EXCLUSIVE: Lil Durk Has New Headache Over New Threat: Free Durk Or We Gonna Shoot That M########### Up

December 10, 2025

Lil Durk’s murder-for-hire case intensifies as prosecutors reveal a “free Durk” threat while fighting to stay on the case.

Since 1998, AllHipHop.com has pioneered delivering Hip-Hop news. Get our daily email for exclusive, breaking news, and weekly digests, all curated for the true Hip-Hop enthusiast. Stay connected and informed with the heartbeat of Hip-Hop culture. Subscribe now!

Lil Durk is caught in more drama in his federal murder-for-hire case, after prosecutors disclosed another violent threat and accused his legal team of twisting facts to try to kick them off the case.

Prosecutors recently disclosed an April phone call where an unknown man phoned one of their own and issued a chilling warning: “Free Durk or we gonna shoot that m########### up.”

When the prosecutor asked, “Shoot who up?” the caller replied, “S###, your ass.”

The government revealed the threat while fighting a motion from Durk’s lawyers to disqualify the entire U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California and dismiss the indictment against him.

Prosecutors said the defense’s accusations of misconduct were “misleading and meritless,” accusing them of making false claims about secret communications with the court.

Lil Durk has been detained since December 2024, accused of orchestrating the 2022 murder of Saviay’a “Lul Pab” Robinson, the cousin of rapper Quando Rondo, at a Los Angeles gas station.

Judges ruled Lil Durk too dangerous to release, finding that he “uses his money, influence and power to endanger individuals whom he perceives as a threat,” and noting his alleged attempt to flee the country after his associates were arrested.

The new dispute stems from two separate incidents involving anonymous threats, one to the magistrate judge and another to a federal prosecutor.

In February 2025, someone left four voicemails for Judge Karen Donahue’s chambers, saying Durk and his co-defendant were innocent and threatening to “burn this m########### down” if they received life sentences.

Prosecutors said the U.S. Marshals Service immediately alerted the court and their office, which then forwarded the information to the FBI. Investigators later identified the caller but found “no contact with the defendants” and “no evidence linking any defendant” to the threats.

Then came the April call. Hours after prosecutors filed an opposition to Durk’s request for release, a man phoned one of the lead attorneys and made the “free Durk” threat.

That call was recorded, and a separate prosecutor, not part of the trial team, handled the investigation. Again, no connection was found between Durk or his co-defendants and the caller.

Despite that, Durk’s lawyers claim prosecutors should have immediately disclosed both threats, arguing the delay showed bias and “a pattern of nondisclosure and ex parte communication.”

They say those actions created the “appearance and reality of unfairness” in the ongoing proceedings.

Prosecutors fired back that the claims are false. They said the only communication involving court staff was a brief thank-you email from an assistant U.S. attorney to a deputy marshal acknowledging receipt of the information.

Their filing argues that Durk’s motion “is not grounded in fact or law” and cites case law warning judges to respect prosecutorial independence. They note that disqualifying an entire U.S. Attorney’s Office is “an extreme remedy” that “invades the role of the executive branch” and is rarely justified.

Prosecutors also noted that a judge had already rejected Durk’s earlier motion to recuse all district judges, ruling there was “no basis” for recusal because the threats came from outsiders, not the defendants.

They added that they disclosed both incidents when they moved for an anonymous jury in October 2025, explaining that “media attention and anonymous threats” warranted tighter protection for jurors. In short, the government says there’s no evidence of bias, no misconduct, and no reason to remove them from the case.

“A criminal defendant cannot cause the recusal of his prosecutor by threatening the prosecutor or having him threatened,” prosecutors wrote, calling Durk’s motion “bewildering” and “provocative”.

The court has not yet ruled on whether to disqualify the prosecutors.

Lil Durk remains in custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles, awaiting trial in 2026 on charges of murder-for-hire and stalking resulting in death.

View Original Source