Podcast Summary: Crime Stories with Nancy Grace

Episode: BOMBSHELL: STATE V. D4VD AKA DAVID ANTHONY BURKE
Air Date: February 16, 2026
Host: Nancy Grace
Guests: Dave Mack (Reporter), Joanna Nieves (Criminal Defense Attorney), Steve Fisher (Private Investigator)

Overview

This explosive episode dissects newly unearthed legal documents in the case of Celeste Rivas Hernandez, a teenage girl found dead in the trunk of David Anthony Burke’s (a.k.a. D4VD) Tesla. The episode’s central revelation is the confirmation that the State of California is officially pursuing a case directly against Burke—not just conducting a broad investigation. Nancy Grace and an expert panel break down the latest legal maneuvers, family involvement, procedural controversies, and forensic developments as the search for justice continues.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. BREAKING: State Vs. David Anthony Burke

• Legal Bombshell: A recently found court document explicitly names David Anthony Burke as a defendant, shifting the focus from a general investigation to a formal case – “The people of the state of California vs. David Anthony Burke.”
• Secret Grand Jury Proceedings: There had been ambiguity about whether a grand jury heard the case as an investigative tool or for indictment, but the documentation clarifies target status.
  • Dave Mack: “This document proves beyond a shadow of a doubt legal paperwork that says the state of California versus David Anthony Burke.” [01:09]

2. Family Subpoenas and Legal Challenges

• Burke Family’s Appeal: Burke’s parents and brother have been subpoenaed to testify before a California grand jury. They’re contesting this, arguing their rights were violated because they received redacted affidavits.
  • Nancy Grace: “They’re claiming their rights were violated... the affidavit supporting that warrant... had a name redacted. That’s the leg they’re standing on. Good luck.” [05:45]
• Procedural Grounds: Joanna Nieves, defense attorney, contextualizes this as a common legal strategy: seeking proper notice and challenging procedural steps, not facts.
  • Joanna Nieves: “We see this pretty often... there are rules you have to follow. Give me proper notice.” [06:50]

3. Discussion of Legal Privilege and Subpoena Powers

• No “Family” Privilege: Nancy underscores that unlike attorney-client, priest-penitent, or spousal privilege, parent-child privilege does not exist.
  • Nancy Grace: “He’s my daddy ain’t one of them, Nieves.” [09:45]
• Potential Angles for Challenge:
  • Religious or Legal Privilege?: Nieves floats the idea that as Burke’s father is allegedly a lawyer and affiliated with a church, he could theoretically attempt privilege claims—but both agree this seems more a legal Hail Mary than a likely shield.
    • Joanna Nieves: “It’s an angle...maybe some of the conversations that happened could fall under those protections.” [10:54]

4. The Nature of Burke and Celeste’s Relationship

• Photo Evidence & Gaps in Proof:
  • Steve Fisher (PI) describes how D4VD was careful not to be photographed with Celeste, hinting at possible coverup, but direct evidence of sexual misconduct is lacking.
    • Steve Fisher: “He was aware when cameras were around and...she’s captured in so few photos, although we have other evidence to link her there.” [14:10]
  • Nancy explains without a living victim or corroborating forensics/texts, sexual assault will likely not be charged, and focus will remain on homicide.
    • Nancy Grace: “Sex assault will likely not be part of the claims...unless I have a witness...I would not put that in the indictment.” [15:01]

5. Forensic and Investigative Developments

• Technology as Evidence:

  • Fisher suggests Wi-Fi router data from the mansion could identify who was present during critical times.
    • Steve Fisher: “...the Wi-Fi router at the house is going to log exactly when they were connected, what days and times…” [17:59]
  • Nancy: This is a reminder for other witnesses to be fully truthful.

• Surveillance & The Tesla’s Whereabouts:

  • The group discusses neighborhood surveillance footage and the movement of Burke’s Tesla while the body was in the trunk. Fisher hints—without confirming—he’s seen who moved the car.
    • Nancy Grace: “Isn’t it true that you told me you saw the face at least once of a person moving the Tesla?” [25:22]

6. Witnesses, Immunity, and Grand Jury Strategy

• Neo Langston’s Grand Jury Appearance:
  • Neo Langston—Burke’s friend—was compelled to appear before the grand jury after being arrested for noncompliance. He spent only 30-40 minutes inside, leading to speculation he pled the Fifth Amendment.
    • Steve Fisher: “I have to believe that he pleads the fifth...he's got a lot more information than 30 or 40 minutes worth.” [20:34]
  • Nancy speculates that granting Langston immunity could have forced testimony, but it appears the state used a different tactic.
    • Nancy Grace: “If you don’t want to testify, you can be put on as a co-defendant...Or you can be an unnamed co-conspirator...Give him immunity and make him testify.” [21:14], [22:56]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Nancy Grace, on the family’s legal argument:
  • “Really, Celeste? A little girl, a teen girl decomposing in their son’s Tesla. And they're claiming their rights were violated... because a name was redacted.” [05:45]
• Joanna Nieves, on potential privilege:
  • “It's an angle...maybe some of the conversations that have happened, if there really is this sort of affiliation, could fall under those protections. No, he doesn't have a father-son privilege...” [10:54]
• Steve Fisher, on surveillance findings:
  • “She was in that trunk for months... there’s a lot of cameras in that neighborhood...some of it doesn’t go back far enough and from other angles.” [24:53]
• Nancy Grace, on prosecutorial strategy:
  • “I would not put [a weak charge] in my indictment. If I were prosecuting this case, I might believe it, I might know it to be true. But unless I have a witness... I would not put that in.” [15:01]
• On Neo Langston’s refusal to testify:
  • “He was only in [the grand jury]...30 to 40 minutes...I can't believe there's a 30 or 40 minute—you would arrive, get sworn in...he's got a lot more information than 30 or 40 minutes worth.” – Steve Fisher [20:34]

Important Segment Timestamps

• [00:00 – 01:49]: Announcement of major legal developments, introduction of guests
• [01:49 – 05:45]: Breakdown of the Burke family’s subpoena challenge and legal nuances
• [05:45 – 13:03]: Attorney privilege discussion, possible legal arguments for/against family testifying
• [13:03 – 17:59]: Steve Fisher recounts investigative timeline, relationships, and forensic evidence
• [17:59 – 19:35]: Importance of router and tech evidence
• [19:52 – 25:43]: Neo Langston grand jury appearance and speculation on his cooperation
• [25:41 – end]: Strategic legal discussion, summary of main findings, call for tips from the public

Conclusion / Call to Action

Nancy Grace concludes with a sharp reminder to potential witnesses and the public that compliance with grand jury subpoenas is mandatory, and that justice for Celeste Rivas demands persistence and transparency. She urges anyone with information on the case to contact authorities.

“If you know or think you know anything about the death of this little girl, Celeste Rivas Hernandez, please dial 213-486-6890.” [27:01]