Speaker 1: Hey, folks, it is Tuesday, July twenty eighth, and through
Speaker 1: nobody's surprise, a judge has officially ruled that singer David
Speaker 1: does have to go to trial for murder. But there
Speaker 1: were still some surprises in day five of his preliminary hearing,
Speaker 1: and with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Robes.
Speaker 1: With surprises came when the defense started introducing some text
Speaker 1: messages from Celeste Robes that were pretty strong language in
Speaker 1: terms of real violent physical threats against David. I wasn't
Speaker 1: expecting to hear that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this was definitely a surprise. Obviously, we knew there
Speaker 2: was a lot and we're talking thousands of text messages
Speaker 2: that investigators and the defense had access to, but we
Speaker 2: until this hearing had not really seen much of it.
Speaker 2: But my goodness, it was surprising to see the own
Speaker 2: the texts that were taking place in the twenty four
Speaker 2: hours leading up to her death.
Speaker 1: Yeah, tone, I guess is a good way to put it. Again,
Speaker 1: we have talked about how this looked alike and a
Speaker 1: lot of what we have seen in this preliminary hearing.
Speaker 1: They were behaving and discussing things you would expect the
Speaker 1: much older older of age, adults in a very serious
Speaker 1: relationship to be talking about. We're talking about a thirteen
Speaker 1: year old girl, so a lot of this is shocking.
Speaker 1: So to get you caught up here is day five
Speaker 1: of the preliminary hearing. It was to present evidence to
Speaker 1: make sure there was enough to go to trial. We
Speaker 1: were fully expecting. I guess that's the first headline that.
Speaker 2: Was established in the first fifteen minutes of day one
Speaker 2: in the preliminary hearing.
Speaker 3: I think we can all agree yet.
Speaker 1: We went through the process, so yes, it's no surprise
Speaker 1: the judge officially make the ruling, but still rose. We
Speaker 1: had one detective who finished up the testimony yesterday who
Speaker 1: was on the stand and rose. We started to get
Speaker 1: some glimpses of what the defense might want to do.
Speaker 1: Since she had two stab wounds. Did she do it
Speaker 1: to herself or was it possibly self defense? Robes, is
Speaker 1: this have they revealed now the direction they're going to go?
Speaker 1: Because they've now presented these text messages in which she
Speaker 1: sounds threatening, we're going to share them. But Robes, are
Speaker 1: they establishing a direction now?
Speaker 3: Yes?
Speaker 2: I think it was very clear in day five that
Speaker 2: I was almost said to four oh my goodness, David's
Speaker 2: defense team was clearly setting or establishing the fact that
Speaker 2: it was Celeste revs Hernandez who was making threats, making
Speaker 2: death threats, making threats of mutilating certain body parts, and
Speaker 2: threatening to ruin his life, his career. Get her dad
Speaker 2: involved all of the things you might imagine a young
Speaker 2: girl who was desperate to try and stay in a
Speaker 2: relationship that she saw slipping through her fingers. I mean,
Speaker 2: you see this in attack. You you can feel her
Speaker 2: anxiety almost in the text, but clearly her threats. And
Speaker 2: then they made it very clear that David didn't want
Speaker 2: her to come over, that she was the one who
Speaker 2: was pushing to come over, that she was the one
Speaker 2: who wanted to see him. So, yes, they are clearly
Speaker 2: establishing or we're starting to see them establish a defense.
Speaker 1: So this was Detective Corey Farrell, and we told you
Speaker 1: about him yesterday, but he was on the stand for
Speaker 1: over two days. But he was the one who had
Speaker 1: the phone and went through a lot of their text messages.
Speaker 1: So a couple of things that they did focus on
Speaker 1: the prosecution at least when he was on the stand.
Speaker 1: An important timeline between April twenty second and April twenty fifth.
Speaker 1: That's the stretch of time when they got into a fight.
