How Is This Not a Crime? Why the LAPD’s “No Update” Is an Update.

On September 8, workers at a Hollywood impound lot reported a strong odor coming from a Tesla that had been towed in after someone called it abandoned in the Hollywood Hills. Inside the front trunk, police found a bag containing human remains. The body was so badly decomposed it took more than a week to identify. The Los Angeles County Medical Examiner eventually identified the victim as 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez.

Some quick background.

The vehicle is registered to musician D4vd, legal name David Anthony Burke. Reporting since then has included the following details: a matching tattoo with Celeste, a mother who said her daughter’s boyfriend was named David, an unreleased love song with the name “Celeste” in the working title, a police raid at a residence connected to D4vd, his subsequent move from that residence, and, after initially continuing his tour, the cancellation of remaining dates.

Authorities have repeatedly said he has not been arrested, charged, or named as a suspect.

The Los Angeles Police Department put out a statement on September 29 saying the Medical Examiner had not determined cause or manner of death, so it was “unclear” whether any criminal culpability existed beyond concealing Celeste’s body. That was weeks after the discovery. Now, weeks after that, when local media asked for an update, LAPD said their prior release “stands on its own.” Translation, nothing more to say, and apparently, no charges beyond concealment on the table.

Private investigator Steve Fischer, who was hired by the owner of the Hollywood Hills property where D4vd had been living, is publicly arguing that the LAPD’s stance is telling, not because it says a lot, but because it doesn’t. He says the department still has no evidence that supports charges other than concealment, and he notes the District Attorney’s Office hasn’t even been presented a case. Fischer also says there is a glaring omission here, namely, the lack of any public acknowledgement that law enforcement is pursuing the nature of the relationship between a 20-year-old and a 14-year-old, something that, at minimum, demands scrutiny.

The timeline, as clearly as I can put it.

• September 8: Workers at a Hollywood impound lot report an odor from a Tesla. Police open the front trunk and find a bag with reportedly dismembered, decomposed human remains.
• Mid-September: Identification takes more than a week because of the condition of the remains. The victim is identified as 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez.
• Late September: Reporting ties the car to D4vd. Additional details surface, including a matching tattoo, a song draft with “Celeste” in title and lyrics, and a police search at a home connected to him.
• September 29: LAPD issues a statement, saying the Medical Examiner has not determined cause or manner of death, so it remains unclear whether there is criminal culpability beyond concealment of a body.
• Following weeks: D4vd initially continues touring, then cancels the remaining dates. He retains a high-profile defense attorney. Authorities do not name him as a suspect.
• November 6: Asked for an update, LAPD replies that its prior release “stands on its own.” The LA County District Attorney, according to Fischer, has not been presented a case.
• Now: Two months since the discovery, there are still no charges other than the possibility of concealment on the table, and no public acknowledgement that the age-based nature of the relationship is being actively pursued.

Why this “no update” is infuriating.

This is simple. A 14-year-old is dead. She was found, apparently, in pieces in the front trunk of a luxury car that did not report as stolen. The body did not magically climb in there and close the lid. Even if medical examiners cannot say precisely how she died yet, you can work parallel tracks. You can build cases that do not depend on a cause of death ruling. You can develop charges tied to the transportation, concealment, and disposal of human remains. You can examine devices, location histories, ride share records, cell site data, purchase histories for items used to move or hide a body, and you can bring charges for conduct that is illegal on its face when a 20-year-old is involved with a 14-year-old.

When law enforcement repeats that their prior statement “stands on its own,” they may think they are avoiding prejudicing the case. What it communicates to the public is reluctance, paralysis, or both. And when a private investigator can say out loud that the DA has no case in front of them, it sounds less like a painstaking investigation and more like inertia.

What about the relationship?

I am going to be careful here. Allegations are just that until they are proven. But, when a 14-year-old’s own words describe what was happening to her, and when you have corroborating context, you do not shrug and say it is hard. You do the work. You find the contemporaneous messages, the metadata, the corroborating witnesses, the physical evidence that shows who controlled what devices, who drove what car where, and when. You interview the people who enabled it. You put it in front of a prosecutor.

Footage has resurfaced of D4vd talking with Celeste Rivas Hernandez on a livestream where she exposes him as a P*DO—then he quickly demands his mods to delete the recording and all traces of it. 😬

Even crazier, his whole chat knew about it, joking about the Epstein files and… pic.twitter.com/RxzXQQB5ia

— levi (@wsplevi) September 20, 2025

If people close to Celeste are reluctant to talk because their cooperation would expose their knowledge of an illegal relationship, that is not a reason to back off. That is a reason to push harder.

What I think needs to happen now.

1. Parallel charging decisions, not a single bottleneck on cause of death. If the facts support concealment and transport of human remains, charge it. If the facts support age-based offenses, present them.
2. Public clarity on scope. LAPD does not need to try this case in the press, but they can say plainly whether the relationship conduct is being pursued as a criminal matter.
3. Timeline transparency. A basic chronology from authorities about key investigative steps taken would go a long way to reassure the public that this is movement, not drift.
4. Witness protection and pressure. If there are individuals who know things and are hesitating, apply lawful pressure, and offer protection where appropriate.

Where does this leave us?

Right now, the official stance leaves grieving people with a message that reads like, “We are waiting for certainty.” Meanwhile, a 14-year-old ended up in a trunk. The absence of charges beyond concealment, at this stage, is unsatisfying and unacceptable.

If you have specific knowledge, if you were present, if you have a device, a message thread, or you saw something you thought was nothing at the time, now is the time to come forward. And if you are in law enforcement and you are waiting for the perfect case, you risk letting a deeply imperfect injustice calcify into permanence.