Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Tyler Robinson Tells The Court That There Is Not Enough Evidence To Proceed To Trial (Part 3) (8/14/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Tells The Court That There Is Not Enough Evidence To Proceed To Trial (Part 3) (8/14/26) · 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 going to pick up where we left
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: off with the Tyler Robinson response to the State of
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: Utah and their motion for binding over. In Chennault Verse State,
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: the defendant was convicted of aggravated murder after shooting multiple
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: individuals inside of a church. There, the defendant fired multiple
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: shots from two pistols, killing two individuals and injuring another,
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: and randomly shooting into the congregation. The jury recommended the
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: death penalty, finding the aggravating factor of knowingly created a
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: great risk of death to more than one person in
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: a public place by means of a weapon or a
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: device which would normally be hazardous to the live of
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: more than one person. The Georgia Supreme Court found the
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: evidence supported the jury's findings. In State vers. McMurtry three,
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: the Arizona Supreme Court issued a remand for resentencing because
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: the trial court did not adequately consider mitigating evidence in
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: the course of emp posing the death sentence. The facts
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: underlying the conviction were that after A. Mcmurdy and the
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: three victims engaged in loud discussion in a bar, he
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: went to the parking lot retrieved a gun and then
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: returned inside of the bar, where he shot three victims,
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: killing two and wounding a third. During sentencing, the trial
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: court found that the defendant knowingly created a grave risk
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: of death to persons other than the murder victims. The
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: Arizona Supreme Court agreed because the evidence at the trial
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: established that the Ranch House bar was crowded the night
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: of the killings, and that there were from five to
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: nine other people in the immediate area of the victims
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: when they were shot. When he emptied his gun at
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: the victims, a pellant created a grave risk of death
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: to those people. The other Arizona Supreme Court decision cited
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: by the Utah Supreme Court is State versus Dos, five
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: sixty eight. In Dos, the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: application of a KGRD aggravating factor where the defendant shot
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: the victim in a place crowded with college student and
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: one of the defendant shots did, in fact wound one
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: of those students. In the course of the conduct, the
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: defendant emptied his revolver. Under these facts, there was no
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: question KGRD applied. The last out of state case cited
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: by the Utah Supreme Court in Johnson is a nineteen
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: eighty one decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court and State
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: versus Saunia. In Sonia, the jury found to be true
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: in aggravating circumstances, that the defendant knowingly created a risk
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: of death or great bodily harm to more than one person.
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: The Louisiana Supreme Court had previously determined that this aggravator
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: is established when the defendant, by a single and consecutive
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: course of conduct, contemplates and causes a great risk to
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: more than one person. In Sonya, the Supreme Court found
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: that the execution of two victims lying side by side
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: with six rapid rifle shots clearly amounts to a single
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: consecutive course of conduct by which defendant contemplated a great
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: risk to more than one person each. Each of these
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: cases relied upon by the Utah Supreme Court and Johnson,
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: the defendant filed multiple shots from a firearm in close
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: temporal and spatial proximity to other individuals, and in each
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: of these cases, individuals other than the murder victims were
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: in fact injured. In twenty nineteen, the Utah Supreme Court
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: revisited the standards for imposition of the KGRD aggravator and
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: Sosa Hurtato III. In Sosa Hurtato two, the defendant was
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: charged and convicted of aggravated murder for shooting and killing Stephen.
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: Just prior to shooting Stephen, the defendant fired the weapon
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: at a second individual, Isabelle, which resulted in injuries to Isabelle.
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: The shooting occurred inside a smoke shop. Sosa Hurtado entered
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: the smoke shop and pulled an assault rifle from his jacket.
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: Sosa Hurtado first fired a shot at Isabelle and missed,
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: but shadowed a glass case, causing injuries to Isabelle. After
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: he shot at Isabelle, Sosa Hurtado turned towards Stephen fired
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: a shot, hitting Steven's head. Stephen fell to the floor.
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: Sosa Hurtado then shot Stephen two more times, killing him.
