A federal jury in Los Angeles has reached a verdict in Lil Durk’s closely watched murder-for-hire trial, bringing weeks of testimony and three days of jury deliberations to a dramatic turning point.

The verdict involving the Grammy-winning Chicago rapper, whose legal name is Durk Banks, is expected to be read aloud in federal court Friday afternoon.

Until the decision is formally announced in the courtroom, the jury’s findings remain unknown publicly.

The development comes after jurors began deliberating Wednesday following closing arguments in a trial centered on the August 2022 shooting that killed Saviay’a “Lul Pab” Robinson, the cousin of rapper Quando Rondo, near the Beverly Center in Los Angeles.

Durk has pleaded not guilty and denied involvement in the alleged plot.

Three Days of Deliberations

Jurors spent portions of Wednesday, Thursday and Friday weighing the government's case against Durk and his co-defendants.

Federal prosecutors allege Durk used members of his Only The Family circle and his financial resources to orchestrate an attempt to kill Quando Rondo, whose legal name is Tyquian Bowman.

The government has argued that the alleged plot was retaliation for the November 2020 killing of Durk's close friend and fellow Chicago rapper King Von, born Dayvon Bennett, following a confrontation involving Bowman outside an Atlanta nightclub.

Nearly two years later, on Aug. 19, 2022, gunmen opened fire on a vehicle carrying Bowman and Robinson near the Beverly Center.

Bowman survived.

Robinson, 24, was killed.

Prosecutors contend Durk was responsible for setting the alleged revenge plot in motion, even though they have not accused him of personally traveling to Los Angeles and carrying out the shooting.

Durk's attorneys have fiercely disputed that theory throughout the trial.

Prosecutors and Defense Offered Two Different Stories

The government's case relied heavily on testimony from cooperating witnesses, including Kacey “OTF Jam” Hester, Keith Jones and Durk's former personal assistant Kavon Grant.

Hester and Jones admitted involvement in the shooting, while Grant also testified for the government.

Prosecutors argued their testimony, combined with travel records, communications and other evidence presented during the trial, connected Durk to the alleged murder-for-hire conspiracy.

Durk's defense team attacked the credibility of those witnesses, arguing that cooperators facing serious federal consequences had powerful incentives to provide testimony favorable to prosecutors.

Defense attorneys Brian Steel and Drew Findling particularly focused their closing arguments on Grant, portraying Durk's former assistant as someone who had access to Durk's resources and could have acted independently.

Findling accused Grant of manipulating investigators and prosecutors, while Steel urged jurors not to accept the government's interpretation of the evidence simply because Durk was the most famous person involved.

Prosecutors pushed back during rebuttal, arguing that the alleged operation made sense only when Durk's money, influence and leadership were taken into account.

The Trial Drew Major Attention Outside the Courthouse

The proceedings have attracted unusual attention for a federal criminal trial.

Fans, livestreamers and independent media personalities repeatedly gathered outside the downtown Los Angeles courthouse as testimony unfolded, while several celebrities appeared inside the courtroom to show support for Durk.

Ye and Machine Gun Kelly were among the high-profile figures who attended portions of the trial.

Supporters have also gathered outside wearing “Free Durk” clothing and following developments as they emerge from the courthouse.

That attention is expected to intensify now that jurors have informed the court that they have reached a decision.

Everything Now Comes Down to the Verdict

Durk entered the trial facing five federal counts, including conspiracy to commit stalking, stalking using a dangerous weapon, stalking resulting in death and two murder-for-hire-related charges.

He has maintained his innocence.

After weeks of testimony, arguments over cooperating witnesses, disputed interpretations of evidence and three days of deliberations, the jury has now made its decision.

What that decision is will become known when the verdict is formally read in court.

Until then, any claims circulating online about whether Durk has been convicted or acquitted should be treated as unconfirmed unless and until the jury's findings are announced in open court.