Hip-hop exec, accused L.A. gang leader pleads not guilty to extortion, murder charges
A music executive who authorities say is a leader of a notorious Los Angeles street gang appeared in court Tuesday to face charges alleging he used his influence to extort wealthy individuals, stole from his charity and murdered a young rapper signed to his label.
Eugene 'Big U' Henley, accused leader of the Rollin' 60s Neighborhood Crips, pleaded not guilty to the charges Tuesday morning. His trial is set to begin on May 20, a spokesperson for U.S. Attorney's Office said.
Henley, 58, turned himself into authorities last month on charges of fraud, robbery, extortion, human trafficking, embezzlement and leading a 'mafia-like' criminal enterprise that was responsible for the murder of Rayshawn Williams, an aspiring rapper who had recorded a diss track about him.
Federal investigators allege Henley, who billed himself as both an 'OG' — original gangster — and an anti-gang activist, shot and killed Williams, then 'dragged the victim's body off Interstate 15 in Las Vegas and left it in a ditch' in January 2021.
He's also accused of using his stature as a prominent figure in the famed street gang to extort wealthy individuals, like celebrities and professional athletes, requiring them to 'check in' with him when visiting the city and coercing them to pay for protection.
The practice was widespread and well known throughout the hip-hop community, prosecutors allege.
Former Dodgers pitcher dies after roof collapses at Dominican nightclub
Investigators say he also embezzled from his 'anti-gang charity,' which was actually just a front for him to transfer donations to his personal accounts, conceal illegal activities and 'insulate other members of the Big U Enterprise from law enforcement suspicion,' the Department of Justice wrote in a March 25 press release. The charity received major donations from celebrities and prominent companies, officials said.
Despite the accusation that he murdered the young rapper, Henley does not face murder charges, but rather racketeering and conspiracy charges related to the killing. If convicted, he could face decades in federal prison for each felony complain — essentially a life sentence.
He is among seven defendants facing charges as part of the criminal operation.
The Rollin' 60s first appeared in the Hyde Park area of Los Angeles and rose to prominence in the 1980s. It is considered one of the largest street gangs in L.A. with hundreds of current and former members, including late musician and activist Nipsey Hussle.
Cameron Kiszla contributed to this report.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
22 minutes ago
The ACLU demands the US release and return a Dominican woman living legally in Puerto Rico
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- In late May, a 47-year-old woman from the Dominican Republic was detained by police in Puerto Rico after she entered a municipal building seeking a permit to sell ice cream on the beach to support herself. Upon being turned over to federal agents, the Dominican woman presented her passport, driver's license and work permits that proved she was living in the U.S. territory legally, her attorney Ángel Robles and the American Civil Liberties Union of Puerto Rico, said Monday. Despite the documents presented, authorities recently transferred her to Texas as part of a federal crackdown on migrants living illegally in U.S. jurisdictions. The woman, whose first name is Aracelis, has not been fully identified because she is a victim of domestic violence. Aracelis is among hundreds of people who have been detained in Puerto Rico since large-scale arrests began in late January, surprising many in the U.S. territory that has long welcomed migrants. Robles and the ACLU demanded Aracelis' release and return to Puerto Rico. 'It's outrageous,' Robles said in a phone interview. 'No charges have been filed against her, and she is not in the system.' Because her name does not appear in a federal database, Robles' request for a bond hearing was denied. 'This case is one of unspeakable abuse,' said Annette Martínez Orabona, the ACLU director in Puerto Rico. The case has fueled already simmering anger against the administration of Puerto Rico Gov. Jenniffer González Colón and local authorities who have been working with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to arrest those believed to be living illegally in the U.S. territory. In a letter sent Monday to the governor and the island's justice secretary, the ACLU accused Puerto Rico's government of violating the Constitution and local laws by providing ICE and U.S. Homeland Security with confidential information on nearly 6,000 immigrants. It also accused ICE of using that data to go on a 'fishing expedition' that it called 'arbitrary and abusive.' A spokesman for Homeland Security Investigations did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In Puerto Rico, undocumented immigrants are allowed to open bank accounts and obtain a special driver's license. The ACLU in Puerto Rico also accused González Colón's administration of not providing protocols to local government agencies for how to deal with such requests from the federal government. The ACLU requested, among other things, that Puerto Rico's government issue an executive order barring public agencies from collaborating with ICE subpoenas not accompanied by a court order. A spokeswoman for the governor did not immediately return a message for comment.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Ex-senator's wife, convicted in bribery scheme, seeks new trial
