Introducing, Reasonable Doubt

AKA Wally Sajimi, the petty Parisian king

Introduction

As the prosecution stepped aside, the defense took center stage, bringing a new layer of complexity to an already high-stakes case. And if there’s one thing Tacopina will do, it’s shake the table. What began as a prosecution-led effort to establish Rocky’s guilt shifted into a battle of credibility, strategic doubt, and the fine line between truth and narrative control.

From the moment A$AP Relli took the stand, his antagonistic posture toward the defense was impossible to ignore. And that raises an important question: shouldn’t a reliable witness be focused on the truth rather than a specific outcome? A credible witness should be neutral and measured, even under cross-examination. Relli, instead, seemed actively resistant, which can signal bias—not necessarily dishonesty, but a personal investment in Rocky’s conviction.

The Cracks in Relli’s Testimony

Under cross-examination, Relli’s version of events started to show fractures. One of the most glaring inconsistencies? The defense presented evidence suggesting that Relli had been on recorded calls discussing the case, yet he outright denied being the speaker. The problem? The calls sound a whole lot like him. If he was willing to lie about something as verifiable as a phone call, what else might be up for debate?

Then, there was the issue of his familiarity with firearms. On the stand, Relli tried to paint himself as someone with no real connection to guns, but that narrative collapsed when the defense pulled out a picture of him at a gun range. He vehemently denied that the photo was from a gun range in Los Angeles and later backed off that claim once it was proven otherwise.

And let’s not forget his shaky story about how he found the bullet casings. One minute, his girlfriend was there. The next, she wasn’t. When his entire claim hinges on credibility, even small shifts in details become significant liabilities. If he was telling the truth, why couldn’t he keep it straight?

To make matters worse, the defense introduced Relli’s bank statements from before the shooting. The implication? Maybe he wasn’t in as stable a position as he claimed. Relli has been telling a story where everything was fine—until Rocky attacked him, and suddenly, everything spiraled. But if jurors see evidence that financial instability predated the alleged incident, it raises the question: was this case about justice or opportunity?

Wally Sajimi’s Testimony

If the goal of cross-examining Relli was to shake the jury’s confidence in him, the defense’s decision to follow up with Wally as their witness was the finishing blow. The order of these testimonies was a strategic win for the defense. Relli had damaged his credibility significantly with his emotional outbursts and blatant inconsistencies. Wally took the stand and sealed the deal.

One of the most damning aspects of Wally’s testimony was his confirmation of the very thing Relli had tried to deny: the recorded phone calls. Relli had insisted specific recordings weren’t his voice. Wally testified that Relli had called him multiple times, discussing how he needed to frame the situation as a criminal case so it wouldn’t look like extortion. That statement alone was incredibly damaging—regardless of what happened that night, it raised serious questions about Relli’s motives and honesty.

The prosecution’s reaction to Wally’s testimony was telling. They seemed noticeably agitated, as if they understood the weight of what he was saying and the implications for their case. While Relli came off as defensive and aggressive on the stand, Wally’s demeanor was the opposite—calm, collected, and matter-of-fact. That contrast alone further weakened Relli’s credibility.

What Side Is Wally On?

The prosecution tried to frame Wally as a biased witness, suggesting that he recorded the call as part of a larger scheme to support Rocky. But that framing ignores something crucial: Relli was the one who called Wally multiple times before Wally even picked up. At one point in the recording, Relli acknowledges Wally’s connection to Rocky, saying I don’t want to put you in a situation where things are complicated with Rocky. That alone confirms that Relli knew precisely what he was doing when he reached out. He wasn’t being manipulated—he was actively trying to shape the narrative with someone who had the potential to be a middleman.

The truth is likely more nuanced. Wally has made it clear that while he’s closer to Rocky, he didn’t necessarily set out to take sides—he was documenting the conversation as a form of self-protection. Wally had no direct involvement in the altercation between A$AP Rocky and Relli. Recording the call was a brilliant act of self-protection, knowing it could escalate into a criminal case where any conversation might be used against those involved.

