Defense for Accused Charlie Kirk Assassin Makes Controversial Court Plea

Attorneys representing Tyler Robinson, the man accused of assassinating Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, have filed a motion requesting that their client be allowed to appear in civilian clothing and without restraints during all court proceedings — a move that has sparked criticism amid a case already under intense national scrutiny.

Filed on October 22, the 20-page motion argues that Robinson has been swept up in what defense lawyers call a “content tornado” — a social-media firestorm of viral videos, speculation, and commentary that they claim has poisoned public perception and jeopardized his right to a fair trial, Fox News reported.

The defense contends that additional footage of Robinson in jail attire could further prejudice potential jurors. They insist that such imagery, combined with ongoing commentary online, risks transforming the trial into a media spectacle rather than a pursuit of justice.

Prosecutors Move to Keep Security Plans Secret

Judge Tony Graf granted prosecutors’ request to file their response under seal, keeping details of their argument confidential. The state’s submission reportedly includes recommendations from the court’s security director, Chris Palmer, detailing specific safety precautions for Robinson’s court appearances.

A closed hearing was held Friday morning concerning the defense’s request for Robinson to appear unshackled and in civilian clothes. Court officials said the session was closed to protect sensitive security information. Judge Graf is expected to rule after a follow-up “ruling hearing” scheduled for Monday.

The next public hearing in the case is slated for October 30 at 10 a.m., where Robinson is expected to appear in person.

Defense Cites Media Coverage and Presidential Remarks

Robinson’s attorneys pointed to extensive media coverage of his early appearances — particularly televised footage of him wearing what appeared to be a bulletproof or suicide vest during his initial hearing.

The motion also references public remarks made by President Donald Trump, Utah Governor Spencer Cox, and other officials — statements the defense argues compromised Robinson’s presumption of innocence.

According to the filing, President Trump said shortly after Robinson’s arrest that authorities had captured the suspect “with a high degree of certainty,” adding, “I hope he gets the death penalty.”
That same day, Governor Cox began a press conference proclaiming, “We got him,” before elaborating on the investigation’s progress.

Defense lawyers claim that such public declarations — paired with televised images of Robinson in custody — have “polluted the waters of justice,” making an unbiased trial nearly impossible.

Legal Argument: Appearance and Fairness

The defense cites Deck v. Missouri (2005) — a U.S. Supreme Court precedent restricting the use of shackles in court except when justified by specific security risks. Robinson’s lawyers argue that this protection should apply to all public court appearances, especially in an era when proceedings are livestreamed to millions of viewers.

They further challenge the Utah County Sheriff’s policy of automatically applying heightened restraints in high-profile cases, calling the practice unconstitutional without individualized findings of risk.

Prosecutors and sheriff’s officials suggested Robinson could appear remotely to minimize public exposure. Defense attorneys rejected the proposal, stating that remote appearances would infringe upon Robinson’s constitutional right to attend his own capital proceedings in person.

“The law does not require a defendant to choose between personal attendance and the appearance of innocence,”
— Defense motion

While opposing physical restraints, the defense concurred with sheriff’s officials that video and photography inside the courtroom should be limited or prohibited, arguing that televised coverage fuels “sensationalism and spectacle.”

What Comes Next

Judge Graf’s ruling next week will determine whether Robinson can appear unshackled and in civilian attire when he returns to court later this month — a decision that could set the tone for one of the most politically charged trials in recent memory.