murder

Evidence in D4vd murder case could become public at May hearing

Evidence in the murder case against the singer D4vd — who is charged with the brutal killing of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez — will not become public until at least late next month, after his defense attorneys pumped the brakes on a preliminary hearing that was scheduled to take place this Friday.

David Anthony Burke, 21, was charged with murder, continuous sex abuse of a minor and mutilating a corpse earlier this month after Los Angeles police stormed a Hollywood Hills home and arrested him. He pleaded not guilty last week.

The singer has long been linked to Hernandez’s disappearance and death, after her badly decomposed body was found in the trunk of a Tesla he owned at a Hollywood tow yard last September. Authorities said Hernandez was last seen at Burke’s Hollywood residence on April 23, 2025.

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman said last week that Burke killed the 14-year-old because she threatened to expose the fact that he’d been sexually abusing her for nearly a year. An autopsy report made public last week revealed Hernandez died from a pair of stab wounds. Her body was dismembered when police found it in the trunk and two of her fingers had been amputated, the report said.

Burke’s lead defense attorney, Blair Berk, said she does not believe the prosecution’s case can hold up to scrutiny and pushed for an immediate preliminary hearing during his initial court appearance. Defendants have a right to a preliminary hearing, in which a judge determines whether prosecutors have enough evidence to bring a case to trial, within 10 business days. In Burke’s case, that would have put the preliminary hearing on track for May 1.

But on Wednesday afternoon, attorney Marilyn Bednarski asked that the hearing be pushed back to May 26, citing the voluminous amount of discovery in the case. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Charlaine Olmedo agreed there was “good cause” to delay the hearing a few weeks.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Beth Silverman expressed some annoyance at Bednarski and Berk’s change of heart, noting she’d already warned the defense team that prosecutors had a trove of evidence to turn over.

Silverman said last week that discovery materials would include the results of a wiretap and searches of Burke’s cellphone and iCloud accounts, which prosecutors allege turned up “a significant amount of child pornography.” Law enforcement executed 54 search warrants in the case, according to court records.

The medical examiner’s report detailing how Hernandez died was not available to the defense until last week. Prosecutors also convened three secret grand juries between November 2025 and February 2026 to collect evidence against Burke, according to Silverman. Transcripts from those hearings were under seal as of last week.

Bednarski said Wednesday she needed “additional time to review the discovery we either just got, or are about to get, in order to have a full and free preliminary hearing.”

“We told them that this was what was going to be coming,” Silverman argued in reply. “As I said in my brief, we sent out subpoenas, we’ve been preparing, we’ve been telling witnesses to cancel planned vacations.”

Berk also sought to have Olmedo seal a filing that Silverman submitted early Wednesday that laid out evidence she plans to present at a preliminary hearing.

“The prosecution has appeared to file a rather unusual pre-preliminary hearing brief that appears to be a very one-sided view of what is anticipated as the evidence in this case. But no evidence has been presented by the prosecution in a courtroom. Certainly there has been no adjudication of the admissibility of that evidence,” Berk said, expressing worry that the publication of such materials would taint future jury pools.

Prosecutors normally file such briefs ahead of trial, which include a list of witnesses they plan to call and a summary of arguments they will make. Olmedo rejected Berk’s request to seal the motion. A copy of the document was not immediately available for review at the downtown Los Angeles courthouse.

Source link

Man pleads guilty in killing of Run-DMC’s Jam Master Jay 24 years ago

More than 20 years after Jam Master Jay of Run-DMC was shot to death in a New York recording studio, a man admitted to his role in the killing.

Jay Bryant, 52, pleaded guilty to a federal murder charge, telling U.S. Magistrate Judge Peggy Cross-Goldenberg that he helped others gain access to the building where the hip-hop icon, born Jason Mizell, was shot in 2002.

“I knew a gun was going to be used to shoot Jason Mizell,” Bryant told the judge, per the Associated Press. “I knew that what I was doing was wrong and a crime.”

Bryant didn’t name the people he helped, but in 2024, Karl Jordan Jr. and Ronald Washington were convicted of Mizell’s murder in a case that prosecutors had been working for decades.

“Y’all just killed two innocent people,” Washington yelled at the jury at the time of the verdict.

Jordan Jr., Mizell’s godson, won an appeal last year to overturn his conviction, with a judge finding that the prosecutors’ case against him didn’t add up. The judge said the evidence didn’t support the contention that he was motivated by anger after he was cut out of a $200,000 drug deal. Earlier this month, U.S. District Judge LaShann DeArcy approved Jordan Jr.’s $1-million bond package.

Washington has challenged his conviction as well.

According to Courthouse News, prosecutors claimed that Washington and Jordan both confessed to the murder, based on witness testimony that both men discussed being involved in Mizell’s shooting while they were in prison.

