Tupac: Why This Lawsuit Changes Everything

All right, let's, let's kick it old school now, everybody. Almost 30 years. This is

who wants to feel old today. 30 years coming this September, since Tupac was gunned down

cobalt and Flamingo in Las Vegas. And let's be honest, Eric, have you, have you been to

Vegas and driven by cobalt and Flamingo and gone, oh, that's where it is. I think every

time I'm in Vegas, I'm like, hey, there it is. It's like inevitably the drive from the

airport takes you by it. Yeah, I was out there a couple of weeks ago and I'm pretty sure

we'd be rolled right through it. I think I've shown my daughter this spot like five times

now in life. It's like, hey, there, like, thanks dad. I already know that's where Tupac

was shot. Anyway, his family just made the most aggressive legal move. This case is ever

seen. A wrongful death civil lawsuit that names Keefy D and up to 100 unnamed John Doe

co conspirators, co co conspirators, the family believes helped plan finance and carry out

the murder, but the lawsuit is not just about accountability here. It's about discovery.

The discovery machine built to force testimony that documents out of people who have never

been compelled to answer a single question under oath with Keefy D's criminal trial set

for August and the civil case now running on a parallel track, the legal battlefield around

this case just doubled in size and the implications for everyone connected to it. Are

enormous joining me to discuss Robin Drake retired FBI special agency for the counter

intelligence behavioral analysis program and attorney Eric Fattest former prosecutor

and defense attorney Eric the Shakur family. What's left of it? Filed this as a wrongful

death suit. The brother of Tupac did this, but they lined up to 100 unnamed co conspirators.

Undose alongside Keefy D. Let's help everybody understand this. When a family goes this route,

they hired the firm Quinn Emmanuel behind them. It feels less like a lawsuit and more

like a private investigation with subpoena power. What does this tell you about what the

family is actually expecting to try and get to the bottom of through discovery?

Totally. So one thing it tells me Tony is their objective probably is not money because

there is little to no collectibility likelihood on a wrongful death case like this. Keefy D's

already in jail. I don't know if any significant assets that he has and these unnamed folks,

you can't get money from an unnamed person. And even if you do name them, trying to attach

personal assets in a wrongful death case is so cumbersome and futile for the most part.

So my apprehension is that their objective is something else. It's truth finding. As you

mentioned, when this discovery process proceeds on the civil case, they'll be able to subpoena folks

for depositions where they have to sit under oath and be peppered with questions about the event

and any potential involvement. And so it seems like their objective here might be truth instead

of money, which is a little bit of a refresher. How deep in the truth barrel can they go? I guess

when you're naming just John Doe's in a civil case and then you want to depose people.

You can't just, I guess, maybe you can. I don't know. Just willy-nilly throw names out there.

I want to talk to this person. You were around at that time. Diddy, I want to talk to you.

Corrupt, I want to talk to you. Just name all these people that were around two pocket the moment

of his death. Some that have been implicated before. Some who were just on the same record label,

if you will. What is the truth-finding mission and how much power does that that do they hold

in terms of subpoenaing people and getting people in for depositions? Can by filing this, can they

get diddy in for a deposition? Because that seems to be where a lot of roads keep leaning. I'm not

saying anything to do with the murder of two pocket, but obviously there's a lot of questions there

and a lot of people that want to get him in to find out what he knew on the record of this case.

At that time and today, can they get there with this?

You know, I think they can certainly try and it would, I would not be surprised to see diddy

asked to sit for a deposition, but in this context, especially with the parallel criminal case

and the specter of possible criminal consequences, that could allow deponence to invoke their

fifth amendment rights and to not provide information during a deposition or written discovery or

something else, you know, as opposed like a car accident case where you can you can subpoena in

the driver and then their passenger or whatever and they're not going to invoke the fifth

in that context, but in this context where they could be faced with a murder charge if they

incriminate themselves in some fashion, that could be a barrier to finding truth here. That being

the latitude that civil litigants have in the discovery process is pretty broad. It's not the same

as a trial where there are all these rules like it has to be relevant and it has to be authentic and

it can't be hearsay, things like that. Those rules are stored during the discovery process, so

broad latitude for these folks, but also some potential legal barriers.

