The devastating murders of three members of Jennifer Hudson’s family in 2008 gripped the world and cast a long shadow over the celebrated actress and singer. William Balfour, Jennifer Hudson’s brother-in-law, was convicted and sentenced to life in prison for these heinous crimes. Now, years later, Balfour has broken his silence, granting his first-ever public interview to ABC7 Chicago, an ABC sister station.
This case, marked by its brutality and connection to a beloved celebrity, garnered immense media attention. Balfour, arrested swiftly after the killings, remained silent, never facing direct questioning from the Hudson family or the press, and notably, never testifying at his own trial. His decision to finally speak prompted the ABC7 I-Team to confront him with a series of probing questions, seeking to understand his perspective on the tragic events.
WATCH: Extended excerpts from the William Balfour Interview
William Balfour, Jennifer Hudson’s brother-in-law, speaks in his first public interview from Pontiac prison about the 2008 murders of Jennifer Hudson’s mother, brother, and nephew.
“I had nothing to do with the case and I don’t know who had anything to do with the case,” Balfour declared, attempting to distance himself from the horrific events that unfolded in the Englewood home of his estranged wife, Julia Hudson, Jennifer Hudson’s sister.
On October 24, 2008, a jury determined that Balfour was responsible for the deaths of Jennifer Hudson’s mother, Darnell Donerson, and her brother, Jason Hudson, in their family home. He was also convicted of abducting and murdering Hudson’s 7-year-old nephew, Julian King, in a fit of jealous rage. Julian’s body was tragically discovered in a stolen SUV, with the vehicle’s keys found in Balfour’s possession, according to police reports. Furthermore, witnesses testified to seeing Balfour with a distinctive chrome and black pistol, resembling the weapon used in the murders.
Investigative journalist Chuck Goudie from ABC7 directly questioned Balfour about this crucial piece of evidence: “Did you ever have the gun?”
Balfour firmly denied any connection to the weapon: “No. Not one time.”
Goudie pressed further, “So the people who said they saw you with the gun were lying?”
Balfour responded unequivocally: “Exactly.”
The exclusive hour-long interview took place at Pontiac Correctional Center, Illinois’ oldest maximum-security prison, housing some of the state’s most dangerous criminals. Balfour is among the 1,500 inmates incarcerated there.
Throughout the interview, Balfour asserted his innocence, claiming that a staggering number of the prosecution’s 81 witnesses were untruthful. This included his own friends and his former wife, Julia Hudson. Julia had testified that Balfour had made repeated threats to kill her entire family, followed by threats against her own life.
Goudie directly challenged Balfour on this point: “You wanted her dead, didn’t you?”
Balfour denied any such intent: “No, not at all… we wasn’t even in a relationship anymore.”
Goudie reiterated the accusations: “You told people that you wanted her dead, didn’t you?”
Balfour maintained his denial: “That never occurred. Them are all allegations.”
Goudie pressed again: “You never said it?”
Balfour insisted: “No. Never. Not one time did I ever threaten her, period.”
It was revealed that Balfour was on parole at the time of the murders, stemming from a 1992 conviction for attempted murder, highlighting his history of violent behavior.
The prosecution presented compelling evidence during the trial, including cellphone records placing Balfour near the crime scenes and gun residue found on his clothing and car steering wheel. Balfour dismissed these findings as fabricated, suggesting that the police and evidence technicians had planted or concocted the evidence against him.
Goudie, incredulous, stated: “To hear you describe it, this was a huge conspiracy.”
Balfour affirmed: “Exactly, exactly.”
Goudie elaborated on the scale of the alleged conspiracy: “Would’ve involved lawyers, witnesses, the police, technicians – is that correct?”
Balfour confirmed: “Right.”
Despite Balfour’s claims of innocence, the jury deliberated for two and a half days before finding him guilty on all charges. The presiding judge, describing Balfour’s soul as “barren,” sentenced him to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole.
Balfour’s subsequent appeal was unanimously rejected by Illinois justices, who cited “plentiful evidence” that he had murdered “all three members of his wife’s family” after numerous threats to do so. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear his case, effectively exhausting his legal avenues for appeal.
