Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Transcripts From The Hearing Dealing With Tyler Robinson’s Courtroom Appearance (Part 1) (7/24/26)

Transcript

Transcripts From The Hearing Dealing With Tyler Robinson’s Courtroom Appearance (Part 1) (7/24/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: this episode, where going to begin taking a look at
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: the transcripts from the Tyler Robinson hearing that was held
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: on October twenty fourth, twenty twenty five. Case number two
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: five one four zero three five seven six, State of Utah,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: Plaintiff First Tyler James Robinson, the defendant. The Court is
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: now in session calling case two five one four zero
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: three five seven six, State of Utah, First Tyler James Robinson. Council,
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: would you please enter your appearances. Mister Ballard, your honor
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: Christopher Ballard on behalf of the state. Also here is
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: Jeff Gray, the Utah County Attorney, Chad Grunider, David Sturgel,
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: Ryan McBride, and Lauren Hunt also all representing the state.
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: And then also mister Ben van Noy from the Utah
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: County Attorney's Office. He's representing the Utah County Sheriff's Office.
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: Thank you, Good afternoon to you all. Miss Nestor, Good afternoon,
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: your honor Kathy Nestor, Richard Novak, and Stacy Visser here
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: on behalf of mister Robinson, who is seated to my
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: left the court. Thank you. Good afternoon, mister Robinson. Good
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: afternoon to you as well. All right, counsel, we have
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: a few matters to deal with. I appreciate your ability
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: to make yourselves available after receiving the motions, I wanted
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: to have a hearing in order for all sides to
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: fully vet out. And it's my anticipation and I'm not
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: sure if we've confirmed, but I plan to make an
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: oral ruling on Monday at one. I wanted to take
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: the weekend to consider the arguments, review all the memos,
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: all the filings, and put that together. So I appreciate
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: your patience for that. I really want to give these
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: important issues as much time as needed in order to
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: make a good decision with that council, how would we
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: like to proceed for a defense? You filed the original motion,
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: and so I want to make sure that we pick
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: the path that's organized and it's easy to follow for
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: all sides. Mister Novak, who's a lawyer for Tyler Robinson,
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: thank you, your honor, Richard Novak for mister Robinson. And
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: there have been some related, partially briefed, fully brief issues
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: that relate to the primary motion, which relates to shackle
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: or shackling. The first thing we did want to ask
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: the court to do is to direct the sheriffs to
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: make one of our client's hands available so that he
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: can take notes during the hearing. We've provided them with
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: paper and pen, and I can tell the court that
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: after spending two hours in a room with mister Robinson today,
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: I can't imagine any reason why he can't take notes
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: during the hearing. And there's no reason why that would
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: jeopardize his safety or the safety of anybody else. So
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: we think to start the hearing, we need to at
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: least begin with a minimal level of unshackling redacted. And
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: he's not able to write or take notes during what
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: we anticipated could be an extended hearing, and we'd like
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: him to be able to do so. Question. It's a
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: sealed hearing. The public's not here, so we just can't
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: imagine any specific reason why the court can't have one
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: of his hands free for writing. The Court all right,
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: the state do you wish to be heard on this,
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: mister van Ney, Yes, Ben van Ney, Utah County Attorney's Office.
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: Given the substance of the motion, I would object on
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: the Sheriff's behalf. This is the heart of what we're
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: trying to decide. This is a pre trial proceeding redacted,
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: but we would request that that be denied, as it
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: should be in all pre trial hearings. Thank you, the Court.
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: Any further input, mister Ballard, No, your honor, the Court,
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: all right. Is there a way to unshackle one hand
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: for him to be able to write that doesn't compromise
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: the rest bailiff redacted? The Court, all right, let's go
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: ahead and proceed with that. Mister Novak, Thank you and
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: your honor. While we're waiting, I don't care if this
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: is on the record. I have a really bad sore throat,
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: so if I put something in my mouth, it's not
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: gum and it's not candy, Okay, But if anybody wants
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: a rocola, I'm happy to share them. The Court all right,
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: mister Novak, thank you. The court depends on the flavor,
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: mister Novak. It's original, the court. Ok some of them
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: are nasky Novak. No, I don't like any of that stuff.
