Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 1 Part 18) (9/14/26)

Transcript

Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing Transcripts (Day 1 Part 18) (9/14/26) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

• 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 he left
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: off with Tyler Robinson day one of his prelim hearing.
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: Picking back up with the prosecution, question, so you were
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: aware that the medical examiner's office did conduct an autopsy? Answer,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: I am, yes. Question, okay. And did you receive a
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: report from the medical examiner's office? Answer, I did, yes. Question, okay.
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: Detailing the autopsy that was performed? Answer, yeah. Prior to
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: receiving the report, myself and Agent Davis visited with the doctor. Question, okay.
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: You visited personally with the doctor that conducted the autopsy? Answer,
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: that's correct. Question, okay. And then subsequent to that, and
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: did you discuss the autopsy with the doctor at that
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: point in time when you were meeting with him personally? Answer, yeah.
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: Agent Davis and I had a fairly in-depth conversation, yes. Question,
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: and where did this conversation take place? Answer, At the
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: medical examiner's office. Question, okay. And do you recall the
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: date and time that that personal visit took place? Answer,
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: I don't recall. Question, okay. Was it within? Gets cut
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: off by the agent. It was soon after. Within a
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: few days of the incident. Question, the autopsy? Answer, yes. Question, okay.
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: And subsequent to that visit, did you receive a report
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: from a doctor that you visited with? Answer, we did, yes. Question, okay.
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: And is that the Dr. Guarwado? That you're struggling to
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: pronounce his name, is that fair to say? Answer, yeah,
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: I apologize, but yes, that's who it is. Question, okay,
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: and the report that was sent to you, do you
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: recall when you received that report? Answer, I don't recall
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: the specific date. Question, okay, have you reviewed the report? Answer, yeah.
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: Question again, you stated earlier that this is not the
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: first murder investigation that you've worked. Answer, correct. Question, okay,
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: I take it this is not the first medical examiner's
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: report that you've received. Answer, correct. Question, okay, do these
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: reports typically look the same? Answer, yeah, they're in standard
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: format that the medical examiner uses. Question, okay, and this
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: report that you received from who you believe was the
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: doctor you spoke to that conducted the medical exam, was
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: there anything peculiar about that particular report that stood out
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: to you? Answer, no, it appeared to be a standard
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: form as used by the medical examiner when they send
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: us reports. Question, okay. On your monitor, exhibit 11, I'm
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: going to have displayed what's been marked states exhibit number 11,
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: judge for identification. Judge graph, right, question, and I believe
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: there's nine pages. So let me know when you see
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: that on your screen. Answer, it's on my screen. Question,
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: all right. What I'd like you to do is just
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: look at this as it scrolls down through the nine
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: pages and wait until we get to the very end.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: And if you need us to pause or stop or
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: slow down, let us know. I want you to be
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: able to look at all nine pages. Did you look
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: at that? Answer, yes, sir. Question, okay. Do you recognize
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: what that is? Answer, yeah. Question, what is that? Answer,
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: that's the medical examiner's report of examination for Mr. Kirk. Question, yeah,
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: and you don't recall exactly when you received it? Answer, no,
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: I don't unfortunately remember the specific date when I received it. Question,
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: do you remember how you received it? Answer, they provided
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: it to us electronically. Question, okay, via email. Answer, sometimes
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: via email, also on disk, compact disk. Question, okay, and
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: does there appear to be anything in that exhibit before
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: you that the report changed at all, or does it
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: accurately depict what you received initially from the doctor? Answer,
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: it accurately depicts it. Question, judge, the state would seek
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: to admit, exhibit 11. Judge Graff, Ms. Nestor. Your Honor,
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: this is an expert report, without the expert being present.
