JUSTICE FOR CHARLIE: TYLER ROBINSON HEARING

Summary

Justice for Charlie: Tyler Robinson Hearing (Day Four)

Podcast: Real America’s Voice
Host: iHeartPodcasts
Date: July 9, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode presents live commentary and analysis from day four of the preliminary hearing in the Tyler Robinson case—the man accused of murdering conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Hosts Beau and Benny Harmony, joined by experts and reporters, deliver real-time breakdowns as key evidence is presented and debated in court. Central themes include the authenticity and admissibility of Lance Twiggs’ (Robinson’s boyfriend) testimony and digital communications, procedural battles over evidence, and the sociocultural context surrounding the case. Analysis is also provided by legal strategist Marlee Hornick and former FBI agent Jonathan Gilliam, with on-the-ground insights from Jack Posobic.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Procedural Updates and Evidence Admissibility

• The episode follows in real time as the court deals with sensitive evidence—some presented only to the court or the in-room audience due to orders from Judge Graff (07:50-10:07, 18:16-20:09).
• Several exhibits (notably States Exhibit 16.3, 16.4, and 5.1) are discussed and admitted, with some redacted for public viewing.
  • Quote:
    "Anytime you hear that audio go out, it's not a technical glitch. It's because evidence is being presented that judge has determined cannot be disseminated to the grander public..."
    — Beau (07:50)
• Judge Graff emphasizes the three-tier system for evidence dissemination: (1) Court only, (2) Courtroom audience, (3) Public/livestream (16:30-17:59).
• Victim targeting enhancement and its relevance to the case are explained by the judge (18:16-19:42).

2. Lance Twiggs’ Testimony and Role

• Lance Twiggs emerges as a central figure, both as a material witness and a source of key evidence (notably, a note Tyler left under his keyboard and incriminating text/Discord messages).
  • Twiggs is depicted as forthright and compliant, challenging media narratives that initially painted him as a suspect or possible instigator.
  • Quote:
    "Just watching him cooperate with law enforcement and not hold anything back, he didn't look nervous, didn't look scared. He looked like he was just being forthright with the information that he had."
    — Benny Harmony (10:53)
• The prosecution points to several exchanges between Robinson and Twiggs as highly incriminating.
  • Quote:
    "Tyler said, I am. I'm sorry. He said, I had to leave the gun in a bush. ... Tyler being more concerned about the missing rifle... than he is about just murdering Charlie Kirk. That's a very odd thing, psychologically speaking."
    — Beau (13:00)
• Twiggs did not delete critical messages per Robinson’s urging and provided law enforcement with saved communications and photographic evidence.
  • Quote:
    "He didn't delete them. ... Not only did he not delete them, Tyler says, don't speak to the media, don't speak to someone, ... He does. Not only did he save those text messages, but he also saved, he took a picture of the note that Tyler left under the keyboard."
    — Beau (14:18)

3. Analysis of Motive and the Digital Culture Angle

• Evidence shows Tyler Robinson discussing use of a Dremel tool to engrave bullets, referencing an apparent "hunting trip"—interpreted by commentators as code for targeting Kirk (11:28, 37:37-38:08).
• The role of online radicalization is discussed with particular focus on Discord and Reddit subcultures as environments enabling conspiratorial and violent thinking (11:28, 47:14-51:09).
  • Quote:
    "This, I have really no words at this exact moment. I mean, today is huge, Bo."
    — Benny Harmony (11:28)
  • Quote:
    "Is this a ripe ground for radicalization? ... it just seems to foment hate. And when I say foment hate, I don't mean just hate. I'm talking about hate that escalates to violence. And I think that's what we've seen here."
    — Beau (50:06)

4. Legal and Probable Cause Analysis (with Marlee Hornick, Constitutional Law Analyst, 26:36–41:24)

• Hornick underscores the defense’s strategy as primarily aimed at suppressing prejudicial evidence rather than refuting Robinson’s culpability.
  • Quote:
    "The defense's arguments are exclusive exclusively to try to shut down access to evidence... There's no way to counter the incredible weight of evidence against Tyler Robinson, including his own admission of guilt."
    — Marlee Hornick (27:14)
• Jury selection is identified as a significant challenge due to the case’s notoriety and Utah’s demographic makeup; death penalty considerations further complicate jury unanimity (28:50-32:23).
• Hornick explains that every piece of evidence must be relitigated for admissibility at trial, despite the strong evidence for probable cause (39:57-40:56).
  • Quote:
    "All we're doing here is to establish probable cause. So the judge did decide that this particular piece of evidence that was being submitted should be public. And he did decide that it mattered. But again, he can't make the decision about whether that makes Tyler Robinson clearly guilty at count one or whether that constitutes complete evidence."
    — Marlee Hornick (33:28)

5. Evidence Handling, Law Enforcement, and Defense Tactics (with Jonathan Gilliam, former FBI, 41:25–51:09)

• Gilliam lauds the post-incident investigation but criticizes pre-event threat assessment and initial scene management.
  • Quote:
    "The evidence collection, the analysis, I think this has been exactly the way law enforcement should have done... What was bad was before the shot was taken, that was a complete failure of a threat assessment and ... lack of awareness on where an attacker could attack from."
    — Jonathan Gilliam (41:46)
• He predicts the defense will exploit gaps, such as questions about unfired bullets and scene control, and is likely to push for plea deals to avoid the uncertainties of trial (43:39, 46:01).
• Gilliam and hosts reflect on how digital subcultures can "foment hate that escalates to violence" and influence attackers' psychology.

6. On-the-Ground Reporting (with Jack Posobic, 51:15–59:42)

• Posobic provides a moving, first-person account of courtroom experience and the emotional weight of the evidence.
  • Quote:
    "Tyler Robinson confessed to killing Charlie Kirk. This is beyond. ... But this is direct evidence in testimony. Not from the government, not from the state, not from the FBI, from Lance Twiggs, the man who was in a romantic relationship with Tyler Robinson, his boyfriend, the man who knew him the most."
    — Jack Posobic (51:25)
• He describes additional courtroom-only exhibits (e.g., visual confirmation of the note, Discord screenshots, digital forensics), and underscores how, whatever the judgment, true satisfaction or closure may be elusive.
  • Quote:
    "I'm never going to be satisfied. Nothing is going to ever make this right. ... But thank God ... that video be played so that the world can see ... the depravity. The world can see the depths of darkness ... that took Charlie Kirk from us. We need to see it. The world needs to see it and we need to look at it. We can't turn away."
    — Jack Posobic (53:45)

---

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• On Lance Twiggs' reliability:
  "He seems like a very stable minded person... You know, Twig seems like more of the normal one, if I have to say so myself."
  — Benny Harmony (10:53)

• On Tyler’s priorities and psyche:
  "Tyler being more concerned about the missing rifle, for his father's sake, his family's sake, than he is about just murdering Charlie Kirk. That's a very odd thing, psychologically speaking."
  — Beau (13:00)