Speaker 1: He lured her over, they say he killed her. He
Speaker 1: had an album release and got it aud d da,
Speaker 1: dada da. So let's start with Robes. How they say
Speaker 1: this all kind of kicked off and why she was
Speaker 1: so pissed on April twenty second, back and forth this again,
Speaker 1: She's it's thirteen, but this feels like a silly thirteen
Speaker 1: year old almost or a young person's argument. I'm mad
Speaker 1: at you because I saw some other girl post something
Speaker 1: on Instagram from your house.
Speaker 3: Yeah that was the heh, and that's it. But that's
Speaker 3: all it took.
Speaker 2: And yes, she was upset about some other girl and
Speaker 2: that is what set her off.
Speaker 3: That is what upset her.
Speaker 2: And yes it was something posted on social media. I mean,
Speaker 2: this is very typical. But her level of I guess
Speaker 2: of anger rose to a pretty high degree. She was
Speaker 2: making some very specific threats.
Speaker 1: So this is on April twenty second, they say, the
Speaker 1: fight happens. Now, this was important as well. Robes, this
Speaker 1: timeline of the last night of her life. They do
Speaker 1: believe now to set this up first of all, Robes,
Speaker 1: April twenty third, when they say he lured her over,
Speaker 1: you just mentioned and it needs to be mentioned here.
Speaker 1: I guess they showed text messages at least the defenstive
Speaker 1: for a couple of days she was begging to come over.
Speaker 1: He kept saying, no, I'm busy, Robes. That establishes a
Speaker 1: pretty good It takes almost that part off the table
Speaker 1: of luring somebody. They're making the point he actually didn't
Speaker 1: want to see her, So how is he planning to
Speaker 1: kill her?
Speaker 2: And that's really important for the defense because part of
Speaker 2: the prosecution's justification for potentially bringing a death sentence or
Speaker 2: a life in prison without the possibility of parole are
Speaker 2: those aggravated circumstances. And part of the aggravated circumstances is
Speaker 2: that he lured her over for financial gain and her
Speaker 2: murder was going to give him money. So you've seen
Speaker 2: them throughout this preliminary hearing try to already establish this
Speaker 2: idea that so much money was at stake, millions and
Speaker 2: millions of dollars, his bursioning career was all at stake,
Speaker 2: and that yes, he lured her own over to kill
Speaker 2: her for his own financial gain. If they can debunk
Speaker 2: that in terms of his role in bringing her over.
Speaker 2: That is going to go a long way in his
Speaker 2: if he were to be found guilty in terms of
Speaker 2: his sentencing, obviously they could eliminate the special circumstances.
Speaker 1: It throws. This is why you get lawyers, and you
Speaker 1: get good lawyers.
Speaker 3: Robes.
Speaker 1: They might have just saved his life. The way to
Speaker 1: look at that, this is why and we look at
Speaker 1: all this evidence and go, my goodness, he's guilty, and
Speaker 1: how he's going to overcome it? Robes. Just by getting
Speaker 1: that detail possibly off the table, gets the death penalty
Speaker 1: possibly off the table, and saved his life. Ro That's
Speaker 1: I guess good lawyering. That's why they get paid the
Speaker 1: pig bucks exactly. So, yes, they pointed all of that out,
Speaker 1: that he wasn't the one trying to get her over.
Speaker 1: But he finally does say okay, they agree that she's
Speaker 1: gonna come over on the twenty third. Now they have
Speaker 1: a timeline that says at eight thirty nine to forvid
Speaker 1: ordered and Uber for her and then around ten ten
Speaker 1: pm this was the final text she ever sent. Robes
Speaker 1: quote almost there open your door if you're home. And
Speaker 1: they do have evidence now Robes that at ten ten
Speaker 1: as well, the uber arrived and at ten ten he
Speaker 1: wrote back gate opened door unlocked. Now Robes ten ten
Speaker 1: to ten thirty one is a very crucial time period
Speaker 1: of twenty one minutes. What the hell happened?
