Pooh Shiesty faces Texas robbery, kidnapping allegations
Pooh Shiesty is accused by federal prosecutors of January robbery and kidnapping in Texas tied to a contract dispute involving 1017 Records.
Cuneyd Erdogan ·
Federal prosecutors on Thursday accused rapper Pooh Shiesty and eight other people of robbing three men at gunpoint and kidnapping them in January in Texas, according to a criminal complaint tied to the case.
Officials said the alleged incident followed a contract dispute connected to a record label associated with rapper Gucci Mane. The complaint was filed in federal court, and an FBI affidavit was attached to the filing.
The US attorney’s office in Dallas declined to identify the three alleged victims by name. In the affidavit, the individuals were referenced only by their initials, officials said.
One of the alleged victims is identified in the affidavit as “RD,” described as the owner of 1017 Records. The filing states that 1017 Records is the label belonging to Gucci Mane, whose legal name is Radric Delantic Davis.
The source material also states that one of the three victims is apparently Mane himself, and that he flew to Dallas for contract discussions with Shiesty. The US attorney’s office did not name the victims, and the affidavit’s use of initials leaves some details unresolved in the public record as described.
The allegations place the dispute and the reported violence in Texas, with Dallas referenced through the involvement of the US attorney’s office there. The timing described in the complaint points to January as the month of the alleged robbery and kidnapping.
For the music business, the case centers on claims tied to negotiations and label relationships, with 1017 Records specifically mentioned in the affidavit. The filing’s description of a contract dispute involving a prominent label figure underscores how business disagreements can become part of criminal investigations when authorities allege threats or violence.
At this stage, the publicly described documents do not provide the victims’ full identities, and the US attorney’s office declined to name them. The affidavit’s reliance on initials, as described, means key elements—such as who “RD” is beyond the label-owner description—remain uncertain based on the information provided.