Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing (Day 6 Part 15) (11/4/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing (Day 6 Part 15) (11/4/26) · Beyond The Horizon

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to dive right back in to
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: the transcript from day number six of the Tyler Robinson
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: prelim hearing. On the morning of September 11th, 2025, Mr.
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: Twiggs asked Mr. Robinson in person if what he said
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: the night before was true. Mr. Robinson responded that it
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: was and that he had wished he had not done it.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: Just before 8 p.m. on September 11th, a message was
• 0:29
  Speaker 1: sent from Mr. Robinson's account to his Discord group, stating,
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: Hey guys, I have some bad news for you all.
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: It was me at UVU yesterday. I'm sorry for all
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: of this. I'm surrendering through a sheriff friend of in
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: a few moments. At approximately 8.30pm, a family friend went
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: to pick up Mr. Robinson and take him to the
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: sheriff's office. He asked Mr. Robinson if he had any
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: property or clothes that he used during the incident. Mr.
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: Robinson responded that he discarded those items and At approximately
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: 9 p.m., Mr. Robinson arrived at the Washington County Sheriff's Office.
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: He was wearing a maroon shirt and jeans. Investigators searched Mr.
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: Robinson's home. They collected a Dremel tool, its bits container,
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: two boxes of. 30- 06 ammunition, some. 30- 06 cartridge cases, and
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: a burned paper that had markings consistent with the note Mr.
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: Robinson left for Mr. Twiggs. Investigators also found shooting targets
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: in a closet with perforations in them consistent with bullet holes.
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: The FBI performed DNA testing on the screwdriver, towel, rifle,
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: spent casings, and three unfired cartridges found near the scene.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: The testing provided support for inclusion of Mr. Robinson's DNA
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: on each item. Turning to the evidentiary standard at the
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: prelim hearing stage, the primary purpose of the prelim hearing
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: is the ferreting out of groundless and improvident prosecutions. Before
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: a defendant may be bound over for trial in district court,
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: the magistrate must find probable cause to believe the crime
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: charge has been committed and that the defendant has committed it.
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: The prosecution's burden is light and merely requires the state
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: to produce believable evidence of all elements of the crime charged.
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: This is the same standard that applies on review of
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: an arrest warrant. The court must view all evidence in
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: light most favorable to the prosecution and must draw all
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: reasonable inferences in favor of the prosecution. Magistrates may disregard
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: evidence as incredible only where it's so contradictory, inconsistent, or
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: unbelievable that it's unreasonable to base belief of an element
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: on the prosecutor's claims on that evidence. It's not appropriate
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: for a magistrate to weigh credibility but conflicting evidence at
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: a prelim hearing because such a hearing is not a
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: trial on the merits. Rather, magistrates must leave all the
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: weighing of credibility but conflicting evidence to the trier of fact. Nevertheless,
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: magistrates are free to decline, bind over where the facts
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: presented by the prosecution provide no more than a basis
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: for speculation, as opposed for providing a basis for reasonable belief.
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: To be sure, the line separating speculation from reasonable inference
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: can at times be faint. An inference is a conclusion
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: reached by considering other facts and deducing a logical consequence
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: from them. On the other hand, speculation is the act
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: or practice of theorizing about matters over which there is
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: no certain knowledge at hand. In short, the difference between
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: an inference and speculation depends on whether the underlining facts
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: support that conclusion. Turning to the constitutional and statutory validity
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: of hearsay evidence under Rule 1102 throughout the prelim hearing
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: Defendant Tyler James Robinson raised and maintained a continuing objection
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: to the state's reliance on out-of-court hearsay statements. Specifically, defendant
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: challenges the constitutional and statutory validity of admitting out-of-court witness statements,
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: medical examiner autopsies, and digital communications under Utah Rule of
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: Evidence 1102. Defendant asserts the state's reliance on such hearsay evidence, one,
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: violates his rights, under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: Amendment of the United States Constitution. Two, deprives him of
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: effective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment. Three, violates
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. And four, infringes upon
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: the separation of powers under the Utah Constitution by delegating
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: judicial authority to define admissible evidence to legislative or rule-based bodies.
