Latest / Beyond The Horizon / Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing (Day 6 Part 1) (10/26/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing (Day 6 Part 1) (10/26/26) · Beyond The Horizon

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the program. In
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: this episode, we're going to dive into day number six,
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: the final closing arguments of the Tyler Robinson prelim hearing.
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: And instead of going through all the rigmarole of starting
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: out the day, we're just going to jump right in
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: to the testimony. Judge Graff, all right, turning now to counsel.
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: Before we begin today with live broadcast, we were in
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: a sealed closure hearing dealing with a request to classify
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: one of the defense's motions. and we conducted that hearing,
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: and present were counsel, and Mr. Robinson, and counsel for Ms. Kirk,
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: as well as the media. We're now going to turn
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: to counsel. I believe there was a request prior to
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: the court making its ruling as it relates to the
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: motion to classify an electronic media coverage as it relates
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: to today's hearing. Ms. Nestor, defense, thank you, Your Honor,
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: Your Honor, as we discussed, based on the court's decision
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: to unredact our opposition to the electronic media, we're asking
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: to withdraw from the court's consideration the actual website identifier
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: and the court's name of the website that we refer
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: to that is redacted. We would like to just remove
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: that from the court's consideration and make the argument generally
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: without providing you a specific website to back up our argument.
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: Just due to our concern that it will create a
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: reasonable likelihood we would not receive a fair proceeding. So
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: we would ask that the court allow us to supplement
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: our motion. We will refile it without the actual website
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: or the name of the web provider. The site provider,
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: I guess I should say, but the argument still stands,
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: without those two pieces of information for the court to consider.
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: Judge Graff, Ms. Nestor. Judge Graff, to the other parties,
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: do you wish to be heard? Jeff Hunt, with the
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: news media. We object to the motion. I really don't
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: see any difference between what we just heard and what
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: the original motion was to classify as non-public. The redacted
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: material is the same argument. We've already had over 45
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: minutes of argument on that one. Once the defense files
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: a motion and they determine what evidence they want to
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: put in front of your honor to decide that motion,
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: which the defense counsel did, once you argue that evidence
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: and the court makes a ruling on it, you're not
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: able to withdraw that. You've waived the ability to withdraw
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: the motion and the material from the court record. You
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: may appeal it. You may file a motion for reconsideration,
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: but you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: They submitted it. They made a calculated decision about what
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: evidence they wanted to put in front of the court.
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: And you don't get to say to the court after
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: the decision on that, never mind. And that's essentially what
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: the argument is. And there's no good reason for that.
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: Because if that were allowed, you can imagine what would
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: happen every time a party lost an access issue or
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: other motion before the court. They would simply try to
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: recreate the record by withdrawing the motion. And that's not
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: the way litigation process works. They made the decision to
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: proceed the way they did. and put their chips in,
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: and they have to keep their chips in once that
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: decision is made. Judge Graff, Ms. Nestor, I fell to inquire,
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: is there any authority that you would like to cite
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: that would allow this under a specific scenario? Defense, Your Honor,
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: first of all, Mr. Hunt, is incorrect. You have not
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: ruled yet on the EMC opposition. That's what we're here
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: to do right now in open court. The only thing
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: that you ruled on in the closed proceeding was whether
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: you would agree... to remove a section from public consumption.
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: That is all that's been ruled on. So Ms. Hunt's
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: entire argument is incorrect. You haven't ruled on it. To
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: have the media suggest to us that we can or
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: cannot argue before you've decided is outrageous. We will decide
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: what we submit to the court. We've decided that it's
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: not worth, for all the reasons we discussed in the
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: close proceeding, we are going to withdraw that support for
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: our motion. That's completely within our ability. The court has
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: utter authority to decide... when to allow parties to amend
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: pleadings at any time. There's no restriction on that. I
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: don't know what he's talking about. So as far as
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: that goes, we're just asking. We don't want the court
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: to consider it. We are removing it as support for
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: our argument. That's what we're here to argue right now
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: is the EMC opposition. And we are just not using
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: that as one of the reasons. And that's absolutely within
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: the court's authority. And that's what we're asking for all
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: the reasons. and we can supplement and file a written
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: amended version after court today. That's not a problem. Judge Graff,
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: thank you, Ms. Nestor. Judge Graff, all right. The court's
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: going to deny the request to withdraw for consideration. What
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: was argued in sealed closure, hearing in the interest of
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: transparency and taking in consideration the constitutional rights of both Ms. Robinson, Mr. Robinson,
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: and Ms. Kirk. As such, the court's going to issue
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: its ruling on the defendant's motion to classify as is
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: presently before the court and electronic media coverage. The court
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: recognizes that it's allowing the cameras in the courtroom prior
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: to making the ruling, and it's done in the interest
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: of transparency. Given the court knows its ruling, the court
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: wants the ruling to be transparent so that the parties,
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: the attorneys, and anyone watching can understand the reasoning behind
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: the order today. All right, the court will begin. Before
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: the court are three related pretrial matters in the capital
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: prosecution of defendant Tyler James Robinson. Defendants motion to classify.
