Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Tyler Robinson’s Motion Opposing Electronic Media Coverage (8/27/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson’s Motion Opposing Electronic Media Coverage (8/27/26) · Beyond The Horizon

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: this episode, we're jumping back into the Tyler Robinson conversation,
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: and we're going to take a look at the defendant
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Tyler James Robinson's opposition to the EMC order for the
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: September 1st, 2026 hearing. And this just builds on what
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: we were talking about yesterday with Tyler Robinson and cameras
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: in the courtroom. State of Utah plaintiff. First, Tyler James Robinson,
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: the defendant. Defendant Tyler James Robinson's opposition to EMC order
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: for the September 1st, 2026 hearing. Case number 251403576. Defendant
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: Tyler James Robinson, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: files this opposition to KUTV's August 17th, 2026 EMC request,
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: docket 710. This objection is grounded in Mr. Robinson's rights
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: to a fair trial. to due process of law, and
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: to a reliable penalty determination under state and federal constitutional provisions,
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: including the 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, and 14th Amendments to
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: the United States Constitution and to Article I, Section 7
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: and 12 of the Utah Constitution. First, Mr. Robinson reiterates
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: his continuing objection to the EMC Challenge procedure in the
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: May 8, 2026 order. The four-page Limitation on Objections The
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: prohibition on oral argument, the lack of an opportunity for
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: an evidentiary hearing, and the inability to seek relief from
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: a challenged EMC order violate state and federal constitutional rights
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: to due process because the procedural restrictions deprive the parties
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: of a meaningful opportunity to be heard. C.U.S. Constitution Amendment
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: 14 Utah Constitution Article 1 Section 7 Coleman v. Alabama
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: 377 U.S. 129-12933, 1964, Chandler v. Florida, 449 U.S. 560-577, 1981. Second, Mr. Robinson,
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: objects to EMC of the preliminary hearing, including the oral
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: arguments on September 1st, 2026, because there is a reasonable
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: likelihood that electronic media coverage will prejudice the right of
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: the parties to a fair proceeding. Utah, administration rule 401.012BI.
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: Continuing EMC of the proceedings, in this case, particularly the
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: preliminary hearing, threatens Mr. Robinson's rights to a fair trial
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: by an impartial jury by perpetuating bias in the public
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: against Mr. Robinson. The pre-existing bias and the lasting threat
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: to a fair trial posed by that bias was detailed
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: in Mr. Robinson's motion to exclude still photographers, TV cameras,
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: and microphones from the courtroom in in his reply and
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: was elucidated in the evidence presented in support of the
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: motion on April 17, 2026. See Docket 305-399. The motion, reply,
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: and the evidence supporting these pleadings are hereby incorporated by reference.
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: Additional evidence of bias developing as a result of the
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: widespread publication of this case can be tracked in real time, redacted.
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: Specific to the oral argument on the preliminary hearing, The
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: EMC will memorialize and widely disseminate argument discussing the largely
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: hearsay-based evidentiary presentation made by the state. Such evidence is,
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: by its very nature, insufficiently reliable for admission at trial.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: CEG Holbrook v. Flynn, 475 U.S. 560-567, 1986 Central to
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: the right to a fair trial guaranteed by the Sixth
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: and Fourteenth Amendments is the principle that one accused of
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: a crime is entitled to have his guilt or innocence
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: determined solely on the basis of the evidence introduced at trial.
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: By continuing to livestream these proceedings and the anticipated discussions
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: of the evidence not yet deemed reliable enough for trial,
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: there is a substantial risk that potential jurors will develop
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: prejudgments based upon inadmissible evidence. It bears repeating that the
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: state of Utah is seeking the death penalty against Mr. Robinson.
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: The taking of evidence during the prelim examination, oral arguments
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: on that evidence, and the determinations made by the court
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: based upon that evidence is a critical stage of these
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: capital proceedings. The media presence in the courtroom both distracts
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: and places added pressure on hearing participants to present for
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: the media as opposed to focusing on the facts, evidence,
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: and mechanics of the case. See State v. Aguayas, 2003
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: Utah 102-63 P. 3D 731. Trial judges are encouraged to continue
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: to exercise caution in maintaining quiet and non-distracting courtroom environments
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: in all cases, and particularly in capital proceedings. Weighing Mr.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: Robinson's interest in a fair proceeding against the interest in
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: an EMC, Mr. Robinson's interests must necessarily prevail. This is
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: so because Mr. Robinson is constitutionally entitled to a fair proceeding,
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: but conversely, there is no right to electronic media coverage.
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: See Richmond Newspapers, Inc., 1st Virginia, 448 U.S. 555-564-1980, noting
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: the defendant's superior right to a fair trial compared to
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: the public's right of access. See also Nixon, 1st Warner Communications, Inc.,
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: 435 U.S. 589-610-1978. The requirement of a public trial is
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: satisfied by the opportunity of members of the public to
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: and the press to attend the trial and to report
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: what they have observed. And as the Utah Court of
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: Appeals has articulated, the Utah Rules of Judicial Administration are
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: not intended to limit, modify, or create substantive rights for
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: any other court participant. See Scott v. Majors, 1999, Utah
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: Appeals 139, 12980 P. 2D 214. Third, Mr. Robinson objects to
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: EMC of the preliminary hearing in its entirety because this
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: court's procedure for adjudicating the request does not allow any
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: opportunity for witnesses to address privacy or security concerns relevant
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: under Rule 4-401.01, 2B2, and 4. As previously argued, those
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: concerns are substantial with respect to defense counsel, and witnesses
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: should be afforded the opportunity to be heard on these issues.
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: of note based upon information provided by the Utah County
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: Attorney's Office, individuals who provided 1102 statements for the prelim
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: hearing and whose information was put into the public record
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: during the hearing, shortly thereafter experienced harassment by media and
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: interested parties appearing at their home. The ECM of the
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: proceedings has real-world consequences for witnesses. Therefore, Mr. Robinson requests
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: that this court deny the request for EMC of the
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: prelim hearing. Respectfully submitted this 22nd day of August, 2026,
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: and it was signed by Kathy Nestor, Richard Novak, Michael Burt,
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: and Stacey Visser. All the information that goes with this
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: episode can be found in the description box.