Tyler Robinson’s lawyers argued that he can’t be charged with aggravated murder because he “hit the intended target” without endangering others
The defense team of Tyler Robinson, the man accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk last September, has argued that the defendant should be spared the death penalty, as he only “hit the intended target.” The defense attorneys insist that the prosecution has been unable to prove the alleged shooter put other people’s lives at risk, thus committing aggravated murder.
The latter, which is a capital crime in the state of Utah, requires at least one “statutory aggravating factor” to qualify as such.
Kirk, a popular podcaster and co-founder of Turning Point USA, was shot in the neck and killed while speaking to about 3,000 attendees of an event at Utah Valley University in Orem on September 10, 2025.
Robinson was apprehended two days later. Investigators allege that he was the sniper who fired the fatal shot from a rooftop, about 130 meters (140 yards) from the packed venue.
In Tuesday court filings, Robinson’s defense attorneys argued that prosecutors had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant “knowingly created a great risk of death to another other than Charlie Kirk.” Kathy Nester, Michael Burt, Richard Novak, and Staci Visser wrote that the “only evidence presented supports that the bullet traveled above, not through, the crowd,” and thus no one other than Kirk was in the line of fire.
Robinson’s defense team also pointed out that the alleged shooter did not specifically mention “any threat or intended harm to any other individual(s)” in communications with his romantic partner, Lance Twiggs, which was cited as evidence by the authorities.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: rt.com
