Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 2 Part 1) (9/18/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 2 Part 1) (9/18/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: our previous episode dealing with Tyler Robinson and the prelim hearing,
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: we wrapped up day number one. Well, now we're on
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: to day number two. And we're going to skip through
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: all of the swearing in and all of that nonsense.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: And we're going to pick up as the court fully
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: comes into session. And the state is up first. Thank you,
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Your Honor. Before this hearing, the defense... moved to find
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: Article 1, Section 12 of the Utah Constitution Rule 7b
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: and Rule 1102 unconstitutional as it relates to the admissibility
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: of hearsay and reliable hearsay at this hearing. The issue
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: was extensively briefed and argued. The court denied the defense
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: motion to exclude the use of reliable hearsay at the
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: prelim hearing. That ruling is at docket number 631. In addition,
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: defense counsel filed a standing objection on July 3rd. That's
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: Docket 678. The standing objection reasserted the argument made in
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: defendant's previous motion, and defendant continues to make these same
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: objections throughout the testimony of each witness. I believe both
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: the state and the court and everyone present knows that
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: the defense objects to the use of hearsay or reliable
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: hearsay at this hearing. On the point of preserving the objection,
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: that has been done. Defense counsel has filed their motion.
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: They filed their standing objection throughout the preceding they've continued
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: to make objections. At this point, further objection is unnecessary
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: to preserve the record and causes undue and unnecessary delay.
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: This is a needless delay. And we'd ask the court
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: to acknowledge and the record to reflect the standing objection.
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: And we also ask the court to give an instruction
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: that continuing objections on this ground are unnecessary. Of course,
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: if it relates to some other ground or some item
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: that's particular to a particular statement, that objection is may
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: be appropriate. But at this point, we feel that the
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: repeated objections that have been made and already been ruled
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: upon are unnecessary and cause undue delay. Judge, thank you, Mr. McBride,
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: to the defense. Now it's Michael Burt for the defense.
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: Good morning, Your Honor. Michael Burt for Mr. Robinson. We
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: have no objection to that procedure as long as the
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: court makes a ruling that the objections are preserved. We
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: do think it would expedite matters if we didn't have
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: to repeat the standing objection that There may be particular
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: objections that are not covered by the standing objection that
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: we've made, so we ask permission to be allowed to
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: make those objections as needed. Judge Graff, thank you. Mr. Burt,
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: thank you both sides. I appreciate the presentation and your
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: argument about this. The court takes no position in regards
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: to whether the objection is made again and again or not.
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: I leave that to the parties. I recognize the need
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: to expedite this, and if both sides stipulate, I'll adopt
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: the request that the standing objection, as it relates, to
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: 1102 Article 1, Section 12 of the Utah Constitution and
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: all relevant authorities that have been cited have been noted
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: and the standing objection by defense is in place. However,
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: if defense feels the need to do that in order
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: to protect the constitutional rights of Mr. Robinson, the court
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: will not prevent that or stand in its way. The
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: court's acting in the role of a magistrate and will
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: allow the parties to move forward as necessary. But, as
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: noted in I'll make that note throughout the rest of
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: the prelim hearing. Anything further or any need for the
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: record given the court statement? Prosecution, not from the state.
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: Kathy Nestor, no, your honor. Judge Graff, all right, thank you,
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: all right. The court acknowledges that the exclusionary rule is
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: in effect. At this time, any witness who is subject
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: to exclusion should be excused from the courtroom. And again,
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: I'll leave it to the parties to monitor the courtroom
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: to ensure that if a witness has come in and
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: they shouldn't be, that they're redirected. I invite Agent Hull
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: to return to the stand to resume direct examination. And
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: Agent Hull, you are still under oath. And before we begin,
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: is there any way to dim these lights just a
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: tad like we did yesterday? Perfect. Thank you. All right.
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: As of yesterday, there is also a bottle of water
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: to your left. And if you wouldn't mind just making
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: sure that the microphone is directly in front of you.
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: We want to make sure that the record picks up
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: your testimony today. Prosecution, your witness. Prosecution, thank you, Judge.
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: Agent Hull, we're going to return to what's been marked
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: as State's Exhibit 12.1. There was a reference to it yesterday.
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: And I'd like to ask you again, have you ever
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: viewed this exhibit? Answer, yes. Question, and if you wouldn't mind,
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: just briefly remind us what the exhibit consists of. Answer,
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: the exhibit is a combination, redacted. Question, okay. Somebody jumps in.
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: Your Honor, excuse me, we can't hear the witness. Judge Graff,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: And that's what I hear. So let's go ahead and stop.
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: I'm not hearing it. So I'm going to have you repeat.
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: Let's test it and go ahead. So they go through
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: it and they test it. Now the microphone's working again
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: and they're back at it. Prosecutor, okay, let's go ahead
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: and go back to what's been marked as state exhibit 12.1.
