Who is referred to as witness 14
Executive summary
There is no clear, sourced identification of a person labeled "witness 14" in the set of reporting provided; the documents and snippets touch on TV episode credits, a Los Angeles grand-jury matter involving a musician and witnesses, and legal rules on eyewitness identification, but none name or define someone as "witness 14" [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Why the question matters: numbering witnesses and anonymity in reporting
Labeling a person as "witness 14" can signal either a formal case numbering scheme used in court or redacted/anonymous reporting practices intended to protect identity, and the materials supplied include an example of numbered crew lists in TV credits and a news summary of grand-jury witnesses — but contain no instance where a numbered label equates to a named individual called “witness 14” [2] [3].
2. What the sources actually show about witnesses in the D4vd grand-jury reporting
Local coverage summarized in the supplied snippet reports that multiple witnesses have testified before a Los Angeles grand jury in the inquiry related to singer D4vd and the death of a teenager, and that one named friend — Neo Langston — was booked after failing to appear as a witness, yet the excerpt does not present any witness-by-number list or identify anyone specifically as "witness 14" [3].
3. Gaps in the public record supplied: no direct identification of “witness 14”
The supplied items include an IMDb cast/crew listing and episode descriptions for Silent Witness that use numbering for production departments, a news blurb about grand-jury testimony and a rules summary about disclosure of identification procedures, but none of these excerpts link the term "witness 14" to a person in a criminal file or media report, so the available reporting cannot substantiate a claim identifying who "witness 14" is [2] [1] [3] [4].
4. How courts and reporting typically use witness numbering — and why that matters here
In many legal contexts, prosecutors and court filings may number witnesses for internal organization or redaction in public filings, while news outlets sometimes use neutral labels to protect minors or unindicted witnesses; Massachusetts rules require prosecutors to disclose identification-related materials to the defense, but this procedural rule does not itself create a public-facing label like "witness 14" in the provided materials [4].
5. Two plausible readings given the supplied material — and why both remain speculative
One plausible interpretation is that "witness 14" is an internal label in a grand-jury dossier or discovery packet for an unspecified person in the D4vd matter; another is that it could be an artifact of unrelated numbering (for example, production department lists in an IMDb credit) being misread as a witness label — the supplied snippets show both kinds of numbered lists but do not tie either to the specific phrase "witness 14," so neither reading can be verified from the available reporting [3] [2] [1].
6. What would be needed to answer definitively and where to look next
A definitive identification would require primary-source court documents (indictments, grand-jury minutes if available, or discovery lists) or reliable reporting that quotes prosecutors, defense counsel, or court filings that explicitly use the label "witness 14" and tie it to a name; none of the supplied snippets constitute that evidence, so further review of official filings or detailed courtroom reporting is necessary [3] [4].