Bombshell Court Decision Rocks D4vd Murder Case

本站添加: 2026-05-12

[00:00:00]Accused murderer David Anthony Burke, aka David, was back in an LA courtroom today, and this has shaken up the entire case schedule. What exactly happened? What can we expect next? And what does this mean for the defense and the prosecution? Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime.

[00:00:21]>> I'm Jesse Weber.

[00:00:24]Okay, I can't jump into this without first telling you real quick about our partner, our sponsor, this app called Upside. Now, Upside gets you cash back, extra cash back on everyday purchases like gas, groceries, takeout. So, here's what you do. You download Upside for free. You claim an offer at one of their 100,000 plus locations. You pay like normal with your card. You verify the purchase and just like that, money back.

[00:00:46]So, say I need to get gas or I want takeout one night. I'll search for Upside Offers first. And after I spend, money appears in my app that I can transfer right into my bank account.

[00:00:54]Now, Upside's frequent users, they earn an average of $254 back a year. So, to start getting your cash back, click the link in the description or scan the QR code and make sure to use promo code sidebar to get an extra 25 cents bonus on every gallon on your first tank of gas. Okay, we got a court hearing in the David case that happened today. We have a reporter, an investigative reporter in the courtroom.

[00:01:15]Going to bring her on in a minute to talk about what happened. Now, remember where we're at. The 21-year-old romantic homicide singer, real name David Anthony Burke, David, is facing charges of firstdegree murder, continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14, and unlawful mutilation of human remains. All in connection with the death of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez, whose decomposed, dismembered body was found in a Tesla in LA back on September 8th of last year. a Tesla reportedly registered to David out in Texas. And prosecutors have also alleged special circumstances with respect to the murder charge. That's what gets you potentially life in prison without the possibility of parole. That's what potentially gets you the death penalty even though there's a moratorium on executions in California. Murder of a witness, murder for financial gain, lying and wait that he used a deadly and dangerous weapon, a sharp instrument. And the ME's office concluded that Celeste's cause of death was multiple penetrating injuries.

[00:02:16]Authorities alleging that David murdered Celeste to keep her quiet, that they were in an alleged illegal sexual relationship, her being a minor, that she was going to expose him, that she was going to ruin his career, a financially lucrative career. I did whole episodes on the potential evidence establishing where he was at in his career. They also talk about these alleged text messages the day before, the night before where she was allegedly angry with him and going to expose him.

[00:02:43]And the allegation is is that he murdered her. Murdered her to keep her quiet. And prosecutors claim that on April 23rd, 2025, he lured Celeste to this property in LA, Hollywood Hills, stabbed her repeatedly, watched her bleed out, and then proceeded to order supplies online to engage in the dismemberment of her body and the cover up of this alleged crime. Chainsaws, body bag, laundry bags, inflatable pool.

[00:03:11]They claim a combination of forensic evidence, surveillance footage, cellular data, DNA evidence, witness testimony, all ties him to these alleged crimes.

[00:03:22]So, what happened in court today? For that, let me bring on somebody who was in that courtroom today. Investigative reporter Julia Deng is with us. Julia, so good to see you. Thank you so much for coming on to talk about this. Really appreciate it. I'm made of questions. I know this was a relatively I think relatively short hearing, but very impactful, very important. First of all, how did David look? Let's start there.

[00:03:45]>> Not great, Jesse, as you can imagine. I mean, we've talked about how he actually requested a haircut last time. It doesn't look to me like he got that haircut. Uh he walked in wearing this orange LA County gel uniform, uh kind of lighter than what I'm wearing right now.

[00:04:03]He had a white long sleeved shirt underneath it. Uh he did not look clean shaven. Hair looked to be a little bit longer, very curly. Um but he he was actively paying attention. You know, he was looking from attorney to attorney as they were speaking during this very brief status conference and he did speak this morning. This was actually my first time hearing his voice live. It was brief. He just said yes, your honor.

