The man accused of killing Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University last September will stand trial for his murder and could face the death penalty. Ruling from the bench in a Provo courtroom, Judge Tony Graf found there was enough evidence to try Tyler Robinson. His decision concludes a months-long process of evidence gathering, hearings and back-and-forth arguments.
“This evidence is sufficient at this stage to support a reasonable belief that the defendant is the individual who shot and killed Charlie Kirk,” Judge Graf said.
Graf determined that the state met the probable cause requirement for all seven counts against Robinson — including the aggravated murder charge and the victim targeting.
After his ruling, the judge asked the defense if the accused would like to enter a plea at that time. On his behalf, attorneys for the 23-year-old man from St. George entered a plea of not guilty.
Pushback over the death penalty
The prosecution and defense spent most of their time in the closing hearing arguing over whether Robinson should be tried on an aggravated murder charge, which could carry the death penalty. For that charge to stick, prosecutors needed to show that Robinson knowingly endangered others in the crowd when he allegedly shot Kirk from a nearby rooftop.
Prosecutor Ryan McBride called it “common sense” that firing a rifle near a crowd puts people in danger.
“You can't shoot a rifle into a crowd of 3,000 people without knowing that you create a great risk of death to all those around your target,” he said. “Just can't do it.”
McBride showed venue photos that he said proved that Robinson clearly saw how many people were there before the shot rang out.
“As he looked through that scope, his scope likely passed over the faces and heads and bodies of multiple people before it rested on Charlie Kirk,” McBride said. “The defendant chose to fire. He knew, as anybody would know, that that creates a great risk of death, not only to Charlie Kirk but the people around Charlie Kirk.”
Defense attorney Staci Visser pointed out that there was only one shot taken, that Kirk was the only person hit and that the alleged weapon was not “a device that is more likely to cause injury to multiple people.”
“There was a case involving a sawed-off shotgun that was found to be more likely to cause injury to people in surrounding areas,” she said. “Bombs. Those are the types of weapons that would cause injury to more people than the actual victim.”
Additionally, prosecutors sought a victim targeting enhancement because, they said, Robinson targeted Kirk over his political views. McBride suggested that because of Robinson’s romantic relationship with his roommate, his views were “repugnant to the positions that Charlie Kirk famously took.”
“The defendant was living in a homosexual relationship with a man who was considering transitioning his gender,” McBride said. “It's not difficult to understand the motive here.”
The defense didn’t buy that argument. The state’s only evidence highlighting any political motivation was Robinson’s relationship with his roommate, Attorney Richard Novak pointed out, and a text allegedly sent by Robinson about Kirk that said he “had enough of his hatred. Some hate can't be negotiated out.”
“There is no evidence of Mr. Robinson having heard or seen anything specific from Mr. Kirk or having expressed anything about Mr. Kirk until the statement,” Novak said.
“That's an inference without evidence, and it's a very inflammatory inference.”
In the end, Judge Graf determined the state met the preliminary burden of proof requirement for both the aggravated murder charge and the victim targeting enhancement.
While Graf determined that the state met its probable cause standard, he also said the defense’s argument was “substantial,” and one which would be fully sussed out when the prosecution is tasked with proving guilt at trial.
“The question at this stage, however, is not whether the state proved the aggravator beyond a reasonable doubt, or whether the defendant's competing interpretation is ultimately more persuasive,” Graf said. “It is whether believable evidence and reasonable inferences support probable cause as to each element. Under that limited standard, the state has met its burden.”
Outside the courtroom
Like the weeklong July hearing, seating was limited in the Provo courtroom due to security. Kirk’s parents, Robert and Katheryn Kirk, arrived with an escort and kept their eyes low with somber expressions as they entered the building. With only a dozen seats for the public, people lined up early in hopes of getting one. Idaho native Oscar Melendez camped out overnight to secure a spot.
“I think for me, there will be a sense of pride saying like I was there,” he said. “I witnessed it, I saw, I heard what was said.”
Melendez wanted to hear for himself what happened in court given the online rhetoric, conspiracy theories and politics of Kirk’s death. For others, like Mitchell Manley, a former Turning Point USA videographer, it was a more personal connection to the shooting.
“I cared a lot about Charlie,” Manley said. “I was there in the arena alongside him, touring with him as a videographer, many of the campus debates you've seen, I was the one recording, you know, facing Charlie. So this means a lot to me, and I don't want to kind of sit on the sidelines.”
When it came time to hear Judge Tony Graf’s ruling, members from the Utah Valley University Turning Point USA chapter huddled around a phone with the livestream playing. When Graf announced he would bind over Robinson for trial on all the counts, the students took a moment to grasp the reality before smiling with a sigh of relief.
It’s been a slow and methodical process
Before this closing hearing, prosecutors spent a week in July making their case. They put investigators and experts on the stand. The Utah County Attorney’s Office presented surveillance video from the day Kirk was killed, allegedly showing the accused’s arrival, movements and eventual escape from campus. They said they have DNA and ballistic evidence that link Robinson to the crime. They reviewed the moments after Robinson turned himself in to police in southern Utah and showed messages Robinson sent, as well as a video interview with his roommate and romantic partner that the prosecution claims amount to a confession.
The court ordered post-hearing briefs so the prosecution and defense could present their arguments given the case’s legal complexities. In the briefs, prosecutors called Graf’s future ruling “likely as straightforward a bindover decision as this Court will ever see.”
In making their argument that Robinson targeted Kirk for his political views, they cited engravings on recovered rifle casings with phrases like “Hey Facist! CATCH!” that showed an “overt political reference."
The defense’s brief disputed prosecutors’ allegation of politically motivated targeting, saying the text message from Robinson wasn’t adequate proof. And as they did in the closing hearing, they argued that Robinson should not face the death penalty because the crowd at Utah Valley University wasn’t injured or endangered. They said the evidence shows that the bullet that killed Kirk “traveled above, not through” the crowd. Prosecutors have publicly stated they will seek the death penalty if Robinson is convicted, and the defense has made multiple attempts to get capital punishment taken off the table.
In a statement posted on Erika Kirk’s social media, the Kirk family said the decision to move to trial “marks an important step in our family’s pursuit of justice.”
“Every step in this process carries the weight of all that Charlie’s murder has taken from his family, especially his children who will grow up without their father,” the statement continued. “We are grateful to all who have continued to pray for us, support us, and stand with us through a year of unimaginable grief.”
