Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 1 Part 19) (9/15/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 1 Part 19) (9/15/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to pick up where we left
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: off with the Tyler Robinson prelim hearing day one. And
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: we're picking back up with the prosecution asking questions. Question.
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: All right. Well, with Tyler Robinson's personal information, were you
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: able to expand your search at all? Answer, yeah. Once
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: we knew a vehicle that we were looking for and
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: we had the actual image of the individual, then we
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: were able to use that video footage to try to
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: track that specific individual. Question, okay, and I'm sorry, let
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: me clarify. So when I said expand your search, I'm
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: referencing the UVU surveillance video. Answer, yeah, we were able to. Question, okay,
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: and were you able to identify in that expanded search?
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Or did you believe you located that Challenger? Answer, yes. Yes,
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: we did. Question, okay. Were you able to determine at
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: what time or times Mr. Robinson visited the UVU campus
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: on September 10th? Answer, yeah. We were able to establish
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: that Mr. Robinson had been on campus approximately four times
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: throughout the day, twice before the shooting, the time of
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: the shooting, and then after the shooting, later in the evening,
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: into the early hours of the 11th. Question, okay. Did
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: you do the same thing with that vehicle? Answer, we did, yes. Question, okay.
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: Tracked it forward and backward? Answer, yeah. Using the UVU
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: footage and additional information that was obtained, yes. Question, and
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: I believe you said in total, Mr. Robinson visited the
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: UVU campus four times that day? Answer, that's correct. Question,
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: and let's just be clear, that's all based on UVU
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: surveillance video, is that fair to say? Answer, yes, correct,
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: that is. Question, okay. Have you reviewed... What's been marked
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: state exhibit 12.1 for identification? Answer, I have, yes. Question, okay.
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: And before we go there, of the video that you've
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: personally watched, does the video include the 10th and the
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: 11th or just the 10th? Question, the video that I've
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: seen includes the 10th and then a very small portion,
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: I think about 30 seconds of the 11th. Question, okay.
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: And I think you said initially you watched about 20
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: hours of video. Answer, yeah. Question, okay. Since that time,
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: Have you watched additional video? Answer, yes. Question, UVU surveillance video? Answer, yes. Question, okay,
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: and who provided the UVU surveillance video to you? Answer,
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: it was part of the collection of videos that was
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: provided by Mr. Olson and his team that we already
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: discussed previously. Question, okay, of all the hours of video
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: that you watched, do you have an idea of how
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: many hours include Mr. Robinson or his vehicle? Answer, just
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: with UVU or... Question, just with UVU, I'm sorry. Answer,
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: just with UVU, would probably be about 16 hours. Question,
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: and let's be clear, this is someone you believe to
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: be Tyler Robinson. Answer, correct. Question, okay. And this person
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: that you identified as Tyler Robinson, that you've been investigating
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: and that you viewed in numerous hours of video from UVU,
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: would you recognize that person if he were in the
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: courtroom today? Answer, yes. Question, is he in the courtroom today? Answer,
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: yes he is. Question, would you point him out and
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: describe something that he's wearing? Kathy Nestor jumps in. Your Honor,
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: we object to unduly suggestive in-court identification for constitutional grounds.
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: Judge Graff, do you wish to specify an unduly constitutional?
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: I'm trying to understand your objection, so I want to
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: make sure I fully understand. Kathy Nestor, Your Honor, I
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: think there's some, and I'll defer to Mr. Bird if
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: he wants to jump in. But I believe that there's
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: a long line of case law that says, and you
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: ask someone to identify the defendant when they're the only
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: person sitting at the table with defense counsel. And that's
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: unduly suggestive and taints any future or past, well, definitely
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: future identification. So we object to that happening in this
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: fashion at this time. Prosecution. Judge. Agent Hull has testified
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: that he's watched numerous hours of video. Well, take a
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: step back. He's looked at personal identifying information of an
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: individual by the name of Tyler Robinson. He's looked at
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: the driver's license record. He's looked at the DMV records.
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: And he's able to determine what car that person drives.
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: He's also looked at surveillance video that he believes depicts
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: this Tyler Robinson. And I've simply asked him if that
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: person that he has seen both in driver's license photos
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: and the surveillance video, if that person is here in
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: the courtroom today. I don't know that that's unduly prejudicial
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: or suggestive. It's the routine. I don't know of any
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: other way to do it other than the way I
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: just did, Judge. Judge Graff, well, I wanted to verify
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: the format of the question. I remember it in my mind,
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: but to Ms. Nestor, was that an accurate portrayal of
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: the question that was asked? Ms. Nestor, yes. Judge Graff, okay. Prosecution,
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: anything further before I issue my ruling? Prosecution, no, other
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: than Judge... I believe it's worth noting that Mr. Robinson
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: is in plain clothes. Judge Graff, counsel, please approach the bench.
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: All right, based off what's been presented in court, I'm
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: not finding that this particular question as previously posed as suggestive.