And here’s the most critical part: by engaging with this recording seriously in court, the prosecution implicitly acknowledged that their star witness had committed perjury. If they genuinely believed Relli’s denial of the recording, they wouldn’t have dissected it line by line. The moment they leaned into that analysis, they reinforced the defense’s argument—Relli had been caught in a lie, and his credibility was in ruins.

Trial Highlight: Wally, the MVP

My absolute favorite moment of the cross-examination—and, honestly, one of my favorite moments of the whole trial so far—was when the prosecution tried to press Wally on whether he had suggested that Relli get money. Unbothered, Wally calmly explained that he wasn’t instructing Relli to do anything—he offered suggestions and alternatives for handling the situation outside the legal system. But the prosecution just could not grasp this distinction. And that’s when Wally, in the most nonchalant but devastating way, shut it down with:

"This is how we talk. You wouldn’t understand."

Yes. Give it up for Wally, bitch! That single line? A moment.

And that disconnect became crystal clear in the back-and-forth that followed. For example, the prosecution kept pressing Wally about his statement that he didn’t want anyone to go to jail. “What do you mean you don’t want anyone to go to jail?” they kept asking as if this was some wholly foreign and incomprehensible concept. That proved Wally’s entire point. This wasn’t just about language; it was about politics. It was about ideology. It was about how we think, move, and see the world.

What the prosecution failed to grasp—what they probably can’t grasp—is that there is a deep, widespread, and generational distrust of the state, the criminal justice system, and law enforcement within Black communities. The idea of not wanting to see someone you know—someone from your community—caught up in that system is not some radical or unusual position.

And yet, for the prosecution, it was treated as if Wally had just confessed to something absurd. They don’t understand how abolitionist thought, anti-state politics, and the general mistrust of the system shape how Black people navigate these situations. It’s not just about the crime itself—it’s about the consequences of what happens when Black people get entangled in a system designed to destroy us.

This moment was much bigger than just the words spoken in that courtroom. It was a perfect, heartbreaking illustration of that ideological divide in real-time. Wally tried to tell them. He wanted to make them see that they fundamentally wouldn’t understand, and then, in real-time, they proved him right.

In that exchange, we witnessed a microcosm of a much bigger, deeply entrenched divide. It was a moment that again exposed how the criminal justice system is built on a foundation that will never truly see or understand us. This perfectly explains why Wally tried to mediate to keep everyone away from that system.

At the end of his testimony, Wally clarified that he flew from Paris to L.A. for one reason only. Relli denied it was his voice on the recordings. Wally was not about to let that slide. He flew across the damn Atlantic to let the court know that Relli perjured himself. And honestly? That level of pettiness? Chef’s kiss.

And the best part? The way he did it so casually, with no extra theatrics—just pure, calculated, slightly smug precision. He wasn’t just a witness; he was the prosecution’s worst nightmare in human form.

Petty. Brilliant.

Give it up for Wally, the Petty Parisian King.

Conclusion

At this stage, the defense has done what they needed: introduce doubt. The prosecution’s case is wobbling, and Relli’s credibility is in shambles. With that much uncertainty in the air, the burden is now on the prosecution to try and regain control. But after the week they’ve had, the real question is: do they even have a move left?

And that brings us to the bigger picture.

If you found this breakdown insightful, you’ll love The Vulture’s Eye, my next deep dive into how media feeds off the justice system, shaping narratives in ways most people don’t even notice. I’ll dissect how celebrity cases are spun, manipulated, and packaged for public consumption and how we engage with the system itself.

Sign up, share, and subscribe—because you won’t want to miss this one.

Bibliography

ASAP ROCKY TRIAL LAWYERS EXPOSE FORMER HATER ASAP RELLI AS A LIAR! NOT A GOOD LOOK