The recent public conversation flooding news and social media outlets around singer d4vd, highlights how quickly song lyrics can become entangled with criminal suspicion.[i] David Anthony Burke, professionally known as d4vd, is an American singer and songwriter whose rise to fame was largely shaped by online culture.[ii] He first gained attention by creating Fortnite gameplay montages on YouTube.[iii] When copyright limited his videos, he began producing original music for background use, which led to his viral hit “Romanic Homicide.”[iv] The song’s success on TikTok moved him into mainstream recognition and earned him a record deal with Darkroom and Interscope Records.[v] He later opened for headline artists and collaborated with Fortnite on an official anthem, solidifying his presence in pop culture.[vi]
However, in September 2025, his momentum was interrupted after the body of fifteen-year-old Celeste Rivas was found in the trunk of a car registered to d4vd.[vii] Online commentators began pointing to lyrics and imagery from d4vd’s songs “Romantic Homicide” and “One More Dance” linking him to her death.[viii] In a resurfaced interview, he explained that his songs drew on an alter ego with a “murderous persona.”[ix] While there is no pending case against d4vd, his situation raises broader concerns about the admissibility of song lyrics in criminal proceedings. The question is simple but critical: When, if ever, should an artist’s words in a creative work be treated as admissions of guilt or evidence of criminal culpability?
This issue has been explored in popular cases with Jamell Maurice Demons (“YNW Melly”) and Jeffery Lamar Williams (“Young Thug”). In State v. Demons, prosecutors, in an ongoing Floirda double-homicide case, attempted to introduce much of YNW Melly’s discography, including his hit “Murder on My Mind.”[x] Although YNW Melly consistently described the song as a fictional narrative, the trial judge ruled the lyrics admissible and allowed the prosecution to argue that the song revealed intent and culpability.[xi] Similarly, in 2022, Georgia prosecutors charged rapper Young Thug under the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (“RICO”) statute, relying heavily on his lyrics and music videos to link him to alleged gang activity.[xii] The trial judge ruled that some of the lyrics were “conditionally admissible” if they could be tied to proving mens rea or actus reus.[xiii] Now in 2025, dv4d’s song lyrics are under similar scrutiny, not in a courtroom but in a trial-by-media, where online commentators are solely relying on the lyrics and violent imagery from “Romantic Homicide” and “One More Dance” as possible confessions to Celeste Rivas’s homicide. These situations demonstrate the tendency to treat lyrical artistic expressions as evidence of culpability, despite their expressive and often fictional nature.
Whether lyrics can be admitted as evidence depends on both constitutional protections and evidentiary rules of the jurisdiction. From a First Amendment standpoint, courts must consider whether using an artist’s words in trial punishes “creative expression.”[xiv] Prosecutors will often argue that their attempt to introduce song lyrics is not targeted at the expression itself, but rather relying on the lyrics to corroborate other evidence suggesting motive, intent, or identiy.[xv] On the other side of the arugement, defendants have some protection through evidentiary rules such as Federal Rules of Evidence 403 (and its state-law equivalents), which allow courts to exclude evidence that is unduly prejudicial.[xvi] The Federal Rules of Evidence 403 (“FRE 403”) is an essential balancing test, as jurors may mistake an artistic persona for literal confession. This concern is particularly relevant in d4vd’s case, where a jury might give undue weight to his self-described “murderous persona” present in his music, even absent any supporting evidence. While some arguments under FRE 403 have led to the exclusion of lyric evidence,[xvii] more often courts determine that the song lyrics’ probative value substantially outweighs any prejudice it may cause.[xviii]
California recently confronted this evidentiary dilemma in back-to-back cases, addressing when introducing a defendant’s creative expression––like song lyrics––crosses the line from probative to prejudical. In 2023, the Court of Appeals reversed a conviction in People v. Venable, concluding that the trial judge failed to apply the heightened level of review when considering the admissibility of song lyrics ,required under Evidence Code section 352.2.[xix] The court emphasized that lyrics are presumptively of low probative value and highly prejudicial when used to show propensity.[xx] Under this standard, if the lead singer of Queen, Freddie Mercury, were charged with murder and the prosecution sought to introduce “Bohemian Rhapsody” as evidence that he “killed a man,” it would be excluded, as it would rest on the assumption that the lyrics reflect how he acted in this instance.[xxi]
This is no longer the case. Just two years later, in 2025, the California Supreme Court in People v. Aguirre, clarified the rule under Califonia Evidence Code section 352.2.[xxii] It held that section 352.2 does not automatically bar song lyrics but instead requires trial courts to carefully weigh whether the lyrics are factually connected to the charged crimes.[xxiii] Under this clarified standard, “Bohemian Rhapsody” could potentially be admitted in Freddie Mercury’s case if there is sufficient evidence supporting the specific facts described in the lyrics. Aguirre thus narrowed Venable’s broad reversal, signaling that even though song lyrics may face higher hurdles, they may still be admissible when sufficient facts closely tie them to the alleged conduct.[xxiv] In d4vd’s situation, the California courts would be required to apply the Aguirre standard, where the lyrics and violent imagery in “Romantic Homicide” and “One More Dance” would carry probative value and be admissible if they were corroborated by other strong, independent evidence linking him to Celeste Rivas’s death.