[00:04:33]when the judge addressed him. Um, and it was a question about pushing back the upcoming dates in this case. So, it is still, you know, a question as to whether or not this is going to trial.

[00:04:45]And the big takeaway from this morning's status conference is that we are going to have to do this exercise all over again. So, there's going to be another status conference June 17th and then this preliminary hearing that we've been talking about May 26th. And as you've been reporting, Jesse, that was supposed to happen back in April. So now they've pushed that back again. That's going to be June 29th now. So David Burke was asked, you know, are you okay with that?

[00:05:15]Um, and he just said yes, your honor, and then he was led back out.

[00:05:20]>> Okay. So I have a number of questions about this. Uh, there are those who say they wouldn't be surprised that the preliminary hearing was pushed back yet again. I mean, even if you talk about what's been reported, 40 terabytes of evidence, computers, tablets, iCloud, even in the prosecution's brief, they talk about surveillance footage and cellular data and witnesses and different trips and all these uh Amazon purchases and it's a big case and it's one that has been investigated for quite some time. At the same time, Julia, I'm trying to understand why this is happening. Because, correct me if I'm wrong, it's the defense who's asking now to have a delay because weren't they the ones who said Blair Burke, his attorney, was pushing for a speedy preliminary hearing as soon as possible? And it was the idea, we're going to challenge the prosecution's evidence. We're gonna ch because in a preliminary hearing. So everybody knows right the prosecution has to present not their whole case but sufficient evidence to establish probable cause low standard but say hey we got enough here to support these charges to move forward towards trial preliminary hearing. Why it's advantage for the defense is because they can challenge that evidence. So they wanted the prosecution, hey we want this a preliminary hearing immediately. We want to see what you got. We want to challenge it. We don't think you have a case here. We don't think he's the cause of Celeste's death. And now and correct me if I'm wrong. Are they the ones today in court saying we need a delay?

[00:06:45]>> They are. That is correct. And Jesse, you're absolutely right. This boils down to evidence. So Beth Silverman with the prosecution, she laid out how there is just voluminous evidence here. It totals at this point more than 40 terabytes. I mean, if you think about how much content you probably had saved on your phone, I mean, that's not even close to one terabyte. They have 40 in this case.

[00:07:13]So, Beth said this morning during this hearing, the prosecution started uploading their evidence last Thursday, and that's part of this case. They have to do that, sharing that information uh between both sides. That's part of discovery. So, Beth says the prosecution started that last Thursday. They have only uploaded at this point about 10 terabytes out of that 40. And then she went on to say, I actually wrote down this direct quote from Beth Silverman this morning. It could take them months to complete discovery with this much evidence. So now the defense is pushing back. This is very much part of their strategy. This is not surprising. You know, they would benefit from having more time just to prep their case. So, they said, the defense, you know, we've requested DNA evidence. We have not gotten that yet. They also said they haven't gotten the uh witness narratives they were hoping for. So, their argument is we need more intel to prep before this can even go to a preliminary hearing. Um, but the prosecution of course also not surprising. They're pushing back as well. They're saying, you know, is this going to be a real thing? Is June 29th going to be they called it a go date or are we going to have to go through this again, push it back again? Um the judge was very stern about that. She said, you know, we have to be clear if we're setting the date for June 29th this time if this is going to be pushed back again at a fourth time. Now, you know, we have to get that motion in writing. Beth Silverman says this kind of thing can go on. She's, you know, in her experience had this kind of thing go back and forth and be delayed for years. The judge saying this morning she promises this is not going to go on for years. So I think June 17th is going to be a sure thing for this new status conference and then June 29th.

[00:09:16]>> Well, here's what's tricky about it.

[00:09:18]It's prosecutors seemingly even though there was reports of multiple grand juries and grand jury could be a way you get an official indictment. Defense doesn't have a role in it. It's a secret proceeding. You get an indictment, you move forward. If you don't go a grand jury route and clearly there hasn't been a grand jury indictment even though there have been reportedly grand juries and panel to hear evidence in this case. Now you have a preliminary hearing and 100% this is where it gets complicated because the defense has an opportunity to challenge the evidence. it can get pushed back and pushed back and pushed back and delayed.

