The D4vd case has taken an even more disturbing turn.

New reporting on the charging documents filed against the singer, whose legal name is David Burke, alleges prosecutors now have a far more detailed timeline of his relationship with 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez — and they believe that relationship is central to the murder case now unfolding in Los Angeles. Reuters, People, CBS Los Angeles, and other outlets reported Monday that Burke pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder and related charges in connection with Celeste’s death.

According to the allegations described in the complaint, prosecutors say Burke engaged in continuous sexual abuse of Celeste between September 2023 and September 2024, when she was under 14. They further allege he killed her on or about April 23, 2025, then mutilated her body on or about May 5, 2025. Prosecutors’ theory, as reported by Reuters and People, is that Celeste was killed because she could expose the alleged illegal relationship and damage Burke’s career.

The charges themselves are severe. Burke has been charged with first-degree murder, lewd and lascivious acts with a minor under 14, and mutilating human remains. Prosecutors have also attached special-circumstance allegations, including lying in wait, murder for financial gain, and murder of a witness, which could expose him to life without parole or the death penalty if he is convicted. He is currently being held without bail, and prosecutors have not yet made a final decision on whether they will seek the death penalty.

The case has already been under intense scrutiny since Celeste’s dismembered body was found in September 2025 inside Burke’s Tesla after she had been missing for months. Authorities say she was last known to be alive in April 2025. Since Burke’s arrest last week, Celeste’s family has publicly spoken about seeking justice, while his legal team has maintained his innocence.

Now, the focus shifts from shock to process. With Burke having entered a not-guilty plea, the next phase of the case is likely to center on how much prosecutors can prove in court — and whether the filings that have fueled public outrage hold up under the far harder standard of trial.