Courts

Singer faces first-degree murder and additional charges that could lead to life without parole or the death penalty.

Singer D4vd has been charged in the United States with murder in the death of Celeste Rivas Hernandez, a 14-year-old girl who was last seen alive nearly a year ago.

The 21-year-old musician, whose legal name is David Burke, ⁠faces first-degree murder and additional charges, including lewd acts with a minor and mutilation of a body. D4vd pleaded not guilty on Monday.

The prosecutor said Rivas Hernandez’s dismembered and decomposed body was discovered in September inside an apparently abandoned Tesla linked to the singer.

Authorities said the case includes special circumstances – lying in wait, committing crime for financial gain and the alleged killing of the witness in an investigation – making Burke eligible for life without parole or the death penalty.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said prosecutors would decide later whether to seek the ‌death penalty.

Burke was arrested at a home in Hollywood on Thursday and was being held without bail.

The witness he is alleged to have killed is Rivas Hernandez, who could have given testimony about the sex crime allegations.

Rivas Hernandez had disappeared in 2024, when she was 13. That was her age when, according to an allegation in a criminal complaint, the singer engaged in continuous sexual abuse of her for at least a year from September 2023 to September 2024.

Hochman said authorities believed the girl went to D4vd’s Hollywood Hills home on April 23, 2025, and “was never heard from again”.

Burke’s lawyers said on Monday that the evidence would show he is innocent.

“The actual evidence in this case will show that David Burke did not murder Celeste Rivas Hernandez and he was not the cause of her death,” they said. “We will vigorously defend David’s innocence.”

Court documents outline secret probe

The singer had been under investigation by a Los Angeles County grand jury looking into the death.

The probe was officially secret, but its existence, and his designation as its target, was revealed in February when his mother, father and brother objected in a Texas court to subpoenas demanding they testify.

The 2023 Tesla Model Y was registered in the singer’s name at their address, according to court filings. Authorities did not publicly acknowledge him as a suspect until his arrest.

Police investigators searching the Tesla in a tow yard found a cadaver bag “covered with insects and a strong odor of decay”, court documents said.

Detectives partially unzipped a bag and found a head and torso.

Investigators from the Los Angeles County Medical Examiner’s Office removed the bag and “discovered the arms and legs had been severed from the body”, according to court documents.

A second black bag was found under the first, and dismembered body parts were inside it. No cause of death has been publicly revealed, and police got a judge to block the release of details of the autopsy.

The court order was expected to be lifted after the charges.

Rising to fame

D4vd gained popularity among Gen Z for his blend of indie rock, R&B and lo-fi pop. He went viral on TikTok in 2022 with the hit Romantic Homicide, which peaked at number 4 on Billboard’s Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart.

He then signed with Darkroom and Interscope Records, and released his debut EP, Petals to Thorns and a follow-up, The Lost Petals, in 2023.

When the body was discovered, the singer continued his North American tour, but when reports of his possible involvement spread widely, he cancelled the final two shows and a European tour that was to follow.

Madrid, Spain – Venezuela’s opposition leader Maria Corina Machado is aligned with Spain’s main right-wing party on its economic visions, but they are divided by social issues such as abortion, analysts say.

On a visit to Spain this weekend, Machado chose to snub an invitation to meet Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez and the left-wing coalition government officials.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner said she had chosen not to meet Sanchez because he was hosting a summit of left-wing leaders from Latin America in Barcelona.

“What has transpired in the past few hours at the meeting held in Barcelona with various political leaders from different countries is proof that such a meeting was not advisable,” Machado told a meeting in Madrid on Saturday.

Instead, she held a series of meetings with leaders from the opposition conservative People’s Party (PP) and the far-right Vox party.

Machado received a rapturous welcome from Alberto Nunez Feijoo, the PP party leader and Venezuelan emigres in Madrid, on Friday.

On Saturday, the Venezuelan opposition leader met Isabel Diaz Ayuso, the populist conservative Madrid regional leader, one of Sanchez’s fiercest critics and a possible rival to Feijoo.

Ayuso presented Madrid’s gold medal to Machado, while Madrid’s Mayor Jose Luis Martinez-Almeida – also of the PP – handed her the keys to the city before a rally with Venezuelan supporters.

Machado also met Santiago Abascal, the leader of Vox, in the Spanish capital.

Feijoo praised how Machado had championed freedom even at the cost of going into hiding in Venezuela away from her family.

“Spain knows well the value of freedom; it cost us dearly to obtain it. The generations of our parents and grandparents know what it is to live without freedom. That is why we cannot look the other way,” Feijoo said.

What divides Venezuela and Spain’s opposition?

Despite the cordial welcome, there are significant differences between Machado and Feijoo, commentators said.

A liberal conservative, who has said she is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher, Machado has been dubbed Venezuela’s “Iron Lady”.