[00:09:51]And just from a point of law, I'll tell everybody, you know, that's a concern for the prosecution, right? They believe that David committed these alleged crimes. They want justice as soon as possible. They don't want to keep pushing this case along. Evidence can get stale. Witness testimony could be upended. So, it's in their interest, too, to have this preliminary hearing sooner rather than later. I I And by the way, when you mentioned DNA evidence, you go back to the prosecution's brief.

[00:10:16]It says DNA evidence developed from blood stains collected from defendants's garage which match the victim's genetic profile. So that was interesting. By the way, you mentioned witnesses. Do we have any idea? Was it revealed today? Any idea who these potential witnesses are?

[00:10:33]>> We don't. That is one of those outstanding questions. And I think Jesse, you actually did an entire podcast segment dedicated to this question. We don't. And it sounds like part of the uh defense's strategy to just stall here and buy themselves a little bit more time to prepare during this pre-trial period is citing the fact that they don't have any kind of narrative relating to witnesses. They don't know who the possible witnesses might be who could be called for this case and they don't have DNA evidence they say they requested. But let me tell you what the prosecution did share. uh they say they have already shared lab reports, they have shared LAPD reports and they've shared again about 10 terabytes of evidence. So if it really is 40 terabytes, uh that's about 25% here. And I don't know what kind of server they're uploading this to, but again, they started doing this last Thursday. So open-ended question here as to how much longer that's going to take.

[00:11:41]Uh but talking to media crews out here, we've all been speculating. You know, there's likely a lot of video content in that 40 terabyte dump. That's typically what takes up the most space. So, we already know some of that video involving Celeste and David and their alleged relationship that cannot that will not be played for the jury if this eventually does go to trial. I'm so glad you mentioned that because as we're understanding what this is, I remember in one of the initial hearings, the prosecution said they found a large volume of alleged child pornography on David's devices. Now, they didn't confirm that was 100% Celeste, but let's remember he is charged with a sex crime with respect to her. this alleged illegal sexual relationship is not only its own individual crime, but it goes to the murder charge, it goes to the special circumstances because if they can prove he was having this relationship with her, didn't want it exposed, wanted to keep her quiet, she was threatening him, that goes into it.

[00:12:43]And of course, I mean, there's other digital data, there's cell phone data, there's surveillance footage. Um, by the way, just taking a quick step back since you're our eyes and ears there, was it a pack courtroom? Like, who else was there? Was there anybody in support of David? Was Nathan Hawkman there, the Los Angeles County District Attorney? What was in that courtroom today?

[00:13:03]>> It was largely media this morning. We did look around in the hallway before we even got into this status conference to see if perhaps he had any supporters. I know last time during his last court date, David did have at least two friends, two supporters with him. There was no family present this morning.

[00:13:21]Nobody for either David or Celeste. Uh, I think it was just the defendant with his uncut hair, his orange jumpsuit, um, and then defense attorneys. So, it was largely media in the back two rows in this courtroom. Um, prosecution, defense, and it went by very quickly.

[00:13:41]They started within 5 minutes of 8:30, uh, the scheduled start time, very clear on directions, you know, no cameras, no cell phones, and it wrapped up within about 10 to 15 minutes.

[00:13:54]And by the way, what was his interaction like with his defense attorneys? I I saw a report, I think, could be wrong, but you'll correct me if I'm wrong. Did he like wink at his defense attorney at one point? What was that interaction like?

[00:14:08]>> This is a fascinating human, Jesse. If I ever have an opportunity to interview David, I I've got questions for this man. Um he seemed incredibly comfortable sitting there. I think he was resting his elbows on the table at one point. Um I mentioned earlier he was listening actively to the back and forth between prosecution and defense. He was looking from attorney to attorney. At one point I think I saw him nodding along. Uh you know he made eye contact with the judge.