Speaker 2: And that is when prosecutors say David murdered Celest Revus
Speaker 2: Hernandez in those twenty minutes, because the reason why we
Speaker 2: know what happened in those twenty one minutes at ten
Speaker 2: thirty one. Between ten thirty one and ten thirty six,
Speaker 2: he starts sending Celeste texts where are you at hello,
Speaker 2: bro Celeste, So it looks as though he is trying
Speaker 2: to yes, cover up or act as though if anyone
Speaker 2: were to get her phone or to check text messages,
Speaker 2: that he was acknowledging she had never arrived, that despite
Speaker 2: the uber showing her being dropped off gate open door unlocked.
Speaker 2: The next text from him or where are you at hello,
Speaker 2: ro sess Celeste.
Speaker 1: So yes, he was a bunch of all the list
Speaker 1: of a few, but it was a bunch of.
Speaker 2: Those trying to make it seem as though he was
Speaker 2: concerned about where she was that she had never shown
Speaker 2: up at his house.
Speaker 1: So that means Robes, by the time she pulls up
Speaker 1: at ten ten. In their theory, they say he attacked
Speaker 1: her immediately. Yes, I don't know how they know that.
Speaker 1: I think there's because of the text messages.
Speaker 3: I guess I get.
Speaker 1: But he had twenty minutes, twenty one minutes. What the
Speaker 1: hell happened in that twenty one minutes and whatever happened
Speaker 1: in that twenty one minutes robed is key to everything
Speaker 1: in this case. It's fascinating that they had narrowed it
Speaker 1: down to a few minutes of time in his whole case,
Speaker 1: so they do have evidence. After that, at eleven ten,
Speaker 1: he starts driving north at Tesla up towards Santa Barbara,
Speaker 1: and this is where along the way her what her
Speaker 1: passport was dumped.
Speaker 2: Her passport ID and so yes, they found some items
Speaker 2: that they actually traced back by using his GPS and
Speaker 2: a cell phone data. I believe that is, I know
Speaker 2: someone found it, but they were able to actually place
Speaker 2: his car almost in the exact area where her items
Speaker 2: were found.
Speaker 1: Okay, So as damaging and damning as all that was
Speaker 1: while the detective was up there, ropes, when the defense
Speaker 1: got up there, this was as effective as they have
Speaker 1: been throughout Robes I was shocked by the revelation about
Speaker 1: her family what this way knew.
Speaker 2: I was always confused by this and maybe more will
Speaker 2: come out because for her, first of all, Babe, she's
Speaker 2: been reported missing since April of twenty twenty four. Didn't
Speaker 2: understand how where was she for him to send an
Speaker 2: uber to take her from wherever she was staying and
Speaker 2: it took more than an hour, so that's about where
Speaker 2: she lived. Where she came from, it was about an
Speaker 2: hour's drive from his place. So if so, how was
Speaker 2: she still missing If she was coming from the place
Speaker 2: where she lived with her family, maybe she was with
Speaker 2: other family members, but how would her parents not have
Speaker 2: known where she was? It just that was always confusing
Speaker 2: to me, how she was still missing if she had
Speaker 2: to or if David had to send an uber to
Speaker 2: go get her to bring her.
Speaker 3: To his home.
Speaker 1: They showed some text messages where she sent just a
Speaker 1: zip code I believe was something to where all she
Speaker 1: did was a zip code in numbers, and he understood
Speaker 1: which place he was supposed to send the uber to
Speaker 1: pick her up. But it was a home in a town.
Speaker 1: They know where it is. Who was there? You're right,
Speaker 1: it's as if she had a residence, as she had
Speaker 1: a full time home somewhere, so how was she missing.
Speaker 2: There were reports that she had stayed with other family members,
Speaker 2: But okay, that still means you're not missing. I mean,
Speaker 2: even if you're not living with maybe your mother or
Speaker 2: your father, you're with an aunt, you're with a cousin,
Speaker 2: you're with somebody. It sounded like that's where she had
Speaker 2: bounced around, So I guess it's just a little fuzzy
Speaker 2: to me that she was still technically missing from from
Speaker 2: her whereabouts wasn't known by her parents, or at least
Speaker 2: that's what it was implied.