Sen. Bob Menendez takes a selfie with his wife, Nadine, and businessman Wael Hana. The three were co-defendants in an 18-count federal corruption indictment. (Courtesy of U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York) The wife of former Sen. Bob Menendez has asked a federal judge to overturn her bribery conviction, saying prosecutors wrongly forced her to change lawyers less than a year before her trial over a 'manufactured' conflict of interest. Nadine Arslanian Menendez had to hire new attorneys in a hurry last year after prosecutors said they might call attorney David Schertler, who had represented her for nearly two years, as a trial witness to testify about information he'd shared with the prosecution during pre-indictment negotiations. But prosecutors never called Schertler to the stand during a three-week trial in Manhattan that ended in April, when jurors found Nadine Menendez guilty of accepting bribes including gold bars, cash, and a luxury car in exchange for power and political influence and of trying to hide her actions from federal investigators. Prosecutors' 'improper government interference' with her legal representation violated her Sixth Amendment right to counsel of her choice, her new attorneys, Sarah R. Krissoff and Andrew Vazquez, wrote in a motion filed Friday. 'To be clear — the Government has broad discretion to choose which witnesses to call and which evidence to offer in proving its case. But the Government cannot create a conflict, forcing Mr. Schertler to be a witness against his own client and to withdraw from the case, and then secretly decide not to call Mr. Schertler or offer any evidence regarding the Government's allegations that created the conflict in the first place,' the attorneys wrote. Prosecutors also never bothered to alert Barry Coburn, the defense attorney who replaced Schertler, that they decided against putting Schertler on the stand, preventing her from rehiring him, Krissoff and Vazquez wrote. 'If Mrs. Menendez had known that there was no longer any conflict, Mrs. Menendez would have elected to bring Mr. Schertler and his firm back into the case at any point, up until the last day of trial. Whether the Government's conduct was careless or intentional, the result is the same: Mrs. Menendez's fundamental constitutional rights were violated,' the attorneys wrote. Such a constitutional infringement created a structural error in the case and necessitates an acquittal or new trial, they argued. The conflict dates back to August 2023, about a month before the indictment, when Schertler met with prosecutors and claimed that mortgage and car payments totaling more than $50,000 that businessmen Wael Hana and Jose Uribe paid toward Nadine Menendez's Englewood Cliffs home and Mercedes-Benz convertible were loans — not bribes, according to court documents. Prosecutors used that information to file new obstruction of justice charges against the Menendezes, and they told the couple they planned to question Schertler before a jury on the matter, creating a conflict between Nadine Menendez and her lawyer. Besides their objections about Schertler's withdrawal, Krissoff and Vazquez repeated the former senator's oft-repeated complaint that the case should have been tried in New Jersey and not Manhattan. They also contend prosecutors improperly used summary exhibits and failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that bribery and obstruction of justice occurred. Nadine Menendez, who was tried after her husband and co-defendants to accommodate her medical treatment for breast cancer, is scheduled to be sentenced on Sept. 11. In an earlier trial that started in May 2024, a jury convicted Hana, real estate developer Fred Daibes, and the former senator last July. Last August, Judge Sidney H. Stein slapped Bob Menendez with an 11-year sentence; he's now scheduled to report to prison on June 17. Hana and Daibes reported to prison last month to begin serving their sentences — just over eight years and seven years, respectively. Sentencing for Uribe has been repeatedly postponed and is now set for Oct. 9 because he testified against his co-defendants in a cooperation deal with prosecutors. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Boston Globe