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: The Court all right. And before we begin, I just
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: want to make sure we're all on the same page
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: on the issues that we're addressing today. Mister Novak, if
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: you wouldn't mind just touching on the topic that you
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: anticipate presenting, and I want to make sure that we're
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: all in sync with what's being presented from both sides.
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: Mister Novak agreed, your honor, and I appreciate the invitation
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: to sort of do the roadmap so on behalf of
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: mister Robinson. We filed a motion to permit him to
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: appear in civilian clothing and without restraints at all hearings.
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: That motion is fully briefed, and we understand that's the
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: primary reason why we're here today. Obviously, the court knows
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: that we interpreted part of the state's opposition as a
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: motion to actually limit the types of appearances at which
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: mister Robinson would appear in person, and we treated that,
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: even though it was designated or wasn't designated as emotion,
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: as emotion, and we filed an opposition to that. The
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: state has not filed a reply. I don't know if
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: that's just because of time or if they don't if
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: the state doesn't intend to file or reply, so that
• 5:05
  Speaker 1: may be a question for Council for the state. But
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: we also filed the motion to strike the state's opposition
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: to our primary motion because we believe it's inpermissibly a
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: pleating filed by a non party. The motion to strike
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: is fully briefed, and in fact, mister Nestor is going
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: to argue the motion to strike if the Court is
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: prepared to hear the argument on that. So I can
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: go a little bit further down the road of what
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: other issues we think are connected with these, And also
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: just so the court knows, counsel for the parties met
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: before the hearing about I think the other motion that
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: is partially briefed and some other motions that the parties
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: plan to file in the near future, and we actually
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: wanted to talk to the court about our proposed sort
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: of briefing schedule for that and when we might have
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: a hearing depending on the court schedule. So it's not
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: super linear, right, that's a little bit of complexity there,
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: the court. Sure, mister Novak, do you want me to
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: mention how mention the slightly related motions now or do
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: you want to deal with that later the court. Let's
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: do that so it's all out there and we can
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: see the trajectory of where we're going. Mister Novak, okay,
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: So I think two issues that relate most squarely to
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: our primary motion to appear in civilian clothing and without
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: restraints are one, a motion that we intend to file
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: on behalf of mister Robinson to completely eliminate all video
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: and audio broadcasting or delayed feeds of court proceedings, and
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: we haven't briefed it. We're not going to argue with
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: today unless the Court decides it wants to hear a
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: prelim argument, but the parties have discussed the fact that
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: we're going to bring that motion, and I think we
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: will bring that motion regardless of the ruling of the
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: Court on Monday on the shackling civilian clothing issue. Okay,
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: so that's one. The second is this court's sue a
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: Sponte pre trial and trial publicity order, which the State
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: has informed us they're going to seek both a modification
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: and clarification of, and we were also even before we
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: knew that we're going to move the court to modify it.
