Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Judge Graf And The Order To Bind Tyler Robinson Over For Trial On All Counts Charged (Part 4) (9/7/26)

Transcript

Judge Graf And The Order To Bind Tyler Robinson Over For Trial On All Counts Charged (Part 4) (9/7/26) · 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 Judge Graff and the bind over order for
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: Tyler Robinson for the alleged murder of Charlie Kirk. D,
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: probable cause, supporting the victim targeting enhancement. The state also
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: alleges that the defendant intentionally selected Mr. Kirk because Mr.
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: Kirk's political expression under Utah Code section 76-3-203.14. Defendant disputes
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: whether the evidence establishes the required motive. For the reasons
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: set forth below in the court's analysis of the sentencing enhancements,
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: the court concludes that the state has established probable cause
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: as to the victim targeting allegation. The court does not
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: rely on defendant's political associations, beliefs, or personal relationship standing alone.
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: The relevant inquiry is whether the evidence reasonably supports an
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: inference that defendant selected Mr. Kirk because of defendant's perception
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: of Mr. Kirk's protected political expression. As explained below, Section 76-3-203.14
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: does not expressly identify an additional penalty consequence for a
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: capital felony conviction. The court, therefore, preserves the state's notice
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: without deciding that the allegation independently alters the penalty applicable
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: to Count 1, Count 2, felony discharge of a firearm
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: causing serious bodily injury, first-degree felony. To bind defendant over
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: on Count 2, felony discharge of a firearm causing serious
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: bodily injury, a first-degree felony under Utah Code Section 7611-210-2
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: and 2 or 3c. The state must establish probable cause
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: that defendant 1. Discharged a firearm, 2. In the direction
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: of Charlie Kirk, 3. Knowing or having reason to believe
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: that Charlie Kirk may be endangered by the discharge, and 4.
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: The act caused serious bodily injury to Charlie Kirk. The
• 1:55
  Speaker 1: evidence described above supports a reasonable belief that defendant positioned
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: himself on the roof of the Losey building and discharged
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: the Mauser. 30- 06 rifle in the direction of Charlie Kirk.
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: The medical examiner determined that Mr. Kirk died from a
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: gunshot wound to the neck and classified the matter of
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: death as homicide. The fatal gunshot wound constitutes serious bodily injury. Accordingly,
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: count two is bound over for trial. Count three, obstruction
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: of justice, second-degree felony. To bind defendant over on count
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: three of obstruction of justice, a secondary felony under Utah
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: Code Section 76.8.306.2, the state must demonstrate probable cause that defendant, one,
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: acted with the intent to hinder, delay, or prevent the investigation, apprehension, prosecution, conviction,
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: or punishment of any person. Two, regarding conduct that constitutes
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: a criminal offense. And three, concealed or removed the firearm
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: allegedly used in the shooting. Under that statute, the offense
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: is a second-degree felony. If the underlying conduct constitutes a
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: capital or first-degree felony, Utah Code 76-8306-2C. The underlying charged
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: homicide constitutes a capital or first-degree felony for purpose of
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: Section 76-8306-2C. Following the shooting, the Mauser. 30- 06 rifle was
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: concealed in a dense wooded area on the UVU campus
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: wrapped inside a dark towel. Defendant alleged intent to hinder
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: the investigation is supported by the text messages attributed to him,
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: in which he stated that he had concealed his rifle
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: by leaving it in a bush where he changed outfits.
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: The alleged concealment of the rifle in a wooded area
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: after the shooting, together with the attributed messages concerning its
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: concealment and possible recovery, supports a reasonable inference that defendant
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: acted with intent to conceal physical evidence and hinder his apprehension.
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: Count three is bound over for trial. Count four, obstruction
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: of justice, second degree felony. To bind defendant over on
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: count four, obstruction of justice, a second degree felony under
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: Utah Code 76.8.306.2, the state must establish probable cause that defendant, one,
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: acted with the intent to hinder, delay, or prevent the investigation, apprehension, prosecution, conviction,
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: or punishment of any person, two, regarding conduct that constitutes
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: a criminal offense, and three, destroyed, concealed, or removed the
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: clothing allegedly worn during the shooting. The state has presented
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: sufficient evidence to establish probable cause as to count four.