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: The Utah Court of Appeals had below examined the sufficiency
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: of the evidence supporting KGRD, reviewing Utah case laws, specifically
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: State versus Pierre and Sair versus Johnson, and persuasive authority
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: from other jurisdictions. The Utah Court of Appeals determined that
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: judicial decisions about whether the aggravator applies are often influenced
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: by three main factors. One the temporal or chronological relationship
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: between any action the defendant may have taken towards the
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: third party and the acts constituting the murder. Two the
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: spatial relationship or a proximity between the third party and
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: the murder victim and the defendant at the time of
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: the acts constituting the murder. And three whether and to
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: what extent the third party was actually threatened by the assailant,
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: either by direct threats or by indirect means such as
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: the risk of astray or Rickochheng bullet. The Utah Supreme
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: Court endorsed these factors in its own analysis. The Utah
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: Supreme Court embrace principles from a KGRD decision in Jersey.
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: In Price, the New Jersey Court found the following to
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: be necessary. In order to support a KGRD finding, The
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: relevant facts to be considered must include a knowing or
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: purposeful state of mind, be s of v the creation
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: of a great risk of death, and there must be
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: a likelihood or high probability of great risk of death created,
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: not just a mere possibility, and that there be at
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: least another person within the zone of danger created by
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: defendant's conduct. In upholding the jury's verdict and the Utah
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: Court of Appeals decision affirming the verdict, the Utah Supreme
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: Court found that a reasonable jury could easily find that
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: the identified factors support the conclusion that Hurtado caused a
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: great risk of death to Isabelle during the murder of Stephen.
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: Sosa Hurtado fired at Isabelle's seconds before shooting Stephen. He
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: shot at Stephen when Isabelle was close by, and he
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: specifically acted with the intent to harmor kill Isabelle in
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: doing so. The Utah Supreme Court endorsed the series of
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: events formulation at first identified in Pierre. In order to
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: satisfy the aggravator, there must be acts in a series
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: that are linked together in a meaningful way. Such a
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: link between acts may be established based on the defendant's
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: intent and knowledge of the risk and the endangered person's
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: proximity in time and place to the murder. The Supreme
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: Court found the shot at isabel alone to be powerful
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: evidence of Sosa Hurtado's state of mind towards Isabelle. Next,
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: there was a close casual connection between the shot at
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: Isabelle and the shot at Stephen, because the evidence could
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: reasonably sustain the conclusion that Sosa Hurtado shot at Isabelle
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: to get him out of the way. Finally, the shooting
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: took place in a small area and the victims were
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: within a couple of feet when Stephen was shot. These
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: facts led the Utah Supreme Court to conclude that the
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: killing and the initial shit got to isabel were part
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: of a series of events, or, in other words, that
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: isabel was within the zone of danger when Soso Hurtado
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: killed Stephen. See the evidence presented by the State fails
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: to establish probable cause as to the KGRD aggravator. Preliminarily,
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: mister Robinson must alert the Court to a significant problem
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: presented by the state's argument as to the facts established
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: at the prelim hearing. The State makes little effort to
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: distinguish between the evidence it presented and inferences that asked
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: the Court to make based upon that evidence. Rather, the
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: State pursues and on constitutional expansion of the KGr D
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: aggravator to the case and fails to distinguish reasonable inferences
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: from speculation. As the Utah Court of Appeals explained earlier,
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: this year in state versus Murphy, a magistrate may deny
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: bind over when the evidence considered under the totality of
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: the circumstances is wholly lacking and incapable of reasonable inference
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: to prove some issue which support it's the prosecution's claim.
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: In other words, a magistrate may properly deny bind over
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: where the facts presented by the prosecution provide no more
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: than basis for speculation. While the line separating speculation from
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: reasonable inference can at times be faint, the two are distinct.
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: An inference is a conclusion reached by considering other facts
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: and deducing a logical consequence from them, and speculation entels
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: the act or practice of theorizing about matters over which
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: there is no certain knowledge at hand. In short, the
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: difference between an inference and speculation depends on whether the
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: underlying facts support the conclusion. Furthermore, it's not appropriate to
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: stack inference upon inference to satisfy an element of the offense.