[00:14:41]He spoke once when he was asked if June 29th would be a go date, a good uh rescheduled preliminary hearing date for him. He just said, "Yes, your honor." He spoke clearly. Uh he did not seem shaken. He did not seem like a defendant being charged with firstdegree murder.

[00:15:02]And that's not it. I mean, we're calling this a murder case, but there are two additional charges on top of that, including continuous sexual abuse of a child under 14. And that it's not just murder, it's mutilation of that murder victim's corpse. And I know we haven't delved into this yet today because we don't yet know if the DA is going to ultimately pursue the death penalty, but that's an option in this case because of the special circumstances on top of that murder charge. And I believe Jesse, in the state of California, you only need one special circumstance to be eligible for the death penalty. In this case, it's not one, it's not two, it is three.

[00:15:49]>> And look, there is a moratorium on executions in California, but that's even besides the point. I mean, this goes to this whole idea of if they decide to go go that way, it would, you know, prolong the trial. It would make it a little bit more complex. But you're talking about the ultimate punishment.

[00:16:03]Not surprising when you talk about this crime. Yes, he's innocent until proven guilty, 100%. But you were talking about the brutal slaying of a 14-year-old girl who was dismembered and also allegedly sexually abused. It's a really, really horrific crime. By the way, I have a couple minutes with you, Juliet. You've been following this case, I believe, from the beginning. You've been following for quite some time. As you're in that courtroom and you're listening carefully to the discussions that's happening between the attorneys and the judge, what is your biggest questions that you want answered right now? What are what are you looking out for in terms of the evidence? I mean, thank you for talking about the the episode we did on the witnesses. I think that's a crucial discussion, whether or not it's going to be somebody like Neil Langston or it's going to be David's family or it's going to be the Riverside County uh sheriff's deputies or it's going to be the medical examiner or members of the medical examiner's department. I mean, you tell me what you're looking out for, what you're keeping an eye to and hearing an eye to as you're in court uh for these hearings. Number one question, Jesse, is what you've been covering extensively. Who are the witnesses going to be? What is their testimony going to entail? I think another big question is relating to some of the more definitive language we've seen in the charging documents. How do prosecutors know, for example, that David stood by and watched Celeste bleed out? My big question is, was there some kind of home surveillance video that captured this? I mean, that wouldn't be out of the question. Many people have cameras in their homes.

[00:17:40]David was also an individual who was very comfortable around cameras. I mean, he was constantly live streaming, snapping things, recording things. Could there be footage actually showing that act? And then I I also want to point out, you know, the wording of what defense attorneys have said. You know, they're denying the charges. David has entered a not-uilty plea on all of these counts. Um, but they're saying that he was not the cause of her death. That raises the question, who was, you know, could there be somebody else involved?

[00:18:20]Could somebody else be charged? When I was waiting to um get into the courtroom this morning, I was talking to a couple other journalists covering this case.

[00:18:29]That's what we're all wondering at this point. Who else may have helped? Who else could have been involved? And what additional cases, what additional charges and defendants could we see coming out of this? I think this is just the tip of the iceberg. I think this defendant is going to be one of several as Celeste and her family and her community fight for justice. I'm so glad you mentioned this because it raises a number of different questions. I've talked about it multiple times about is it possible a 20-year-old singer, the allegations are true, killed this 14-year-old, took steps to dismember her body and ultimately did it, took that alleged trip to Santa Barbara to hide evidence? Sure. But is it also possible he may have had some help? I asked Nathan Hawkman about this on my NewsNation show and he wouldn't obviously confirm one way or another whether they're looking into any other people there going to be any other arrests. But it also goes to the idea of other charges. If there's child pornography uh allegedly on his devices or you're talking about a minor who was allegedly brought across state lines and there's sexual activity. Is there sex trafficking? I did an episode on that too. But but you also talk about the cause of death. And I think that one of the complicating factors here is her body was in that Tesla for quite some time decomposed, dismembered. How exactly? I mean, will the defense bring their own forensic pathologist to try to push back and say, "How do you know definitively it was multiple sharp force injuries? Is there something else that might have contributed to this?" Do you have evidence of maybe the cleanup and the dismemberment, but not necessarily the murder? And going back to that other point about, you know, how they know she bled out. Now, I'm split on this. I I interviewed Joseph Scott Morgan, and he basically said he believes there could be a witness, a witness to this. He also talked about the surveillance footage.