She moved from the right politically to the centre-ground during the 2024 presidential campaign to attract voters in the middle ground.

As a conservative, Machado heads a Venezuelan opposition that is split and which also contains more liberal factions.

In contrast, Feijoo heads a well-organised conservative political party, which has only recently suffered divisions after the formation of the hard-right Vox party in 2013, analysts said.

Carlos Malamud, an expert on Latin America at the Real Elcano Institute, a think tank in Madrid, said the structure of both opposition groups was different.

“Machado is the leader of a small, disorganised opposition, while Feijoo is the head of the PP, which is a well-organised national political party,” he told Al Jazeera.

Malamud said Machado did not demonstrate the traits of a would-be Venezuelan president by refusing to see Sanchez.

“If Machado wants to be the president of Venezuela next year, she needs to be prepared to meet the head of the Spanish government, whoever that may be,” he explained.

“Perhaps the Venezuelan opposition sees the Spanish Socialist Party as being allied to (former Spanish prime minister) Jose Rodriguez Zapatero.”

Zapatero has played a controversial role in acting as a mediator between Spain and the government of former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who was abducted by the United States in January.

Maduro faces charges of narcoterrorism, conspiracy to commit narcoterrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and corruption, which he denies.

Machado ‘more conservative’ on social issues

Malamud said one factor which unites Machado and Feijoo is that they came from political systems which suffered from polarisation.

“Venezuelan politics is the same as Cuban politics, or like Spanish. They all suffer from the same degree of polarisation,” he added.

Ana Ayuso, an investigator in Latin American affairs at the Barcelona Centre for International Affairs, said Machado shared the liberal economic theories of Feijoo, but they differed on social issues.

“She is in favour of freedom of trade and a small state, so she is quite liberal on economic affairs like Feijoo,” Ayuso told Al Jazeera.

“She is also closer to Isabel Diaz Ayuso in terms of economics, in terms of free trade and the participation of the state.”

“However, she is more conservative when it comes to social issues. Machado is against abortion, and religious affairs are important to her. She is close to the [Roman] Catholic Church. Feijoo supports the right to abortion.”

In an interview in 2024 with Spanish newspaper El Pais, Machado said she was against abortion but in favour of changing the law in Venezuela to allow abortion in cases of rape.

At present, the law in Venezuela allows abortion only when there is a risk to the life of the mother or child. Otherwise, it is illegal and can carry a jail sentence of up to two years.

“Machado does not have any similarities with Vox. Venezuela does not have a problem with immigration. Emigration is the problem,” added Ayuso.

She said the Venezuelan opposition leader had initially been a staunch supporter of US President Donald Trump, but he had shunned her in support of Delcy Rodriguez, the acting Venezuelan president.

Machado was now closer to Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, who supported her cause within the MAGA movement, she added.

Court filings have indicated that lawyers for President Donald Trump are seeking a resolution with the Department of Justice over a $10bn lawsuit he filed against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

But the trouble, critics say, is that such a settlement would leave Trump essentially negotiating with an executive branch under his control.

Friday’s court filing, however, emphasises the efficiency of seeking a settlement.

In the document, Trump’s lawyers call for the case to be paused for 90 days to allow a resolution to be hammered out.

“This limited pause will neither prejudice the parties nor delay ultimate resolution,” the filing says. “Rather, the extension will promote judicial economy and allow the Parties to explore avenues that could narrow or resolve the issues efficiently.”

How did the case start?

The case stems from an incident that began in 2017, when a worker named Charles “Chaz” Littlejohn was re-hired as a contractor through the government consulting firm Booz Allen.

While working on IRS files, Littlejohn stole copies of Trump’s tax returns, which had been the source of prolonged public scrutiny.

Until Trump, every president since Richard Nixon had released their tax returns as a gesture of transparency. Trump, however, claimed he could not, citing ongoing audits.

The tax returns Littlejohn stole were ultimately released to the media, and in 2020, The New York Times released a series of articles that showed Trump paid no income taxes in 10 of the 15 preceding years.

Other years, he paid relatively small sums, like $750, because he reported more losses than gains. ProPublica also ran stories based on the leaked tax returns, highlighting inconsistencies and Trump’s low tax payments.

Privacy law protects taxpayer information from being released by the IRS without explicit permission. Littlejohn was sentenced to five years in prison in 2024.

But in late January of this year, Trump filed a lawsuit arguing that he, his businesses and his sons Eric and Donald Jr had suffered “significant and irreparable harm” from the leaks.

The defendants in the lawsuit were the IRS and its overseeing body, the Treasury Department, both of which are part of the executive branch.

“Defendants have caused Plaintiffs reputational and financial harm, public embarrassment, unfairly tarnished their business reputations, portrayed them in a false light, and negatively affected President Trump and the other Plaintiffs’ public standing,” the lawsuit reads.