• Defense's strategy:
  "The defense's arguments ... are exclusively to try to shut down access to evidence.... There's no way to counter the incredible weight of evidence against Tyler Robinson, including his own admission of guilt."
  — Marlee Hornick (27:14)

• On the court's handling of evidence:
  "Anytime you hear that audio go out, it's not a technical glitch. It's because evidence is being presented that judge has determined cannot be disseminated to the grander public..."
  — Beau (07:50)

• On digital radicalization:
  "These things are a threat to national security. They're a threat to young people, they're a threat to experienced people. I just think it’s an area of operations for nefarious individuals..."
  — Jonathan Gilliam (48:08)

• On the emotional gravity of the moment:
  "He said he was going hunting. ... He was going hunting when he went to hunt Charlie Kirk on that campus, who went there peacefully, who went there without hate in his heart ... And Tyler Robinson said he wanted to hunt him."
  — Jack Posobic (51:25)

---

Important Evidence & Exhibit Timestamps

• [02:32-04:54]: Chain-of-custody for the note under the keyboard and digital forensic handling discussed.
• [07:50-10:07]: On-the-ground updates about evidence shown in-court-only; first impressions of video testimony from Twiggs.
• [12:15-14:18]: Discussion about digital correspondence and its implication for motive and culpability.
• [17:59-22:52]: Judge Graff's explanation of evidence dissemination tiers; debate over redacted video evidence.
• [23:00]: Reading of Robinson’s instructions to Twiggs about requesting a lawyer if questioned by police.
• [39:57]: Clarification that the preliminary hearing is only about probable cause and evidence will have to be re-admitted at trial.

---

Overall Impression and Takeaways

• Compelling Evidence: The prosecution has presented a formidable case, with communications, physical evidence, and direct testimony strongly implicating Robinson.
• Witness Credibility: While once scrutinized, Lance Twiggs now appears to be critical in corroborating the prosecution’s narrative, and his composure underlines his reliability as a witness.
• Legal Process: The podcast repeatedly reinforces that this is a preliminary hearing; however, commentators agree that the evidence to date is devastating for the defense.
• Digital Subculture: Analysis emphasizes how online environments can enable not only radicalization but provide a hidden infrastructure for planning and confessions, as seen in this case.
• Call for Justice: Throughout, emotional stakes are acknowledged—especially by in-the-field voices like Posobic, who articulate the pain, urgency, and public demand for justice, while also recognizing the due process required by law.

---

Final Thoughts

The episode delivers an exhaustive overview of a pivotal day in the Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing, balancing procedural facts, legal commentary, and human stories. Not only does it document the progression of a high-profile case, but it also sparks necessary discussion about digital culture, the limits of evidence transparency, and the arduous pursuit of justice in the American legal system.

Transcript

[Marlee Hornick]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[Agent Davis]

Guaranteed Human.

[Jack Armstrong]

Why should you listen to Armstrong and Getty on demand? We're not boring. A lot of news is boring and tedious and depressing. It makes you angry. You don't want to live your life like that. Hey, I'm Jack Armstrong. He's Joe Getty. We're Armstrong and Getty. We try to bring you the truth and help you figure out this crazy modern world.

[Jack Posobic]

How about something about a comedic tone?

[Jack Armstrong]

We have a winner. Yes. Listen to Armstrong and Getty on Demand on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Joel Osteen Daily Podcast.

[Beau]

God's plans for you are for good.

[Jack Armstrong]

Be inspired.

[Agent Davis]

Get ready.

[Beau]

God is about to exceed your expectations.

[Jack Armstrong]

Joel Osteen Daily Podcast.

[Beau]

You are coming out of that dry place into more than enough daily encouragement

[Jonathan Gilliam]

right when you need it.

[Beau]

There are opportunities in your future bigger than you can imagine.

[Jack Armstrong]

Listen to the Joel Osteen Daily podcast on the iHeartRadio, Apple, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your favorite podcasts.

[Beau]

And welcome to justice for an hour of thoughtful analysis. This is day four of the preliminary hearing of Tyler Robinson to determine probable cause. What's happening right now in the courtroom is there's a piece of evidence that has been admitted that is being shown and heard to the courtroom only, not for public dissemination. So that's why there is no audio on this feed. So you will be hearing silence in the courtroom at this moment, even though we. We're not able to hear it. But those present in the court, such as Erica Kirk and her family and Tyler Robinson and everyone in that courtroom, would be able to hear what's going on right now. So we'll make sure we tune in right now, and we'll be able to come back out as soon as we know more. So let's take a look.

[Agent Davis]

This letter note he found under Tyler's keyboard, per a text message he received, he states from, you know, 11:00pm on September 10th. And so at that point, Lance finds this. This is the letter he finds under that keyboard.

[Mr. Novak]

Okay, so to clarify, Mr. Twigs gets a text from Mr. Robinson around 11pm on September 10th telling him to look under his keyboard?

[Agent Davis]

Yes. Correct.

[Mr. Novak]

And this is what Mr. Twigs represented was underneath the keyboard?

[Agent Davis]

Yes. Yes.

[Mr. Novak]

How did law enforcement get this photograph?

[Agent Davis]

So following Lance's first interview at St. George PD, his phone is recovered at that point, taken into evidence. It is downloaded. I believe it was the following day or shortly after that, the FBI transported that phone to the rtfl, which is The Regional Computer Forensic Laboratory in Salt Lake City. The phone was downloaded through Cellebrite. And after that, following that download was complete, SBI received a flash drive containing that download. From there, it went to a SIAC analyst to go through that data of his phone to look for any pertinent evidence or information that may be on there. And at that point, that this image of this letter was located.

[Mr. Novak]

All right, I'm going to break down a few things you mentioned. I just want to make sure the record's clear. You mentioned Celebrate a few times. What is Celebrate?

[Agent Davis]

It's a. It's a downloading software that's commonly used by law enforcement. I don't do that myself, but it's commonly used to recover data, to download electronic devices, particularly cell phones.

[Mr. Novak]

And then you mentioned siac. What does that mean?

[Agent Davis]

It's the Statewide Information Analysis Center. It's a division within dps. That's a fusion center. They assist law enforcement with intelligence, various intelligence information for our investigations.

[Mr. Novak]

You mentioned that you don't personally do Cellebrite phone extractions. Have you spoken to the law enforcement officers that performed the celebrate extraction on Mr. Twig's phone in this case?

[Agent Davis]

I don't believe I specifically talked to those individuals. RCFL that did that, but, yeah, that was then provided.

[Mr. Novak]

Sbi, did you speak with officers at SBI that have recovered this photo that we're seeing in States Exhibit 16.3?

[Agent Davis]

Yes, yes, I've spoken to. Yeah, I have spoken with the PSYC analyst who particularly in particular, found this image. I've spoken to her personally as well.

