Law&Crime Sidebar - Horrific Autopsy Photos Stun Court in D4vd Murder Hearing

Episode Date: July 24, 2026

Those present in a Los Angeles courtroom Friday for D4vd's preliminary hearing were forced to see graphic and disturbing photos of his alleged victim's mutilated and decomposed corpse. The singer, whose real name is David Burke, is accused of killing 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez before allegedly cutting up her body and leaving it in the trunk of his Tesla. Law&Crime's Jesse Weber and NBCLA reporter Julia Deng discuss the gallery's reaction to the gruesome testimony, as well as how the accused killer himself responded.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Make the switch to Chime® to earn 3.75% APY: https://chime.com/sidebar Thanks Chime for sponsoring this video!Chime is a fintech, not a bank. Banking services provided by Chime's bank partners.Savings APY: No min. balance required. For more information on Annual Percentage Yields, go to chime.com/disclosures.9x national average: Comparison to national average rate on the FDIC's National Rates and Rate Caps website, as of 07/13/2026.HOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea, & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson, Heather Berzak & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrimeTwitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A very important day in accused murderer David's preliminary hearing because not only did the Deputy Medical Examiner testify about the cause and manner of death of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez, but we just got an idea of what the defense may be doing, what they may argue, if this case goes to trial. And I will tell you right now, it is something. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by law and crime. I'm Jesse Weber. Okay, day four, David's preliminary hearing. Remember, this is all to determine if there is sufficient evidence, if there is probable cause, sufficient probable cause to support the charges that he faces for this to go to trial. Remember, he's facing murder, continuous sexual abuse of a child, unlawful mutilation of human remains charges,

all in connection with the death of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez, whose decomposed dismembered remains were allegedly found in a Tesla allegedly registered to David. So now we are going back, and today's big because this is the testimony of the deputy medical examiner, Dr. Grant Howe. Let's talk about it. Okay. Let me bring in our eyes and our ears. Once again, Julia Dang, NBC, LA reporter who has been fantastic throughout all this. Good to see you again. There's a lot to get into here.

There is a lot to get into when we talk about the deputy medical examiner's testimony. Before even do that, we've always started by talking about David's demeanor in the courtroom. And the way that we've gone through it for the past several days, it's that he looks kind of bored. He looks like he, you know, you described the court reporter even said yesterday that he looks like he's on another plane, disengaged. Today, though, if I'm reading the notes that you sent over, a little bit different from David today, right?

A tiny bit, Jesse. He is a little bit more animated. He came in today, you know, wearing the standard to L.A. County Jail uniform, that orange jumpsuit. He's got a shirt on underneath it. Hair is kind of grown out. He looks tired, unshaven. But he did seem a little bit more animated.

He sat down, had a conversation with one of his defense attorneys, and then started smiling and chit-chatty a little bit with her. That was different. But once testimony started up again, and we were hearing from the death. medical examiner, one of two people involved in actually performing the autopsy on Celeste, after her remains were found in David's Tesla, he went back to his usual, you know, expressionless, emotionless, really motionless pose sitting at the council table. He's staring straight ahead, kind of just blinking at the witness on the stand, staring at the exhibits on that overhead monitor, and really not moving, not reacting.

And by the way, before we even get into the substance of the testimony, where I really think it's interesting what both this medical examiner had to say and what the defense has been saying, the photos that were shown to the whole gallery, which you saw, your reporting indicates there was an audible reaction in the courtroom to those photos. Can you describe what you mean by that? There was an audible reaction. There was a visceral reaction.

And let me describe to you what happened possibly by accident. Before we were actually shown the exhibits that we were supposed to see in the order that they were supposed to be presented, during this deputy medical examiner's testimony, the projector in the courtroom, actually flipped through numerous autopsy photos before we were supposed to see that. So imagine, right, this overhead monitor kind of like flipbook style in a matter of seconds going through probably about half a dozen photos. And I'm talking on topsy photos, showing the victims, torso, open chest cavity, extremities laid out, you know, cleaned off and laid out on a silver exam table. There was an audible gasp. you know, a reporter sitting behind me in the courtroom, you could hear her reacting to this. You could see everybody reacting, I think, very viscerally.

But Dr. Grant Ho, the witness on the stand right now, she's going through this methodically, step-by-step. For him, this is his day-to-day. This is just part of his job. And he's answering the questions that way. There's nothing emotional, nothing grisly or gruesome about any of this to him. Makes you think about that job. I mean, my gosh. All right.