Questions of ethics and legality

But experts have warned that the lawsuit contains flaws that would normally prompt the Justice Department, also under Trump’s control, to seek dismissal.

The lawsuit, for instance, arrives at its whopping $10bn sum by supposedly tallying up media references to Trump’s leaked tax returns.

However, experts say the formula for damages is calculated by the number of unauthorised disclosures by a government employee, not by media re-printings.

Then there is the question of Littlejohn’s employment status. He was an outside contractor, not a government employee.

Trump also has to contend with the two-year statute of limitations in the case. The lawsuit contends that “President Trump did not discover the numerous violations” of his tax returns until January 29, 2024.

But critics point out he had posted on social media about his tax information being “illegally obtained” as far back as 2020, when The New York Times published its series.

Opponents say the lawsuit should be dismissed or at least delayed until Trump is no longer president. Otherwise, they argue it represents a conflict of interest, with Trump fundamentally negotiating with his own administration for a payout.

Controlling ‘both sides of the litigation’

Trump himself has acknowledged that such a payment would “never look good”. But he has justified the sum by saying it would be donated to charity.

“Nobody would care because it’s going to go to numerous very good charities,” he said in February.

Even that, legal experts argue, could run afoul of the Emoluments Clause in the US Constitution, which prohibits the president from profiting off his position, apart from his salary.

Government watchdogs have attempted to stop a settlement from unfolding. On February 5, for instance, the group Democracy Forward filed an amicus brief arguing the court should act to prevent an abuse of power.

“This case is extraordinary because the President controls both sides of the litigation, which raises the prospect of collusive litigation tactics,” the brief explains.

“To treat this case like business as usual would threaten the integrity of the justice system and the important taxpayer and privacy protections at the heart of this case.”

But the $10bn IRS lawsuit is not the only case Trump is seeking to settle with his own government. In 2023 and 2024, Trump filed administrative complaints seeking compensation for federal investigations he considered to be unfair.

One complaint concerns an FBI investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election, and the other is about the FBI’s raid of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate after he refused a subpoena to return classified documents.

For those complaints, Trump is reportedly seeking additional damages to the tune of $230m.

JODIE Marsh has been charged with assault after allegedly confronting her neighbour in a row over her animals.

The ex-glamour model, 47, said she “lost it” and “put her hands on his neck” after he carried out what she called a “campaign of harassment”.

Marsh claims the neighbour filmed her animals and doctored clips to make them look “skeletal” after trespassing on her land.

Describing the clash, she said: “I put my hand on his neck because I leaned in to whisper to him.

“I can’t even remember what I said because I was so upset. It lasted around 30 seconds.

“I’m scared to sleep in my own house. I’m scared to go out.”

STAR’S TRAUMA

Celeb presenter reveals he was sexually assaulted 12 years ago by two men

STAR ARRESTED

Hunger Games actor arrested after ‘trying to shoot three men dead in car’

The former lads’ mag star turned her back on fame to run Fripps Farm rescue centre in Lindsell, Essex.

Marsh is due to appear at Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court tomorrow.

She is charged with common assault, specifically the use of “threatening / abusive / insulting words / behaviour with intent to cause fear or provoke unlawful violence”.

Common assault carries a maximum sentence of six months in prison.

But speaking to The Sun, Jodie insisted she did not hurt her neighbour, adding: “I didn’t actually injure him in any way.”

An Essex Police spokesman said: “At around 12.40pm on Friday 16 January officers were called to an address in Lindsell to reports of a woman behaving aggressively towards a man and assaulting him.

“It was further reported that verbal threats were made.

“As a result of further enquiries, charges of common assault and using threatening / abusive / insulting words or behaviour have since been authorised against Jodie Marsh, 47, of Lindsell.

“She is due to appear at Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court on Friday 17 April.”

Fripps Farm is currently home to over 250 animals including alpacas, emus and reptiles, many of which have been saved from slaughter.

The reality star’s website reads: “Jodie gives a loving home to animals that are either unwanted or in danger of being put to sleep or slaughtered.”

It comes after a fire on her farm killed two of her beloved marmosets.

Fripps Farm hasn’t been without its controversies amid neighbour rows and court battles.

Marsh was left in tears of joy after winning a court battle to keep lemurs at the sanctuary.

She had appealed against a council’s decision to refuse her application for a wild animal licence.

Concerns had been raised about her taking a meerkat to the pub.

She said trolls were behind much of the criticism.

At a previous hearing, clips of screeching zoo lemurs were played to Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court.

But Judge Christopher Williams dismissed the council’s argument about the animals’ noise.

Magistrate hands the opposition figure five-year term, that his lawyers say will be appealed.