[Mr. Novak]

Was Mr. Twigs shown what's been marked as States Exhibit 16.3 during his second interview?

[Agent Davis]

Yes, he was.

[Mr. Novak]

And again, you were present for that?

[Agent Davis]

Yes, I was.

[Mr. Novak]

There is Exhibit 16.3 a Fair and accurate representation of the photo law enforcement obtained from Mr. Twig's phone and that he was subsequently shown in the second interview?

[Agent Davis]

Yes, it's fair and accurate.

[Mr. Novak]

Your Honor, the state would move to admit exhibit 16.3 and then also publish pursuant to court order.

[Judge Graff]

Mr. Novak.

[Beau]

Just noting the objections that have previously been made. And I think that the court's order is that it may be published in the courtroom only.

[Judge Graff]

Thank you. Noting the standing Objection by Defense 16.33. Correct.

[Mr. Novak]

Correct.

[Judge Graff]

Is admitted into evidence and may be published only in the courtroom and not be shown or videoed.

[Beau]

And just as a reminder, what we're watching right now, Benny Harmony with me as well. I want to mention that Benny's with us for this. Justice for Charlie hour is during day Four of the preliminary hearing. They are listening to evidence right now that is being redacted for public consumption, meaning the viewing audience on TV with the livestream camera. But. But that same evidence is actually able to be distributed to the courtroom itself. So anyone in that courtroom, which includes Jack Posobec, Erica Kirk, the families, anyone in that courtroom can hear it and see it, just not us. And it looks like we may actually be able to go back to this now because we are picking up our audio. Again, anytime you hear that audio go out, it's not a technical glitch. It's because evidence is being presented that judge has determined cannot be disseminated to the grander public, meaning the viewing audience. So let's take back a listen and let's see where we are now.

[Mr. Novak]

Does states Exhibit 16.4, is that a fair and accurate representation of what you reviewed from the FBI and that the FBI released?

[Agent Davis]

Yes, it is.

[Mr. Novak]

The state moves to admit exhibit 16.4 and publish according to court order.

[Judge Graff]

Mr. Novak, no further objections.

[Agent Davis]

Thank you.

[Judge Graff]

All right, noting the standing objection by defense overruling that Objection, states Exhibit 16.4 is admitted into evidence and may be

[Mr. Novak]

published in the courtroom and again in the. In the discord.

[Beau]

And once again, we'll remind you that in the courtroom right now, the court is listening to or viewing evidence that the judge has determined is viewable or consumed only by the courtroom itself, not by the live stream camera and the feed that we see now. Benny, just real quick before we. Hopefully we'll get the audio back because they're kind of coming in and out. It's been a big day so far. I mean, we're seeing the video testimony of Lance Twiggs. Today is all about Lance Twiggs. And my initial thoughts just in watching that video is a compliant person, someone who seems to be very forthright, very truthful, doesn't seem like he's hiding anything for all the conspiracies that have been around. Lance Twigs, who is he? Is he transitioning this and that. That aside, what I see as a compliant witness, how do you see it?

[Benny Harmony]

No, he seems like a very stable minded person. And just watching him cooperate with law enforcement and not hold anything back, he didn't look nervous, didn't look scared. He looked like he was just being forthright with the information that he had. And, you know, I think there's been a lot of questions surrounding this Lance Twigs guy. You know, he's this transgender. He's, you know, he's mentally this and mentally that. But even the Text messages that were shown between him and Robinson. You know, Twig seems like more of the normal one, if I have to say so myself. So, I mean, this. I have really no words at this exact moment. I mean, today is huge, Bo.

[Beau]

Yeah. And one key piece of evidence or admission in that exchange, that video exchange, is Tyler Robinson asking for a Dremel, which I had never really heard of before, but it's a tool that's used to engrave bullets. And Tyler said it's for an upcoming camping and hunting trip. That's how he described it. Not many people would want a tool like that to engrave a bullet. It seems a bit strange, all things considered. I thought that was strange. You know, Benny, if we're able to later in the show with some of our guests, I'd love to get into some of the Reddit and discord culture that is really being talked about right now, because I believe that is a breeding ground for where some of this radicalization could have occurred. But as you just said, it almost makes Lance Twiggs seem the more rational one of the two, all things considered.

[Benny Harmony]

Well, you know, Lance Twiggs even said that, you know, he didn't. He doesn't really follow politics. He doesn't really talk about politics and any of these things. And then, you know, he says that Robinson never mentioned Charlie Kirk, but mentioned Donald Trump a lot. And so, I mean, Twix just seems like he was almost like, what are you doing? What, is this real? Did you actually do this? I mean, these text messages are so incriminating. Beau. I mean, he said he left early in the morning. The engraving of the bullets, frequently talking about the President. And so Robinson just seemed very obsessed, if I have to say so myself.

[Beau]

Yeah. And if you look at the compendium of the evidence, and of course, we've seen the movements of Tyler Robinson, which, by the way, I do want to clue you in that Kevin Posobic, we're putting together this montage of footage that you're going to see later on tonight where Kevin walks the steps of Tyler Robinson through the UVU campus. That's an exclusive that we'll be giving to you later tonight. Make sure you tune into that. I make sure I want to plug that because it's a pretty cool compilation of footage of Kevin walking the steps of Tyler Robinson. But these text messages that we've heard about Benny, but now we're seeing them admitted as evidence, and I just want to read some of it, too. But Tyler saying to Lance, gotta grab my rifle, still And Lance tweaks, saying, are you the one who did it? Tyler said, I am. I'm sorry. He said, I had to leave the gun in a bush. What's also very interesting to me, Benny, is Tyler being more concerned about the missing rifle, for his father's sake, his family's sake, than he is about just murdering Charlie Kirk. That's a very odd thing, psychologically speaking.

[Benny Harmony]

No. And then one of the things that I found very interesting is he's talks about how his dad was worried that this gun wasn't going to suffice on the hunting trip. And he said, I think it'll do just fine. If it, you know, if today was any indication, I mean, these text messages, the fact that he would say this, I mean, and then. And then think that deleting the text messages is going to get him out of this and that he was going to drive four hours and be perfectly fine and keep this till an old age. Yeah, he thought wrong.

[Jack Posobic]

Yeah.

[Beau]

And here's something else that's interesting just popping into my head is for all of the conjecture that we've had about Lance Twiggs, Tyler was telling him, delete this thread, delete these messages, delete it. And these are lovers, right? These are people who've been in a relationship. And you have to think of two people who love each other. Plenty of conjecture about what love makes people do. But he didn't delete them. Not only did he not delete them, Tyler says, don't speak to the media, don't speak to someone, don't speak to the police. He does. Not only did he save those text messages, but he also saved, he took a picture of the note that Tyler left under the keyboard. So, all things considered, you have to look at Lance Twiggs as someone who has been really pivotal in putting this case squarely on the shoulders of Tyler Robinson. Now, to what degree Lance Twiggs was compliant, we don't know. I think we talk about the DNA that's on the screwdriver, that's on the towel with the gun in it. Who knows why and how much of Twigg's DNA is on that. It seems proportionally it was more Robinson. But at the same time, you've got someone who easily could have deleted those texts, easily could have gotten rid of evidence and didn't and still complied with law enforcement. We don't know what kind of a deal he got, we don't know what kind of immunity he's been given. But thus far, Lance Twiggs testimony and the Evidence being brought forth is incredibly damning to the defense's case.