While there is no pending case against d4vd, the public discussion around his music highlights the danger of conflating artistic expression with criminal culpability. California courts in particular have struggled to balance free expression with probative value. Ultimately, d4vd’s situation illustrates why courts must tread carefully. Song lyrics may be probative, but they are not necessarily confessions. In d4vd’s case, the California prosecution would need to have a clear factual nexus between the lyrics, video, and the alleged crime for them to be admissible. Without such a connection, admitting the lyrics would substantially risk undermining the artist’s First Amendment rights.
[i] See Julie Sharp & Dean Fioresi, D4vd Concert Dates Canceled As Police Investigate Death of 15-Year-Old Girl Found in Singer’s Tesla, CBS News (Sep. 20, 2025), https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/news/d4vd-los-angeles-concert-canceled-death-investigation/ [https://perma.cc/84DH-Z7AB] (“The body of Rivas was discovered inside the trunk of a Tesla registered to David Anthony Burke, who uses the stage name d4vd, which was impounded at the Hollywood Tow yard.”).
[ii] Harrison Brocklehurst, If You’ve Only Heard of D4vd This Past Week, Here’s Who He Really is and How He Got Famous, The Tab (Sep. 24, 2025), https://thetab.com/2025/09/24/if-youve-only-heard-of-d4vd-this-past-week-heres-who-he-really-is-and-how-he-got-famous [https://perma.cc/D2ER-ZS6L] (“David Anthony Burke, known professionally as d4vd (pronounced ‘David’), is an American singer and songwriter whose career has been shaped by social media and online culture.”).
[iii] Id. (“Before he started releasing his own music, Burke was active online in other ways. He gained a following for making Fortnite gameplay montages on YouTube.”).
[iv] Id. (“When copyright strikes began affecting his videos, he decided to create original music to use as background audio. That decision led him to experiment with writing and recording songs, which he began uploading to SoundCloud.”).
[v] Id. (“[H]e released Romantic Homicide, a lo-fi track that resonated with listeners on TikTok and spread quickly across the platform. Its viral popularity helped it climb the charts, reaching number three on Billboard’s Hot Alternative Songs and giving him his first entry on the Billboard Hot 100.”).
[vi] Id. (“In 2023 he released a few EPs and opened for SZA on her tour. . . . He also had just released a collaboration with Fortnite – a single that was pegged as the game’s official anthem including a music video using skins from the game.”).
[vii] Id. (“All this momentum was derailed however, by the discovery of 15 year old Celeste Rivas Hernandez in a Tesla register to him at the start of September. The body was grimly revealed to be heavily decomposed and dismembered.”).
[viii] See Alexa Mae Asperin, D4vd Explains Idea For His Music’s Murderous Alter Ego in Resurfaced Clip, Fox 11 L. A. (Sep. 23, 2025 at 11:17AM), https://www.foxla.com/news/d4vd-romantic-homicide-alter-ego-resurfaced-video [https://perma.cc/HC3T-5WW8] (“[M]any continue to analyze D4vd’s songs, with some people drawing parallels between his lyrics and violent imagery as possible breadcrumbs to the missing teen’s murder. . . . In the video, D4vd . . . explains the origin of his alter ego in his most popular song, ‘Romantic Homicide.’”).