I know this is a 180. I get it. But I have to call this out because I think it's really concerning. Why are so many of us still settling for earning almost nothing on our savings? Is that how you just thought banking worked? Well, this is why I got to tell you about chimes. So with our sponsor, Chime, this is America's number one choice for banking. you could earn 3.75% APY on savings.

That is nine times the national average. And you only need to set it up once. Your money is going to grow automatically. Even while you sleep, by the way. You can set savings goals in the app too for an upcoming European vacation, a new laptop or tablet, a new car, an emergency fund, you name it. There are no monthly fees or minimum balance requirements.

It's just your money growing. And Chime wants you to keep more of your money and earn on it. So make the switch to Chime and go to chime. slash sidebar. It's going to be at the top link in the description box, or you can scan the QR code on screen. Only takes a few minutes to sign up and make sure you go through my link to support the channel. But that is chime.com slash sidebar. Join the millions who are already banking fee free today. Okay. So today's an important day. There has been so much about evidence about David's alleged illegal relationship with Celeste. There's been a lot of evidence and testimony regarding the

potential cleanup, the dismemberment. When it comes to the actual killing, when it comes to the actual alleged murder, this is what we were waiting for. What did Dr. Grant Ho say about the cause and matter of death of Celeste Revis Hernandez? There is a lot of back and forth during this cross-examination now of Dr. Grant Ho, but he repeated findings from the medical examiner's office that have already been published. This was released months ago. We have reported on this, but he walked us through with the support of visuals this time that we have not previously seen from the autopsy. He walked us through what they already found months ago. They decided the cause and manner of death of 14-year-old Celeste

Rebus Hernandez was homicide, and they attributed her death to multiple penetrating injuries. Here's what's interesting, though. They did not identify what kind of weapon or tool caused those penetrating injuries. And they stopped short of actually calling it a penetrating injury caused by a sharp instrument. So they're not saying that she was definitely stabbed to death. And that's because of the advanced state of decomposition. They simply don't know for sure exactly how or what caused. caused a lot of what they found, which we are looking at right now in the courtroom, documented

in these very, very visual exhibits. Let me tell you why that's so significant. You know, but our audience should know. One of the special circumstance allegations in this case that has been presented by prosecutors is that David Anthony Burke personally used a deadly and dangerous weapon, a sharp instrument, to commit this crime. And yet what you're telling us is this deputy medical examiner can't definitively say that that's the case. We don't know that for sure. And I think defense attorneys made a point of underscoring that several times.

That is one of the elements of this first degree felony murder charge that is interesting, that is different, right? And if he is convicted, there could be a sharp instrument enhancement. I believe in the state of California that could tack on an additional consecutive year. But those three additional special circumstances, that makes this murder case eligible for the death penalty. Here's what else the deputy medical examiner doesn't know for sure. And defense leaned really hard into all of this on cross. They don't know which penetrating injury occurred first.

there's one on the victim's abdomen, and there's one on her lateral left chest. So one is associated, possibly with liver damage, the other, possibly with rib damage and diaphragm damage. Deputy Emmy can't say which one happened first. He can't say definitively whether or not they may have happened seconds apart. He cannot say which one caused her death. He cannot say how long it may have taken Celeste to die from either one of those injuries. There's so much we simply don't know. And that created a gap for one of the defense attorneys to ask something that we have not heard yet in this case.

She asked this witness, this deputy medical exam, if he could rule out that Celeste may have inflicted both of these stab wounds on her own. And he said, based on his findings in this autopsy, that was not something that he could definitively rule out. The reaction in the courtroom, following that line of questioning, though, I turned around and I could see a couple people, you know, glancing at each other, eyebrows raised, it looked and felt to me like people watching this line of questioning felt like it may have been bordering on the absurd. It may not be something a jury would believe. Let's map that out for a second. So in other words, and this is based on what we saw this week

from the defense, they are potentially building the argument if this goes to trial, and correct me if I'm wrong, that Celeste would have come over to his place, something happened. She killed herself or had an overdose. David panicked and tried to get rid of her body. I mean, is that something that you see the building blocks for, even though they've tried to, because remember,

one of the most significant things I think the defense has been trying to do is saying, well, all these alleged purchases, the chainsaws, the laundry bags, the body bag was all after she allegedly died. So it's not like he planned to kill her. Am I understanding that that's maybe the building blocks of where they may go as a potential defense?