[00:20:11]It's also possible they're just making an assumption based on they look at the cell phone data and they say, "Well, this is when she arrived, right, by the ride share. This is when her phone activity stopped. This is when David allegedly sent a text message to her 20 minutes later to maybe cover up his his tracks, maybe create an alibi." And that's why they believe that he stabbed her or allegedly stabbed her and just watched her bleed out because there was no calls to 911 or emergency services.

[00:20:37]So, they might be making a guess here. I I have to ask you one more part about this. Um you're in LA. I'm not in LA.

[00:20:43]You're in LA. There has been so much discussion about the coordination, the cooperation between the ME's office, the LAPD, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office. As somebody who covers these stories and somebody who's in LA, whether it's this case or other cases, is there disagreement amongst these different organizations? Are they usually in lock step? Because there's been so many questions about why there's been a delay and why there's information that's been sealed. No mention of pregnancy in the prosecution's brief.

[00:21:21]And yet, the medical examiner now had to change the update to it's not known if she was pregnant. And I think they did that for other reasons. But I'm just curious in your experience, what should we be thinking about? And to be clear, I when I interviewed Nathan Hawkman, he said they're completely locked step.

[00:21:36]There's no surprises. They're in it together. They know what they're doing.

[00:21:39]Um I'm just curious your perspective.

[00:21:42]>> There is so much to unpack here. There are so many questions, Jesse, about the coordination and and the timing. And I think the biggest thing that happened in this case that we don't typically see uh with charges of this magnitude, I mean, the LAPD made the arrest on what was it, April 16th, and it wasn't until April 20th that charges were filed. So, that alone raises questions about the coordination. Why were charges not filed first? Did LAPD do that because they were trying to force the DA's hand? And if so, what was the holdup? What was taking them so long to investigate when it seems to all of us like they already had overwhelming evidence? They had probable cause here. So, a lot of questions. You know, I don't want to give rise to any additional conspiracy theories. I think everybody on the internet is buzzing about all of this already, but just the facts of the case here. arrest on April 16th, charges not filed until days later, and then now information being changed. I I think that part about um Celeste not being pregnant and then that not being able to be definitively determined, that may have something to do with this state of decomposition. But that is one of the questions that I think you've debunked on this podcast. There does not appear to be any definitive evidence pointing to the fact that Celeste was pregnant.

[00:23:19]Um, if that does emerge at some point, that for sure is going to add additional charges onto what is already a stunning and an incredibly disturbing case against David.

[00:23:34]>> Yeah. And just the final point before we wrap up, I'll say if prosecutors knew that she was pregnant, they would have 100% have included that. I mean, what better way to establish an alleged illegal sexual relationship to show he needed to allegedly keep her quiet if you take the allegations are true. I mean, proof of pregnancy, they would definitely put that in there. Now, I will say seems to me yes, because of the decomposition, perhaps they can't definitively say that. And I think also they have to put unknown considering the prosecutors say there were messages, text messages about pregnancy and plan B and things like that. So I think the investigative portion of that is what led to it. Julia, thank you so much for taking the time. I really really appreciate. I would love to I would love for you to come back when we have the next hearing now uh in June. See what happens. But Julia Deng, thank you so much for taking the time. Great reporting.

[00:24:23]>> Thank you, Jesse. Talk soon.

[00:24:25]>> And that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so much for joining us and as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcast. You can also check us out on NBC's Peacock as well. If you want to follow me, ex Instagram, my NewsNation show, Jesse Weber live, Monday through Friday, 11:00 p.m.

[00:24:41]Eastern. See you next time, everybody.