[Benny Harmony]

Well, I think at the beginning of all of this, the media even kind of put a focus on Lance Twiggs is maybe he was the one that encouraged Robinson to do this. But now looking at this stuff, it's almost like Twigs, I mean, after this happened, didn't agree with this and didn't understand why Robinson did it, and almost maybe created some doubt in Robinson's mind, like, oh, my gosh, why did I do this? I shouldn't have done this. Like, he thought he was doing this for his lover, but in the end, his lover didn't ask him to do this, didn't tell him to do this. And who knows if he even followed Charlie Kirk? And so there's so many questions that. That still need to be answered as to the involvement. And, you know, go back, going back to the DNA, we saw that Twigs DNA was also on this stuff. Was it because of the shared appliances in the house and Twigs telling Robinson where that engraver was? I mean, there's. There's just so many questions, Beau. But overall, the blame is on Robinson on this one.

[Beau]

Well, there's no question about that. I do, you know, I don't know if we have any audio from the courtroom yet. And, guys, the control room, please tell me if it does come back. We don't. Okay, so. So, well, Benny, let's just. If we have some guests later, that would be great. But I do want to kind of recap how we got to where we are right now, because there was a very, very lengthy debate yesterday about whether the video statement from Lance Twiggs would be admitted. And it was just so people understand it was admitted to the court, meaning to Judge Graff there, in full, unredacted, completely unedited version, is in front of the court for him to make the eventual determination about probable cause. However, due to some of the defense's objections, a heavily redacted version, the one that we just saw just under an hour ago, was presented both in the court and to the public. And so Judge Graff, you know, it's a redacted version, but you have this motion, Benny, from Erica Kirk that was filed and her personal attorney, and she wants all exhibits to be made public because they've waited 10 months for this trial. And she wants everything to be put out there. She wants to see. Her attorney said, we want to see everything that you see, Judge, Graffiti. And so what Judge Graff said, and I think this is important because this is how our legal system works that they, you know that there are three tiers that Judge Graff has to consider in terms of consumption. One is for the court itself, and when I say court, I mean Judge Graff himself to make his determination. Then you have two. The gallery in the courtroom, which is why we're not hearing some of the testimony right now. And number three is the public at large and the livestream. So those are the three tiers that Judge Graff talks about in making his rulings.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

And.

[Beau]

And as we're seeing now, some of that evidence is being presented only to himself. The unredacted version, some of it. Okay, okay, one second. Let me just finish the thought. The second tier is for the courtroom itself, and the third is for us to view. It sounds like we're able to get some more testimony now. So let's take a listen in 5.1

[Judge Graff]

to be admitted into evidence for full consideration by this court. And so that is received as it relates to publication and taking in consideration the arguments by Mr. Novak. Well, first noting the objection, the standing objections by defense, that is overruled as it relates to the admission to 5.1. But going to the publication court understands the argument made by defense that this is going toward perhaps religion and that the enhancement. And let me just read that from the information. Victim targeting enhancement in violation of Utah Code Annotates Annotated 76. 3. 203.14 sub 2. Tyler James Robinson intentionally selected Charlie Kirk because Tyler James Robinson's belief or perception regarding Charlie Kirk's political expression. And that was also noted as an enhancement for count two and count seven. The court is not going to engage the court. It can weigh how this is applied, but it finds it relevant whether

[Agent Davis]

how

[Judge Graff]

it relates to the enhancement is for the court to way as it looks at the bind over decision. And it's not engaging in that decision making today, but finds that it is relevant, it is admissible to the court and is publishable to the gallery as well as to the public. And so if the state wishes to publish stays Exhibit 5.1, it may do so at this time.

[Mr. Novak]

Thank you. Yes, we do. And Kimberly, I don't know if we want to use the same kind of slow scrolling. Thank you. All right, I believe that should be sufficient. And Agent Davis, I apologize. I'm going to take you very briefly back to States Exhibit 16.1, which is the text thread between Mr. Robinson and Mr. Twiggs. Kimberly, if you could turn to page. 17. And because this has already been admitted and court, correct me if I'M wrong. Published not only to the gallery, but to cameras at large. I'd ask that it be displayed in that fashion again.

[Judge Graff]

All right. Any input from any other party on that request. All right, thank you. It may be published and the media may pick this up as well.

[Mr. Novak]

Agent Davis, if I can direct you to the very last message on that page, starting with if any. If you could read that out loud.

[Agent Davis]

Okay. This is Tyler. He says if any police ask you questions. Sorry, let me start over. If any police ask you questions, ask for a lawyer and stay silent. My lawyer should be Doug Terry. I'll see if he can reach out to you and make sure the police. The police follow.

[Mr. Novak]

Okay, thank you. That's all I need from that exhibit. And then finally, Agent Davis, you testified before that you flew down to Washington County Sheriff's Office and observed Tyler Robinson there, correct?

[Agent Davis]

Correct.

[Mr. Novak]

You got his name there?

[Agent Davis]

Yes.

[Mr. Novak]

You stated that you transported or assisted transporting him up to Utah County Jail.

[Agent Davis]

Yes.

[Mr. Novak]

And that you were the booking officer.

[Agent Davis]

That's correct.

[Mr. Novak]

Do you recognize Tyler Robinson here in the courtroom today?

[Agent Davis]

Yes, I do.

[Mr. Novak]

If you could point him out and briefly describe something that he's wearing.

[Agent Davis]

He's the individual seated at the defendant's table in the center chair with a gray suit coat and a green tie.

[Mr. Novak]

Your Honor, if record could reflect identification of the defendant.

[Judge Graff]

Counsel?

[Jack Posobic]

No, Judge.

[Judge Graff]

All right. I'll note for the purposes of this hearing only that Agent Davis has identified Mr. Robinson in court. Thank you.

[Mr. Novak]

And, Judge, if I can just have a moment.

[Judge Graff]

You may

[Mr. Novak]

ready to pass the witness. Thank you. I don't know now would be a good time for lunch.

[Judge Graff]

All right, we'll go ahead and break right now for lunch for one hour. Well, one hour and five minutes. Let's come back at 1:30. We'll resume. We'll pick up the defense for cross examination if they choose for Agent Davis. Does either party need the benefit of the record before we go on our lunch break?

[Mr. Novak]

Not the state.

[Beau]

No cross examination for Agent Davis. So I don't want him to wait here if he has other things to do.