Goudie directly addressed the challenge of believing Balfour’s statements now: “Why should anybody believe what you’re saying now?”
Balfour deflected responsibility, stating: “I mean it’s up to them to make sense out of it. Because if you make a statement and the statement don’t add up to the way the murders happen – then it’s a problem. That’s reasonable doubt.”
Balfour’s background further paints a troubling picture. At 34 years old, he is described as a career criminal with a lengthy police record dating back to age 14, including gang involvement, carjacking, burglary, and drug dealing. He is a high school dropout whose father and brother are also ex-convicts, suggesting a pattern of criminal behavior within his family.
Goudie posed the critical question: “If you didn’t kill Jennifer Hudson’s family, who did?”
Balfour claimed ignorance: “I don’t know. I can sit here and speculate the many names and just throw them out there to you, it still wouldn’t solve it, period.”
Notably, Balfour refused to answer only one question during the interview: “Why did you not testify?”
Balfour attributed this decision to his trial lawyer: “My trial lawyer.”
Goudie pointed out Balfour’s autonomy: “You could’ve overruled that.”
Balfour conceded but remained evasive: “I know that. But they was things that was discussed in private about taking the stand.” He declined to elaborate on these private discussions.
However, Balfour readily spoke about his past relationship with Jennifer Hudson, recalling a picture taken a year before the murders where they were seen toasting her Academy Award win.
Goudie asked: “What would you say to Jennifer Hudson if she was sitting across from you?”
Balfour reiterated his denial directly to Jennifer Hudson, albeit hypothetically: “I didn’t have nothing to do with her family being killed. Period.”
Goudie then focused on the youngest victim: “Do you ever think about Julian?”
Balfour claimed to think about Julian: “Of course I do.”
Goudie probed his feelings: “What do you think about him?”
Balfour described a past connection with Julian: “This was a child that I used to see all the time, tried to get him to ride a bike, all the time. I mean… I don’t know… Do I miss him? Yea. Do I love him? Yea.”
Goudie pressed for an explanation for the child’s murder: “Why would a 7-year-old have been killed?”
Balfour offered a speculative and convoluted theory: “That’s what I’m saying… it could have been a wrong place at the wrong time, the person who come in there to kill somebody don’t kill who they kill. If you are a witness and you can identify somebody, they can say I killed him because he could have identified me but that’s not the case.”
Goudie directly linked Julian’s murder to Balfour himself: “That 7-year-old boy could have identified you.”
Balfour appeared to acknowledge this possibility: “That what I said earlier, that he could identify me and that’s why he got killed. Or he killed him because he could identify him. Now Julian was smart, he could remember faces.”
Goudie concluded this line of questioning with a moral judgment: “And what do you think about a person who could kill a boy that age in the way that he was killed?”
Balfour condemned the hypothetical killer: “Heartless, straight heartless. He isn’t got no family morals, nothing.”
In response to Balfour’s interview, the Chicago Police Department released a statement affirming their confidence in their investigation, stating they “firmly stand behind” a case “based exclusively on facts and evidence.” The Cook County State’s Attorney spokesperson echoed this sentiment, describing the evidence as “overwhelming” and emphasizing that Balfour “was afforded every legal right and the opportunity to present any relevant defense.”
Balfour’s legal representatives declined to comment. Jennifer and Julia Hudson did not respond to requests for interviews from the I-Team.
The official statements from the Chicago Police Department and the Cook County State’s Attorney further solidify the conviction and the overwhelming evidence against William Balfour in the tragic murders of the Jennifer Hudson Family members.
The Chicago Police Department spokesperson released the following statement:
“CPD stands firmly behind our investigation which was based exclusively on facts and evidence in this senseless murder.”
The Cook County state’s attorney spokesperson released the following statement:
“This defendant was convicted of these heinous crimes, including the vicious murder of a 7-year-old child, after a lengthy trial before a Cook County Jury. He was afforded every legal right and provided the opportunity to present any relevant defense. The evidence establishing this defendant’s guilt of these unspeakable crimes was overwhelming.”
