A juror in the shooting trial of A$AP Rocky said they believe that the rapper was lying on several occasions during the trial — but not enough to convict him because the prosecution’s case was too flimsy.
Jurors actually caught A$AP allegedly lying
Some of the unnamed jurors spoke with renowned court reporter Meghann Cuniff who explained that the jurors believe Rocky and his legal team lied about these two things:
First, Cuniff wrote on her X platform that the post-trial interview with jurors revealed that they “DID think the gun was real.“
A crime was committed, jurors believe
Secondly, Cuniff, the founder of legalaffairsandtrials.com, revealed the jurors believed a crime was committed, but the evidence was too sparse to convict. Couple that with enough “reasonable doubt,” Rolling Stone’s court reporter Nancy Dillon stated, and the jury believed it had no choice but to go with a “not guilty” verdict.
Thirdly, A$AP Relli did not turn out to be a reliable or believable star witness for the prosecution.
Arguably, the most important element in the trial was whether the gun was real or fake. Rocky and his attorneys’ story that the gun was a toy was not believable. But without the real gun, nor evidence that shots were fired during the altercation, it hurt the prosecution’s case.
Jurors didn’t believe A$AP Rocky’s gun explanation
“I think most of us felt it was a gun. Just from the behavior on the videos and from some of the testimony,” the juror said. “Unfortunately, a lot of the witnesses — we didn’t consider all of their testimonies to be reliable. I didn’t really believe it. I didn’t think that…they had really convincing evidence that it was a prop gun. It was kind of a little mysterious the way it disappeared, and they couldn’t produce it as evidence. So some of the testimony did not sound accurate or truthful.”
The evidence didn’t support an A$AP Rocky conviction
The juror also said that they believe that there was a crime committed, and that A$AP Rocky was the perpetrator, but the lack of evidence prevented them from voting for a conviction.
“I think we kind of were almost at the verdict [but] we had a couple of people, including myself, who…still had some questions and we were all thinking that a crime had been committed,” she said, according to Vibe magazine. “But the thing is with the instructions we had and with the law we didn’t think that was enough evidence to commit.”
It is not clear if the same unnamed juror spoke to blogger Nique at Nite on their process of delivering a fair trial for a celebrated entertainer.
“Everybody was really focused on delivering justice,” the unidentified juror stated. “I think that we really took our time. We discussed all the issues and all the questions that we had, we clarified those, and we really kind of looked over some pieces of the evidence that people wanted to see a little bit more closely.”
The juror added: “And I think that we did the best we could with the instructions that we had, and with the evidence that we had.”
