Key facts
- Defense attorneys for Tyler Robinson argue he should not face the death penalty for the killing of Charlie Kirk.
- The defense claims Robinson hit his intended target and did not endanger other attendees at the Utah event.
- Prosecutors allege Robinson targeted Kirk due to his political views, a motive the defense disputes.
- Robinson surrendered to authorities the day after Kirk's death at Utah Valley University.
- A judge previously denied a request to remove the death penalty as a potential sentence.
Attorneys for Tyler Robinson, the man charged with killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk, are arguing against the death penalty, asserting that Robinson "hit the intended target" and did not endanger others at the event. The defense filed documents late Tuesday attempting to block the case from proceeding to trial on capital charges. Prosecutors allege Robinson targeted Kirk due to his political views, citing a statement that he "had enough of his hatred," but the defense contends this is insufficient proof of motive, especially after searches of Robinson's devices yielded little beyond that comment.
Robinson surrendered a day after Kirk was killed at Utah Valley University on September 10. His defense team had previously sought to remove the death penalty option after prosecutors were found in contempt of court for speaking to the media about the case, but State District Judge Tony Graf rejected that request. The Utah County Attorney’s Office has until August 18 to respond to the defense's latest arguments.
Robinson's former roommate, Lance Twiggs, told investigators that Robinson sometimes discussed politics, including President Donald Trump, but never mentioned Charlie Kirk before the shooting. Twiggs also stated Robinson did not frequently discuss gender issues or LGBTQ+ rights. Closing arguments for the preliminary hearing are scheduled for September 1, after which Judge Graf will decide if the case proceeds to trial and on what charges. Legal experts suggest the preliminary hearing's extended timeline reflects the judge's careful consideration and the volume of evidence.