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: Defendants unredacted opposition to the EMC order for September 1st, 2026.
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: KUTV's August 27th, 2026 request for electronic media coverage, seeking
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: permission to conduct live streaming and still photography. And the
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: Salt Lake Tribune's August 14th, 2026 EMC request, seeking permission
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: to conduct newspaper still photography during the upcoming prelim hearing
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: oral arguments. On August 22, 2026, defendant filed timely opposition
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: to both EMC requests, raising substantial constitutional and statutory concerns
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: regarding pretrial bias, courtroom physical capacity, and witness privacy. On
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: August 27, a broad coalition of news organizations, collectively referred
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: to as the news media, filed a timely consolidated opposition
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: to defendant's motion to classify and a consolidated response to
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: defendant's EMC oppositions. asserting a presumptive constitutional and administrative right
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: of public access to both courtroom proceedings and record filings.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: The state of Utah has not filed any motions or
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: pleadings addressing these issues as of court today. Under Rule 4.202.204,
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: the Utah Rules of Judicial Administration court records are presumptively open,
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: but a party may move to reclassify records because defendant's
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: motion to restrict access was contested Rule 4-202.04 Sub 4
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: requires a closure hearing. The court conducted that hearing this
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: morning at approximately 10 a.m., wherein counsel for the defense, prosecution,
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: news media, as well as the attorney for victim representative
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: Erica Kirk were present and given an opportunity to be
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: heard on the record. The court limited access to the
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: closure hearing, only to the extent necessary to avoid disclosing
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: the information whose classifications remained unresolved. Having considered the party's submissions,
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: the arguments presented at the closing hearing, the relevant portion
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: of the existing evidentiary record, and the governing authorities, the
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: court denies defendant's motion to classify and grants EMC's request
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: in part, subject to the limitations set below. The defendant
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: is charged with aggravated murder, a capital offense, for which
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: the state of Utah is seeking the death penalty due
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: to the nature of the charges and the prominent public
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: profile of the individuals involved. This case has received extensive
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: and continuous publicity. On May 8, 2026, the court entered
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: an order establishing specific procedure for resolving challenges to electronic
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: media requests, including a four-page limit for objections, a prohibition
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: on oral argument, and a timeline for filing. On June 30, 2026,
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: the court issued a comprehensive ruling, an order on the
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: defendant's objections to electronic media requests, overruling defendant's blanket objections,
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: to cameras and microphones for the prelim hearing held on
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: July 6th through July 10th of this year. The prelim
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: hearing was open to the public and was subject to
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: electronic media coverage under the terms of the court-standing decorum order.
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: In support of this current opposition and his motion to
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: classify defendant incorporates the extensive evidentiary record developed at the
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: April 17th, 2026 hearing on his prior motion to exclude.
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: During that hearing, defendant presented expert testimony from Dr. Brian Edelman,
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: a trial consultant, and Dr. Christina Ruva, a cognitive psychologist
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: to demonstrate the prejudicial impact of pretrial publicity. Dr. Edelman
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: conducted a survey of 200 residents in Utah County and
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: prepared a report concluding that 99% of the community recognized
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: the case, and 64% had already formed an opinion that
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: the defendant was guilty. Dr. Edelman testified only about 25%
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: of the viewers watch court live streams directly, while the
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: majority consume a sensationalized social media commentary or new snippets,
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: which typically reinforce the prosecution's narrative and spread misinformation. Dr.
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: Ruva testified regarding source, primacy, and cognitive bias, explaining that
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: exposure to negative pretrial publicity causes potential jurors to unconsciously
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: distort trial evidence to align with pre-existing bias. She concluded
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: that video and audio coverage On August 22nd, 2026, defendant
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: filed the timely opposition to both EMC requests. In his opposition,
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: defendant raised substantial constitutional concerns regarding pretrial publicity. In support
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: of his claims, defendant pointed to Polymarket, a popular online
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: prediction and betting website, which hosted an active betting pool
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: titled Tyler Robinson Convicted of Homicide. As of August 22nd, 2026,
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: at the time of the filing, Over $ 300, 000 in shares
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: had been traded on the question of whether Defendant will
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: be convicted of capital homicide. Defendant represented that the betting
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: odds and market volume fluctuated significantly during the evidentiary portion
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: of the preliminary hearing in July of this year. Defendant
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: argues that the pervasiveness of online betting represents a morally
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: dubious enterprise that commodifies capital litigation and that continuing to
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: broadcast legal arguments and would exasperate the commercial gambling. All right, folks,
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: we're going to wrap up right here. And in the
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: next episode, we're going to pick up where we left off.
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: All the information that goes with this episode can be
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: found in the description box.