk’s legal battle is about to take another big step, and DJ Akademiks is already sharing his expectations for what could go down when the rapper returns to court in November.

Durk is in custody, awaiting his next VICAR case in which authorities say he was running a criminal enterprise. His next trial was set for October 5, but recent developments have called into question when those proceedings will occur.

Durk’s murder for hire trial recently resulted in a not guilty verdict in November. Regardless of that outcome, he remains in custody because the separate racketeering related charges remain unresolved. Durk’s attorneys have asked for the new hearing and have been ordered to appear by U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services, which also must submit a fresh bail report.

Against that backdrop, legal commentator Bradford Cohen had previously suggested Durk could eventually get bond. That view ties in with Durk’s not-guilty verdict in the earlier case, and the argument that the outcome could make it harder to sustain the remaining allegations.

DJ Akademiks sees things a bit differently. In a recent livestream, Akademiks predicted that Durk would not get a bond at the Nov. hearing. He believes the charges will stick and cites the seriousness of the allegations in the VICAR case as his reasoning. He also doesn’t appear to expect the rapper to be released from jail anytime soon as the case moves forward.

Akademiks’ prediction concerns the bond hearing, not Durk’s chances at trial. Durk’s legal situation remains unresolved for now. His recent acquittal has altered the circumstances of his arrest, but the separate racketeering case still looms over the rapper as both sides prepare for the next phase.

Tweet LinkedIn PinShares0

Celebrity

DJ Akademiks Resurrects 2015 Drake vs. Meek Mill Beef With Alleged Nicki Minaj Backstory

DJ Akademiks is digging up hip-hop history buried for 10 years as he offers his supposed explanation for how the Drake/Meek Mill feud came to a head in 2015. The back-and-forth between Akademiks and Meek Mill has resurfaced the conversation. Akademiks returned to the long-running Drake-Meek beef on his stream last night, saying a comment by Nicki Minaj had something to do with what happened between the two rappers.

According to Akademiks, Meek and Minaj were shopping at a designer fashion store when they got to the register. He says that when Meek told her he didn’t have the cash to pay for Minaj, she allegedly told him he would never be Drake. Akademiks also claims Minaj left the store on her own, and then Meek went on X, and what happened next started the infamous feud with Drake.

The account remains an allegation, not a confirmed explanation. The information provided has not been independently verified, and ultimately only those involved, including Minaj and Meek Mill, could confirm the story’s authenticity.

The beef between Drake and Meek Mill started in 2015 and has become a staple in hip-hop conversation. Meek struggled after the fallout, while the beef became a defining moment in Drake’s career. However, the two eventually made up and collaborated on “Going Bad,” signaling a return to a more cooperative relationship despite the rivalry’s tension.

Now that Akademiks and Meek are throwing shots again, the events of 2015 are back in the conversation. By reflecting on the feud, Akademiks has added another possible piece of context to a story that has been a hot topic in hip-hop for years.

Whether his version of events is what actually happened, however, remains unresolved. Currently, the designer-store story isn’t factual, but it is Akademiks’ version of the events surrounding the beef.

Tweet LinkedIn PinShares0