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: I'd asked you a moment ago if you've reviewed that exhibit. Answer, yes,
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: I have. Question, okay. And would you remind us what
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: the exhibit consists of? Answer, it's a compilation of videos
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: that were part of the overall footage that was obtained
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: from the Utah Valley University as part of the investigation. Question,
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: and does that compilation video, from your point of view,
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: capture Mr. Robinson arriving to and visiting the UVU campus? Answer,
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: yes it does. Question, on September 10th through the 11th, 2025? Answer, correct. Question, okay,
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: and again, I asked you this question yesterday. but did
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: you prepare that video compilation? Answer, I did not. Question, okay,
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: do you know who did? Answer, the Utah County's Attorney's Office. Question, okay,
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: does that video, and I'm referring to 12.1, State Exhibit 12.1,
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: does it include all the footage collected by the SBI
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: from UVU? Answer, it does not, no. Question, does that video, again, 12.1,
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: include all the footage you collected from UVU that captures
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: who you believe is Mr. Robinson walking around the campus? Answer,
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: not all the footage, no. Question, you reviewed this compilation
• 6:23
  Speaker 1: with Mr. Olson, is that correct? Answer, correct. Question, and
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: in its entirety? Answer, yes. Question, and then you collected
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: an 1102 statement from him? Answer, I did. Question, and
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: I believe that was actually been admitted into evidence as
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: state exhibit 12.3. Did Mr. Olson refer to that exhibit 12.1
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: in his statement? Answer, he did, yes. Question, okay, 12.3.
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: I'm going to put your monitor state exhibit 12.3. And
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: I ask that if you scroll down toward the very bottom,
• 6:54
  Speaker 1: and I would ask that you read from the statement
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: specifically that Mr. Olson said about state exhibit 12.1. And
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: I want to narrow your focus. So I'm going to
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: draw your attention about three quarters down the page. There
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: is a sentence that begins on the left margin. I
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: have reviewed. Do you see that? Answer. I do. Yes. Question. Okay.
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: Would you please read that sentence? Answer. I've reviewed State
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: Exhibit 12.1, and the recordings are true and accurate, including timestamps, dates,
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: and camera labels. The only changes are some zooms and
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: red highlights, which were not part of the original coding
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: or recording. Would you like me to? Prosecution. I'm sorry.
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: Agent Hall. Sorry, I didn't know if you wanted me
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: to continue. Prosecution. No, that's good enough. Have you had
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: a chance? Well, you reviewed the raw footage yourself. Is
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: that correct? Answer. Correct. Question. And does that comport with
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: your viewpoint of that exhibit? Answer, it does, yes. Question,
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: have you had a chance to refer, or I'm sorry, review,
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: what's been marked as state exhibit 12.4? Answer, yes. Question, okay.
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: And when did you review that exhibit? Answer, this morning. Question,
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: and who did you review that exhibit with? Answer, with
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: Kimberly inaudible. Question, okay. Was there any conversation about that exhibit? Answer, no,
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: I was just shown the video. Question, okay, nobody asked
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: you questions or suggested anything to you? Answer, they did not, no. Question,
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: did you prepare that exhibit? Answer, I did not. Question,
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: do you know who did? Answer, the Utah County's Attorney Office. Question,
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: all right, and I'm referring specifically to what's been marked
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: State Exhibit 12.4. What's depicted in that video? Answer, that
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: video is again a compilation of videos from the overall
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: footage that was obtained from the Utah Valley University for
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: September 11th and September 12th. Question, and how does it
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: compare to what's been marked as State Exhibit 12.1? Answer,
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: it appears to be the same footage. However, on this
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: particular version, there were no circles or blurs that had
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: been made to the video. Question, how about zooming in
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: and zooming out? Question, no, there was no zooming in
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: or out. Question, does it appear to be identical to
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: the raw footage that you've seen that portrays this particular
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: part of the UVU surveillance video? Answer, it does, yes. Question, judge,
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: the state would move to admit what's been marked as
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: State Exhibit 12.4. Kathy Nestor, Your Honor, we just object
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: to the publication of this for all the reasons that
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: we argued yesterday. We think this video is going to
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: play a big role in the trial, and to allow
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: the public to see it now would seriously impact our
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: ability to get a fair trial and we're asking the
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: court not to publish it. Judge, thank you, and to
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: all counsel, as it will apply to all counsel, when
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: you're moving a piece of evidence, there's three parts, whether
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: admissibility into the record, to be published in the courtroom,
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: to be published in the courtroom and captured by the media. So, prosecution,
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: what's your request? Where are you requesting? Answer, judge, first
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: of all, clearly, I'd move to admit the exhibit. And judge,
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: the presumption is that this is a public record and
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: it should be published. And so the state's position is
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: that it should be published here in the courtroom and
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: it should be published in such a way that the
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: media can capture it on video. Judge Graff. All right.