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: The UVU surveillance video depicts the shooter wearing a specific
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: outfit as he moved towards the rooftop of the Losey building.
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: The communications attributed to defendants state that he changed outfits
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: in the wooded area where the rifle was left. The
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: clothing depicted on the alleged shooter was not recovered. Those
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: circumstances viewed together support a reasonable inference for purposes of
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: this prelim hearing that defendant concealed or destroyed the clothing
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: with intent required by the statute. Count four is bound
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: over for trial. Count five, tampering with a witness, third
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: degree felony. To bind defendant over on count five, tampering
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: with a witness, a third degree felony under Utah Code 76-8508,
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: the state must demonstrate probable cause that the defendant, one,
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: believed an official proceeding or investigation was pending or about
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: to be instituted or intended to prevent an official proceeding
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: or investigation, and two, attempted to induce or otherwise cause
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: another individual to withhold testimony, information, a document, or an item.
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: An instruction to delete communication may constitute an attempt to
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: cause another person to withhold information or a document when
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: made with the intent required by Utah Code 76-8508. After
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: the shooting, defendant allegedly sent Twiggs text messages in which
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: he stated that he'd shot the victim and concealed the rifle.
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: At the end of the exchange, defendant texted Twiggs, delete
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: this exchange. The surrounding circumstances support an inference that defendant
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: knew law enforcement was investigating the shooting and searching for
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: the person responsible. The instruction to delete this exchange, considered
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: in context, supports a reasonable inference that defendant attempted to
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: cause twigs to withhold those communications from investigators by deleting them.
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: Count five is bound over for trial. Count six, tampering
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: with a witness, third-degree felony. To bind defendant over on
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: count six, tampering with a witness, a third-degree felony under
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: Utah Code section 76.8.508, the state must demonstrate probable cause
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: that the defendant, one, believed an official proceeding or investigation
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: was pending. or about to be instituted or intended to
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: prevent an official proceeding or investigation, and two, attempted to
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: induce or otherwise cause another individual to withhold testimony, information,
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: a document, or an item. The state alleges that defendant
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: committed this offense by directing his roommate to stay silent
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: if police questioned them. Information at three. The evidence shows
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: that on September 11th, 2025, defendant sent a text message
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: to Lance Twiggs stating, If any police ask you questions,
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: ask for a lawyer and stay silent. Defendant argues that
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: count six must be stricken as a matter of law.
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: He contends that this message was merely advising a loved
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: one to exercise constitutional rights to remain silent and seek counsel,
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: which cannot, standing alone, constitute a criminal offense. Defendant therefore
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: argues that the record does not support the required obstructive intent.
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: The court considers this a meaningful distinction because the words,
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: ask for a lawyer, and stay silent, viewed in isolation,
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: describe lawful advice concerning constitutional rights, and do not themselves
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: establish criminal intent. Standing alone, advising another person to request
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: counsel and remain silent is lawful and does not establish
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: witness tampering. The state relies, however, on the context of
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: the communication, including defendants' earlier alleged instruction to delete this exchange.
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: Viewed together and in the light most favorable to the state,
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: those communications permit a reasonable inference that defendant intended to
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: cause twigs to withhold information from investigators. The court does
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: not determine at this stage whether that inference is ultimately
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: more persuasive than defendant's lawful advice explanation, and it does
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: not treat the exercise of legal rights or advice concerning
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: those rights as criminal conduct standing alone. Although defendant's lawful
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: advice interpretation remains a reasonable, competing interpretation of The surrounding
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: communications permit the state proposed inference as well. Because the
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: court may not choose between reasonable competing inferences at the
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: prelim stage, probable cause supports count six. Count six is
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: bound over for trial. Count number seven, violent offenses committed
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: in the presence of a child. Class B, misdemeanor, reclassified
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: as class A. To bind defendant over on count seven,
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: violent offense committed in the presence of a child, a
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: Class B misdemeanor under Utah Code Section 76-3, 203.102 and 2.