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: While inferences drawn from facts in evidence are appropriate, inferences
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: drawn from inferences are not. And when evidence supports more
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: than one possible conclusion, none more than likely than the other.
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: The choice of one possibility over another can be no
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: more than speculation. The following is a recitation of the
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: evidence presented at the prelim hearing specific to this Court's
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: determination on the aggravator and the State's argument regarding the aggravator,
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: without drawing inference upon inference, as the State aske coort
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: to do. The afternoon of September tenth, twenty twenty five,
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: several thousand people gathered in and around an amphitheater on
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: the UVU campus to watch and listen to guest speaker
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: Charlie Kirk. At twelve twenty three, twenty eight pm, mister
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: Kirk was struck by a projectile on the left side
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: of his neck, and the injury resulted in his death.
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: Shot fired at twelve twenty three pm. I guess that
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: means there is no exploding microphones. Huh, well, that's interesting.
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: The best evidence of the events on September tenth, twenty
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: twenty five, on the Utah Valley University campus are the
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: videos states. Exhibit twelve one and twelve four are compiling tions.
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: I VIEWVU surveillance footage from September tenth, twenty twenty five,
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: at five thirty three, at twelve and one and twelve
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: and four. The surveillance depicts the roof of the LOSI
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: building and the walkway between the LOSI Building and the
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: Computer Science Building, beginning at twelve fifteen twenty pm. At
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: six eighteen of twelve dot four, the shooter scene going
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: over the railing separating the walkway from the LOSI roof
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: Bagley a little guardrail, probably about a couple feet high.
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: Each of the videos then jump to twelve twenty two
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: twelve PM, when a figure is seen running across the
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: LOSI roof. At twelve twenty two, the figure drops to
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: the roof and begins to crawl to the western edge
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: of the roof, go on both south and west. The
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: shooter reaches the edge of the roof at approximately twelve
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: twenty two forty four pm, although additional body positioning on
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: the ground is visible until approximately twelve twenty two fifty
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: six pm. See also pH one nine d D ninety one
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: ninety four describing evidence of prone position in gravel on
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: the rooftop. Agent Hull testified that the shooter was prone
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: for fifteen to thirty seconds. At twelve twenty three, twenty eight,
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: the figure gets up begins running to the northeast corner
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: of the roof and drops off the Losi Building roof
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: to the ground. Officer Bagley observed shoe prints and grass
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: where individuals observed jumping from the roof. Exhibit twelve Dot
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: one and twelve Dot four show the shooter was in
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: position on the southwest corner of the Losi Center roof
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: for approximately thirty five to forty four seconds. Officer Bagley
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: testified that there is a clear line of sight between
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: the tent and the top of the Losi Center A
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: Exhibit seven depicts the shooting of mister Kirk from behind
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: the individual asking him questions immediately prior to the shooting.
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: The questioner is separated from mister Kirk by a barrier,
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: a patch of grass of unknown dimensions, a table, and
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: the space behind the table in front of mister Kirk,
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: and mister Kirk is sitting in a chair on an
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: elevated platform that's centered on the backdrop. The shot occurs
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: at thirty two seconds of this video. There is one
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: individual seen to mister Kirk's right and behind mister Kirk
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: under the tent. This individual is on the opposite side
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: of where the bullet struck mister Kirk. The video has
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: no timestamp. State Exhibit eight begins with mister Kirk in
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: the courtyard throwing hats to members of the crowd. The
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: video has no timestamp. Beginning at thirty two seconds, State
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: Exhibit eight depicts mister Kirk seated at the table under
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: the pop up tent, with the same questioner visible in
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: front of mister Kirk. There's what appeared to be to
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: security personnel in front and diagonal to mister Kirk standing
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: in the grass area by the barrier seen in Exhibit seven.
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: The camera recording mister Kirk is visible above and beyond
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: mister Kirk in State Exhibit seven, meaning the camera is
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: angled downward. The shot occurs at forty eight in the video.
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: One of mister Kirk's security guards comes into frame from
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: the right of mister Kirk three seconds after the shot.