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: being offered by an individual who's not an expert in
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: this field. If they're presenting him as an expert in
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: this field, based on the limited questions about his experience
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: and seeing previous medical exam records, I'd like to voir
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: dire him on his qualifications to opine about it. This
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: is hearsay. It's highly technical. It should be presented only
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: through an expert. It could never come into trial any
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: other way. We submit that it's hearsay, and to the
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: extent they're going to ask this individual about any opinions
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: about it, that would be improper. He's not qualified to
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: do that, and furthermore, we just think that this is
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: clearly falling under our constitutional concerns about the absence of
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: our ability to be effective to cross-examine, to question. We
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: can't even question the expert's experience or CV or anything
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: that we would normally do to determine if this should
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: even be accepted or considered by the court. And so
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: we strenuously object to its admission and for all the
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: reasons to its publication as well. There are some really
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: personal things in there that should never be published that
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: deal with Mr. Kirk's medical condition. History is the condition
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: of his body. It shouldn't be published, Your Honor. Judge Graff,
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: thank you. To the state. Prosecution. Judge, this is clearly
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: reliable hearsay admissible under Rule 1102 of the Utah Rules
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: of Evidence. I would direct you specifically to subsection B5
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: for purposes of, and I'm quoting the rule, for purposes
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: of criminal preliminary examination only. Reliable hearsay includes subsection 5,
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: specifically states, medical and autopsy reports and records. Again, that's
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: supported by Article 1, Section 12 of the Utah Constitution,
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: which states that reliable hearsay can be relied upon at
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: prelim examination in whole or in part. Judge Graff, and
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: to the second part, it's in regards to publication. Prosecution,
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: as far as the publication, Judge, we agree with Ms. Nestor.
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: This is a document that does contain very sensitive information,
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: and information that Mr. Kirk's family would appreciate it not
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: being published, and so although we seek to admit it,
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: we'd ask that it not be published here in the courtroom,
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: or that it be published in any fashion, or way
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: that the public could see it, by virtue of camera.
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: Judge Graff, Ms. Nestor? Kathy Nestor, Your Honor, I just
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: want to point out that even though 1102 has a
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: provision about exams, I mean the court still has the
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: overarching mission... under 1102, to make this reliability finding, right?
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: And it's just completely in a vacuum being offered by
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: someone who's a police officer. So again, we would just
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: argue that you're, you're, you're just not, it's hampering you
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: for making the analysis you need to make to admit it,
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: and we object to it. Judge Graff, all right, anything
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: further from the parties? Answer, no, your honor. Kathy Nestor, no,
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: your honor. Judge Graff, sir, all right. So again, relying
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: upon the analysis on Utah Constitution, Article 1, Section 12,
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: as it relates to reliable hearsay, and then turning to
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: Utah Rules of Evidence, Rule 1102, B-5 specifically notes, medical
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: and autopsy reports and records. The court is going to
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: overrule the objection and admit State Exhibit 1, or I
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: believe it's 11. Prosecution, 11, yes sir. Judge Graff, citing
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: to Utah Constitution, Article 1, Section 28, Dignity Portion, Respect
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: and Dignity, It will not be published either in the
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: courtroom or viewable on media by the camera for the
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: reasons previously stated as it relates to the video, and
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: so the court will receive it and it's admitted into evidence,
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: and that concludes that portion. Is this a good point
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: to stop and take our 15-minute afternoon break? Prosecution, I
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: think it'd be great, Judge. I just got one last
• 7:36
  Speaker 1: question if I could. Judge Graff, always, you may. Prosecution,
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: with respect to the medical examiner's report, Agent Hull, in
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: that report, does the doctor relate cause and manner of
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: the death? Answer, yes he does. Question, okay. And in
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: that report, what is the stated cause of death? Answer,
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: it was stated as a murder. Question, and manner of death? Answer,
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: it was a gunshot wound to the neck. Question, okay.
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: Give me one second. Kathy Nestor jumps in. Your Honor,
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: I object. It's not stated as murder. I believe it's
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: stated as homicide, which is an important distinction. Prosecution. Judge,
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: I'll go back and correct that. Judge Graff, alright, so
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: I'm going to sustain. Well, first of all, let me
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: look at the report. I need to see the section.
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: I need to be able to draw my own conclusion. So, okay,
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: I see, Ms. Nestor. Are you referring to page 1
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: of this report? Kathy Nestor, I'm sorry, Your Honor. Could
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: you repeat that? I apologize. Judge Graff, as it relates
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: to your objection for the misstatements, are you looking at
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: page 1 of the report? Nestor, yes. Judge Graff, alright.
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: Kathy Nestor and Your Honor... I also need to make
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: an objection on the best evidence rule, too. Thank you.
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: Judge Graff, all right. So I'm going to sustain the
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: objection as it relates to the manner of death. It
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: does not say murder, but in regards to the best
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: evidence rule, again, under 1102 and the Utah Constitution, that
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: it permits reliable hearsay. State Exhibit 11 is admitted. Prosecution?
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: Prosecution back asking questions. Agent Hull, I'm going to ask
• 9:08
  Speaker 1: you to look at the first page of Exhibit 11.
