Courtney Jordan, Esq.

Courtney Jordan, Esq. Attorney | Former Federal Prosecutor | Felon — I built cases with these systems. Then they were used on me. Now I expose them.
(1)

09/01/2026

A cooperating witness in the Lil Durk federal trial said something on cross that stopped me: “All you got is me.”

Those five words illustrate one of the most important things a jury has to do with evidence: figure out exactly what each piece proves.

Here's where people get it wrong, both ways: his testimony IS evidence, and a jury can believe a witness without independent corroboration.

But jurors can also ask what supports each part of the story, because corroboration goes to weight. Testimony can be enough.

That doesn't mean corroboration doesn't matter. And you do it allegation by allegation, a case can have mountains of corroboration on some things and little on others.

Note - Trial testimony, not findings of fact. Banks has pleaded not guilty.

08/31/2026

In the Lil Durk federal trial, the government played the jury a short clip from his DJ Akademiks interview to support its argument that the pressure to “Slide for Von” was getting to him.

Today his lawyers filed a motion asking the judge to let the jury hear more of that same interview. There's an actual rule of evidence for this.

In the government's excerpt, Banks is cryptic: “For some reason, I just don't see those comments no more.”

But the defense points to another part of the same interview where he says he doesn't take the trolling seriously, tries to “stay out the way,” and is “trying to turn all the hate into love.”

Same interview, two very different impressions, depending on where you cut it.

That's Rule 106, the rule of completeness: if one side shows part of a recording, the other can ask to bring in the portions needed to keep it from leaving a misleading impression. It doesn't mean the jury automatically gets the whole tape, it means you don't get to build a misleading story by choosing where the tape starts and stops.

The defense says that's what happened here. Now the judge has to decide.

Note – Trial filings are arguments, not evidence. Lil Durk has pleaded not guilty.

08/30/2026

The Lil Durk federal murder for hire conspiracy case is built to look overwhelming with texts, money, witnesses, and this week a mountain of social media.

But a case can look enormous and still have a gap running through the middle.

Here's the one thing all of it still has to prove.

The government's theory is motive, money, and association: he was angry, he paid for things, he knew the people who did it. All real. None of it, by itself, is the crime.

What they actually have to prove is AGREEMENT, that he agreed to this killing. Money may prove he paid. Messages may prove he talked. The cooperators say he ordered it, and each made a deal to say so.

So when the social media drops Monday, watch it through one question: does any single piece cross from connection into him agreeing to the murder, or is it just more connection stacked higher?

A mountain of connection still isn't a contract. That's how the system makes a case look stronger than its weakest link.

Note - Opening statements are arguments, not evidence. Lil Durk has pleaded not guilty.

08/29/2026

In the Lil Durk federal trial, the government's witness made a deal to testify against Lil Durk. On cross, his story collapsed.

Early in his recorded interview: he never knew of any bounty. 2 hours later, same room: “Durk said kill him.” Both can't be true. And that's not me, that's his own recorded words.

Then his memory got sharper with time, a vivid new scene at trial that was on none of the earlier recordings. Memories fade, they don't sharpen. Cornered, his escape was one word: he “only meant personally.” The meetings that would back him up weren't recorded, and his arrest note said “no recordings.”

Cross-examination is the one moment a deal-made story gets tested in the open. When you know what to watch for, you can see it fall apart in real time.

Note – This is trial testimony; nothing here is a finding of fact and the defendant has pleaded not guilty.

08/28/2026

You can password your phone, turn off your backups, encrypt everything, and it may not save you.

In the Lil Durk federal trial, the government didn't break into his phone. They went into someone else's cloud account and pulled out evidence about him.

Everything you send doesn't just live on your phone, it lands on theirs, and backs up to their iCloud or Google account automatically.

So even if your phone is a locked vault, your life is sitting in the accounts of everyone you've ever talked to, and you have zero control over their password or their backups.