South African opposition politician Julius Malema has been sentenced to prison time for firing a rifle in ⁠the air at a party rally.

Malema, the leader of the far-left opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), was handed a five-year sentence on Thursday by Magistrate Twanet Olivier.

Malema, who is one of South Africa’s most prominent politicians, was convicted last year of charges, including unlawful possession of a ⁠firearm and discharging a weapon in a public place over the 2018 incident at a stadium in the Eastern Cape province.

The 45-year-old leader of the fourth-biggest party in parliament had pleaded not guilty, arguing the gun was a toy.

“It wasn’t … an impulsive act,” the magistrate said. “It was the event of the evening.”

Malema’s defence said the shots were only intended to be celebratory.

His lawyers applied for leave to appeal the magistrate’s decision within ⁠minutes of it being ⁠read out in a court in KuGompo City, formerly East London, on Thursday.

Outside the court, hundreds of Malema’s red-clad EFF supporters gathered for the sentencing in the politically charged case.

The EFF – a small but vocal party – says the case is an attempt to silence its outspoken leader, who is known for fiery speeches.

Party supporters have threatened protests should their leader be jailed.

The magistrate stressed it “is not a political party who has been convicted here … it is a person, an individual.”

The maximum time was a 15-year prison sentence. If confirmed after all appeals, the five-year sentence would bar Malema from serving as a lawmaker.

That would be a major setback to the EFF, which has strong support among young South Africans frustrated by the racial inequality that has persisted since the end of white minority rule in 1994.

Brazil’s Supreme Court has ordered a probe into whether right-wing presidential candidate Flavio Bolsonaro issued defamatory statements about his election rival, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

On Wednesday, a decision from Justice Alexandre de Moraes was published, allowing the Federal Police to proceed with an investigation into posts Bolsonaro published in January.

Bolsonaro, at the time, responded to news that the United States had abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro with insinuations linking Lula to crimes.

“Lula will be exposed,” Bolsonaro posted on the social media platform X, with screenshots of a handcuffed Maduro and an article about Lula.

He then predicted that the left-wing alliance known as the Sao Paulo Forum would collapse in scandal.

“It is the end of the Sao Paulo Forum: international drug and arms trafficking, money laundering, support for terrorists and dictatorships, rigged elections,” Bolsonaro wrote.

There are limitations to the freedom of speech in Brazil, and under its penal code, defamation can be a criminal offence. Prosecutors have the option of seeking heightened penalties for defamation against presidents or heads of state.

The Federal Police have a period of 60 days to carry out their initial investigation.

But in a statement to local media, a spokesperson for Bolsonaro, a senator for Rio de Janeiro, denounced the probe as a violation of his rights.

“The senator limited himself to reporting facts and detailing crimes for which Nicolas Maduro was arrested and is being prosecuted internationally,” the statement said, adding that there was no “direct criminal accusation against” Lula.

Bolsonaro and Lula are currently in a neck-and-neck race for the presidency ahead of October’s general election.

A poll released this week from the research firm Quaest shows Lula slightly ahead in the first round of voting, with 37 percent of the vote compared with Bolsonaro’s 32 percent.

But if the race proceeds to a run-off, the frontrunner flips. Bolsonaro polls slightly ahead in a one-on-one contest against Lula, netting 42 percent support compared with the incumbent’s 40 percent.

The poll has a margin of error of about 2 percent, though, meaning the results are not conclusive. There is also nearly five and a half months until the first round of voting on October 4.

Both Bolsonaro and Lula are well-known quantities in Brazil’s political sphere.

For the 80-year-old Lula, this year’s race will see him run for a fourth term in office. Previously, he served as president from 2003 to 2011, and then he ran again in 2022, defeating Senator Bolsonaro’s father, Jair Bolsonaro, the incumbent president that year.

The elder Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence for attempting to subvert the results of that election.

The margins were tight in the 2022 run-off, and then-President Bolsonaro refused to concede defeat, instead suggesting that there were “malfunctions” in the electronic voting machines that favoured Lula.

His supporters took to the streets to protest his loss, blockading roads and attacking police headquarters in the capital, Brasilia.

The unrest culminated in an attack on January 8, 2023, against government buildings in the capital, which was seen as an attempt to trigger a military uprising against Lula’s leadership.

Former President Bolsonaro was later convicted in September 2024 of plotting to stay in power, with prosecutors presenting evidence that he and his allies explored options including calling a new election and assassinating Lula.

The former president has denied wrongdoing and accused his adversaries of a political witch-hunt.

In December, his eldest son, Flavio, 44, entered the 2026 presidential race with his father’s endorsement. He has suggested he would seek his father’s freedom as part of his campaign.

Earlier this year, Lula vetoed a bill that would have lowered Jair Bolsonaro’s prison sentence. He has denounced his predecessor’s actions as a coup attempt.