Jesse, I don't know if that's where the defense is actively trying to go. I think this is their opportunity during this preliminary hearing to kind of test out different lines of questioning, right? See what sticks. See where the biggest openings might be for them to just create. more gaps in the prosecution's case. I don't believe that line of questioning is going to go anywhere. But here's how they laid it out this morning. Marilyn Bidnarski was the one asking Dr. Grant Ho these questions. She wanted to know first. Is it helpful for somebody doing an autopsy to maybe have information about whether the decedent has a mental health history?

is it helpful to know if they are suicidal? Is it helpful to know if they are habitual drug users? So to each of those questions, Dr. Ho answered potentially. So then she asked him, did you have any conversations with the decedent's relatives to explore those characteristics? He did not. So then she proceeded to ask about the injuries, right? the documented injuries, these penetrating wounds, the disruption to one of her ribs, the damage noted on her liver. And a defense wants to know, you know, can you definitively link those

observations that were made during the autopsy to what you see on the overlaying skin? And do you know exactly how that occurred? Are you able to definitively report that somebody else caused those injuries. And I think the broad answer to all of this is the advanced state of decomposition precludes a lot of definitive inflammation. The deputy Emmy simply cannot say how this happened or who did this to her. I don't know if this is actually going to end up being a building block for an argument that Celeste killed herself. But it's certainly a line of questioning that I think any sharp defense attorney would explore during this opportunity, during this preliminary hearing that we've been calling kind of a mini bench trial or a rehearsal for trial, if you will. And I mean, if they're trying to muddy the waters in terms of how long had she been dead for, you know, they might be suggesting, can you definitively say she died on that night in April?

What about this whole back and forth about a gunshot wound? This was interesting, too, because this was new. And Dr. Ho just clarified on the stand before we broke for lunch that his way of saying anything could have happened to inflict what he'd observed on her ribs, damage to one of her left ribs. That could have come from anything. He cannot say with certainty that it came from a knife or another sharp. sharp instrument. And the reason, again, that they attributed her death to penetrating wounds as opposed to a sharp instrument is because they cannot rule out a possible gunshot wound with an exit wound in her body. They don't know for sure what killed Celeste.

And there was also a discussion about the chainsaws, right? So in other words, yesterday in the past few days, we know that chainsaws were collected. But as far as we know, they tested negative for blood. There seems to be one chainsaw that may be missing. In terms of a chainsaw potentially being used to inflict these injuries on Celeste, whether it was in the form of her cause of death, to kill her or to dismember her, what was the discussion of chainsaws today? So the witness was very careful to answer that line of questioning. He noted, I think, several times that he is not an expert when it comes to tools, power tools, used to dismember bodies. He did offer us some general knowledge about what might lead to the types of cuts that he noted on the victim's body.

He described it as clean or smooth around the edges. That, though, I think, is going to be called into question as well because the appearance of all of these wounds, right? They have changed post-mortem during decomposition. But he talked about how to cut through soft tissue or organs, you can do that with a scalpel. He talked about how to cut through bone. You might use something like a bone saw. And he said to cut through rib, you would need something essentially like hedge cutters. That's what he said on the stand.

Still, he cannot definitively identify what was used to sever this victim's limbs from car body. And to be clear, the prosecution hasn't laid out a specific murder weapon or what happened to a potential murder weapon? They have not. Not yet. we do know two of the chainsaws found in David's garage during a search about a week after the test lab was found with the victims remains in the front trunk. We do know those two chainsaws tested negative for blood. What about the insect activity? That was another detail that I think got a visible reaction in the courtroom this morning. Dr. Ho described the beginning. The beginning stages of maggots all around the victims remains when he first got the case when he was preparing

to do the autopsy. I think it was a good morning for the victim's parents, both of our parents, who've been sitting in for most of this preliminary hearing to not be in the courtroom. I walked past them in the hallway just now when I was exiting for lunch. They are here. They are in the courthouse, but they elected not to sit in there. this morning for this testimony. I think that was an understandable move on their part. Julia, you are as much an expert on this case as anybody I know. So I'm going to ask you this part because I think it's important. As we're recording this, we're coming, we're at the end of the morning session. You're waiting to go back in for the afternoon session. Over the past four days,

and you know, you can tell me in terms of timeline, whether this is going to go on into Monday or not, what how strong is the prosecution's case right now so there's two questions right there's a question of do they have enough for this to go forward to trial right it's a lower standard it's probable cause it's not beyond a reasonable doubt it's just does the prosecution have sufficient evidence to support these charges at this stage to go forward how strong do you think the case is when it comes to first degree murder continuous sexual abuse lawful mutilation of human remains and where are the gaps or what is missing right now? What is missing right now that they have yet to definitively show?