[Agent Davis]

Thank you.

[Judge Graff]

Thank you, Mr. Novak.

[Agent Davis]

Thank you.

[Judge Graff]

No cross examination. May this witness be excused?

[Mr. Novak]

Yes.

[Judge Graff]

All right, Agent Davis, you may step down. And then we'll resume with the state on their next witness. Court is now in recess.

[Mr. Novak]

All right.

[Beau]

And the court has broken for recess at this moment. We expect that to last probably about an hour as it has earlier in the week. Benny, just want to get your initial thoughts there. We've seen a lot. Of course, there are some things we did not see in here because the judge has determined that that evidence will not be going out to the public. And of course, we have to remind ourselves that this is a preliminary trial. This is not the trial. I think it's important that we say that because there are certain things the public does not have a right to know. There are things that will be admitted into evidence when the trial begins, should it go to trial, which we assume that it will. But of what we've seen and what has been made public, probably to those in the courtroom. We'll get a full report from Jack Posobic later. But also what we've seen just in the viewing audience, it just looks worse and worse for Tyler Robinson.

[Benny Harmony]

No, it does. And we are very chronically online, Beau. I know that we are on Twitter. We are all over and monitoring constantly the political environment and stuff. But the things that we have seen today specifically, I think, really give a semblance of closure to people who do have questions. And so I'm very happy with the evidence that we've seen, and I'm really excited to get to hear from Jack about what he saw inside that courtroom.

[Beau]

Well, I think we have our guest ready. This is Marlee Hornick. She's a constitutional law analyst and a litigation strategist. The perfect person, actually, to talk to Marlee. I'd love to get your reaction to kind of what you've seen today. Again, we've seen the damning evidence, of course, of what the prosecution put together in terms of the movements of Tyler Robinson. Those felt very compelling. But I think everybody has been waiting on this video testimony from Lance Twiggs. We know that we're only seeing a redacted portion of it. I'd love to know what you saw in that testimony. And two, what would have been redacted that we didn't see that would have been prejudicial, if you could take a guess, since we don't really know.

[Marlee Hornick]

Right. Well, I think, Beau, the problem we've been seeing all along through this trial is that the defense's arguments are exclusive exclusively to try to shut down access to evidence. As you're noting with this video. This has been, you know, a debated item since yesterday when the prosecutors tried to show the whole thing. And then, you know, there they go. The defense starts to make an argument that the information in the video is prejudicial to the jury trial. And this is the primary argument they've been raising the entire time, whether it was literally what they were trying to keep out of the Court was the mission statement of Turning Point. Right. So that there would be no possible prejudice to the incoming jury, that the motive formulated through Charlie Kirk's life's purpose as the head of Turning Point couldn't be established. I mean, these arguments. Well, all that they show us, Bo, and I think this is obvious. I heard you guys talking. I think you get it, is that the defense has no argument. There's no way to counter the incredible weight of evidence against Tyler Robinson, including his own admission of guilt.

[Benny Harmony]

And, Marlee, you know, you touched a little bit on the jury selection, you know, in the upcoming trial after this pretrial, realistically, what does that jury selection look like with. Now, we've seen these text messages, and everybody across the world, regardless of if they really know who Charlie Kirk was. I feel like people have heard about this case in some way, shape or form. What does that selection look like from an. From an analysis point of view?

[Marlee Hornick]

Well, they're going to attempt to bring people in who don't actually follow the news and are busy. Perhaps in Utah, they might have large numbers of children and be bringing them to baseball games and practices and gymnastics and getting their homework done. And, you know, there are people not like us who don't go on social media, don't follow the news, and may not really have a formulated opinion. And that's who the defense is going to be looking for. And that's why they keep making these arguments. The arguments they're making, they are really counterintuitive to the way Utah runs this trial process. Their state law requires this preliminary hearing to establish probable cause. You cannot bring the trial without their preliminary hearing. And I guess that's probably in. In light of what they like to call a judicial economy, I think is the. The typical term that's used. Right. They don't want to waste the court's time going through a lengthy trial that lacks the proper evidence. So in the. In the hearing, in the preliminary hearing, they're allowed to bring in hearsay. They're allowed to bring in almost any kind of evidence to establish that there really is a case. So going back to your question, you know, the. The fact that the defense keeps trying to argue this is going to taint the jury. Well, they're going to have to try to look for people who are just oblivious.

[Beau]

And Marlee, how would you find that? Because the way I see it, I've been to Utah before. Very, very red, very, very Mormon, Very, very lds. You know, you'd have to be living under a rock not to hear about Charlie Kirk and what happened there. So my thought then would be it's going to be really tough to find an unbiased jury. But maybe the other element of this, which of course we have to know is on the table, is the death penalty. And my understanding is that it has to be unanimous with Christians and Mormons alike and people of religious faith having some objection to death penalty and needing the unanimity of that. Is there any difficulty if all of them reach a guilty verdict, but they can agree on the death penalty since that count one has that targeted enhancement charge, how difficult of a barrier will that be with that type of jury in that particular region of that particular state?

[Marlee Hornick]

Yeah, it's a very good question, Beau. And we on that one, honestly, and unfortunately we'll have to wait and see because it depends on the character of the individuals who end up serving on that jury. And you know, you raise a very good point, which is, are they going to have the spiritual stomach to make that decision? And it's a difficult one, I think. And you raise a very good point when you have that religious viewpoint, when that is the basis, which is ironically exactly the opposite of how Tyler Robinson clearly sees the world. But when you accept that every citizen or every human being has a godly source, it does raise that question internally. And it's a very strong threshold for a lot of people. It's a kind of a line in the sand, which is, we condemn this person to life in prison. We condemn this person's actions. We may even pity this person for their really obviously compromised view of reality that they're not even experiencing how beautiful creation is. But will we actually take that step of saying he no longer deserves the life that God bestowed upon him? It's a very good question.

[Beau]

Yeah, it's something I've been thinking about because I thought, you know, you get in more red areas, and I think a lot of red areas, and I'd say Tech, Texas is probably one of them. Florida, Tennessee, they're happy to go with death penalty because I believe in eye for an eye, and I think the firing squad is an option in Utah. But when you get into the very religious red areas, there is this conflict. I suppose. Now, having talked with the man who has this hour, usually Jack Bosobic and his brother Kevin, who are devout Catholics, they have no issue at all with the death penalty. And there may be a lot of people who feel that way when it comes to Mormons and of course, those. And I'm not going to say everybody on the jury Selection is going to be Mormon, but some of them inevitably may be. You have to have that unanimity to get that conviction for the death penalty. Now, based on what I'm seeing, and I don't know if you would agree, I'd love your legal opinion. This is not the trial, this is just a preliminary hearing. But of the compendium of evidence that we're seeing, I see count one, target enhancement as fully being met. But I'm one guy among what would be a pool of jurors. So what do you see? Do you see all the evidence necessary there, even though we're not going to see everything?