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: And to that, David Ryman jumps in, who is one
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: of the lawyers for the media. Your Honor, can I
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: be heard on that very briefly? The judge, you may.
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: If you'd approach the lectern, please, and state your name.
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: I'm David Ryman. I represent the news media. I didn't
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: make an appearance because the news media technically aren't parties,
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: but as you know, they do have a right to
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: be heard on issues like this, and I have tried
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: to keep that to a minimum. But since this is
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: the first one that's come up today, I thought it
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: might be helpful to just address it again. There is
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: a presumption not just that it be published in the
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: courtroom as we talked about yesterday, because the participants or
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: the spectators in the courtroom have a right to know
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: what the court's viewing so that they can understand how
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: you're making your decisions. This seems like a very important
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: piece of evidence. It doesn't seem like there's a basis
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: to keep the people who are in the courtroom today
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: from understanding why it's being introduced. It's not like the
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: videos yesterday, and to my understanding at least is. You
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: can correct me if I'm wrong, but we didn't object
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: to the videos that weren't published yesterday that were graphic.
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: We didn't object to the non-publication of the autopsy report.
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: The argument here is that Mr. Nestor just made this
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: seems really relevant, and that is precisely why it needs
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: to be public. The last thing that I'm going to
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: address is EMC. There is a presumption, it's a rule, presumption,
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: not a constitutional one, that EMC is allowed. And I
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: think that for all the reasons that we've briefed this,
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: for your honor, several different ways, there needs to be
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: a really good reason why. If it's being published in
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: a public proceeding in the courtroom, it should not also
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: be allowed to be published to the media. Judge, thank you.
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: David Ryman, thank you. Prosecution, do you wish to respond
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: or perhaps give a little bit more detail on what
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: this video purports to show? Prosecution, okay, well, do you
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: want me to proffer that judge or have the witness? Answer,
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: I'll defer to you. Prosecution? Okay, well, first of all,
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: if I could take one step back, let me ask you.
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: I may have misheard, but let's just be clear about
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: the video, the compilation video. It includes video surveillance from UVU,
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: campus from what dates? Answer, September 10th, 2025, and the
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: morning of the 11th, 2025. Question, and if you wouldn't mind,
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: just describe that in a bit more detail. What the
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: compilation includes? Answer, by Agent Hull, the compilation shows the
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: movement of individual individuals believed to be Mr. Robinson, on
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: Utah Valley University campus arriving and leaving in a vehicle.
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: Arriving and leaving on foot, and then returning and leaving,
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: and then attempting to gain access again in the vehicle,
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: and his movement throughout the day, are included in the
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: videos also. Question, is there any footage of the alleged shooting? Answer,
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: there is not, Judge. Question, okay, I just want to
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: clarify that Ms. Nestor, given that additional information, and anything
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: further defense? Answer, Your Honor, Mr. Burt's going to. He's
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: the one who's been litigating all the First Amendment issues,
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: if he could address Mr. Ryman's argument. Judge, yes, Mr. Burt,
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: if you wouldn't mind coming forward. Judge Burt, Judge, I
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: just want to clarify one argument that was made by
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: counsel for the media yesterday, and that was the rules.
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: The rule 4-202.02 does not apply to the situation that
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: we're in right now, and that is wrong. The rule
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: says that this rule applies to the judicial branch... And
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: 4-202J says the judge may regulate or deny access to
• 13:50
  Speaker 1: exhibits to ensure a fair trial. So I think that
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: rule does apply to our situation and the Supreme Court
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: in Algier case 258 Pacific 3rd 589 apply the rule
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: in the context of an evidentiary exhibit. And I know
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: the court has not mentioned since counsel made the argument
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: this particular rule, but I think it does apply here.
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: and also applicable to the Supreme Court's decision in the
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: Kearns case, which we talked about when we argued the
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: motion for denying access to cameras, and in that case,
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: Kearns Cameras, and that case Kearns v. Tribune Corporation, 685 Pacific,
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: 2nd 515, says that the standard the court ought to
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: apply in determining whether an exhibit at a prelim hearing
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: should be sealed is one of a realistic likelihood of prejudice.
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: and we rely on the evidentiary showing we've made in
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: connection with our motion to exclude cameras, and there is
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: a realistic likelihood of prejudice in this way. The court
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: knows and has access to the media coverage up to
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: the time when we litigated the motion concerning closing this
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: hearing to the cameras, and the court knows that one
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: feature of the media coverage has been a very pro-prosecution
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: bias of every story that's been published on this account.
