Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing: Day 3 | 7.8.2026
Legal Arguments on Evidence Admissibility
Prosecution counsel Ryan McBride argues that under Rule 104A, the court can consider evidence for admissibility even if not fully admissible at trial, and that preliminary hearings are open to the public. Defense counsel Michael Bert counters by referencing the Archeletta ruling concerning public access to exhibits and client's right to a fair trial, suggesting potential taint to the jury pool.
Agent Brian Davis's Extensive Experience
Agent Brian Davis of the Utah State Bureau of Investigation is presented, detailing his 27 years in law enforcement, including 18 with SBI, and extensive experience in homicide investigations (60+ cases), cold cases, and various task forces (ATF, FBI, US Marshals). His certifications and training in forensic interviewing and crime scene investigation are highlighted.
Robinson's Surrender and Initial Processing
Tyler Robinson surrendered to authorities on September 11, 2025, after being informed of his involvement in the UVU campus shooting. He arrived at the Washington County Sheriff's Office around midnight, accompanied by his parents and a family friend. Law enforcement, including SBI and FBI agents, coordinated the process, and Robinson was formally arrested around 4:00 AM on September 12th before being transported to the Utah County Jail.
Mike Mitchell's Statements
Family friend Mike Mitchell played a role in facilitating Robinson's surrender. He was interviewed on September 12th and later provided a handwritten 11:02 statement on March 31st of the following year, after being admonished about the consequences of false statements. This second statement was collected by Ryan McBride and others from the Utah County Attorney's Office, along with SBI Agent Chris Terry.
The Bullet Found on the Computer Science Building Roof
A live .223 caliber bullet was discovered on the roof of the computer science building, located southeast of the Losi building. Agent Ben Schneider documented and collected the bullet. According to Schneider's report, there was no direct line of sight from this roof to the tent where Mr. Kirk was stationed.
Lance Twigs' Interviews and Statement
Lance Twigs, Robinson's roommate, was interviewed twice: first on September 12th at the St. George Police Department by FBI agents, where his phone was voluntarily provided, and again on April 20th at the Utah County Attorney's Office. The second interview, which included Twigs' attorney, was conducted under use immunity and involved prosecutors from the US Attorney's Office and the Utah County Attorney's Office.
Prosecution: Use Immunity for Lance Twiggs
The prosecution confirms that Lance Twiggs was granted use immunity by both the Utah County Attorney's Office and the United States Attorney's Office, prohibiting him from being prosecuted based on his interviews. His interviews were recorded and accurately depict the conversations.
Defense: Procedural Objections to Recorded Statement
The defense argues that the prosecution's introduction of the recorded 1102 statement is procedurally flawed due to surprise and untimely objections. They claim they received the transcript with proposed redactions only recently, disrupting the hearing, and that the state had ample opportunity to address these issues earlier.
Prosecution: Admissibility and Judicial Discretion
The prosecution contends that the defense's procedural objections are untimely, as they had previously briefed the 1102 issue without raising redaction concerns. They argue that judges are capable of disregarding inadmissible portions of evidence, making extensive redactions disproportionate and unnecessary, especially in a preliminary hearing.
Defense: Best Evidence, Relevance, and Privacy Concerns
The defense argues that portions of the recorded statement violate the best evidence rule, constitute hearsay by counsel testifying about other exhibits, are irrelevant, and infringe upon Mr. Twigs's privacy rights, especially if broadcast, thus impacting Mr. Robinson's right to a fair trial.
Defense: Transcript as a Tool for Admissibility
The defense clarifies that the transcript is merely a tool to identify inadmissible portions of the video, not a request to change the exhibit's format. They suggest the video can be edited into admissible segments within the courthouse, posing no significant delay to the hearing.
Judge: Role in Case Management and Evidence Rulings
The judge clarifies their role is not to dictate case strategy but to rule on admissibility based on rules and rights. They emphasize that while they won't interfere with counsel's decisions, they will weigh in if proceedings violate legal standards, and they are prepared to address specific objections to State's Exhibit 16.
Prosecution: Sidebar Procedures and Public Access
The prosecution argues that sidebar discussions, including those concerning evidence admissibility, are not for public consumption in real-time or subsequently. They advocate for such discussions to be conducted privately to protect party rights and prevent undue influence on potential witnesses or jurors.
Prosecution's Stance on Evidence Presentation
The prosecution argues that presenting evidence, such as Mr. Twigs's recorded statement, through audio and video recordings, as allowed by law, is a meaningful way to convey tone and context, which is preferable to a simple written statement. They believe this method enhances the presentation of their evidence.
Defense's Constitutional Concerns on Publication
The defense argues that electronically publishing what the state calls a confession raises significant constitutional issues under the 14th Amendment, citing Supreme Court precedent that prohibits televising confessions before trial to protect a defendant's due process rights and prevent prejudice.
Court's Ruling on Redactions and Publication
The court orders specific redactions to State's Exhibit 16, citing Rule 403 for reasons such as needlessly presenting cumulative evidence, particularly concerning text messages. These redactions are for publication purposes, not for the court's own consideration, as the entire exhibit is admitted for the court's determination.
Media's Argument for Presumptive Access
The media representative argues, citing Utah case law like Archeletta, that the same considerations supporting public access to preliminary hearings also advocate for access to documents the court uses, asserting a presumptive right of access to promote conscientious performance and discourage improper means.
Kirk Family's Plea for Unredacted Transparency
Jeffrey Nyman, representing the Kirk family, strongly believes that any evidence admitted in the preliminary hearing should be made public without redactions, arguing that a lack of transparency breeds doubt and distrust in the judicial system, and urges the court to consider the family's position.
Defense Reiteration on Fair Trial Precedence
Mr. Novak reiterates that the primary concern must be protecting Mr. Robinson's right to a fair trial, arguing that pre-trial exposure to certain information, like confessions, can compromise jury impartiality, even if the information is already partially public or the victim's family desires full transparency.
Legal Debate on Estes and Redau Precedents
The court and defense counsel engage in a detailed discussion about the interpretation of the Estes and Redau Supreme Court cases, specifically whether Estes established a rule against publicizing confessions or merely referenced a dissenting opinion, highlighting the complexity of applying legal precedent.
Court's Final Ruling on Exhibit 16 Publication
The court finalizes its ruling on State's Exhibit 16, specifying redaction times and confirming that the entire exhibit is considered by the court, but only the non-redacted portions will be published. The court acknowledges the balancing act between transparency and constitutional rights, citing Rule 403 for cumulative evidence, particularly text messages.
Defense Proposal for Additional Redactions
The defense informs the court about another exhibit involving five screenshots of Mr. Twigs's phone for which they also propose redactions, noting it's a simpler matter than the transcript but still raises publication questions similar to those already discussed.
Court's Request for Legal Memoranda
To aid in efficiently addressing complex legal arguments, the court requests that counsel, particularly the defense, prepare a memorandum or short brief on the cited case law, allowing the court to review the arguments in detail before further discussion.
