A Utah judge ordered nearly half of a recorded video statement from Tyler Robinson’s former lover cut from public view on Wednesday, delaying the most anticipated evidence yet in the preliminary hearing for the man accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk last September. The ruling came after defense attorneys raised constitutional objections to televising what prosecutors and the public would characterize as a confession, a characterization the defense disputes.
Judge Tony Graf Jr. of 4th District Court in Provo directed that approximately 16 minutes be redacted from the roughly 37-minute recorded statement of Lance Twiggs, who has been described as Robinson’s romantic partner at the time of the shooting. Prosecutors chose to postpone the video rather than scramble to comply mid-session, pushing the screening to Thursday morning.
The dispute over the Twiggs video dominated Day 3 of a weeklong hearing that will determine whether Robinson, who has not yet entered a plea, faces trial on charges that could carry the death penalty. Fox News reported that the full video is expected to show Twiggs discussing texts, chat logs, and a note that the defense said prosecutors and the public would treat as a confession from Robinson.
The Kirk family’s attorney, Jeff Neiman, pushed back forcefully against the redactions. Neiman approached the podium, apparently urged to do so by Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, who was watching from the gallery, and asked the court to play the unredacted video for “all the world to see.”
“The Kirk family believes strongly that if the evidence is being admitted in this preliminary hearing, it should be made public for the world to see no redactions.”
Neiman argued that showing only a redacted version would breed “doubt and distrust in the judicial system.” He also reminded the court it had other tools to protect Robinson’s right to a fair trial short of hiding evidence from the public.
“This court has tools at its disposal to make sure the defendant receives a fair trial. You’ll use them if you find that you need to.”
Judge Graf sided with the defense on the redaction question but made clear the underlying evidence would still factor into his decision. He stated he will consider the alleged texts between Robinson and Twiggs when making his probable cause determination, even though those portions will not air publicly. The hearing is confirmed to wrap up by 5 p.m. Friday.
The content prosecutors want the public to see is damaging enough on its own. They claim Robinson’s alleged texts to Twiggs reference being “stuck in Orem”, the city where the shooting took place, and that Robinson appears to take responsibility for being “the one who did it.” The defense has not characterized these communications as a confession, setting up what could become a central evidentiary fight if the case proceeds to trial.
Separate reporting has filled in more of what prosecutors have in their files. Newsmax reported that prosecutors allege Robinson left a confession note for his roommate reading: “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.” Robinson reportedly texted his roommate that he targeted Kirk because he “had enough of his hatred.” A former Utah Valley University officer, Christopher Bagley, testified he found what appeared to be a “sniper pad” on a nearby gravel rooftop with a clear sightline to Kirk’s location at the campus event on September 10.
Former prosecutor and state judge Mark Kouris told Newsmax the probable cause standard for a preliminary hearing is “extremely low” and that “the chances of them not getting through it are, quite frankly, almost nothing.”
The evidence introduced earlier in the hearing paints a picture of premeditation that goes beyond the texts. The New York Post reported that prosecutors presented bullet casings engraved with obscene and politically charged messages, including references to anti-fascist messaging, video games, taunting phrases, and a transgender and furry subculture meme. Robinson allegedly texted Twiggs musing about Fox News having to explain the engraving after the killing.
Twiggs, who was granted limited immunity in exchange for cooperation, is central to the prosecution’s case. The relationship between Twiggs and Robinson has been described inconsistently, the Fox News headline referred to Twiggs as Robinson’s “former roommate,” while the body of the same report called him Robinson’s “former lover” and “his lover at the time of the shooting.” Both descriptions may be accurate simultaneously, but the distinction matters as the case moves forward and Twiggs’ credibility comes under scrutiny.
The unsealed ATF ballistics report in the Kirk case has already added forensic detail to the prosecution’s narrative. The volume of physical and digital evidence prosecutors are presenting suggests they are building a case far beyond the minimum needed for probable cause.
The redaction battle on Wednesday was not the first time sensitive evidence nearly escaped the judge’s control. The Washington Examiner reported that an alleged confession letter was briefly displayed on the court’s livestream in violation of a prior order from Judge Graf barring its public display before jury selection. The letter, addressed to Twiggs, reportedly stated: “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk, and I took it.” Twiggs testified that Robinson later admitted the contents of the note were true, expressed regret, and said he intended to surrender to authorities.
Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told the Examiner the accidental disclosure is unlikely to have significant legal consequences. “None of this is being shown to a jury. We don’t even have a jury yet,” he said.
Inside the Provo courtroom, the emotional weight of the proceedings was visible. Robinson appeared uneasy at times, especially during mentions of Twiggs. He took deep breaths, fidgeted, and adjusted his suit jacket. On the other side of the gallery, Erika Kirk and Kathy Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s mother, shared several emotional embraces throughout the day. Erika Kirk wiped tears during the hearing and shared a tearful hug with her mother-in-law as the day ended.
The contrast between the defendant’s visible discomfort and the Kirk family’s grief framed a hearing that is less about whether Robinson will face trial, legal experts say that outcome is all but certain, and more about what the public will be allowed to see before that trial begins.
Defense attorney Richard Novak’s constitutional objection to televising the Twiggs video before trial raises a legitimate legal question. Pretrial publicity in a death-penalty-eligible case can complicate jury selection and potentially taint the pool. Courts routinely weigh a defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights against the public’s interest in open proceedings.
But the Kirk family’s argument carries its own force. When a judge redacts evidence in a case of enormous public interest, the fatal shooting of a prominent conservative figure at a university event, the gap between what the court sees and what the public sees can itself erode confidence. Neiman’s warning about “doubt and distrust” is not hypothetical. High-profile cases that unfold behind partial curtains invite speculation that often proves harder to manage than the evidence itself.
Judge Graf’s approach, redacting the public video while still considering the underlying texts in his probable cause ruling, attempts to split the difference. Whether that compromise holds through a trial that could carry the ultimate penalty remains to be seen. The recent pattern of judges making notable rulings in high-profile cases involving political figures suggests courts are navigating increasingly charged terrain where every procedural decision draws public scrutiny.
Several questions hang over the remainder of the hearing. What specific constitutional argument did Novak present to justify the redactions? What exactly will remain in the roughly 21 minutes of video the public will see Thursday morning? And what is Twiggs’ full legal status, cooperating witness with limited immunity, or something more?
The hearing’s first two days covered law enforcement video, witness testimony, and DNA evidence, but the Twiggs video and the alleged texts represent the prosecution’s most direct link between Robinson and the killing. How much of that link the public gets to evaluate in real time is now in Judge Graf’s hands.
Judicial conduct in Utah’s courts has drawn scrutiny on other fronts recently, and the Robinson hearing adds another case where the public is watching not just the defendant but the bench itself. Meanwhile, procedural missteps in other criminal cases have shown how a single courtroom error can reshape an entire prosecution.
Robinson has not entered a plea. He faces the possibility of the death penalty. The hearing wraps Friday. And the family of the man he is accused of killing wants every piece of evidence laid bare, not for vengeance, but because they believe sunlight is the best guarantee that justice is done right.
When the government asks the public to trust the process, the least it can do is let the public watch.
By signing up, you agree to receive newsletters and promotional content from American Frontline News and selected publications in the American Digest Media Network, operated with Patriot Mom Digest LLC, and you accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.
By signing up, you agree to receive newsletters and promotional content from American Frontline News and selected publications in the American Digest Media Network, operated with Patriot Mom Digest LLC, and you accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.