PROVO, Utah — A Utah judge ruled Tuesday that Tyler Robinson must stand trial on all seven charges filed against him in the assassination of conservative leader Charlie Kirk, rejecting defense efforts to prevent the case from moving forward.
Fourth District Judge Tony Graf found that prosecutors presented sufficient evidence to establish probable cause that Robinson shot and killed Kirk during a Turning Point USA event at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025.
“This evidence is sufficient at this stage to support a reasonable belief” that Robinson was the shooter, Graf said from the bench, according to KUER.
Robinson, 23, pleaded not guilty after Graf ordered him bound over for trial.
He faces six felony charges: aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm causing serious bodily injury, two counts of obstruction of justice and two counts of witness tampering. He also faces a misdemeanor charge of committing a violent offense in the presence of a child.
Utah County prosecutors are seeking the death penalty.
The ruling followed a weeklong preliminary hearing in July, extensive written arguments and hours of closing arguments Tuesday. Prosecutors presented surveillance recordings, witness testimony, DNA evidence, ballistics evidence and electronic messages they say connect Robinson to the killing.
Kirk was speaking before approximately 3,000 people at an outdoor campus event when a single rifle shot struck him in the neck. Prosecutors allege Robinson fired from a nearby rooftop before fleeing the campus.
Investigators later recovered a rifle wrapped in a towel and hidden in bushes. Prosecutors said DNA recovered from the weapon and other items matched Robinson.
The state also presented surveillance footage it says documented Robinson’s arrival on campus, movements toward the alleged shooting position and escape following the gunfire.
Prosecutors said Robinson later admitted responsibility in messages to his roommate and romantic partner. Other messages allegedly instructed the roommate to delete their communications and avoid speaking with investigators.
Robinson’s attorneys challenged several parts of the state’s case, arguing that prosecutors relied on unreliable hearsay, questionable forensic conclusions and unsupported assumptions about Robinson’s alleged motive.
The defense focused heavily on the aggravated murder charge, which allows prosecutors to continue seeking the death penalty.
Under Utah law, prosecutors argued that the shooting qualified as aggravated murder because Robinson knowingly created a grave risk of death to people other than Kirk.
Deputy Utah County Attorney Ryan McBride said firing a high-powered rifle toward a gathering of thousands created an obvious danger to those standing around Kirk.
Defense attorney Staci Visser argued that only one shot was fired, Kirk was the only person struck and the elevated trajectory of the bullet did not place the crowd directly in its path.
The defense said the state had not proved that the shooter knowingly endangered anyone other than the intended target.
Graf rejected that objection.
The judge determined that prosecutors presented enough evidence to allow a jury to consider whether firing toward the crowded campus event created the additional danger required for the aggravated charge.
The defense also challenged the state’s victim-targeting enhancement. Prosecutors allege Robinson selected Kirk because of Kirk’s political expression and outspoken positions on marriage, gender and cultural issues.
Attorneys for Robinson called that conclusion speculative and accused prosecutors of making inflammatory assumptions about their client’s beliefs and personal relationships.
Graf acknowledged that the defense raised substantial arguments but said the preliminary hearing was not the stage for deciding which interpretation would ultimately prevail.
At a preliminary hearing, prosecutors are not required to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They must show enough believable evidence to establish probable cause and send the case to trial.
The judge found that standard had been met on every count.
Graf’s ruling does not establish Robinson’s guilt. He remains presumed innocent unless prosecutors prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt before a jury.
It does mean the defense failed to convince the court that the evidence was too weak or legally insufficient to proceed.
Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, and other relatives attended Tuesday’s hearing. Robinson’s family was also present as the judge announced his decision.
In a statement reported by the Deseret News, the Kirk family called the ruling “an important step in our family’s pursuit of justice.”
The family said every stage of the case carries the weight of what Kirk’s death took from his children, who must now grow up without their father.
Attorneys representing the family asked the court to move the case forward without unnecessary delays. Prosecutors told Graf they were prepared to proceed quickly, while defense attorneys emphasized the complexity of a capital murder case.
A pretrial conference is scheduled for Oct. 23. A trial date has not been announced.
Nearly one year after Kirk was killed while speaking to young Americans, the case is finally moving beyond preliminary arguments and toward a jury.
Robinson is entitled to due process, a complete defense and a fair trial. Those constitutional protections must remain firm, even in a case involving political violence and a possible death sentence.
But justice also requires accountability, transparency and a process that does not forget the victim.
Graf’s ruling did not decide Robinson’s guilt. It decided that the evidence is serious enough to be placed before a jury.
Charlie Kirk can no longer speak for himself. The evidence will now speak in court.
Original article
Comments