Yeah, I mean, they're spending a lot of time, money and resources for the only thing we can

guess at is from what you're saying is some truth and transparency. What other potential gains could

they get out of this? You know, Robin, if they, so like I said, there's no reasonable likelihood

of collectability on any sort of damages for KVD in my opinion, but you know, sometimes

through the discovery process, you learn about the involvement of other folks. You learn about the

potential civil responsibility of other folks, like folks who have money, folks who still have

assets, folks who are, you know, successful entertainers. And so perhaps they're saying, hey,

let's start with KVD and let's, and the people around him, let's build our knowledge base,

let's see if we can develop any ties through this discovery process by which we can potentially

add more defendants. That's why they included up to 100 John Does is because they want to replace

those John Does with actual names, potentially, of folks who have money.

So basically it's an expensive fishing expedition.

That's certainly how defense would characterize it on that. And perhaps you're not too far off.

Do we see that, is that kind of common in doing these types of civil suits after such a long time

is elapsed? It's not terribly common because there's not a ton of incentive for the attorneys,

usually on such a civil suit, the attorney would get paid from a percentage of any settlement or

verdict. But if there is no reasonable likelihood of the financial recovery, how are these attorneys

being paid through fame, through name recognition, I suppose, but that's a shift on a work to do over

the course of what could be years. How much latitude does Diddy have to say,

I'm not coming in for this. Can't nobody hold me down? I'll be missing you. You guys have fun

over there. What kind of latitude does he have to not show up for a deposition? And what sort of

legal repercussions could exist if he just says no? I got enough problems. I don't even

more money or more problems. I don't need to go for this deposition. I'm a bad boy for life.

Go shake a tail feather. What do I think I worked in about Tony's radio background shines

through every day. I nailed about seven Diddy songs in that question. On purpose. Yeah, but what's

sort of latitude does he have? Well played. So he can't just outright refuse without any sort

of legal response if he is properly served with documents requiring his attendance at a deposition.

However, he can file a motion to quash, like I said, if he was subpoenaed for this deposition,

he can file a motion to quash saying, hey, I'm just going to invoke my Fifth Amendment right anyway.

This is a meaningless procedure. And court don't make me come do this.

But they can't just say come with me. How many more of these you got?

He only had so many hits songs. He was usually on, he was usually somebody else's backing vocal.

Right. He needs a girl to ride, ride, ride. You know,

right. You know, what comes to mind to though is the plaintiff could potentially submit written

discovery to could they submit it to a non party? It depends on on the jurisdiction, but they

might be able to submit written questions to Diddy that he asked to answer under. And you can

only invoke your Fifth Amendment right. If you have a reasonable belief that the response could be

incriminating. And so if they're just asking him if they phrase the questions in such a way

that could not elicit a criminal response, but instead just trying to obtain knowledge about

what happened about people, you know, who do you know and who might have been there, things like

that. He might not be able to validly invoke his Fifth. It gets pretty complicated, but I don't

think he can just say no screw you guys. I'm invoking the Fifth and I'm never going to have any

involvement. I think it's going to be more nuanced than that from what you're seeing. Does this

look like a very complex way in order to try to get at Diddy? Very well could be especially with,

you know, some of the documentaries that have come out recently and 50 cent did his and it was

pretty unfavorable for Diddy to say the least. And they've got to find somebody with

deep pockets. I don't know if you know, it seems like Diddy might still have some significant

assets just based on what's publicly available. And if they were able to tie him in, that could

bring back sort of the financial element of this civil wrongful debt to make it worthwhile for

the attorneys and for the litigants as well. So if they could bring him in, certainly would be

a huge win for the point. He's not named in the suit right now, but that's where the the window

is open with the 100 John Does. Is the window into this, you know, going after key fee

D, that gets the lawsuit going, you can end up naming more defendants as you go on as the John Does,

if you so choose at some point in time. I'm wondering if that's the vehicle that's trying to

to get them there. And then I wonder if maybe there is a financial motive for it at some point

or truth or just both or one or the other. I don't know, but but it seems to get a kind of step

on some lily pads to get to the other side of the pond. If Diddy is there, but at the end of the

day, if if there was evidence to convict Diddy or to connect him to the death of Tupac,

wouldn't we have probably seen it by now? If there's any, and this is 30 years ago, so the

digital trail, all that stuff, it's gone. There's not really anything to find. It feels like all

that's really left would be if Diddy self incriminated himself. And all he has to do is shut up

or just or say he doesn't remember. And if that's the only thing that can get him, that might be

the only thing that could still get him, right? Potentially, but one thing that also comes to mind,

though, is, you know, let's say that there is an associate, let's just say hypothetically,

I'm not saying Diddy did this, but let's go for a hypothetical that he did do this. And through

the wrongful death lawsuit, they identify some associate of Diddy and they loop that person in

and they scare the hell out of that person. They say, hey, you're going to be liable for millions

of dollars. You might go to jail. This could turn into a criminal thing for you. Are you sure there's

not more info you want to tell us about Diddy? And then perhaps that person's like, whoa, hey, dude,

like I don't need my life screwed up forever. Diddy did this. And let me tell you how and let me

tell you about these conversations. Let me tell you about these events. Let me tell you about

things like that. Now that would not be, you know, sacrosanct evidence, certainly could be

challengeable, but there are ways to get to Diddy that are sort of peripheral to Diddy.