[Marlee Hornick]

Well, I think that's what the judge was actually just alluding to when he allowed the last document to be added to the public evidence and to be, to be shown on the screen where that particular document again speaks to motive. So I think that you're correct that count one is affirmatively met. Although he did say, and this is what we always have to do in, you know, in law and in legal analysis, it's always judicial deference. So he didn't say that he made the decision. He said that he allowed that it was material and that it appears to substantiate the count, but he didn't say he's making the decision. And he was very careful about that. And that's just how legal analysis goes. You even see the court itself is deferring to the judge that actually presides over the trial. Again, all we're doing here is to establish probable cause. So the judge did decide that this particular piece of evidence that was being submitted should be public. And he did decide that it mattered. But again, he can't make the decision about whether that makes Tyler Robinson clearly guilty at count one or whether that constitutes complete evidence. And that's, you know, that's just the frustrating nature of trials in general. And the legal process is you're never allowed to say the outcome until the judge says the outcome.

[Beau]

Right? And Marley, we're all hungry for the red meat. Everybody, everybody thinks, you know, and would love for this to be a five day trial. He's, he's, he's, he's the, you know, the verdict is read, the sentence is made and bam, we get justice for Charlie. But we know that that's not going to be the short term. That's, it's impossible. It's just not the way our judicial system works. But you're a legal analyst. You're this person who can provide so much insight on this. We would like for you to hang on through the break. Let's take a quick two minute break

[Jack Armstrong]

and we'll be right back.

[Beau]

More with Marley. And for this special, justice for Charlie.

[Jack Posobic]

Never ever stop fighting. No matter what. We will achieve American greatness. We are just getting started.

[Beau]

Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Now, I was looking for fun ways

[Jack Posobic]

to tell you that Mint's offer of

[Beau]

unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills, but it

[Jack Posobic]

turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a [e-mail] Switch upfront payment

[Benny Harmony]

of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for a 12 month plan. Required $15 per month equivalent taxes and fees. Extra initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes. Me slow when network is busy. See terms.

[Jack Armstrong]

Why should you listen to Armstrong and Getty on demand? We're not boring. Lotta news is boring and tedious and depressing. You don't want to live your life like that. Hey, I'm Jack Armstrong.

[Beau]

He's Joe Getty.

[Jack Armstrong]

We're Armstrong and Getty. We try to bring you the truth and help you figure out this crazy modern world.

[Jack Posobic]

How about something about a comedic tone?

[Jack Armstrong]

We have a winner. Yes. Listen to Armstrong and Yeti on Demand on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. The Joel Osteen Daily Podcast.

[Beau]

God's plans for you are for good.

[Jack Armstrong]

Be inside, get ready.

[Beau]

God is about to exceed your expectations.

[Jack Armstrong]

Joel Osteen Daily Podcast.

[Beau]

You are coming out of that dry place into more than enough daily encouragement

[Jonathan Gilliam]

right when you need it.

[Beau]

There are opportunities in your future bigger than you can imagine.

[Jack Armstrong]

Listen to the Joel Osteen Daily podcast on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your favorite podcasts.

[Jack Posobic]

Never ever stop fighting, no matter what. We will achieve American greatness. We are just getting started.

[Beau]

Welcome back to justice for Charlie. We have our guest, Marley Hornick, a constitutional law analyst and litigation strategist. Also we have with us Benny Ray, Harmony. Benny, go ahead and take it away.

[Benny Harmony]

Yeah, Marley. So Jack Bosobic, right now one of the big things he is on is, you know, Lance Twig said that Tyler Robinson was going hunting and kind of, you know, figuratively, but also literally. You know, we've heard about this hunting trip that he was apparently planning, but now it's looking like maybe this hunting trip was a hunting trip for Charlie. So talk to us a little bit about your perspective on that and kind of just what this is like going forward with this wording and moving forward with trial.

[Marlee Hornick]

Sure. Well, it does seem, Benny, like that may have been what he was alluding to.

[Agent Davis]

You know, you.

[Marlee Hornick]

You bring up a point that I'm remembering now because one of the issues about the actual gun itself is that if it is truly Tyler Robinson's weapon, the gun would be quite unique. He refers to that in some of the text messages that were successfully published today and discussed, not, I think, maybe even within the hour, about how the gun he used may have been modified by his grandfather. It was, you know, a family weapon, a family heirloom. So, remember, if that's the same weapon that's in custody, and there's no reason to think that it's not. I mean, it's crazy to think that there's some other weapon because it was wrapped in a towel with him and Lance's DNA on it, that the family is going to have a hard time and they already were participating in helping him to go turn himself in. Remember, the family is going to have a hard time arguing down the idea that it isn't a family heirloom and a very specific weapon that only Tyler Robinson could have used. So you just made me think of that with the hunting illusion that you're. That you're making. I agree. It sounds like that's what Tyler was referring to, tragically, that he thought this was some kind of a human hunting trip. A very, very disturbed man and took

[Beau]

a Dremel tool, actually to engrave on the bullets. And we know that there were engravings on the bullets. That just adds up. Marley, before we let you go, just in a litigation sense, just so we're clear, anything that's being introduced right now for the judge is all just for probable cause. We know that's a low bar, but it's true that once it goes to trial, every single bit of evidence that we're seeing would also have to be litigated once again, in terms of its admissibility. Is that accurate?

[Marlee Hornick]

That is accurate. You know, I want to go back to something you said before the break because you said, you know, this is going to be a lengthy trial. That is not necessarily the case. This case has such extraordinary evidence. There is video footage of Tyler Robinson on the scene, his license plate, his car, his family heirloom gun, his DNA on the towel, his text messages, his. His discord chats. I'm. The evidence is pretty overwhelming, and it doesn't have to Take a long time for a jury to decide that. Just to be clear. It doesn't take a long time. In fact, I was trying to remember the case. It was a big one, and it was just decided in literally three days by a unanimous jury. I don't think I'm going to recall which case. It was very recent. I was just discussing it. And so it's just an example of how when you really have overwhelming evidence, it doesn't necessarily lead to a lengthy trial.

[Beau]

And I think you're right. I mean, I think the common sense in us would say it should be very quick, but unfortunately, our litigation system moves at the speed that it has to. And I think my point was just. I think for Erika Kirk, the family and just the public at large, nothing could possibly be too soon because we want justice and we want it to be today. You know, I think that's the thing is in our hearts we know that, but there's just. The legal system has to play itself out. So I share your view, and I hope that it will be swift. Marlee Hornick, thanks so much. We appreciate you.

[Benny Harmony]

Thanks, Marlee.

[Marlee Hornick]

Thanks a lot.

