Part 2 of our two-part legal deep-dive with Eric Faddis on the David Anthony Burke case. This episode is focused entirely on the charging document and the defense strategy already taking shape around it.

Eric breaks down the three special circumstances, explains whether DA Hochman's financial-gain theory actually fits the statute, and compares trying a case on a complaint versus an indictment, something Blair Berk flagged publicly after the grand jury failed to indict across four months of proceedings. He walks through the discovery fight over more than forty terabytes of evidence, the newly unsealed autopsy, and what each of those pieces could do to the defense theory.

He closes on the specific language the defense keeps using. "He did not murder Celeste Rivas Hernandez and he was not the cause of her death." Two separate claims. Eric explains the trial theory that language signals and how the prosecution has to build against it.

If you have not watched Part 1 on the inner circle and who is still legally exposed, watch that first. Subscribe for every filing and every hearing as this case moves toward trial.

#D4vd #DavidAnthonyBurke #CelesteRivasHernandez #BlairBerk #FelonyComplaint #DeathPenalty #SpecialCircumstances #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #CaseUpdate

Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/

Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1

Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/

Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/

Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod

X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod

This publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.