ATLANTA — A group of Georgia lawmakers introduced a bill to bar or limit what artistic material can be used as evidence in a criminal trial.
The bill follows the longest-running criminal trial in Georgia history, the prosecution of Jeffrey Lamar Williams II, also known musically as Young Thug, in a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization case that had at one point more than two dozen defendants.
During the Young Thug, and broader Young Slime Life, RICO trial, Superior Court Judge Ural Glanville ruled that lyrics could be used as evidence by the prosecution, but set conditions for it to be admissible.
[DOWNLOAD: Free WSB-TV News app for alerts as news breaks]
In November 2023, Glanville allowed prosecutors from the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office to use 17 sets of rap lyrics from Young Thug as evidence against him and his alleged associates in the gang trial.
After Glanville’s conditional permission, Atlanta rapper Pastor Troy told Channel 2′s Michael Seiden that artists should be careful about what they put in their music.
“A lot of these rappers don’t have nothing to worry about because they be lying anyway. But if you do have any situations that may be able to come up in court, don’t say nothing in your song that you wouldn’t want to say in front of the judge,” Pastor Troy said at the time.
TRENDING STORIES:
- Funeral arrangements announced for Roswell officer killed in the line of duty
- Teacher accused of exchanging nude photos with teen girls in at least 6 states, including Georgia
- 3rd tour date added to Atlanta for Beyonce’s Cowboy Carter tour
In addition to lyrics from songs written by artists, prosecutors also cited tattoos and social media posts were evidence of claims against the defendants in the case.
Now, lawmakers are working to pass the bill in the legislature to restrict how this type of material is used in court.
More specifically, the bill sets rules and regulations for how the artistic materials can be put into evidence, and the process to allow it.
“Evidence of a defendant’s creative or artistic expression, whether original or derivative, shall not be received into evidence against such defendant in a criminal proceeding unless such evidence is determined by the court to be relevant and admissible after an offer of proof by the proponent of the evidence outside the hearing of a jury, or such hearing as the court may require, and a statement by the court regarding the findings of fact essential to its determination of admissibility is made part of the record,” House bill 237 reads.
The bill defines creative or artistic expression, for these purposes, as including “music, dance, performance art, visual art, poetry, literature, film, and other such activities or media,” but said tattoos are not included.
For prosecutors to receive permission to use art as evidence at trial, the following conditions will have to be met:
“Evidence of the defendant’s creative or artistic expression, the proponent of the evidence shall affirmatively prove by clear and convincing evidence that:”
- The defendant intended to adopt the literal meaning of the work as the defendant’s own thought or statement;
- There is a strong factual nexus indicating that the creative or artistic expression refers to specific facts of the crime alleged;
- There exists relevance to an issue of fact that is disputed; and
- There is distinct probative value provided by other admissible evidence.
Courts will also have to apply “careful redactions, provide proper instructions and consider the least prejudicial means of presenting the creative or artistic expression” when allowing creative or artistic expressions as evidence at trial.
[SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]
©2025 Cox Media Group
