Judge In Charlie Kirk Assassin Case Rules In Motion to Seal Evidence
A Utah judge on Friday rejected a key request from the defense team representing the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk, ruling that court proceedings in the high-profile case should remain largely open to the public.
Tyler Robinson, 22, is charged in the September 2025 killing of the Turning Point USA founder. His attorneys had sought to limit public access to certain court filings ahead of an upcoming evidentiary hearing, arguing that extensive publicity could make it harder to seat an impartial jury.
But Tony Graf Jr. ruled that the defense had not shown sufficient grounds to justify closing the proceedings.
“In balance, the defendant has not provided a sufficient basis for the court to find that the interests favoring closure outweigh the interest favoring an open proceeding and the presumptive right to access,” Graf said Friday, per Fox News.
The judge also emphasized that the American legal system has long-standing methods for protecting a defendant’s right to a fair trial—even in widely publicized cases.
“Moreover, as the Utah Supreme Court recognized, even in highly publicized cases, a defendant’s right to a fair trial can be protected through the regular time-honored process for selecting jurors, like enlarging the voir dire of potential jurors, utilizing a detailed juror questionnaire and conducting a thorough voir dire of potential jurors.”
Defense Pushes to Limit Public Exposure
During the hearing, Robinson’s legal team warned that releasing preliminary evidence into the public domain could influence potential jurors before the trial even begins.
“So what we’re talking about is releasing preliminary evidence into the public sphere that has the potential to impact jurors,” defense attorney Staci Visser said. “And it is important enough that we are concerned that it will sway people’s opinions one way or the other.”
Visser stressed that the defense’s primary concern was the ability to select jurors who have not already formed strong opinions about the case.
“I want to make clear that our concern here is with selecting an impartial jury,” Visser added. “Really, it goes both ways. Whether the evidence is good for my client or bad for my client, whatever it is, it makes it harder to find impartial jurors if they are entrenched in an opinion about our client’s guilt or innocence either way.”
Robinson faces the possibility of the death penalty if convicted of the September 10 shooting at Utah Valley University where Kirk was killed.
According to court filings, Robinson’s legal team also argued that certain evidence should be presented behind closed doors to avoid repeating what they describe as damaging media narratives surrounding the case.
“Specifically, Mr. Robinson seeks to take evidence in a closed setting regarding the unfairly prejudicial and misleading media coverage and the improper statements of government officials in order to avoid republicizing the same. Mr. Robinson also asks this court to take evidence regarding the privacy violations detailed in the ‘motion to exclude cameras’ in a closed setting, to, again, avoid reiterating the violative material,” according to defense filings.
Battle Over Cameras in the Courtroom
The defense also attempted to block cameras and microphones from the courtroom, arguing that constant media coverage could further prejudice potential jurors.
Attorney Michael Burt told the court the case has already been subject to extensive publicity.
“We’ll show both that we have categories of prejudice that are recognized as presumptively prejudicial, and we’ll show that beyond that, the overall picture of this case is one of extreme prejudicial pretrial publicity that justifies the kind of relief we’re asking for,” Burt said.
During an evidentiary hearing scheduled for April 17, the defense intends to present examples of what it calls harmful media coverage.
“While there is simply not enough time to present all of what is referenced in the ‘motion to exclude cameras,’ the compilation anticipated will highlight the most egregious and most concerning media coverage impacting Mr. Robinson’s case,” the defense stated.
Prosecutors Argue for Transparency
Prosecutors strongly opposed the request to restrict media access, arguing that transparency is essential when dealing with a case of such public significance.
“We are not media lawyers, we are not representing the interests of the media,” said Christopher Ballard. “Our client is the people of the state of Utah who do have an interest in the public nature of these proceedings.”
Judge Graf ultimately sided with that argument, declining to close the hearings or seal the filings. However, he directed the defense to submit a redacted version of its motion to exclude cameras by March 30.
Robinson appeared in court Friday wearing a blue dress shirt and tie and was seen occasionally taking notes during the proceedings as both sides prepared for the next stage of the case.