Speaker 1: Well, it was implied, but Robes it was flat out
Speaker 1: stated in court yesterday that her parents knew about this relationship,
Speaker 1: her adult sister knew about it, her cousins knew, her
Speaker 1: friends knew. Not only that Robes, they had given their
Speaker 1: blessing to this relationship. I am not clear on what's
Speaker 1: happening here.
Speaker 2: Yes, And they even went so far as to say
Speaker 2: that her parents signed a permission slip allowing her to
Speaker 2: travel with him to London, and that her sister came too.
Speaker 2: So and you think about that, even David trying to
Speaker 2: say he doesn't know or he didn't realize how old
Speaker 2: she was. Obviously she had a passport. Obviously you can
Speaker 2: see her date of birth. And yes, when you travel
Speaker 2: overseas with a minor, you have to have some sort
Speaker 2: of documentation from a parent that they were all to
Speaker 2: leave the country. So all away with her sister on
Speaker 2: this one, her adult sister.
Speaker 1: Is there any chance that he wasn't involved? Is can
Speaker 1: he make any argument that even then he still didn't
Speaker 1: know she was thirteen years I think.
Speaker 2: That would be really hard for anyone to believe. But
Speaker 2: initially maybe that she lied about her age. Fine, kids
Speaker 2: do that. Young young kids do that, wanting to be
Speaker 2: older and cooler. So maybe initially I would buy that
Speaker 2: he might not have known how old she was but
Speaker 2: when she was eleven, But maybe she said she was
Speaker 2: fourteen when she was eleven, who knows. And he was seventeen,
Speaker 2: so he didn't think it was that crazy. But eventually,
Speaker 2: obviously he had to have known.
Speaker 1: Yeah, when you say, hey, you want to drive tonight
Speaker 1: and she had no license.
Speaker 3: Or hey you want to go to the club tonight,
Speaker 3: or you want to.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's all kinds of stuff, Okay, But the stuff
Speaker 1: about the family knowing and blessing the relationship is confusing
Speaker 1: to me. The detail that they he even went to
Speaker 1: church with the family ones.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and we had heard before that she traveled with
Speaker 2: him to Texas to meet his family. So it seemed
Speaker 2: as though, or it's starting to seem as though both
Speaker 2: families were aware of this relationship as illegal as it was.
Speaker 1: Bro This is going to get fleshed out in a
Speaker 1: trial at some point. The dynamics in the background on
Speaker 1: this are mind blowing to me. So he's committing a
Speaker 1: crime and everybody around is welcome him into the church.
Speaker 1: They know how old she is. He's not lying about
Speaker 1: his age.
Speaker 2: Is he?
Speaker 3: I wouldn't think so. I mean, how couldy?
Speaker 2: He looks as like he looks like an eighteen, nineteen
Speaker 2: twenty year old old who's.
Speaker 1: Going along with the relationship. You all know she's thirteen ropes.
Speaker 1: I'm what am I missing?
Speaker 3: I don't know.
Speaker 2: Different families, different different different beliefs. I mean, look, some
Speaker 2: cultures will marry off their daughters very young, so different
Speaker 2: folks have different beliefs about what the right age is.
Speaker 2: Even though we have laws in this country saying exactly
Speaker 2: when the right age is. Who knows what different families,
Speaker 2: different folks, how they operate well.
Speaker 1: And this is where again he wrapped up this this
Speaker 1: detective we're talking about ro if they shared some text messages. Again,
Speaker 1: this was the other bombshell part of the surprising part.
Speaker 1: The defense gets up there and yeah, they just listen
Speaker 1: to the prosecution go through all these text messages that
Speaker 1: are so damning to David. Then they put off these
Speaker 1: robes that are kind of damning. Might not be the
Speaker 1: right word, but they.
Speaker 3: Paint threatens a certain picture.
Speaker 1: Robes. Was she serious? She was only thirteen or fourteen? Robes.
Speaker 1: This is some some pretty heavy stuff that the defense
Speaker 1: can use to suggest he might have been fearful or
Speaker 1: she might have been unstable.
Speaker 2: Yes, so the threat the texts that they put up
Speaker 2: or they discussed in court. Celeste sends this to David.
