MK True Crime
Episode: Rob Reiner Son’s Alarming Court Appearance, “Burn Cage” Found in D4vd’s Home, and Hope for JonBenét Case
Hosts: Phil Holloway, Ashley Merchant, Dave Ehrenberg
Date: December 19, 2025

Main Theme & Episode Overview

This end-of-year episode dives deep into three headline-making cases:

• The legal and mental health drama surrounding Nick Reiner, son of Hollywood legend Rob Reiner, accused of murdering his parents.
• New developments in the disturbing case of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez, whose remains were found in singer D4vd’s Tesla—now with the revelation of a “burn cage.”
• Fresh hope for closure in the JonBenét Ramsey case, 29 years later, thanks to advances in DNA technology.

Throughout, the hosts provide legal analysis, behind-the-scenes insights, and personal perspectives.

Detailed Breakdown & Key Insights

1. Nick Reiner’s Court Appearance & Double Murder Charges

[01:05–13:47]

Setting the Scene

• Phil Holloway introduces the case: Nick Reiner, son of Rob and Michelle Reiner, is charged with their double homicide—a high-profile, brutal crime involving a knife.
• Nick appeared in court in an anti-suicide smock and shackles, signaling concerns over his mental state.

Legal Strategy & Mental Competency

• Defense attorney Alan Jackson requests more time at the arraignment due to complex mental health aspects:

  “There are … complex and serious issues associated with this case … allow the system to move forward … not with a rush to judgment, but with restraint and dignity.”
  —Alan Jackson, defense attorney (via Phil, [03:34])

• Ashley Merchant explains likely motivations for delay:

  • Nick is on suicide watch, indicating acute mental health concerns.
  • Defense may need time to determine Nick’s competency to stand trial:

  “When you’ve got a client who is potentially not capable of assisting in their own defense … you actually have to choose for them. And so it’s just a greater amount of stress.”
  —Ashley Merchant ([04:59])

• Dave Ehrenberg contextualizes:

  • Requests for delay are typical when competence is questioned.
  • Mental illness and recent unusual behavior (e.g., at a Christmas party) may factor in.
  • If found incompetent, Nick could be sent to a mental hospital.

Insanity Defense vs. Competency

• Phil asks if strange pre-crime behavior points to psychosis or drug-induced break.

• Ashley outlines defense priorities—gathering fresh, accurate info on Nick’s mental state and drug use.

• Dave, from a prosecutor’s view, notes:

  • Insanity defenses are rarely successful.
  • Fleeing, hiding in a hotel after the murders undermines insanity claims (implies understanding of right and wrong):

  “It’s your actions after the fact that can easily disprove you didn’t know the difference between right and wrong.”
  —Dave Ehrenberg ([11:43])

  • As prosecutor, develop evidence to refute incompetence and watch for malingering (faking).

2. Inheritance & Defense Funding: Legal and Ethical Quagmires

[17:40–23:58]

Can Nick Inherit? Who Pays His Lawyer?

• California’s “Slayer Statute” bars murderers from inheriting from victims.

• Unique wrinkle: Nick’s defense is being funded from his parents’ estate, via family/trust.

• Ashley empathizes with family funding quality defense:

  “I understand why they would want him to have a good defense lawyer … that’s the only way I could sleep at night and know that the truth came out.”
  —Ashley Merchant ([18:51])

• Dave notes strategic reasons:

  • Hiring a top defense lawyer like Alan Jackson could allow the family some influence—perhaps to avoid a “Menendez defense”-style trial that disparages their parents’ legacy:

  “You generally hire Alan Jackson… to do a high profile fight... perhaps to create a Menendez situation, which would be appalling… Maybe there is an incentive… because then they have a little bit of control.”
  —Dave Ehrenberg ([21:24])

3. Prosecuting a Potential Death Penalty Case

[23:58–29:01]

• Nick Reiner faces “special circumstances” that qualify for the death penalty in California (double homicide, use of deadly weapon).
• Ashley notes:
  • At trial: guilt/innocence phase, then aggravation/mitigation phase (for the death penalty).
  • Mental health elements, drug use, or abuse history could be mitigation factors. Start gathering this immediately.
• Discussion of possible “Menendez defense” (abuse allegations), strategy for both sides:

  “You’ve got to look into any allegation and just disprove it... as a prosecutor, it would make me extra angry… if they try to victimize the victims yet again.”
  —Dave Ehrenberg ([26:48])

4. Update: D4vd Case & the ‘Burn Cage’

[33:07–39:09]

Case Background

• Phil recaps: Decomposed remains of 14-year-old Celeste found in D4vd’s Tesla; no charges yet, but investigation is ongoing with grand jury and cooperating witnesses.
• A private investigator found an unopened “industrial burn cage” in D4vd’s high-end rental—capable of incineration at 1,600°F.

Legal Implications

• Dave calls it “real evidence”—but possibly not used by police yet because it wasn’t part of the original warrant.

  “There’s only really one reason why someone… would use that for. It’s like a scene from Ozark.”
  —Dave Ehrenberg ([35:16])

• Ashley (defense perspective): If there’s an innocent explanation, “there better be a really good reason” for having such a device.