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: You see that? Agent Hull, yes. Question, okay. So let
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: me ask you again. Can you look at it? And
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: would you mind relating what the doctors report as a
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: matter of death? Answer, yeah. I misspoke. It does say homicide. Question,
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: and then the immediate cause of death? Answer, a gunshot
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: wound to the neck. Prosecution, nothing further, Judge. Well, at
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: this moment, I think it'd be a great idea that
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: we take a 15-minute break. All right, so they get back.
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: They get seated, and the judge calls the courtroom back
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: to order, and prosecution, once again, is asking questions. Question,
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: thank you, Judge. So, Agent Hull, in addition to what
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: you've already described, what, if anything else, did you do
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: on the 10th of September, 2025? Answer, our primary focus
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: was to identify the individual who'd been seen. on the
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: roof with the prelim footage. And so there was a
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: big effort to review as much of the video that
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: we had available to us from both the public, but
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: predominantly from Utah Valley University in an effort to follow
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: that individual both forward and backwards from the time of
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: the shooting. Question, okay, so if I understand you correctly, priority,
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: was it to identify the shooter? Answer, yes. Question, and
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: to that end, you started reviewing even more UVU video
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: than you've already described? Answer, correct, yes. Question, okay, what
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: if anything else? Either did you, do, or happen initially
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: that helped you identify who that shooter was? Answer, so
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: there were hundreds of hours of video that was reviewed.
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: But the predominant focus, again, was on tracking the individual
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: from the roof either after the shooting had occurred or
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: trying to trace the steps of the individual prior to
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: the shooting. And we were able to do that through
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: a combined effort of individuals, and the focus was having
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: people reviewing video identify people who could fit the original
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: description of the individual that jumped off the roof. Question, okay,
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: so at this point, approximately, how many hours of UVU
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: video do you think you personally had seen or watched? Answer, myself,
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: maybe 10 or 20 hours of video, being called in
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: to look at different camera angles and different views of individuals.
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: But there was a large team of people reviewing video. Question, okay,
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: reviewing video? Answer, yeah, from UVU. Question, were some of
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: them SBI agents? Answer, yes, correct. Question and combined, how
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: much video do you think you watched that first day
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: on the 10th? Answer, it would be in the tens
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: or hundreds of hours of video that was reviewed. Question, okay,
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: did anything else come along that helped you identify who
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: the shooter might be? Answer, yeah, eventually. On the evening
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: of the 11th, we received word from Washington County that
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: an individual in that area had reached out to law
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: enforcement and was wanting to turn themselves in for the
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: incident at UVU. Question, okay, and at that point in time,
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: did you receive a name from Washington County? Answer, yes,
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: we did. Question, and what was that name? Answer, Tyler Robinson. Question, what,
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: if anything, did you do with that information, the name
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: Tyler Robinson? Answer, that information was given to our SIAC,
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: or State Information and Analysis Group, and they put together
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: what would be called a workup. So they would look
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: at his driver license records, DMV records to determine addresses,
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: obtain pictures of individuals, and then any associated vehicle or
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: things like that. Question, so that was done with Mr. Robinson? Answer,
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: it was, yes. Question, driver license record was pulled? Answer, yes. Question,
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: did that include, if you remember, or do you know,
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: did that include a photograph of Mr. Robinson? Answer, it
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: did include a photograph of Mr. Robinson. Question, how about
• 12:55
  Speaker 1: an address and date of birth? Answer, there was an
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: address and a date of birth, and I believe a
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: DMV record with an associated vehicle. Question, all right, so
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: the DMV record did include a vehicle that was associated
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: with Mr. Robinson. Answer, correct. Question, do you remember what
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: the make and model of the vehicle was that was
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: tied to Mr. Robinson? Answer, the Dodge Challenger. Question, anything
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: else beyond that that you remember? Answer, it was silver
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: in color, and I believe there were two registered owners
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: of the vehicle. Question, okay, and who were the registered owners? Answer, Mr.
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: Robinson and his mother. Question, do you recall whether or
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: not the date of birth was included in that driver's
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: license information that you got initially? Answer, yeah, I believe
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: the actual driver's license record was shared. So it would
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: have included a date of birth. All right, folks, we're
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: going to wrap up right here. And in the next
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: episode dealing with the topic, we're going to pick up
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: where we left off. All the information that goes with
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: this episode can be found in the description box.