Speaker 2: I swear to God, I will kill you. I will
Speaker 2: strangle you to death. I will tell my dad so
Speaker 2: many lies about you. I will end your career and
Speaker 2: your life. I will straight up mutilate your penis.
Speaker 1: I don't know what to make of that, babe. So
Speaker 1: fourteen year old kid, thirteen, fourteen year old kid sending
Speaker 1: that stuff? What in God's good Heaven.
Speaker 2: That is the first we have heard or seen any
Speaker 2: texts even like, not even in that tone or in
Speaker 2: that like.
Speaker 3: This was shocking to see.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, is that just how you kind of talk?
Speaker 1: And obviously it's not supposed to be taking taken seriously
Speaker 1: when she says, I swear to God, I will kill you,
Speaker 1: I will strangle you to.
Speaker 3: Death, I will mutilate your penis.
Speaker 1: Roums, What is is there any and they shared up
Speaker 1: from him and his response to her, he didn't. I mean,
Speaker 1: there might be others somewhere they can dig up in
Speaker 1: the prosecution. At least the defense showed some responses that
Speaker 1: were measured in how he was responding and trying to
Speaker 1: deal with her robes. I don't know if the defense
Speaker 1: is going to be able to take this and make
Speaker 1: it a defense he was. She had already threatened to
Speaker 1: literally kill him, came over that night a ratic out
Speaker 1: of control. She did this, she picked up that, and
Speaker 1: what can you say? But who can tell that story?
Speaker 1: He's the only one man, He is the only one.
Speaker 1: So you can't enter that even into evidence. You can't
Speaker 1: enter that scenario.
Speaker 3: Unless he's willing to testify.
Speaker 1: Or unless they have some forensic somebody who can put
Speaker 1: together the scene. No, you can't robes he's it? Am
Speaker 1: I missing something?
Speaker 3: Nope?
Speaker 1: Who else can tell that story? But stay here, folks,
Speaker 1: The defense was not done. They may a couple of
Speaker 1: other significant points that again lead to a counter narrative
Speaker 1: that is developing.
Speaker 2: And welcome back everyone to this episode of Amy and TJ.
Speaker 2: We are talking about day five, and it was a doozy.
Speaker 2: It was the final day of the David Anthony Burke
Speaker 2: preliminary hearing where a judge, yes, ultimately decided no surprise
Speaker 2: to anyone that this is going to trial. But what
Speaker 2: was surprising was the window into what we are about
Speaker 2: to see from David's defense team, what his defense will
Speaker 2: likely be a trial, and they are already painting a
Speaker 2: picture of a erratic, maybe even vengeful, angry Celestrivas Hernandez
Speaker 2: who was making threats in the hours leading up to
Speaker 2: her own death. In addition to some of these texts
Speaker 2: that we saw come out in court yesterday, we also
Speaker 2: yes learned that she was begging him, begging David to
Speaker 2: come to his home, not the other way around, Not
Speaker 2: that luring thing that prosecutors have been painting a picture
Speaker 2: of and so she insisted on going to his house
Speaker 2: that night, and David was They were texting back and forth.
Speaker 1: Robes, she he's planning. They said he had to get
Speaker 1: her over that night to kill her. He'd been telling
Speaker 1: her not to come for days, said he was busy,
Speaker 1: apparently had an album coming out in a couple of days. Right, Robes.
Speaker 1: That is a very good point that they were able
Speaker 1: to make Robes and show that she was pestering to
Speaker 1: a certain degree. Have to see you this week. I
Speaker 1: can't go another week without da da da da. Can
Speaker 1: I come with the night? We need to talk about
Speaker 1: this face to face Robes. Look, we've been waiting. On
Speaker 1: the defense, we were waiting. They usually always come up
Speaker 1: with something the other thing they show in the text
Speaker 1: from that night, Robes, they had a good line that
Speaker 1: always saw he wasn't planning a murder. He was planning dinner.
Speaker 1: He was actually texting her as she was on the
Speaker 1: way in the uber about possibly getting in and out burger.