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: The court also knows from coverage that the information is
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: being widely disseminated, and you have found in connection with
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: the shackling issue that publicity in this case is likely
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: to reach jurors who will be part of our jury pool.
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: And we've also submitted to the court public opinion survey,
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: which shows that the prejudicial publicity that the media has
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: already generated in the case has affected the jury pool.
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: And so those are all the factors the court can
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: point to and rely on and conclude that publication of
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: this particular exhibit should not be allowed because there is
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: a realistic likelihood of prejudice to Mr. Robinson's right to
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: a fair trial. So under that standard and under the rule,
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: the court ought to deny its publication. Thank you, Mr. Burt. Judge,
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: any final arguments from the parties before the court issues
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: its ruling? Prosecution, Your Honor, can I be heard on
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: that briefly? Judge, yes you may. Prosecution. Thank you, Your Honor.
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: I just want to clarify. I don't know that Mr.
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: Burt and I necessarily disagree about what he said about
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: the rule. What we're talking about yesterday was something different.
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: That's the portion of the rule that classifies records that
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: are in the court file. It's not the same as
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: what happens in a public hearing. And Mr. Burt referenced
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: the portion of the rule that essentially just tracks the
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: constitutional standard, which of course controls here as to whether
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: this is public proceeding and it can be closed in
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: any way, and non-publication of exhibits as a form of closure.
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: So I don't necessarily disagree. I would just underscore a
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: lot of what Mr. Byrd has said has been briefed
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: ad nauseum at this point. Their position that publicity is
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: incompatible with a fair trial. An Algier case he mentioned,
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: I know that case. I litigated that case. It involved
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: a confession that the court found public because you have
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: so many other tools to seat a fair and impartial jury.
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: And we have cited that case repeatedly and so has,
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: Your Honor, I think recognized in your ruling saying pretrial
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: publicity can coexist with a defendant's right to a fair trial.
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: So the last thing that I'll say is just that
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: the constitutional standard that I think we're all agreeing applies
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: here is weighty and difficult to overcome. And it never satisfies,
• 17:13
  Speaker 1: as we've explained, by just generalized assertions. And there's a
• 17:16
  Speaker 1: lot of publicity out there. It's got to be something
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: really specific that they just haven't made that showing. and
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: I certainly don't think that a video that apparently just
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: shows a defendant walking around the UVU campus qualifies. Question,
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: thank you. Anything further? The state judge from the state, no.
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: But I think I'd like to be crystal clear. You
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: asked if there's any portion of this video that captures,
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: and I believe you asked for the actual shooting. There's
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: no video of that. There is video, however, and you've
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: heard testimony related to this, where the shooter goes on
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: top of the Losey building. goes out to the edge
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: of the building, low crawls, and then leaves after what
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: we assume is a shot being fired. That's as close
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: as it gets. I don't know if it makes a difference, judge.
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: I just wanted to make the record clear, and I
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: want to be crystal clear with you, your honor. The judge,
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: thank you, I appreciate that. Clarification as it's guiding for
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: this court and making its ruling. I turn to Utah, well,
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: let me put this up. So rule 4-202.02, I go
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: down to, well, first it says, statement of the rule.
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: One presumption of public court records. Court records are public
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: unless otherwise classified by this rule. Two public court records.
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: Public court records include, but are not limited to, and
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: I'm going to go down to 2J. Exhibits. But the
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: judge may regulate or deny access to ensure the integrity
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: of the exhibit of fair trial or interest favoring closure.
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: And the court recognizes the importance of the constitutional rights
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: of Mr. Robinson being upheld and protected at the same time.
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: The court also recognizes the importance of transparency and a
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: proper balance to ensure that the constitutional rights of all
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: parties are upheld. As it relates to Exhibit, I believe
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: it's 12.4. Based off the representations of what is in that,
• 19:06
  Speaker 1: the court differentiates this exhibit from the exhibits from yesterday,
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: namely Exhibit 7 and 8 and Exhibit 9, as those
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: are different in nature. And those go to issues relating
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: to Utah Constitution, Article 1, Section 28, as it relates
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: to the Declaration of Rights of Crime Victims. And the
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: court also recognizes Utah Rule of Evidence 1102, as that
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: is the foundation that's being laid for the admission of
• 19:32
  Speaker 1: this exhibit. Having taken in consideration all factors, the court
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: rules that Exhibit 12.4 is admitted into evidence and shall
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: be played in the courtroom and may be broadcast by
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: the media. We can proceed. All right, folks, we're going
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: to wrap up right here. And in the next episode
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: dealing with the top we're going to pick up where
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: we left off. And that's with, thank you, Judge, Agent Ho,
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: before we actually watch State Exhibit 12.4. All the information
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: that goes with this episode can be found in the
• 20:03
  Speaker 1: description box.