Estimated read time: 5-6 minutes
- Tyler Robinson's defense seeks to ban electronic media coverage from his trial.
- Judge Tony Graf denied sealing the motion but allowed the defense to file a redacted version.
- Robinson claims media coverage threatens his right to a fair trial.
PROVO — Tyler Robinson says because of the heavy media coverage of his capital murder case — which includes press conferences and statements made from Utah and national political leaders — cameras and microphones should not be allowed in his court hearings in order to ensure he gets a fair trial.
In January, Robinson filed a motion requesting that "television cameras and microphones, still photographers, radio microphones and other similar implements of the electronic or broadcast media" be kept out of the courtroom during his legal proceedings. The motion was filed under seal because Robinson didn't want the news stories and press conferences his team cited as reasons for banning cameras to be republicized by the media.
In March, 4th District Judge Tony Graf ruled that while he is sensitive to the pretrial publicity that the case has generated, a lot of the so-called sensitive information listed in the defense motion — such as media interviews and photographs — is already public. Thus, Graf denied Robinson's request to keep that motion sealed and gave the defense until March 30 to file a substitute redacted motion in which information that is determined to be "private" can remain redacted.
That lengthy motion, which is mostly unredacted, was filed this week. In it, Robinson points to the extensive media coverage the killing of Charlie Kirk received even before Robinson's arrest, and comments made by people such as Gov. Spencer Cox and President Donald Trump.
"Even before a suspect was arrested for the killing of Mr. Kirk on Sept. 10, 2025, influential politicians were appearing on national television broadcasts to proclaim they knew for a fact what the motivation for the killing was and what awaited the killer once he was apprehended. For instance, shortly after the killing, Utah Gov. Cox held a nationally televised press conference in which he announced that although the 'investigation is ongoing,' 'I want to be very clear that this is a political assassination,'" the motion states.
The governor also stated, "I just want to remind people that we still have the death penalty here in the state of Utah," and the next day used the words "assassin" and an "evil human being" to describe the gunman who killed Kirk.
"The president of the United States, the vice president, the attorney general, the governor of the state of Utah, the county attorney, law enforcement officials, and the electronic media have all condemned Mr. Robinson before his trial has even begun," the motion argues. "The president has told a nationwide audience that 'with a high degree of certainty, we have him,' that 'I hope he is going to be found guilty,' that 'I hope he gets the death penalty,' that 'The depraved assassin who planned and executed Charlie's killing has been arrested and charged with capital murder,' and that 'God willing, he will receive the full and ultimate punishment for his horrific crime.'
"From the outset of this tragic case and continuing up to the present, many electronic media outlets, politicians, and others have used the case to advance outlandish conspiracy theories and political agendas," the defense argues in the motion. "The prejudicial electronic pretrial publicity in this case, with its obsession on courtroom attire and restraints, mugshots, demeanor, and other irrelevant and prejudicial factors, has imperiled not only Mr. Robinson's constitutional right to an impartial guilt and penalty phase jury, but also his Eighth Amendment (right) … to be free from cruel and unusual punishment."
Robinson also argues that the "the affidavit of probable cause, the statement of probable cause, and the mugshots should never have been released to the media." Such affidavits and charging documents are public records. Additionally, the defense points to a press conference held by Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray during which he explained the charges against Robinson and to a live media interview with Utah County Sheriff Mike Smith.
"The reactions of the media to these early press conferences were predictable and extremely damaging to Mr. Robinson's right to a fair trial," according to the motion.
Because this is a death penalty case, "the court must be especially vigilant to guard against the pernicious effects of prejudicial pretrial publicity, and do everything it can to ensure that every procedural safeguard is observed," the defense argues.
First Amendment attorneys have argued that there has never been a case in Utah in which a defendant was found to have received an unfair trial because of pretrial publicity, even though there have been many high-profile criminal cases in Utah before Robinson's.
Robinson will be back in court on April 17 to argue the issue of electronic media coverage in the courtroom. One of the witnesses the defense is expected to call to testify is Dr. Christine L. Ruva, a professor and chair of psychology at the University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee. According to her online bio, "Her research focuses on applying principles of memory, emotion, social perception, and group decision-making to the area of jury decision-making."
"Dr. Ruva will testify as to the research and opinions described in her declaration, and to her opinion that the nature and extent of publicity in this case is reasonably likely to cause conscious or unconscious bias," Robinson said in his notice to the court that Ruva will be called to the witness stand.