Speaker 2: That is so strange, like could he have been doing
Speaker 2: it to have her guard be down and think, Okay,
Speaker 2: we're going to have a lovely, fun takeout dinner and
Speaker 2: We're gonna have makeup sex and everything's going to be fine.
Speaker 2: Or was is that true? Was he really he didn't
Speaker 2: have murder on his mind. He had a burger on
Speaker 2: his mind, and he was not expecting things to unravel
Speaker 2: the way they did so quickly.
Speaker 1: And this bro, what do you make of it? He
Speaker 1: can prove now that at least she told him she
Speaker 1: was older. They have text messages from two different years,
Speaker 1: and one of them she says she was sixteen, another
Speaker 1: she says she was eighteen. Does he know that he
Speaker 1: believe that? Yeah.
Speaker 2: I don't think it's unreasonable to think that a thirteen
Speaker 2: year old girl would lie about her age. I think
Speaker 2: that plenty of girls have done that to try and
Speaker 2: get the attention of an older guy. I don't think
Speaker 2: that's unreasonable to think. But I do believe after a
Speaker 2: three year relationship, at some point, meeting the family, et cetera,
Speaker 2: I feel like it's unreasonable to believe that he wouldn't
Speaker 2: have actually known her real age. I think maybe initially
Speaker 2: and maybe for a little while. I've been duped by
Speaker 2: someone's age before, so it can happen. But as an
Speaker 2: adult with another adult, let me just please put that
Speaker 2: into context.
Speaker 3: But yes, so I.
Speaker 1: Need to give further details.
Speaker 2: No, completely different situation, but that's not unreasonable to me.
Speaker 2: But still I guess that would just only speak to
Speaker 2: the sexual crimes he's facing and Rome.
Speaker 1: The other part of that is she was threatening him.
Speaker 1: What was she threatening him with revealing the relationship? Yes,
Speaker 1: so I would in a legal relationship.
Speaker 2: That's a really good point. He wouldn't have had his
Speaker 2: career wouldn't be on the line if she was of age.
Speaker 2: It just would have been a messy breakup and some
Speaker 2: girls saying he did me wrong, but.
Speaker 3: That'd be it. He had to deal with all that
Speaker 3: on and pretty.
Speaker 2: Much every singer songwriter in the world has actually made
Speaker 2: millions of dollars off of those scenarios with their lyrics.
Speaker 2: So yes, it would not have been an issue had
Speaker 2: he had he not known.
Speaker 1: Well, they're supposed to be in court next month? Is
Speaker 1: it August thirty first? Yes, I remember that correctly, they're
Speaker 1: supposed to be in there. That's kind of a scheduling hearing,
Speaker 1: if you will, they're going to go over when trial
Speaker 1: is going to be and what are the next things
Speaker 1: to do? In robes? Did you see this as well?
Speaker 1: Some law. Is it law, they're supposed to possibly get
Speaker 1: a trial within ninety days. I saw that as Well's
Speaker 1: every thing I'd seen before said next year.
Speaker 2: Look as much as we see delays and just how
Speaker 2: long these things take, just for both sides to get
Speaker 2: their ducks in a row, and just for the legal process,
Speaker 2: the courtroom availability, et cetera. It takes a while to
Speaker 2: schedule these things. So to hear that could be beginning
Speaker 2: by the end of this year is fairly shocking. But
Speaker 2: we shall see, because I guess maybe in the interest
Speaker 2: of a swift trial, and if I usually it's the
Speaker 2: defense that holds things up because they're looking to try
Speaker 2: and get more evidence, et cetera. So if they're good
Speaker 2: to go, it's possible we could have a trial here
Speaker 2: in a matter of months.
Speaker 1: Goodness all right, folks, we got our eyes on it.
Speaker 1: But yes, the preliminary hearing is over. Deforvid is officially
Speaker 1: going to be going to trial for the murder of
Speaker 1: Celeste revs. Hernandez. We always appreciate you going along with us,
Speaker 1: Signed T. J. Holmes on behalf of my dear Amy
Speaker 1: Robot will talk to you as soon