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: I find for the purpose of this hearing only that
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: in-court identification by Agent Hull of Mr. Robinson has been made. Again,
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: this only relates to the prelim hearing, and you may proceed. Prosecution,
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: thank you, Judge. Agent Hull. Have you reviewed what's been
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: marked state exhibit 12.2 for identification? Answer, I have, yes. Question,
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: and where did you review that video? Answer, it was
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: provided to me. I reviewed it on my computer in
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: my office. Question, okay, and is that the first time
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: that you've seen this particular video footage? Answer, this particular
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: version of the footage, yes. Question, okay, so this particular version,
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: the first time, but have you seen the video that comprises,
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: I guess, exhibit 12.1? Answer, I've seen the original video
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: if that's your question, yes. Question, so what is State
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: Exhibit 12.1? How would you describe it? Answer, I would
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: describe it as a compilation of the video that we
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: obtained from Utah Valley University during the course of the
• 6:23
  Speaker 1: investigation that depicts the movement of the individual I believe
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: to be Mr. Robinson moving around the campus on September 10th,
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: 2025 into the morning of September 11th, 2025. Question, did
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: you prepare this video compilation? Answer, I did not. Question, okay.
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: Do you know who did? Answer, yeah. Utah County's Attorney's Office.
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: I believe Ms. Durfler is the one who produced the video. Question, okay.
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: Do you know Ms. Durfler's first name? Answer, Kimberly. Question, okay. What,
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: if anything, did you do to authenticate the video in
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: the compilation? Answer, I reviewed the video to make sure
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: that it was a reflection of what I understood the
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: original videos to show. Question, okay, what if anything else
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: did you do? Answer, I reviewed it. I know that
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: there were some zooms and some changes to the footage. Question, okay,
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: did you meet with Mr. Olson with regard to the
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: particular video? Answer, yeah, this video was also part of
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: the original meeting with Mr. Olson for the prior exhibit, yes. Question, okay,
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: so at the same time you sat down with Mr.
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: Olson and discussed the prior exhibit. And let's just be clear,
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: which exhibit that is. So I believe the, well, The
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: 1102 statement that you gathered from him is Exhibit 12.3.
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: Is that correct? Answer, yes. Question, okay. So at the
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: same time that you gathered that 12.3 or that written
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: statement that is State Exhibit 12.3, you talked to him
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: about the specific exhibit as well? Answer, yeah. Mr. Olson
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: was shown the exhibit. Question, okay. And did he include
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: that in the 1102 statement? Answer, yeah, I believe specifically
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: referenced the exhibit by name, stating that it was a
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: true reflection of the footage from the campus. Question, and
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: let's just go back to what you were stating earlier.
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: To you, it appears to be a compilation of videos
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: that you've already seen. Answer, correct. Question, that you received
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: as a mass dump. I guess for lack of a
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: better term, if you view video, is that fair to say? Answer, yeah. Question, okay.
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: And the exhibit 12.1 says, Does it appear to be
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: the same as the raw video that you saw previously? Answer,
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: it does, yes. Question, okay. Are there some minor? Are
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: there any additions or anything different about the particular exhibit? Answer,
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: there are some portions of the video where a zoom
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: is initiated, which wasn't a function of the camera. I
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: believe some specific individuals have been blurred from the footage,
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: and I believe there are some red circles to show
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: poignant information or individuals within the footage itself. Question, okay,
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: so other than the red circles, the blur, and the zoom,
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: does it appear to accurately depict what you've seen in
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: the raw video footage? Answer, I believe so, yes. Question, okay,
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: on your screen. I'm going to have displayed an image.
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: Let me know when you see it. Answer, the image
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: is there now. It's gone again. Question, is it there? Answer,
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: we're back, yeah. Question, okay, we're back. So do you
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: recognize what this is? Answer, yeah, this is the first
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: frame of the video compilation that we just referenced. Question
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: okay and again. This video portrays what you believe is Mr.
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: Robinson visiting campus that day. Answer correct. Question okay. And
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: is it throughout the day? Answer it is. Question and
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: then you believe you said into the early morning hours
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: to the 11th. Is that right? Answer correct. Question okay, Judge.
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: The state would move to admit what's been marked state
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: exhibit 12.1. Judge Graff, Ms. Nestor, Kathy Nestor, Your Honor,
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: we have objections to its admissibility. This is a compilation
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: video that was put together from a bunch of different
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: sources by the county attorney's office. This individual did not
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: create the compilation, cannot testify to the accuracy or the
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: actual material that it's taken from, and furthermore, Mr. Olson
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: himself is just referred to by Agent Hull. He specifically
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: says people have altered these recordings. They've zoomed in. When
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: the actual recording isn't zoomed, they've added little circles to
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: people they want you to pay attention to. They've blurred
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: people's faces out. So I mean it's been clearly altered.
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: I mean they admit it's been altered, so we have
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: real concern about authenticity of it. Furthermore, this particular video
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: should be protected, and so that deals with the admissibility factor.