As for Bryant’s role in the murder, his uncle Raymond Bryant testified in 2024 that his nephew confessed to killing Mizell, saying he “did it.”

Additionally, a hat with Bryant’s DNA that law enforcement officers found in the recording studio placed Bryant at the scene of the crime.

Bryant told the court Monday that he was in cahoots with people who were wrapped up in a drug deal with the DJ and that he played a part in the killing by helping them gain entry to the recording studio. According to the Associated Press, Bryant flashed a thumbs up to a person in the courtroom before leaving.

Bryant faces 15 to 20 years in prison for his role in the murder, as well as separate narcotics trafficking and firearms charges to which he already pleaded guilty.

“More than two decades after the cold-blooded, execution-style killing of Mr. Mizell, an exhaustive investigation revealed Bryant’s role and today he finally admitted his guilt,” stated U.S. Atty. Joseph Nocella in a news release.

“Justice in the murder of Jam Master Jay has been pursued with determination and resolve for more than two decades. The defendant’s role in facilitating access for the killers was integral to this crime,” added Bryan DiGirolamo, special agent in charge for ATF New York field division.

Although Mizell’s public persona as the “master of the disco scratch” promoted the wholesome side of hip-hop and encouraged a drug-free lifestyle, officials said he turned to dealing after the group’s heyday had come and gone. According to prosecutors, Mizell became involved in arranging the sale of kilogram-size quantities of cocaine.

In August 2002, Mizell was fronted 10 kilos of cocaine from a supplier. Prosecutors alleged that Jordan Jr. and Washington planned to deal the drugs in Maryland, but a dispute led to the men being cut out of the $200,000 deal.

On Oct. 30, 2002, Mizell was playing video games with a friend inside his Queens, N.Y., recording studio, 24/7. According to prosecutors, around 7:30 p.m., Bryant entered the building containing the recording studio and opened a locked fire escape exit door to allow others to slip in without being seen by Mizell.

Two shots were fired and Mizell was hit once in the head, killing him. The second shot struck another individual in the leg.

Source link

Mother sentenced to life for brutal abuse, murder of 4-month-old son

Demonstrators calling for heavy punishment against a woman on trial for murdering her four-month-old son block an inmate bus carrying the woman near Gwangju District Court in Suncheon on Thursday. Photo by Yonhap

A woman who brutally beat her four-month-old son and left him to die in a bathtub was sentenced Thursday to life imprisonment in a child abuse case that stunned the nation.

The Suncheon branch of the Gwangju District Court ruled that the mother, in her 30s, had “cruelly” abused her child for half of his short life before ending it.

The woman was indicted for indiscriminately beating her son and leaving him in a running bathtub at their home in Yeosu, about 310 kilometers south of Seoul, on Oct. 22. The infant died of multiple fractures and internal bleeding.

The court also sentenced the child’s father to four years and six months in prison on charges of neglecting the abuse and threatening a witness in the case.

“Despite the defendants having the infinite responsibility of raising their child safely as parents, the child died 133 days after being born due to the abuse from his own parents, who should have been the world to him,” the court said.

Prosecutors had sought a life sentence for the mother and a 10-year term for her husband.

Investigators earlier determined that the woman had abused her child on 19 separate occasions since Aug. 24, and found multiple bruises and signs of internal bleeding on the infant’s body.

The case drew nationwide attention after footage of the abuse was aired by local broadcaster SBS’ investigative series “Unanswered Questions.”

A group of protestors staged a rally outside the court earlier in the day calling for heavy punishment.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

Source link

D4vd charged with murder of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez | Crime News

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.

Recommended Stories

list of 2 itemsend of list

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.

LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell walks past an image of Celeste Rivas Hernandez Monday
Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell walks past an image of Celeste Rivas Hernandez [Damian Dovarganes/AP]

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.

Source link

Supreme Court weighs phone searches to find criminals amid complaints of ‘digital dragnets’

A man carrying a gun and a cellphone entered a federal credit union in a small town in central Virginia in May 2019 and demanded cash.

He left with $195,000 in a bag and no clue to his identity. But his smartphone was keeping track of him.

What happened next could yield a landmark ruling from the Supreme Court on the 4th Amendment and its restrictions against “unreasonable searches.”

Typically, police use tips or leads to find suspects, then seek a search warrant from a judge to enter a house or other private area to seize the evidence that can prove a crime.

Civil libertarians say the new “digital dragnets” work in reverse.

“It’s grab the data and search first. Suspicion later. That’s opposite of how our system has worked, and it’s really dangerous,” said Jake Laperruque, an attorney for the Center for Democracy & Technology.

But these new data scans can be effective in finding criminals.

