The fallout from Lil Durk’s trial is still spreading through the rapper’s circle, and one man who moved in that world is now openly calling Vonnie, the associate whose testimony drew wide attention, a snake and a snitch. He also said he was not surprised by any of it.
The criticism centers on Vonnie’s time on the witness stand, which many observers viewed as among the most damaging moments of the proceedings.
Unlike some other witnesses, Vonnie came across as polished and educated. That made his account hard to dismiss and turned him into a lightning rod for anger among people close to Durk.
The associate pushed back on the idea that Vonnie was ever part of the inner circle. He said prosecutors tried to frame the two as close, but in his view they were not.
According to him, Vonnie was known to the group mainly through a mutual associate he once lived with, and the two families had ties going back to their fathers.
Asked how he felt watching the testimony unfold, his answer was short. “I expected it,” he said.
He explained that he had long kept his guard up around Vonnie, even while the two shared laughs whenever they were together.
He described Vonnie as someone he enjoyed joking with, but said he was always careful about what he did and said in his presence. “I know not to say around you,” he added.
He then said Vonnie had a look that gave him away, and that he could read his body language well enough to know what kind of person he was dealing with.
In his telling, those instincts pointed to a snitch, a thief and a finesser long before Vonnie ever took the stand.
When the conversation turned to claims that Vonnie had taken money from the late associate’s estate, he did not confirm them. He said he did not know and was not in a position to speak on financial matters.
Still, his broader view of Vonnie did not soften. “Snake, snitch,” he said, explaining that he accepted everything that came with Vonnie and could not be surprised by any of it, speaking not as a street figure but as a man.
The most striking claim came when he discussed the end of the trial. As the case moved from closing arguments to jury deliberations, he said he already had inside knowledge. “I knew the verdict before everybody,” he said.
He recalled posting about it online before the decision became public, a post he said took off. “The verdict is in,” he said he wrote, adding that he also told a friend, who doubted him at first. Half an hour later, he said, the friend came back with “damn, you was right.”
He attributed his early word to his own legal connections, saying his lawyer worked on the prosecution side. While others waited for news, he said he stayed quiet about what he knew. “I’m knowing everything, but I’m playing my role,” he said.
He also explained why he was not present in the courtroom himself. He said he would have attended if not for restrictions tied to his own legal case. “I would have been at court though,” he said, noting that his situation at the time limited his movement.
His comments add another voice to the growing tension surrounding Vonnie’s role in the trial. For those in Durk’s camp, the testimony has become a dividing line, and this associate has made clear which side of it he stands on.