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: As far as the publication factor of it, the video
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: should be classified as protected under UCJA 4-202.0. go to
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: 4-202 subsection 5J, as in jelly bean, and then little
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: i and little double i, because this is going to
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: interfere with the defense ongoing investigation with Mr. Tyler's ability.
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: I mean, Mr. Robinson's ability to get a fair trial.
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: This is basically putting together photos that are clear with
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: photos that aren't clear, putting them all together in such
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: a format that makes the case that it's all one person.
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: It would be extremely prejudicial for people that may ultimately
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: serve on this jury to watch this video before the
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: case goes to trial. We don't believe proper foundation's been laid,
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: which would make it admissible at this point, so the
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: fact that it would be shown to the public would
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: be extremely damaging to the ability to put on a
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: defense at trial, and so we object to its publication,
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: both in the courtroom and to the media, Your Honor.
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: Judge Graff, Prosecution. Judge Ms. Nestor is correct. This is
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: a compilation of a series of videos. The video, as Sgt.
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: Hull has testified to, is a compilation of raw videos
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: that he has received from Utah Valley University. And he
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: has not seen this video, but he has seen all
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: the raw footage, and by his estimation or according to
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: his testimony, these are all videos that are accurate and
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: they depict what the raw footage depicts, other than those
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: minor additions. Judge, if you refer to Mr. Olson's written statement,
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: it's Plaintiff Exhibit 12.3. He, too, has reviewed the video,
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: and he has also identified this video as being accurate,
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: with the exception of those additions. In his words, it's
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: the zooms and the red highlights. They weren't part of
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: the original video, according to Mr. Olson, but other than that,
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: he states, The same as Agent Hull, these videos are accurate,
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: and they were captured by UVU's surveillance video. Judge Graff,
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: Do you have a version of this video that does
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: not have alterations, such as zooming or circling? My concern
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: is that the 1102 says what it says about these videos.
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: These were the videos. But then it was altered. And
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: typically an exhibit which has been altered, and if it
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: wasn't done by the person who supplied the 1102, that
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: can become problematic. And so do you have a version
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: of this exhibit that does not have the zooming in
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: or the circling? Again, I don't know all the alterations
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: that were made. But it seems to fall outside 1102
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: because you don't have a person testifying 1102 saying I
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: made these alterations. And so that's the concern of what Ms.
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: Nestor was talking about as it relates to the state's evidence.
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: I have that concern about those alterations. Again, I don't
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: know when they were made, what they were made, how
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: much was done to manipulate the video. And as I say,
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: manipulate to not saying it in a nefarious way, but
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: I don't know what the scope of what of that is.
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: and how much it deviates from what the original form. Prosecution, well, Judge,
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: to answer your first question, do we have a version
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: of this particular video that has not been altered? We don't.
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: Not right now, not today. I guess there's a, well,
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: there's a couple of things I'd simply like to point out, Judge,
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: and that is that we have two witnesses who watched
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: the raw footage, and Agent Holt, here today on the stand,
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: and Mr. Olson, in the form of his written statement,
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: they have both said that this video, with the exception
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: of these alterations, accurately depicts the video that was captured
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: by UVU surveillance video. Judge, I will proffer that those
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: changes made to the video were not done by either.
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: I know who that person is. We could actually call
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: that person as a witness if that would cure that,
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: and we're prepared to do that if necessary. But Judge,
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: I think that our burden is to simply authenticate what
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: this is. And it's a video that, with only a
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: few exceptions... alterations that really don't change the substance of
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: the video or the content of the video, they're accurate.
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: They depict what the cameras captured on September 10th and
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: the 11th, and we have two people who have seen
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: that raw footage, and they've explained that they're the only
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: difference between what we originally have and the original videos
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: and what you're seeing today. And in the additions, I
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: will submit, Judge, were only added to make it easier
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: to view. Judge Graff, all right, anything further from the parties? Ms. Nestor, no. Prosecution, no.
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: The judge, all right, I'm sustaining the objection. Typically, when
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: exhibits are admitted to the court, it's without alteration. If
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: a party circles an exhibit, a photograph, that's not the
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: original format. And I don't have the person who made
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: the alteration and 1102 substantiate that. And what I have
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: is the original video. And Mr. Olson saying, this is
• 15:22
  Speaker 1: the video minus the alterations. And we have Agent Hull saying,
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: this is the video and there are alterations, but I'm
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: missing a link. And it may be minor alterations, But
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: in this type of case, I want to be thorough
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: and I want to make sure what is minor is
• 15:35
  Speaker 1: still important. And for that reason, I'm going to sustain
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: the objection, leave it to the parties on how you
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: wish to handle the video. And in the future, I
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: don't want to provide guidance either way. But as it
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: stands today, this exhibit, state's exhibit 12.1 is not admitted. prosecution. Okay, judge,
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: could I just have a moment? Judge Graff, you may.
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: All right, folks, we're going to wrap up right here.
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: And in the next episode dealing with the topic, we're
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: going to pick up where we left off. All the
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: information that goes with this episode can be found in
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: the description box.