The trial involving rapper Scally Milano, whose real name is Daniil Dmitriev, proceeded in St. Petersburg, with the proceedings taking place at the Smolninsky Court. The case was observed by observers reporting through the Unified Press Service of the Courts, providing updates on the hearing and the court’s rulings. The proceedings highlighted a broader discussion about the responsibilities of artists when addressing sensitive topics such as drug use in their music and public messaging.
During the hearing, the artist’s representative presented a petition to the court, expressing sincere remorse for the actions at issue. The petition noted that Scally Milano had published an open appeal to his followers on his channel, announcing an initiative to purge his creative output of drug-promoting language and urging fellow musicians to join in this reform effort. The court documented that these actions reflected a conscious effort by the artist to acknowledge the potential impact his content could have on young and impressionable listeners, and to promote a protective stance toward the audience.
According to the press service, the representative underlined that this case marks a significant moment in the cultural landscape, illustrating a scenario in which a contemporary musical figure takes responsibility for the messaging embedded in his work and actively works to minimize harmful influences. The court, after considering the presented arguments and the charitable intent behind the revisions, chose a measured response, issuing a formal warning to Dmitriev rather than more severe sanctions.
In April 2023, Scally Milano engaged with the leadership of the Safe Internet League, with Ekaterina Mizulina’s team affirming that the musician’s efforts were not aimed at promoting illegal drugs or violating Russian law. The musician pledged to reformat selected tracks, a process that could include altering lyrics to remove references to dangerous behaviors or illicit substances. This commitment represented a practical step toward ensuring that the artistic output aligns with contemporary norms and legal boundaries while still maintaining artistic integrity.
Subsequently, the president of the Safe Internet League, in a public capacity, announced that the audit by the Investigative Committee concerning Scally Milano had been canceled. The decision appeared to reflect an assessment that the measures already taken by the artist were sufficient to address concerns about drug propaganda and the potential influence on audiences, particularly younger listeners. This development underscored the ongoing dialogue between artistic expression and the safeguards designed to protect public welfare in the digital age.
Earlier, Lyubov Uspenskaya commented on the situation, weighing in on the matter of whether the artist should be perceived differently because of his daughter’s career in music. Her perspective highlighted the broader attention such cases attract within the entertainment sphere and the public conversation about responsibility, influence, and the consequences of fame. The discourse surrounding Scally Milano’s case illustrates how cultural figures can become focal points for discussions about ethics in art, audience impact, and the evolving standards expected of performers in a media-rich environment.
The case stands as a reference point for conversations about reform within the industry, illustrating that accountability and proactive measures can shape outcomes in ways that support safe, responsible creative work while acknowledging the complexities of artistic expression in modern society. [Cited: Unified Press Service of the Courts; Safe Internet League communications; Investigative Committee updates]