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: The court addresses each objection in turn. The admissibility of
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: reliable hearsay at a criminal prelim examination is governed by
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: the plain text of the Utah Constitution and Rule 1102
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: of the Utah Rules of Evidence. The 1995 Victim's Rights
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: Amendment to the Utah Constitution expressly provides nothing in this
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: Constitution shall preclude the use of reliable hearsay evidence as
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: defined by statute or rule in whole or in part
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: at any prelim examination to determine probable cause. or at
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: any pretrial proceeding with respect to the release of a
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: defendant if appropriate discovery is allowed as defined by statute
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: or rule. Pursuant to this explicit constitutional authorization, Utah Rules
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: of Evidence 1102A codifies that reliable hearsay is admissible at
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: criminal prelim examinations. Under Rule 1102B, the law defines specific
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: structured categories of out-of-court assertions that constitute reliable hearsay including
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: evidence establishing the foundation for or the authenticity of any
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: exhibit under subsection B3, medical and autopsy records and records
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: under subsection B5, and a declarant statement that is written, recorded,
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: or transcribed verbatim and that is made under oath or
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: affirmation or after notification that a false statement is punishable
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: under subsection B8. The Confrontation Clause Defendant argues the state's
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: reliance on testimonial hearsay without an opportunity for cross-examination violates
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: the Sixth Amendment. The court recognizes the significance of that
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: protection at trial. Under State v. Timmerman, however, the federal
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: confrontational clause does not apply to a Utah prelim hearing
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: in the same manner because the proceeding determines probable cause
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: rather than guilt. Accordingly, defendant's confrontational clause objection does not
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: provide a basis at this stage to exclude hearsay that
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: otherwise satisfies Rule 1102, nor does Crawford v. Washington require
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: a different result. Timmerman explains that Crawford addresses the testimonial
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: hearsay at trial and does not extend to the trial
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: level confrontation right to a Utah prelim examination. Assistance of
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: counsel in due process. Defendant also argues that that admitting
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: out-of-court statements without an opportunity to cross-examine the declarants renders
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: his right to counsel ineffective. The court is not persuaded
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: that the right to counsel provides a broader right to
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: cross-examination and out-of-court declarant when the confrontation clause itself does
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: not apply at the prelim hearing. Defendant was represented by
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: counsel who challenged the state's probable cause-showing and cross-examined the
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: witnesses who testified. On the record, the court finds no
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: independent violation of defendant's rights to counsel arising from the
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: consideration of hearsay that otherwise satisfies Rule 1102. Defendant's due
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: process argument likewise does not establish a constitutional violation. The
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: admission of reliable hearsay at this stage does not violate
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: the 14th Amendment's due process clause. Gerstein v. Pugh holds
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: that full adversarial proceedings, including cross-examination of adverse witnesses, is
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: not constitutionally required for a pretrial probable cause determination. A
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: Utah prelim hearing likewise determines whether the state has established
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: probable cause. It does not adjudicate guilt. Because the defendant
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: retains the full trial-level protection applicable to the adjudication of guilt,
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: consideration of reliable hearsay at this prelim stage does not
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: independently violate due process. Separations of Power and Applications to
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: Evidence Finally, the court considers defendants' separations of power argument
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: and concludes it does not establish a constitutional violation. Article 1,
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: Section 12 expressly permits reliable hearsay at a prelim examination
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: when that hearsay is defined by statute or rule. Rule
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: 1102 implements that constitutional authorization. The rule does not displace
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: the magistrate's judicial function. The court remains responsible. for determining
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: whether the evidence satisfies the governing evidentiary rule and whether
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: the state has established probable cause under Rule 7b. The
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: court therefore concludes the application of Rule 1102 in this
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: proceeding does not violate the separation of powers. Rule 1102
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: does not render all hearsay admissible. Agent Davis and Hull,
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: Examiner Baker and Examiner Karner, testified at the prelim hearing
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: and satisfied the witness requirement of Rule 1102E and Rule 7BD2.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: The medical examiner's report falls within Rule 1102B5, and the
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: evidence establishing foundation for authenticity falls within subsection B3. The
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: twig statement may be considered under subsection B8, only to
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: the extent the record establishes that the subsections required. that
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: it establishes that subsections required predicate. Any other hearsay in
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: which the court relies must independently satisfy subsection B9, including
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: its reliability requirement. The court relies only on hearsay satisfying
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: these requirements. an analysis of charges and probable cause determinations.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: Having resolved the defendant's threshold constitutional objections, the court now
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: turns to a count-by-count review of the evidence admitted at
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: the prelim hearing to determine whether the state has met
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: its burden of establishing probable cause. All right, folks, we're
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: going to wrap up right here. And in the next episode,
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: we're going to pick up where we left off. All
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: the information that goes with this episode can be found
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: in the description box.