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: State Exhibit nine is UVU surveillance footage from behind the
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: pop up ten that begins at twelve twenty one fourteen,
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: the moment the shot occurs at two thirteen In the video,
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: confirmed in testimony from Agent Hole, no one is immediately
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: behind the center of the American Comeback pop up ten
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: when the shot occurred. It's also self evident from the
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: video and State Exhibit seven that no one can see
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: through the back of the pop up ten. Agent Hole,
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: you would not be able to see through it. Agent
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: Hole testified that he can't answer what would have been
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: visible to the shooter on the low C center roof. Finally,
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: State Exhibit six depicts twenty two seconds of the event
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: from the perspective of the witness aw There's no timestamp
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: on the video, but based on the content, it appears
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: to be taken close in time to why mister Kirk
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: initially sat on the elevated platform under the pop up ten.
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: The state's forensic investigator, Jennifer Folmina, testified that the day
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: distints of the slope between the rooftop vantage and the
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: pop up ten was approximately four hundred and fifteen feet.
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: Agent Folmina also testified that the elevation between the bottom
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: of the amphitheater and Losi roof was approximately sixty eight feet. Finally,
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: Agent Folmina testified that the distance without consideration of the
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: slope between the two points was four hundred and ten feet.
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: A Mauser Model ninety eight rifle was recovered in a
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: wooded area across the street from the northeast corner of
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: the Losi Center, where the individual ran after jumping from
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: the roof. The rifle was a thirty odd to six
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: caliber with a skulp. The rifle was a bolt action rifle.
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: In order to load it, lock it, as well as
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: extract anything that's in the rifle, the user has to
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: manipulate the bowl. When law enforcement manipulated the bolt, the
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: rifle had a fired cartridge case inside and three unfired cartridges.
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: The fired cartridge case was still in the chamber of
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: the rifle. State Exhibit twelve one and twelve four also
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: contained video of an individual the state's witness identified as
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: mister Robinson entering exiting campus parking structures four times on
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: September tenth, twenty twenty five, twice before the shooting, once
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: at the time of the shooting, and once after the shooting.
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: A vehicle is seen matching mister Robinson's on campus. The
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: first entry was approximately eight thirty am, with an individual
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: State witness identified as mister Robinson returning to his vehicle
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: at approximately nine twenty five am. Agent Holl testified that
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: during this initial visit, mister Robinson went to the Amphitheater
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: area and spoke to some representatives from TPUSA. The second
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: entry was at approximately ten am, and Agent Holl testified
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: that mister Robinson went to a Chick fil A in
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: the Sorenson Center, walked to a wooded area across campus Drive,
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: and appears at the railing on the walkway between the
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: Computer Science Building and the Loci roof. Mister Robinson left
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: campus the second time just prior to eleven am. The
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: individual identified as mister Robinson is next scene returning to
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: campus in different clothing and walking with a limb. According
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: to Agent Hull, the individual identifies as mister Robinson is
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: seen walking in a parking structure in front of the
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: low CI Center and then on the walkway between the
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: Computer Science Building and Loci Center at approximately twelve fifteen.
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: None of the footage shows the individual identified as mister
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: Robinson passing by or near individuals that are clearly miners.
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: A search was later conducted of the residence mister Robinson
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: shared with Lance Twigs in Saint George, Utah. In the
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: closet on the first floor of the apartment, law enforcement
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: found some shooting targets with perforations on it. Agent Fonmena
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: testified that the perforations were consistent with bullet holes. The
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: targets show perforations outside the target, closer to the target,
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: and then even closer with a perforation in the center.
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: The communication the State admitted between mister Robinson and mister
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: Twiggs indicate mister Robinson's intention to kill Charlie Kirk. I
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: had the opportunity to take Charlie Kirk out, and I
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: took it. There is no mention of any threat or
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: intended harm to any other individual. All right, folks, we're
• 17:14
  Speaker 1: gonna wrap up right here, and in the next episode
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up with subsection D.
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: All the information that goes with this episode can be
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: found in the description box.