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: The state must demonstrate probable cause that defendant 1. committed
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: criminal homicide, 2. in the physical presence of a child
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: younger than 14 years old, and 3. with knowledge that
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: the child was present and may have seen or heard
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: the commission of the criminal homicide. The state further alleges
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: that the offense is reclassified as a Class A misdemeanor
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: under under Section 76-3, 203.143, A2, because of the victim
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: targeting allegation. The first two elements are supported by evidence
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: of the charged homicide and evidence that children younger than
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: 14 were physically present at the event. The disputed and
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: closer issue is knowledge. Defendant argues that the state has
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: not shown that, from a distance of approximately 415 feet,
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: he knew a child younger than 14 was present and
• 9:59
  Speaker 1: might see or hear the offense. Knowledge may be established circumstantially,
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: but it cannot rest solely on the general proposition that
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: children sometimes attend public events. The relevant question is whether
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: the circumstances described in the record permit a reasonable inference
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: that defendant knew a child was present. The state relies
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: on several circumstances specific to the event. Defendant allegedly planned
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: the shooting for more than a week. He visited the
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: event area twice before the shooting and had an opportunity
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: to observe the venue and preparations. The state's evidence places
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: them at an elevated location with a clear line of
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: sight toward the event area, where thousands of participants were present,
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: and the rifle contained an optical scope. The event video
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: also depicts young children and infants within the event area.
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: The court recognizes the force of defendant's argument that an
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: opportunity to observe a large crowd does not necessarily establish
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: knowledge that a child younger than 14 was present. The
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: court therefore does not infer knowledge from crowd size alone.
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: The combined circumstances permit do not compel an inference that
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: defendant knew a child was present and might see or
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: hear the shooting. The court does not equate being familiar
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: with the venue and opportunity to observe the crowd. or
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: the presence of an optical scope with actual knowledge. Rather,
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: the court considers the circumstances collectively, and under the prelim
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: hearing requirement that reasonable inferences be drawn in the state's favor,
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: taken together, these circumstances are sufficient at this stage to
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: establish probable cause as to the knowledge element. Whether defendant
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: actually observed the child, and whether the state's inference is
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: ultimately persuasive, remain questions for the trier of fact. Count
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: 7 is bound over for trial. Analysis of merger double
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: jeopardy objections. Defendant argues that count two must merge with
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: count one because both arise from a single gunshot directed
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: at a single victim. Utah Code section 76-1402 limits multiple
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: convictions when one offense is included within another. But merger
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: ordinarily concerns convictions and punishment. And a fact-dependent merger determination
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: may be premature before the charges have been presented to
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: the trier of fact. At this stage, the court determines
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: only whether probable cause independently supports the charged offenses. The
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: court does not decide whether either offense is ultimately a
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: lesser included offense of the other. If convictions are returned
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: on both counts, the merger issue may be addressed at
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: the time under Section 76.1.402. Analysis of the Sentencing Enhancements
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: The information presents three related but legally distinct matters. The
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: Separate Offense Charged in Count 7, under Utah Code 76-3203-10,
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: the presence of a child sentencing, consideration under Section 76-3203-9,
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: and the victim targeting allegation under 76-3203-14, because these provisions
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: have different legal effects. The court addresses them separately. Because
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: the victim targeting allegation would reclassify Count 7 from a
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: Class B to a Class A misdemeanor, Under Section 76.3203.14.3a.2,
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: that allegation is subject to the probable cause determination, C. Apprendi,
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: 1st New Jersey, 530 U.S., 2000. The court also considers
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: whether the remaining sentencing allegations have factual support without deciding
• 13:29
  Speaker 1: that each constitutes a separate element of an offense, a
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: presence of a child allegation. For the reason stated in
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: the analysis of Count 7, the record provides probable cause
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: for the factual allegation that the charged conduct occurred in
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: the presence of a child under 76.3.203.9. That circumstance operates
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: as a sentencing consideration rather than a reclassification of the
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: underlying felony. B. Victim Targeting Allegations Utah Rule of Evidence
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: 417 limits the use of defendants' expressions or associations in
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: proving a victim targeting allegation. The evidence must otherwise be
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: admissible and must specifically relate to the defendant's selection of
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: the victim. Pastor Engelhardt's statement may establish the nature of Mr.
