Model Maleesa Mooney was allegedly involved in a short-lived but intense romance with Magnus Humphrey just days before her murder

18 October 2025

New revelations in the case of Los Angeles model Maleesa Mooney reveal that she and Magnus Humphrey embarked on what prosecutors now describe as a five-day relationship shortly before her tragic death in 2023. During an October 16 court hearing, the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office laid out the timeline in chilling detail: Mooney, 31, and Humphrey, 43, met through his estranged brother in September of that year and were allegedly inseparable in the days that followed.

Friends of Mooney say Humphrey quickly became obsessive, tagging along to a family barbecue and introducing her as “my girl” and “my woman,” statements that are now central to the prosecution’s portrait of their bond. Despite this closeness, the relationship turned deadly. Mooney was found bound, gagged, and concealed inside her refrigerator in her downtown Los Angeles apartment during a welfare check in September 2023, a crime scene that shocked the city.

Humphrey was charged with felony murder and torture in the killing, and is eligible for the death penalty if convicted. His attorney, Michael Lambrose, acknowledged a relationship existed at the time of Mooney’s death but rejected the implication that Humphrey had violent intent. He described the evidence as “thin” in court, pointing out that while DNA matches and video place Humphrey at the scene and imply intimacy, they do not necessarily prove homicide intent.

Investigators believe the relationship’s brevity and intensity could shed light on motive and opportunity. Over the course of those five days, the couple were rarely apart, according to one of Mooney’s friends, Keirsten Dossett. The sudden closeness and near immediate unraveling adds a layer of urgency and complexity to an already disturbing case.

The courtroom hearing served as a turning point in the prosecution’s case: the judge ruled that sufficient evidence exists for Humphrey to stand trial. It moves the case out of preliminary motion phase and closer to full adjudication.

For Mooney’s friends and family, the new relationship details are both painful and necessary. They underscore that she was lured into a situation she believed was safe, she invited Humphrey into her home, only to be betrayed in the most extreme way. A statement from her family emphasized the hurt of betrayal and the need for accountability.

The wider significance of this case goes beyond a single homicide. It highlights how modern intimacy can accelerate and intensify, sometimes dangerously, and how social proximity can mask risk. Legal observers point out that prosecutors now have to link the personal relationship to criminal conduct not just proving presence, but proving intent and action. They must show that the relationship did not simply exist, but that it preceded and perhaps precipitated violence.

Humphrey’s defense, meanwhile, must navigate the fact that while relationship evidence is not crime evidence, juries often let relational dynamics color their judgments of motive, threat, and guilt. Lambrose’s argument presents the possibility that the relationship was genuine, protective even, rather than predatory. It is a framing that seeks to deny the prosecution’s narrative of obsession and betrayal.

As the trial looms, several key questions remain. Why did the relationship begin so rapidly? What role did Mooney’s vulnerability play, if any, in shaping her decisions? And are there overlooked warning signs that friends or family missed? The case also raises concerns about how quickly trust can be exploited and how little time can pass before trust turns tragic.

In many ways Mooney’s story reflects broader themes in contemporary culture around intimacy, trust, and risk. The way she and Humphrey reportedly moved from strangers to “practically inseparable” in days is emblematic of fast-paced social lives mediated through introductions and appearances. It also raises issues about consent, emotional safety, and the hazards that lurk when personal and public lives collide.

Regardless of outcome, Mooney’s legacy will likely become more than the date of her death, it will become a cautionary tale about haste, assumption, and vulnerability. Her friends hope that her death brings awareness about the dangers of unverified intimacy and the importance of boundaries.

As the legal process advances, the world watches. The evidence is now public, the narrative set, and the stakes high. For Humphrey, the trial will determine not just his fate but how the story of Maleesa Mooney and her brief yet fateful relationship is recorded in memory.