  “This isn’t like a burn pit ... This is literally a device to cremate remains.”
  —Ashley Merchant ([36:48])

• Investigators likely building a circumstantial case from a trail of bizarre behaviors and evidence.

5. Hope for JonBenét Ramsey: Cold Case Breakthroughs

[39:09–46:48]

Brief Recap

• JonBenét: 6-year-old beauty queen, murdered December 26, 1996, Boulder, CO.

Advances in DNA/Genealogy Tech

• Ashley details the transition from older (“blood, semen, saliva”) to “touch DNA” and genealogy databases (Ancestry, 23andMe).

• Law enforcement now pursuing leads via genetic genealogy:

  “Now take that a step further … we have all these people going into … genealogy databases and that’s where they’re trying to take this case.”
  —Ashley Merchant ([40:56])

• Dave highlights its parallels to the Idaho/Kohberger case, and explains why officials are secretive—so suspects and relatives don’t hide from DNA databases:

  “It’s a real chance that we could find a match that didn’t exist before … you don’t need all the stuff you needed before. You just need touch DNA and a relative.”
  —Dave Ehrenberg ([43:47])

• Phil plays sound from John Ramsey (JonBenét’s father), advocating for Othram Labs to use “investigative genetic genealogy,” estimating “70, 80% chance of getting an answer.”
  ([45:31]–[45:33])

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On Defendants & Mental Illness:
  “I would bet that you both have had clients commit suicide. I’ve had three clients commit suicide. That’s a lot. And I will never forget any of that.”
  —Ashley Merchant ([08:23])

• On Prosecutors' Burden of Proof:
  “It’s your actions after the fact that can easily disprove that you didn’t know the difference between right and wrong.”
  —Dave Ehrenberg ([11:43])

• On the “Menendez Defense” Trap:
  “If they try to victimize the victims yet again, it would make me extra angry to dig in my heels and to demand serious punishment, life in prison, even the death penalty.”
  —Dave Ehrenberg ([26:48])

• On New DNA Techniques:
  “They’re really hoping that some of the advances in DNA, particularly with genealogy, is going to at least narrow down to a family member maybe so that they can … keep the case alive.”
  —Ashley Merchant ([40:56])

Timestamps for Key Segments

| Time | Topic | |------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 01:05 | Opening; Reiner case intro & Nick’s arraignment | | 03:34 | Defense attorney Alan Jackson’s statement | | 04:59 | Mental health/competency discussion (Ashley) | | 06:40 | Dave Ehrenberg on standard arraignment procedures | | 11:43 | Prosecution strategy on insanity/competency (Dave) | | 18:49 | Funding defense with parents’ estate (Ashley, Dave) | | 23:58 | Death penalty implications, mitigation strategy (Ashley) | | 29:01 | Menendez “abuse defense” discussion; defense approach (Ashley, Dave) | | 33:07 | Transition to D4vd case; burn cage found | | 35:16 | Dave: “scene from Ozark” analogy | | 36:48 | Defense perspective on burn cage (Ashley) | | 39:09 | Phil: Ongoing investigation and potential for charges | | 40:56 | JonBenét Ramsey recap and DNA technology advances (Ashley) | | 43:47 | Dave: Genetic genealogy and solving cold cases | | 45:31 | John Ramsey (JonBenét’s father) on new investigative approaches | | 49:33 | Closing arguments: Ashley on Fani Willis’s Senate testimony — “that’s a dumbass…” | | 52:18 | Dave on hope and the human spirit after a year of tragedy | | 55:29 | Phil on “stealth jurors” and perils of jury selection in high-profile trials | | 59:20 | Episode closes with thanks and holiday wishes |

Closing Arguments: Memorable Conclusions

1. Ashley Merchant: Rants on Georgia DA Fani Willis’s combative Senate testimony; criticizes her “dumbass question” remarks.

   “If you had looked at the indictment, you would clearly see that you yourself, Ms. Willis, had alleged that this crime started to occur before you took office. So there’s my rant.”
   ([49:33])

2. Dave Ehrenberg: Finds hope amidst tragedy, spotlights acts of heroism and bipartisan compassion (e.g., positive words about Rob Reiner by ideological rivals).

   “…Never lose faith that the power to heal this world is within us all.”
   ([52:18])

3. Phil Holloway: Warns about “stealth jurors” in high-profile cases—people who lie to get on juries to sway outcomes, undermining justice.

   “…They undermine the fundamental right to a fair and honest impartial jury as guaranteed by law…”
   ([55:29])

Summary: Episode Takeaways

• Nick Reiner’s trial will hinge on mental competency, possible insanity, and defense funding dilemmas—a dramatic legal and ethical crucible.
• The D4vd/Celeste Hernandez case’s grim new evidence (burn cage) adds pressure and media scrutiny, but legal hurdles remain.
• There’s serious progress—and hope—for breakthoughs in the JonBenét Ramsey case with forensic genealogy, possibly bringing answers at last in 2026.
• The hosts close the year by advocating for legal rigor, compassion, and vigilance against systemic flaws—while looking ahead to more trial coverage in 2026.

A compelling, nuanced episode rich with legal insight, expert commentary, and candid reflection—a must-listen (or read!) for true crime and justice system aficionados.