[Beau]

And I want to bring in Jonathan Gilliam now. Jonathan Gilliam is a former FBI special agent and a Navy seal. Jonathan, just real quickly, because you are a former FBI special agent, how do you believe the FBI and the Utah State Bureau of Investigations did a good and complete job that won't be undermined by the defense? Are you satisfied?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, I think they probably did a good and complete job, but will it be undermined by the defense? I'm sure of that. So, listen, I think that the reality of this, from the very initial, from the time the shot happened and to the. To the time that we are now, the evidence collection, the analysis, I think this has been exactly the way law enforcement should have done their do carry out any investigation, done their work. What was bad was before the shot was taken, that was a complete failure of a threat assessment and, and lack of awareness on where an attacker could attack from. So, you know, that part was a complete failure. But I think what we see with the investigators and how they have systematically put together this picture of the movement of Tyler Robinson, of the DNA, of the weapon itself and where it was located and do the video footage, all this stuff, has really painted a very accurate mountain of evidence that implicates him. And I think it's not just enough to go to trial, but it's definitely going to be enough to convict him.

[Benny Harmony]

And Jonathan, you know, one of the big things that they're talking about during this trial is that other bullet that wasn't shot that was found on a separate rooftop. Now, if I believe right, we heard one of the investigators say that it was an unfired bullet from an officer's gun or something along those lines. Do you see any issues with how law enforcement handled certain little things like this? I know you said you weren't very happy with, with the planning leading up to this event. Was there things that they did that are going to. To come out and in some way be on the defense's side?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, I would think so. Look, a lot of these universities, their law enforcement departments aren't really up to par. I've seen it myself firsthand, up close, and I'm not sure when that round was, how it got there, or when it was there. But I'll just put to you this way. When it comes to crime scene management, when it comes to the initial investigation of any type of incident like this, if you don't have experienced investigators there, they can attain a crime scene, they can drop things there, they can do these things. So it's very important to freeze that area as quickly as possible. And I just think that that's probably going to be something that the defense goes after. And listen, when I say the defense, I can clearly see what they're doing in trying to string this out as long as possible. They're probably looking for some type of a deal they can make with the prosecution. But also, I really, truly believe that, like warfare with drones and social media involved. Now, I think lawfare and the way that the legal system works is that defense attorneys are very in tune. They're very in tune with how the social media rumors are playing out. And I think they're using that in a lot of ways to convict the law enforcement in the court of public opinion and mistrust.

[Beau]

Jonathan, do you think there's any way that he cuts the deal that takes death off the table? Because when you look again at this compelling evidence and just everything that we've seen thus far, and this isn't even the trial, it's just a preliminary hearing, but based on what you're seeing, you're saying you think they get the conviction to get the death penalty, of course you have unanimity, but because there's so much evidence, and maybe, as Marley Hornick said, maybe it isn't a very lengthy trial, do you think death is taken off the table for any reason? Because my understanding from criminal defense attorneys is you can appeal, you can, you can take death off the table and get life imprisonment, but you can't waive every single appeal ever. He could say he has insufficient counsel and he can appeal, which he very well could do. So do you think there's any instance where they take death off the table now that we've seen so much and we haven't even seen everything yet?

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Yeah, I think it's always a possibility. Now with the way the legal system works and these prosecutors people just don't want to go to trial anymore. I mean, there's very many. There's many, many reasons why that's the case. I mean, I think that a lot of prosecutors don't trust juries anymore because they. The information is so widely disseminated, and some of that information, obviously, is going to be rumor and gossip and conspiracy. So I think, you know, I think prosecutors are always concerned with that.

[Judge Graff]

And.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

And then also you have a lot of prosecutors. I don't know these ones in particular, but you have a lot of prosecutors who are careerists, and the last thing they want to do is lose any case. And I think it's always safer for those careerists to take a plea deal and consider that a win. So I think in both these circumstances and when you talk, when or if they talk and consider what, you know, the Kirk family wants, there's a. I would say, a good possibility that once this is all laid out and the. The defense sees that there's no room to wiggle, that they will ask for a plea deal, and it's a good possibility that he'll get it.

[Beau]

Wow. Jonathan, I do want to ask you about this, too. You know, so much was about Lance Twiggs today, and this is something I actually really wanted to ask you because, you know, I've interviewed before on different shows, and you've got such a bright mind and scope when it comes to this Internet discord culture. And I'm thinking about, is this based on what you've seen? Is this a ripe ground for radicalization? Because I've seen some things about it. I've seen how leftists can kind of. It becomes this enclave of anonymity, but it's also a community. These are outcasts. These are black sheep. Lance Twiggs and Tyler Robinson have been called black sheep of their family. So talk about the Internet subculture, because a lot of people don't understand this, myself included, of how that kind of community can bestow the type of thing Tyler Robinson did, allegedly.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Well, I'll tell you, this has been going on for a long time with Terrorists use this type of communication to plan and carry out attacks all the time because there's, you know, they can really stay anonymous in that area. Speaking of Anonymous, QAnon, these types of, of conspiracy, floods of info, of fake information milked in with some possible facts float in these chat areas all the time. I, I have good friends who have tons of experience, but they don't even know each other. But I could call them at any point and say, what do you think about this? And it could be a hot button topic. And instead of looking at facts, they, they repeat the same narratives that they hear in these chat type of groups. And so I think these things are a threat to national security. They're a threat to young people, they're a threat to experienced people. I just think it's, it's an area of operations for nefarious individuals to either plan attacks, spread rumors, and build up their clout. And I think it's something that wasn't there 15 years ago, but now is a huge part of the way society maneuvers and gains information. That's a very scary part because it's not vetted. And I think when you add that to the fact that these groups exist, these groups can exist to talk to each other, but the same type of ridiculous gossip and conspiracy, it exists out there, and that's where these people get angry and end up doing something like this and carrying out these killings. So it's filled with hate, it's filled with gossip, and it affects both left and right. And I think it's a very dangerous thing that is occurring.

[Beau]

I have to agree with you, Jonathan. And you know, as I looked at this subculture to armed queers SLC group that's they may not be connected, but I'm just looking at some of these different ancillary things around it, and it just seems to foment hate. And when I say foment hate, I don't mean just hate. I'm talking about hate that escalates to violence. And I think that's what we've seen here. So thank you so much.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

Can I say one thing for that? You're exactly right. They, they may not be directly involved with this, but these groups just like the influencers out there that have these shows on YouTube and, you know, podcasts or whatever you want to call it now, they have millions of people that follow them and live and breathe by their gossip. And I think these people somehow, some way, eventually have to be held accountable for the influence they have in causing people to do these things. I Know, there's been cases where people have talked to other people into committing suicide. Well, that's exactly what's happening in these types of areas where they convince people that it is bad enough for you to go out and carry an attack. And something has to be done about this eventually.

[Beau]

You're damn right they do. Jonathan Gilliam, thank you so much for your. For your wisdom today. We appreciate you, sir. Thank you.

[Marlee Hornick]

You.

[Jonathan Gilliam]

You got it. God bless.