[ix] Id. (“In the interview, D4vd described himself as an anime fan and at one point was writing his own manga series about a detective with a murderous alter ego solving the very murders he committed.”).
[x] See Mae Zeitouni, Exclusion On My Mind: The Admissibility of Rap Lyrics as Evidence in Criminal Proceedings, Wake Forest L. R. Current Issues Blog (Mar. 2024), https://www.wakeforestlawreview.com/2024/03/exclusion-on-my-mind-the-admissibility-of-rap-lyrics-as-evidence-in-criminal-proceedings/ [https://perma.cc/HUW4-FUFR] (“The prosecution hopes to cite the lyrics in [YNW Melly]’s rap songs as proof of culpability, intent, and/or his real-life actions.”).
[xi] Id. (“In a controversial decision, presiding Judge John Murphy has ruled that Demon’s lyrics are admissible evidence that the prosecution may use as part of their case.”).
[xii] See Jonathan Raymond, Young Thug’s Arrest | These Lyrics Are Being Used as Evidence in His RICO Case, 11 Alive (May 11, 2022 at 9:10PM), https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/young-thugs-arrest-these-lyrics-are-being-used-as-evidence/85-45af3e5a-826c-4516-b231-026720e750ec [https://perma.cc/9XBK-A5HD] (“In a nearly 90-page indictment, [Young Thug] is accused of being the gang’s leader and orchestrating some of the activity. Fulton County’s District Attorney’s Office referenced his songs and lyrics in its indictment, calling it proof of his gang activity and linking him to other charges.”).
[xiii] See Zeitouni, supra note x (“[W]hen hip-hop star Jeffery ‘Young Thug’ Williams was charged with criminal racketeering under Georgia’s RICO [act] in 2023, a Fulton county judge ruled that Williams’ rap lyrics and music videos were ‘conditionally admissible’ as long as the lyrics were relevant to proving either mens rea or actus reus.”).
[xiv] See Kelly McGlynn, Jacob Schriner-Briggs & Jacquelyn Schell, Lyrics in Limine: Rap Music and Criminal Proceedings, A. B. A. (Jan. 11, 2023), https://www.americanbar.org/groups/communications_law/publications/communications_lawyer/2023-winter/lyrics-limine-rap-music-and-criminal-prosecutions/ [https://perma.cc/FX5M-4ZLT] (“Under First Amendment principles, courts evaluate whether the artist is being sanctioned for creative expression.”).
[xv] Id. (“Prosecutors can argue—usually successfully—that the admission of art as evidence does not sanction the expression but rather the underlying crime.”).
[xvi] Fed. R. Evid. 403.
[xvii] See, e.g., People v. Coneal, 254 Cal. Rptr. 3d 653, 669 (Cal. App. 5th Dist. 2019) (holding the probative value of the videos and lyrics were substantially outweighed by the unfair prejudicial effect and admission of the rap video was an abuse of discretion).
[xviii] See, e.g., United States v. Wilson, 493 F. Supp. 2d 484, 488–89 (E.D.N.Y. 2006); United States v. Pierce, 785 F.3d 832, 841 (2d Cir. 2015); United States v. Foster, 939 F.2d 445, 456 (7th Cir. 1991).
[xix] People v. Venable, 304 Cal. Rptr. 3d 731, 733 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2023), overruled by, People v. Aguirre, No. S175660, 2025 Cal. LEXIS 5621, at *1 (Cal. Aug. 28, 2025).
[xx] Venable, 304 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 740.
[xxi] Bohemian Rhapsody, Genius Lyrics, https://genius.com/Queen-bohemian-rhapsody-lyrics [https://perma.cc/AJ28-SX5F] (last visited Oct. 20, 2025) (“Mama, just killed a man. Put a gun against his head, pulled my trigger, now he’s dead.”).
[xxii] Aguirre, 2025 Cal. LEXIS 5621 at *77–78.
[xxiii] Id. at *98–100.
[xxiv] Id. at *107.
