Tupac’s murder: Is US police inching closer to solving decades old crime?

On July 17 of this year, the Las Vegas metropolitan police department executed a search warrant to enter the home of Duane Davis, 60, allegedly involved in the murder of legendary hip-hop artist Tupac Shakur.

The murder occurred while Shakur was a passenger in a BMW, driven by Suge Knight – then head of major hip-hop label Death Row Records – along the Las Vegas Strip in September 1996.

The crime remains unsolved.

Important details however are known and connect with the recent search of Davis’ home.

Davis was in the Cadillac from which Shakur was fatally shot. Four other gang members were in the vehicle with him.

In weeks following the murder Davis was questioned by both Las Vegas and Los Angeles police. After denying any involvement he later, protected by a “limited non-prosecution agreement”, offered police details about the crime. Still, neither he nor those with him in the Cadillac were ever formally charged or prosecuted.

Davis has been far from quiet about Shakur’s murder. In fact he wrote and published a 2019 memoir, Compton Street Legend, where he – in a bravado-like manner – relates several details surrounding Shakur’s murder.

According to Davis the crime was in retaliation to Shakur physically assaulting Davis’ nephew, Orlando Anderson (aka Baby Lane), in the MGM Grand after a Mike Tyson boxing match at the well-known Vegas hotel. Following the incident Davis claims to have enlisted the four gang members to aid him in both the killing of the artist and Knight, shot at from the Cadillac. Knight was hit in the head by a bullet but luckily survived.

More recently Davis has been attempting to secure financing for a television or film production on Shakur’s murder, highlighting further details of his involvement therein. The reasons for the apparent self-incriminating move are unclear. However, given Shakur’s iconic status – not only as a rapper but unapologetic voice against anti-Black racism – it is not out of the realm of possibility that Davis may be desirous of fame.

Even if negative the widespread attention that would garner is arguably appealing to the likes of Davis who, relative to the outsized musical and financial success of Shakur (selling over 75 million records to date), resent the “smallness” of their own lives, perhaps because they – on account of narcissism, grandiosity, poor self-esteem, etc. – feel entitled to a lot more. In being known as the killer of Shakur, a larger-than-life figure in American pop culture, they see an opportunity to, perversely, compensate for that.

The inventory of the search warrant to enter Davis’ home suggests there's a possibility we may eventually learn more about what’s been on his mind. It lists several laptops and other digital technologies, routinely used to document thoughts, ideas and other personal information. Whether any of it is actually incriminating is not yet known and police have mostly remained mum as to their next steps.

In his memoir, Davis writes: “I have a deep sense of remorse for what happened to Tupac. He was a talented artist with tons of potential to impact the world. I hate that Tupac’s family, friends, and fans, especially his mother had to go through the pain of losing her son”.

It’s conceivable Davis actually feels this way. Davis may have come, over time, to see the great harm he’s caused an entire community of people who embraced the artist for the remarkable person he was.

Remorse, however, is not tantamount to justice. For that to occur, those responsible for the murder of Shakur must be held accountable through the American judicial system.

"I stand firm on the point,” Davis also confesses in the memoir, “that Tupac, Suge Knight, and the rest of those [expletive] didn’t have any business putting their hands on my beloved nephew Baby Lane. Period”.

In his view that might be a legitimate basis for killing Shakur. But the eye for an eye mentality that underlies this is appropriate to revenge, not justice.

This is counter to any genuine democracy, whether in America or elsewhere, which is ultimately governed by the rule of law. It does not tolerate the vigilante who, spurred by revenge, decides to kill another person and often on a whim.

Where a society accommodates the opposite it shows contempt for justice, which does not aim to harm. Rather, it aims to discipline – as in balanced and fair court proceedings – wrongdoers, thereby honouring the dignity of victims.

Decades after his murder Shakur is still owed nothing less.