[Beau]

And we have Jack Posobic, who is standing by with us outside the courtroom. Jack, I think hopefully you're able to hear me. Are you, sir?

[Jack Posobic]

Yeah, Bo, I've got you. I mean, I. I can't even imagine 10 months ago, a day like any other. Charlie starting the tour out. And then we get the message about the shooting. We see the video, and it's now taken 10 months of our time to be able to get this evidence out. And it's finally here. We're finally hearing the evidence directly from Lance Twiggs, the boyfriend of Tyler Robinson, stating for the record in court, in testimony under oath, Tyler Robinson confessed to killing Charlie Kirk. This is beyond. You know, we have the forensics, we have the text messages, we have everything. But this is direct evidence in testimony. Not from the government, not from the state, not from the FBI, from Lance Twiggs, the man who was in a romantic relationship with Tyler Robinson, his boyfriend, the man who knew him the most. And what did Tyler Robinson tell him he was doing? That he said he was going hunting. He said, I'm engraving bullets because I'm going hunting. Yeah, he was going hunting when he went to hunt Charlie Kirk on that campus, who went there peacefully, who went there without hate in his heart, who said that he wanted to talk to other people and have a conversation. And Tyler Robinson said he wanted to hunt him. I. I'm. I'm. I'm very relieved that this came out. The judge yesterday looked as though he was going to acquiesce to everything the defense wanted, that he was going to block it, that he was going to. Was going to prevent the world from seeing this. And now it's out there, Jack. Now it's out there for the entire world to see. How.

[Beau]

How satisfied are you with what was? Because I know there were moments when we were in the show where there were bits of evidence being played that we did not see, that you would have seen in the courtroom. And I'd love for you to comment on those pieces of evidence, since we don't know what they were. But also, are you satisfied, even though it was completely redacted with what we saw in the video testimony from Twigs today.

[Jack Posobic]

Am I satisfied? I'm never going to be satisfied. Nothing is going to ever make this right. Nothing. Not even if there's a conviction. Not even all of it. It's going to provide. Is it going to provide a modicum of justice? Yes. And we do need justice, not just for Charlie and in this case, but all the groups that you were talking about, the entire ecosystem that created this situation from happening, this hellacious demonic situation where he's in these chat groups with people who are treating Charlie Kirk as if he's some kind of meme, as if he's some kind of not real person. He's not a flesh and blood human being who had a family, who had a mother and a father and a wife and two incredible children. And look, am I satisfied? Of course not. But thank God. Thank God that he sent the Holy Spirit down and that the Holy Spirit went upon that judge last night and said, judge, you need to do the right thing here and you need to let that video be played so that the world can see that the world can see the depravity. The world can see the depths of darkness, the depths of the evil that took Charlie Kirk from us. We need to see it. The world needs to see it and we need to look at it. We can't turn away. We cannot turn away from this. This is the truth. This is the evidence. This is from the horse's mouth, Lance Twiggs. And he showed us the text messages and we saw the handwritten note and we saw the rest of it. But this is Lance Twiggs on video telling us Tyler Robinson killed Charlie Kirk.

[Beau]

So, Jack, again, to go back to those pieces of evidence that you saw in the courtroom that we did not. I'm assuming one of those is the photo of the handwritten note under the keyboard. Tell me what that looked like and tell me about any other pieces that you would have seen and the family would have seen in that courtroom that we as a public did not get to see.

[Jack Posobic]

Well, look, it's the handwritten note, is there. It looks like a handwritten note. We weren't seeing it close enough that we could really read it. That those words have been released a million times so people could, could see that. Now we had the actual evidence of the note itself. We saw the discord messages. Again, those have also been released. So what you're looking at are photos of a phone showing the text messages, then the discord chat and then photos of the letter itself. So. So you can see all of these things. And more to the point, though, you have Lance Twiggs on video confirming all of this. He's saying, yes, I was in this text thread. Yes, I was in this Discord server. Yes, these are the messages that Tyler sent us. Yes, this is Tyler's account confirming. This is Tyler's phone number. This is the number that I have him saved under. This is the name I have him saved under. This is the screen name that he used on Discord. So again, it's. It's Lance Twigs fully corroborating everything on video. And that's why I keep bringing it back to this, because this is not an astronomy interpretation that's being made by. As the defense would have you believe. You know, the state isn't just saying this. The state isn't just making this up. This is the boyfriend, the lover, the roommate of Tyler Robinson confirming on video everything. And he was given use immunity to be able to say this, because you can see there are instances where to my mind, and, you know, I'm not a lawyer, but to my mind, it's sounds like he's almost talking to Tyler about how to recover that gun from the drop site. Almost like he's an accessory after the fact by trying to help him recover the gun, recover the rifle, talk him through that. And this, of course, is why he wanted the immunity, because in these text messages, there are things that Lance Twiggs is confirming that seemed to me as if he was helping Tyler after the fact and certainly gets very, very close to that. And if, you know, if I'm looking at that, just using common sense, it looks like he could be incriminating himself for confirming those things. That's why he was given that immunity. But keep in mind, he could still be prosecuted because we've yet to even go further, and I'm sure we will in the trial, when we get to the trial. That. About what exactly did he know? What were the conversations about going hunting that Tyler said? He said he's going hunting. He's going hunting. Where are you going hunting, Tyler? Where were you going? Were you going hunting on a college campus?

[Beau]

Maybe.

[Jack Posobic]

Maybe on top of the LOSI Center? It's. I'm just. I'm very. You look at this stuff and you know what he did, and then to try to come around and say, I'm so. Oh, I'm sorry. You're not sorry, Jack. By the way, he never says that. That he's sorry for doing it. Tyler, in the text messages so he never says that he. That he's sorry for doing it in the text messages. The only inference we have of that is from Twigs. And keep in mind, this is the interview from April 20, which is months and months after the shooting itself. Nowhere in the actual text messages or discord thread does Tyler say, I'm sorry for doing it. He says, I'm sorry I got caught. That's what he's sorry for. He said, I'm sorry I got caught. I'm sorry I left the rifle. I'm sorry I brought this on us, the scrutiny, the arrest. I'm sorry we can't live together in this world of love that we thought we were going to have by eliminating Charlie Kirk's hate. Again, by the way he confesses over and over and over. This is the many confessions of Charlie Kirk, or, excuse me, the many confessions of Tyler Robinson for the murder of Charlie Kirk that we're seeing here. But he never once says in text or in the notes that he's sorry for doing it. He just says he's sorry for getting caught.

[Beau]

Yeah, that's true, Jack. We've only got maybe 20 seconds more. Do you think Lance Twiggs is as oblivious as he claims in this video?

[Jack Posobic]

I think Twigs is terrified of being prosecuted. That's what I think is going on. And I think that he knows exactly what he did and he knows exactly what Tyler did. And honestly, I'm just going to say I don't buy it, that they never talk politics or that he never said anything about Charlie, never said anything about LGBT.