Lacking leads in the Virginia bank robbery, a police detective turned to what one judge in the case called a “groundbreaking investigative tool … enabling the relentless collection of eerily precise location data.”

Cellphones can be tracked through towers, and Google stored this location history data for hundreds of millions of users. The detective sent Google a demand for information known as a “geofence warrant,” referring to a virtual fence around a particular geographic area at a specific time.

The officer sought phones that were within 150 yards of the bank during the hour of the robbery. He used that data to locate Okello Chatrie, then obtained a search warrant of his home where the cash and the holdup notes were found.

Chatrie entered a conditional guilty plea, but the Supreme Court will hear his appeal on April 27.

The justices agreed to decide whether geofence warrants violate the 4th Amendment.

The outcome may go beyond location tracking. At issue more broadly is the legal status of the vast amount of privately stored data that can be easily scanned.

This may include words or phrases found in Google searches or in emails. For example, investigators may want to know who searched for a particular address in the weeks before an arson or a murder took place there or who searched for information on making a particular type of bomb.

Judges are deeply divided on how this fits with the 4th Amendment.

Two years ago, the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans ruled “geofence warrants are general warrants categorically prohibited by the 4th Amendment.”

Chief Justice John Roberts poses for an official portrait at the Supreme Court building in 2022.

Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court’s liberals in a 4th Amendment privacy case in 2018.

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

Historians of the 4th Amendment say the constitutional ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures” arose from the anger in the American colonies over British officers using general warrants to search homes and stores even when they had no reason to suspect any particular person of wrongdoing.

The National Assn. of Criminal Defense Lawyers relies on that contention in opposing geofence warrants.

Its lawyers argued the government obtained Chatrie’s “private location information … with an unconstitutional general warrant that compelled Google to conduct a fishing expedition through millions of Google accounts, without any basis for believing that any one of them would contain incriminating evidence.”

Meanwhile, the more liberal 4th Circuit in Virginia divided 7-7 to reject Chatrie’s appeal. Several judges explained the law was not clear, and the police officer had done nothing wrong.

“There was no search here,” Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote in a concurring opinion that defended the use of this tracking data.

He pointed to Supreme Court rulings in the 1970s declaring that check records held by a bank or dialing records held by a phone company were not private and could be searched by investigators without a warrant.

Chatrie had agreed to having his location records held by Google. If financial records for several months are not private, the judge wrote, “surely this request for a two-hour snapshot of one’s public movements” is not private either.

Google changed its policy in 2023 and no longer stores location history data for all of its users. But cellphone carriers continue to receive warrants that seek tracking data.

Wilkinson, a prominent conservative from the Reagan era, also argued it would be a mistake for the courts to “frustrate law enforcement’s ability to keep pace with tech-savvy criminals” or cause “more cold cases to go unsolved. Think of a murder where the culprit leaves behind his encrypted phone and nothing else. No fingerprints, no witnesses, no murder weapon. But because the killer allowed Google to track his location, a geofence warrant can crack the case,” he wrote.

Judges in Los Angeles upheld the use of a geofence warrant to find and convict two men for a robbery and murder in a bank parking lot in Paramount.

The victim, Adbadalla Thabet, collected cash from gas stations in Downey, Bellflower, Compton and Lynwood early in the morning before driving to the bank.

After he was robbed and shot, a Los Angeles County sheriff’s detective found video surveillance that showed he had been followed by two cars whose license plates could not be seen.

The detective then sought a geofence warrant from a Superior Court judge that asked Google for location data for six designated spots on the morning of the murder.

That led to the identification of Daniel Meza and Walter Meneses, who pleaded guilty to the crimes. A California Court of Appeal rejected their 4th Amendment claim in 2023, even though the judges said they had legal doubts about the “novelty of the particular surveillance technique at issue.”

The Supreme Court has also been split on how to apply the 4th Amendment to new types of surveillance.

By a 5-4 vote, the court in 2018 ruled the FBI should have obtained a search warrant before it required a cellphone company to turn over 127 days of records for Timothy Carpenter, a suspect in a series of store robberies in Michigan.

The data confirmed Carpenter was nearby when four of the stores were robbed.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, joined by four liberal justices, said this lengthy surveillance violated privacy rights protected by the 4th Amendment.

The “seismic shifts in technology” could permit total surveillance of the public, Roberts wrote, and “we decline to grant the state unrestricted access” to these databases.

But he described the Carpenter decision as “narrow” because it turned on the many weeks of surveillance data.

In dissent, four conservatives questioned how tracking someone’s driving violates their privacy. Surveillance cameras and license plate readers are commonly used by investigators and have rarely been challenged.

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer relies on that argument in his defense of Chatrie’s conviction. “An individual has no reasonable expectation of privacy in movements that anyone could see,” he wrote.

The justices will issue a decision by the end of June.

Source link