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: Kirk's public expression, but it does not independently establish defendant's motive, knowledge,
• 14:20
  Speaker 1: or state of mind. Defendant argues that the state has
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: not established probable cause that he selected Mr. Kirk because
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: of a qualifying personal attribute identified here as political expression.
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: Utah Code Section 76-3-20314-1K2. The court therefore considers Englehart's statement
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: only for the limited purpose described above and looks to
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: other evidence to determine defendant's alleged reason for selecting Mr. Kirk.
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: When asked why he shot Mr. Kirk, defendant alleged response,
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: I had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: negotiated out. The word hatred standing alone is ambiguous and
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: does not establish the statutory motive. The state also presented
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: evidence that defendant identified Mr. Kirk by name in communications
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: concerning the planned shooting, allegedly planned the shooting in advance,
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: and carried it out during a public event associated with Mr.
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: Kirk's political expression. Viewed together, in the light most favorable
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: to the state, those circumstances support a reasonable, though not compelled,
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: inference that defendant selected Mr. Kirk because of perception of Mr.
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: Kirk's political expression. the court does not determine whether that
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: inference will ultimately prove more persuasive than other interpretations of
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: defendant's statement. At this stage, the targeting allegation satisfies the
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: probable cause standard. Its legal consequences differ by count. For
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: count 7, section 76-3203.14.3a2 reclassifies the offense from a Class
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: B to a Class A misdemeanor. For count 2, a
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: first-degree felony, the statute makes the victim's selection in aggravating
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: sentencing consideration rather than reclassifying the offense. Section 76-3203.14 does
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: not expressly identify a penalty consequence for a capital felony.
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: The court, therefore, does not decide that the statute authorizes
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: an additional penalty for count one. The state's notice remains preserved,
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: but any asserted consequence for a capital felony conviction must
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: rest on separately identified legal authority. This ruling does not
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: affect the targeting allegation as applied to counts two and seven.
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: Ruling and order. For the foregoing reasons and based on
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: the record and the party submissions, it's hereby order that
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: defendant Tyler James Robinson is bound over for trial in
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: the 4th Judicial District Court on the following counts and
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: sentencing allegations. A. Count 1. Aggravated murder. A capital felony.
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: In violation of Utah Code section 76-5-202. including the capital
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: aggravating circumstance under Section 76.5.202.2.A.3. B. Count 2. Felony discharge
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: of a firearm causing serious bodily injury, a first-degree felony
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: in violation of Utah Code Section 76-11.2.10.2.3.C., including the victim
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: targeting allegation under 76.3.203.14.2. Subject to the sentencing treatment described
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: in 76.3.203.14.3b and the presence of a child aggravating factor
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: under section 76.3.203.9. Count 3. Obstruction of justice. Secondary felony
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: in violation of Utah Code 76.8.306.2. D. Count 4. Obstruction
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: of justice. A secondary felony in violation of Utah Code
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: section 76.8.306.2. Count 5. Tampering with a witness. a third-degree felony,
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: in violation of Utah Code 76-8508. Count six, tampering with
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: a witness, third-degree felony, in violation of Utah Code 76-8508.
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: Count seven, violent offenses committed in the presence of a child,
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: a Class B misdemeanor, under Utah Code Section 76-3-20310. Reclassified
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: as a Class A misdemeanor under 76-3-20314-3-A-2. based on the
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: victim targeting allegation under Section 76.3.203.14.2. All evidentiary determinations in
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: this order are limited to the prelim hearing and do
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: not determine admissibility or the ultimate weight of the evidence
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: at trial. Nothing in this order constitutes a final determination
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: of defendant's guilt or witness's credibility. Defendant remains presumed innocent
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: and the state bears the burden at trial of proving
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: each charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Its sole order
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: dated this first day of September, 2026, and this order
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: was signed by Judge Graff. All the information that goes
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.