Yeah, it's really interesting, too, because Diddy's still behind bars, correct, right?

Yeah, but I heard rumors. I thought we heard he might be getting out early, good behavior,

sound like that, but I don't know. It kind of changes by the week. Yeah, but what's really

interesting about that, Eric, and this is because like, again, you got to look at the motivations,

the intent of what people are doing of what they think's in their best interest. So these attorneys

think it's in their best interest to do this. And so like you're saying, there's got to be some

sort of payoff that they're taking the gamble on. And the fact that, you know, a lot of Diddy's

circle would remain the very loyal to him, even to the very end, but now that that end has

happened is behind bars, I'm curious with you as well. Now that he is actually behind bars

or period of time, I wonder how that has influenced his network around him or not. And they might be

able to take a separate run at these people from the other side. And the fear factor might be higher

in them now than before. It's, you know, from prosecution and such. It's a really interesting,

it's really, really interesting to kind of think about that. That there's probably such

animosity against Diddy from this camp that even so they could even say in their minds, you know,

we might not getting monetary gain out of this. We might not be able to loop him in, but even the

thought of being able to keep him stumped down from this other camp might be enough to motivate them.

Could be. And you know, Robin, if there were, let's just say hypothetically, Diddy had some

involvement. I'm not saying that he did, but hypothetically, did. And there were some associates who

knew about this. Their fear of this thing ramping up and getting in trouble civilly or criminally

is probably increased. And their fear of Diddy, who's behind bars, is probably decreased. That

certainly has reached from the inside, but he's, but that that reaches lessen and his resources

have lessen, his reputation has lessen. And so perhaps there are folks with information who might

be more inclined now to come out and give that then they would, you know, five years ago when he

was having his parties and freaking off. I wonder, I wonder about that. Like how much has the field

cleared up that that pulled the fear factor of Diddy down where, where it used to just be, well,

I'm not going to talk about this because I don't want to have the repercussions from Diddy's

goons. Again, I'm not saying he did it all hypothetical, but from, from Diddy's goons coming at

me because obviously we've heard the other stories, kid, kid Cutty, all of this, you know,

firebombing the cars, things of that nature, those allegations. It seems, you know, he had a

propensity allegedly maybe in some people's opinions to bring repercussions to people who crossed him.

But if that's no longer a factor and you're caught in the middle and you have knowledge about

something theoretically, you got him, you're having to weigh then, oh, I might, you know,

owe a lot of money if I don't say something here I might face some sort of criminal charge

or face the wrath of Diddy. Well, you know, the weight is a little bit shifted these days and it's

not what it used to be. So I wonder how much that could influence where this might go. But the only

thing I'm going to bring up Mark Fry in our comments always makes me laugh. And if they are successful,

if for some chance getting all hypothetical, Diddy gets wrapped into this the only way he'll be able

to provide compensations with baby oil. There we go, big shipment of baby oil to the law firm.

Congratulations. Here's what you get. Uh, yeah. What am I going to do with that?

It's not up in Etsy store, you know, the leftover Diddy baby oil. Diddy's oil.

Oh my god. Uh, that's what happens. Well, money, no problems. That's what you end up doing.

All right. Your thoughts on the comment section on substacking YouTube. We'd love for you to weigh in.

The links are in the description. Eric Fattis. Thank you so much for being here. Robin Drake's

latest book. It's out. It's not all about me. It's available wherever you get books. Go and buy it

right now. You will. You shall. It's great. You'll love it. It's do it now. Okay. And buy it for

someone in your life. You think needs to hear that message. Exactly. Buy it for someone in prison.

Jim Bob, buy it for, get to in your prison. No, I, well, one. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You know,

two for one. Maybe they could share it. Like, you know, you could like move it or anyway.

Anyway, until next time for everyone, I'm Tony Bruceke. We'll talk again, Wilson.