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: And the reason why we believe that these are all
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: related to each other is because we, meaning mister Robinson
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: and his defense team, are very concerned that the nature, content, scope,
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: pervasiveness of pre trial publicity of the statements that have
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: already been made by law enforcement officers, by lawyers, by
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: the representatives of the state in the case may have
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: a significant impact on the fairness of his trial, and
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: so modifying the pre trial publicity order, addressing the cameras
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: in the courtroom, and frankly, addressing the individualized propriety of
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: shackling in the courtroom all really relate to the fairness
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: of the proceedings. There are two other reasons why shackling,
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: we believe is the current shackling protocol and practice with
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: respect mister Robinson, unconstitutional, but those don't relate directly to
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: the fairness of the proceedings in the traditional sense. There's
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: another motion which we've also discussed with counsel for the state,
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: and they're well aware that we're going to do this,
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: and this is a motion to actually disqualify the Utah
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: County attorneys from representing the state in the prosecution of
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: the case. If the Utah County attorneys want to represent
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: the sheriff as an entity for security purposes, that's a
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: different issue. We're focused on whether there is a conflict
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: of interest, and we are in a skilled hearing, correct,
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: your honor, the court, Yeah, mister Novak, Okay, So I'm
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: not trying to pre argue the issue, but the Utah
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: County Attorneys have advised us that a family member of
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: one of the attorneys was present at the incident at
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: which mister Kirk was shot and killed. That this child,
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: I don't know if they're an adult, but I'm not
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: referring to them as a minor. This child was present,
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: observed it was within eighty five feet of mister Kirk
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: when he was killed had to flee. That the Utah
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: County's Attorney's office was all advised of this, that law
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: enforcement were actually deployed to the area with her safety
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: and status in mind. I'm not trying to pre argue this,
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: your honor, and I'm not saying anything that we haven't
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: already discussed a couple times with Council for the state.
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: So we're going to file that motion to disqualify, and
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: all of these motions we've already talked about getting them
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: all filed before Thanksgiving. That doesn't mean that we want
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: the court or anybody else to work over the holidays,
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: but there's a lot of work there, and so we
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: need a few weeks to get all that done. The
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: court may have some preferences for how those motions are triaged,
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: if I may, but those are the things sort of
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: circling around today's motions, and I think I should stop
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: talking here the court, all right, all right, to the state,
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: I just want to make sure that from your perspective,
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: that the same understanding of what we're addressing today. I
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: just don't want to go down the path. And then
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: one side says, wait a second, I thought we weren't
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: going there. I just want everyone to start at the
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: same starting point, mister Ballard. That's perfect, your honor, with
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: respect to what's that issue today, we agree the motion
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: to strike, the state's response, the joint response of the
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: State and Sheriff's office, and then also the substantative motion
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: about clothing and resp The State did not make an
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: affirmative motion in its response, and so that's why the
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: state has not filed a separate reply. So and I'll
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: explain that later during my argument. But from the state's perspective,
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: those two motions are fully briefed, ready to go for
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: the court today. As far as the three motions that
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: Council mentioned, I think that's all the State's understanding as well.
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: That those will be filed. We'll do our best to
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: respond expeditiously. We're very interested in getting a prelim hearing
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: set in this case as soon as possible, and we
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: were anticipating that once we get those motions resolved or
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: at least argued, then we can move forward with setting
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: a prelim hearing date. There are two other motions that
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: I think the court should be aware of that are docketed.
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: There is defendant's motion to preserve evidence that's dock at
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: number seventy five. The court entered a premature order on
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: that motion. That's dock at number one oh seven, and
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: the state has filed a motion to set aside that
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: premature order that's dock at one sixteen. The defendants were
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: response to that motion is due in early November, and then,
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: from our perspective, the defendant, Yeah, defendant needs to file
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: or reply in support of the motion to preserve evidence.
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: Mister Novak, we may be able to meet and confer
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: on the preservation of evidence and eliminate adversarial litigation about it,
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: because I think and yeah, I just think that we
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: may be able to do that. We'll try to do that.
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: It's really a question of what evidence needs to be
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: preserved and what advanced notice needs to be given to
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: us before biological evidence can be used, even if it
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: might disappear, And so we're going to at least try
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: to meet and confer about it. We may have different
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: definitions of materiality, but we'll do that and do what
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: we can to eliminate things that we may be can
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: agree upon and not burden the court with another set
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: of briefings the court. All right, I appreciate that. Anything else,
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: mister Ballard, mister Ballard, no, your honor, thank you. All right, folks,
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: we're going to wrap up right here, and in the
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: next episode dealing with the topic, we're going to pick
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: up where we left off. All the information that goes
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.