I think they had a strong enough case for this to move forward to trial. Now, the threshold for that, as you noted, is far lower than needed for a jury to convict the defendant on all three of those felony counts. Think of probable cause as just 51%. I think the prosecution has that. I think Beth Silverman, the deputy DA prosecuting this case, I think she knows they have that. She seems very relaxed today, definitely more so than yesterday. I talked about how it felt a little bit tense in the courtroom yesterday morning, different energy today. She actually walked in and realized her phone was missing. She's got staffers looking for it. She is cool as a cucumber today. I think she knows she has a strong enough

for this to go to trial. But what's missing? We haven't seen any definitive proof yet that links David to the actual murder. We haven't seen any video that actually shows him committing that alleged act. We haven't heard from any witnesses who say they watched it happen. That is missing. We don't know what else they may present. This preliminary hearing, of course, is just one step in the process. This is not all of their evidence. These are not all of their witnesses. It's just a selection. So like we've been saying, there's much, much more to come. Have they shown any evidence about what led up to her allegedly going to his place and then that that fateful night or that alleged fateful night? Have they presented any evidence about the timeline leading up to that? And what happened

immediately after in the sense there was no more activity from her phone because I think that to me is what I haven't seen but maybe I missed it in terms of what was the communication between the two of them leading up to her allegedly going to his house that night and she had by all accounts been heard from her seen again what was you know now the text messages was there an uber receipt have we learned any of that yet because I think that's going to be a critical piece because if they can establish that she got to the house and then they could establish she's moving the car and they can establish the alleged dismemberment, that that may be what they need. They don't necessarily always need an eyewitness to a murder.

They don't always necessarily need surveillance footage. You look at the totality of the evidence. Have they shown any of that yet leading up the hours, the minutes, the moments before on how she got to his house? You make a great point there, Jesse. A jury can absolutely convict on purely circumstantial evidence. We do not necessarily need to see surveillance video of David actually murdering Celeste for him to be found guilty. We have heard descriptions of the text message argument between David and Celeste before he sent her an Uber to pick her up in Lake Elsinore and take her to his home in the Hollywood Hills.

We've heard descriptions of it. We haven't actually seen that back and forth those text message records in courts. I imagine we will if this goes to trial. We did hear testimony yesterday about the digital evidence left behind by David's Tesla and his iPhone. We heard about the exact timing and the approximate location of where both his phone and his Tesla were tracked, leaving his home and then going up north toward Santa Barbara County. That's, of course, where he's accused of dumping evidence related to this case. But defense, right, they jumped in immediately on cross and said, you cannot prove David was actually the one in the car.

You cannot prove David was actually the one using his own phone. But there was an outgoing call about an hour, maybe an hour and a half after Celeste would have been dropped off at his home in the Hollywood Hills. from David's iPhone to her number. But again, like defense attorneys noted, nobody can prove just yet that David was actually the one who made that call that went to voicemail. I think prosecution brought that up as just another detail supporting their narrative that he trying to cover this up. Before I let you go, because I know you have to run, I just want to ask you one more point about this. Look, we know the medical examiner has been in the news a lot that. office in terms of alleged leaks of information potentially regarding Celeste's case. We know that there was this a little bit of back and forth between them and the LAPD regarding a sealing of records for several, several months in this case. Did any of that conversation come up today?

I believe I saw something about the deputy ME being asked, why was there a delay in terms of releasing or finding out the cause and matter of death? Can you explain if anything came up about that. So quite a few parts to that question, Jesse. First, about LAPD and the L.A. County Medical Examiners Office, nothing specifically related to that back and forth came up today. And of course, after the Emmy's office did the autopsy, right, they came out with a statement saying the victim may have been in that car for quite some time. And then LAPD made a motion requesting that no additional details come out from the autopsy, and then the medical examiner issued another statement saying that they just want transparency around this case. They need that to do their jobs properly. So there was

that a couple months ago. This morning, that specific back and forth was not referenced. Now, there was a question about that delay, right? Three-month delay. And Dr. Grant Ho explained very clearly on the stand, it was because they had to do some ancillary testing. They were basically waiting for the toxicology testing to be done because they wanted to rule out that an overdose played a role in her death. Once they got that toxicology report back, and all they found was inconclusive for methamphetamine, negative ultimately for benzos, and a very, very low. detection of ethanol in her liver that Dr. Ho says may have actually been produced by the body itself as it was decomposing. After they got those results back, they went ahead and they attributed

her death to the multiple penetrating injuries. So basically, they had to wait a couple months so that they could roll out an overdose. Julia, dang, thank you so much for coming on. As always, I know you have to get back into the courtroom. I look forward to talking to you again as this case progresses. 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 Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you get your podcast. You can also check us out on NBC's Peacock as well. If you want to follow me, ex-instagram, my News Nation show, Jesse Weber Live, Monday through Friday, 11 p.m. Eastern. I'll see you next time, everybody.