The moment one of them cooperates, or just gets a warrant served on them, their whole cloud goes to the government. Every conversation. Every photo you're in. They don't need your permission, and you won't know until you see it used as an exhibit.

Your privacy isn't about your phone. It's only as strong as the least careful person you've ever texted.

08/27/2026

In the Lil Durk federal trial right now, the government is making an argument that should scare everyone with a phone: that protecting your privacy is evidence you're guilty.

Changing your number. A second phone. Deleting messages. Things millions of people do every day.

Prosecutors told the jury the defendant changed his number about 48 hours after a certain video went around, and they're arguing the timing proves intent.

They also claim the group cycled through burners and deleted threads, and point to a text they attribute to him saying to delete a chat and start a new one.

Normal privacy habits, retold as a confession.

Note - All of this is the government's allegation. He has pleaded not guilty.

Why it matters for you: every privacy habit can be flipped. Deleting texts becomes hiding evidence. A second phone becomes a burner. Disappearing messages become consciousness of guilt.

The exact things experts tell you to do, a prosecutor can call proof you had something to hide. Privacy and guilt look identical on a slide, and the government narrates the slide.

08/26/2026

The Lil Durk federal murder conspiracy trial is happening right now where Lil Durk may have never been at the scene, never touched anyone, and he's still facing life. As a former prosecutor who now defends these cases, here's the exact argument I'd be making, because it protects you too.

What people get wrong about conspiracy: being around a crime isn't one. Knowing the people who did it isn't one. Even wanting the same thing isn't one. The government has to prove you actually AGREED to join the plan. Not that you were there. Not that you knew. That you agreed. And an agreement can be invisible.

So the defense is one sentence: show me the agreement. Texts, associations, motive, that's proximity, not a pact. Knowing people who did terrible things isn't the same as agreeing to do them. You can know people who break the law and not be part of what they did. The law protects that. The danger is a jury seeing association and filling in agreement on its own.

08/25/2026

Lil Durk’s federal trial just started and one of the biggest fights is whether the government can use his own song lyrics against him. Here's what almost nobody understands: the most dangerous evidence isn't always what police found. Sometimes it's what you said.

The rule: the government can't use your words to argue you're just the type of person who'd commit the crime. That's propensity, and it's banned. That's because a jury decides what you did, not who you are. When prosecutors tried to use a lyric to suggest that Lil Durk runs from the law, the judge threw it out as "sheer propensity."

But the same words can come in through a different door. If the government argues they show motive, or intent, or your role in a group, a judge can admit them anyway. Same words, different label. That's how your texts, your posts, even your art get in front of a jury. Not to prove you're a bad person, but to prove why you did it.

08/24/2026

Police took Lil Durk’s phone when he was the victim of a home invasion. They copied everything on it. Nearly 5 years later, a different agency working a different case pulled that copy back out and used it against him. A judge just said that's allowed.

What it means for you: once the government copies your phone, for any reason, even a case where you were the victim, that copy doesn't expire. It can sit in a file for years, and a different agency in a case you've never heard of can get a fresh warrant and use it against you. The moment your data leaves your hands, you stop controlling where it goes.

08/22/2026

| 20% off at joindeleteme.com/COURTNEY with code COURTNEY

I spent years as a federal prosecutor. I put people in prison. So I am careful about who can find me. Then I ran a privacy report on myself, and my name and home address were being sold on 25 different websites.

41 exposures. 130 individual pieces of my data, my address, my phone number, my relatives' names. Over 11,000 records with my information in them. If a former prosecutor who is careful about this was that exposed, you are too.

That is why I use DeleteMe. Their privacy experts remove your data from hundreds of data broker and people search sites, hands-free. These are people search sites, they legally collect and sell your information to anyone with a credit card, no consent, no notification. DeleteMe is trusted by judges, journalists, and election workers. Removing your data helps reduce the risk of identity theft, phishing, and doxxing.

Find out your number —

Address

Tulsa, OK

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Courtney Jordan, Esq. posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Featured

Share

Category