8 hours ago
- Boston Globe
‘She knew nothing about it': Newton judge Shelley Joseph denies helping defendant evade ICE in 2018
Monday's hearing involves the latest chapter in a saga that stretches from President Trump's first term to his second, amid a renewed immigration crackdown that has sparked As part of that agreement, Joseph admitted she knew that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were waiting to detain defendant Jose Medina-Perez, that she asked them to leave the courtroom, and that she had an off-the-record conversation with court parties that violated court rules. But she did not admit wrongdoing or deliberately helping Medina-Perez avoid ICE. Advertisement The Advertisement Joseph's disciplinary case is being heard before Denis J. McInerny, a former deputy assistant attorney general with the Department of Justice, and the commission has appointed former Superior Court chief justice Judith Fabricant as special counsel to prosecute the case. McInerny will submit his findings to the Commission within 30 days of the hearing, and the Commission can then recommend discipline to the Supreme Judicial Court. Only the Legislature can remove a judge from the bench for misconduct. The hearing began with a site visit to Newton District Court Monday morning. Proceedings resumed in Boston with the questioning of defense attorney David Jellinek, who acknowledged hatching the plan to help his client evade ICE. Fabricant accused Joseph of allowing an off-the-record conversation in violation of court rules, and accused her of lacking transparency when she later discussed the incident with senior judges. 'She did not volunteer information she should have volunteered,' Fabricant said. The hearing is scheduled to resume Tuesday morning, with testimony from former Middlesex assistant district attorney Shannon McDermott, the prosecutor for Medina-Perez' case. The controversy dates back to April 2018, when Medina-Perez, a Dominican national who had been deported twice before, was in court to face charges for possessing drugs and for being a fugitive from justice. An ICE agent had shown up to the courthouse to detain him, and Joseph had him wait outside the courtroom, what she said was in accordance with policy set by Newton District Court's First Justice Mary Heffernan. Advertisement Joseph and the prosecutor agree on a certain set of facts. On the day at issue, Medina-Perez had switched from a court appointed defender to Jellinek, a veteran private attorney who frequently practiced in Newton District Court. After a lunch break, Jellinek asked for a side bar conference, telling Joseph and McDermott that he was concerned ICE had misidentified his client and was going to detain him anyway. Jellinek then asked to go off-the-record, leading to a 52-second unrecorded conversation between himself, Joseph and the prosecutor. McDermott agreed to drop the fugitive charge, and Joseph ordered Medina-Perez released without bail pending his next hearing on the drug counts. Instead of exiting through the front door, which would be typical, Jellinek and the court officer went downstairs with Medina-Perez and released him through a back door, which the waiting ICE agents did not discover until he had already left the building. But what exactly was said during that 52-second gap in the tape recording remains under dispute. Jellinek, who was given immunity by federal prosecutors, told a grand jury he told Joseph of his plan to help Medina-Perez avoid capture, and that she agreed to it. 'My impression was she did also did not want ICE necessarily to pick up the wrong person,' Jellinek said at Monday's hearing. But Joseph's attorneys argued that Jellinek had incentive to exaggerate the judge's knowledge to avoid facing federal charges himself. Thomas Hoopes, one of Joseph's attorneys, described Jellinek's deal as a 'get-out-of-jail-free card.' 'Did anyone explain to you how rare it is for the mastermind of any crime — federally — to be immunized?' Hoopes said. Advertisement 'I never had that conversation,' Jellinek said. Mulvey described Jellinek as the 'mastermind' of an 'ill conceived scheme,' saying Joseph was left in the dark about his true intentions. 'Nobody told her Medina Perez had gone out the back door,' Mulvey said. 'She knew nothing about it.' Jellinek denied deceiving Joseph, and defended his behavior as legitimate advocacy for his client's interests. He said he asked to talk off-the-record because he knew helping Medina-Perez leave by the back door was 'right on the edge of acceptable or appropriate.' 'I was trying to protect everybody, but myself and the judge especially,' Jellinek said. Joseph is not the only judge to face federal prosecution for allegedly helping a defendant evade ICE. Last month, a federal grand jury Shelley Murphy can be reached at
