April 17, 2026 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
53:07
TYLER ROBINSON TEAM WANTS TO BAN CAMERAS, DELAY TRIAL 4 MORE MONTHS
Tyler Robinson's defense team seeks a four-month delay and camera ban during his murder trial for killing Charlie Kirk, citing 200 terabytes of data despite hosts arguing these tactics stall public momentum. While the ATF report confirms bullet fragments match the class of a .30 caliber rifle used in the shooting, the defense claims forensic limitations prevent specific identification. Simultaneously, seven Republicans voted to extend Temporary Protected Status for Haitians until 2029, a move critics call a "death sentence" driven by diaspora politics. Ultimately, the episode emphasizes that procedural delays and political compromises undermine transparency in both the courtroom and elections. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Fighting for a Delay00:06:33
Hey guys, it's Jack.
I wanted to let you know that we're starting a new push for subscriptions here on Human Events Daily.
So make sure that when you're listening to this podcast, you hit subscribe, you download it, and you share it with five of your friends.
Make sure they're all going and downloading as well because we need to get the signal out as much as possible.
Look, we've done so much over the past couple of years since this show started, and we're only going to do so much more.
Let's get it.
This is what happens when the Fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
Commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posobick.
Christ is King.
And so, going to that point that you just asked, so how do you propose the court balance your request for a potentially large, a long delay against the constitutional rights of victim representative Ms. Kirk and her right to a speedy disposition of the case?
For example, I noted in your motion, you stated that your DNA expert needs, I believe it was six months.
That was her estimate.
And so, how do we balance that?
And I appreciate your statement, but going to your statement as it relates to Ms. Kirk's right to a speed disposition of a party outside, right?
Not counsel from either side.
But it seems like we're going to be held to the timeline of somebody outside who's an expert who's saying six months.
And that concerns the court.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition, Human Events Daily.
We're here live, Washington, D.C. Today is April 17th, 2026.
The Tyler Robinson hearing is currently live in Utah, Charlie Kirk murder trial.
I want to go to that immediately.
Given the complex mixture that they're dealing with.
And so that question cannot be answered based on the information that we have and we reviewed.
Thank you, Mr. Root.
I appreciate that.
Thank you.
It provides a lot of clarity.
All right, let's go ahead and we're at the 12 o'clock hour.
Let's break for 15 minutes, come back at.
Uh 1215, uh to uh to confer with defense in regards to discovery, and then we're going to transition to talking about the um the media in the courtroom.
Uh, as indicated the court, it's not the court's intent to issue a ruling about uh continuing the preliminary hearing.
I want to weigh the evidence, the oral argument, the information today, but I am also uh cognizant of uh the timelines and and so that ruling will not be delayed because both parties require that, as they should.
With that, court is now in recess.
So what we're seeing here, guys, and leave the shot up as it's live.
I just want to be able to see what's going on in the courtroom.
I can explain a little bit.
Folks, so just catching up, this is the Charlie Kirk murder trial that you're seeing.
We're looking at some of the preliminary, some of the pre preliminary hearings, I should say.
Today's hearing was going to be mostly about media in the courtroom, cameras in the courtroom, which you know that I've been fighting for, that human events was the very first outlet to fight for.
We've been fighting so much and so hard for cameras in the courtroom that Tyler Robinson's lawyers have even attacked us by name in the courtroom, calling us out for our open letter calling for the cameras.
So what have we seen so far today?
So far, they're arguing for a further delay in the case.
Tyler Robinson's legal team is arguing for two things right now.
They're arguing that cameras be banned from the courtroom because they don't want the American people seeing this.
And they're also arguing for a delay.
They want a delay in the case.
And as we've said here on Human Events over and over, that if they thought that their client, Tyler Robinson, was innocent, wouldn't they want the case to be moved?
And held as quickly as possible.
This preliminary hearing, which is set to take place next month in Utah in this courtroom, is going to be the preliminary hearing.
What does that mean?
The evidence against Tyler Robinson will be presented for the first time in full, at least the evidence as collected for the purposes of probable cause for making the indictment, the charges on him.
It'll be presented.
There'll be an overview of the investigation.
It's not the official trial.
And then, of course, Tyler Robinson will have the opportunity to make his Plea guilty or not guilty, he has yet to enter a plea seven months after the murder of Charlie Kirk, and it'll be eight months by the time of the preliminary hearing, unless it gets delayed.
That Tyler Robinson has yet to actually enter a plea of guilty or not guilty yet.
His lawyer, Kathy Nestor, is there and is known for these types of delay tactics.
So rather than hear any arguments about evidence, any arguments about dispositive evidence or evidence of innocence, we're not hearing that.
We're hearing arguments about delay, And again, we've been asking the question over and over if you believe your client is innocent, if you believe the evidence shows that your client is innocent, why do you keep pushing for these delays?
You can't have it both ways.
Either you say that the evidence is stacked in your defendant's favor, then you would want the trial, you'd want the hearing, you'd want it to be going on as fast as possible.
You don't say, Your Honor, you got the wrong guy.
That's what you would do.
You would say, let's get in here.
And by the way, why would you want to ban cameras?
Wouldn't you want to do that in front of the entire world to exonerate your client?
Wouldn't you want your client's innocence to be shown to the entire world before God and man that they could see that your client was innocent?
Wouldn't you want every camera in the entire world to be able to see that?
Because if you believed he was innocent, that's what you would want.
If you believed that your client was an innocent man falsely accused, you would want the world to see it because you would want the world to be able to give him his life back.
The way that Charlie will never have his life back.
But you could do that as a defense lawyer, and you would do it if you thought your client was innocent.
Saving Our Country Together00:02:27
So, again, you know, we see these moves being made.
Judge Graff, by the way, I'll just say, you know, I was watching this live on Adrian Burkhart's channel.
Fantastic.
Huge shout out to her.
Great work.
He seemed to be getting very frustrated with the defense team because even asking them a direct question, they would not give him a direct answer on why they needed the delay, why they're asking for a six month delay, by the way, which would be incredibly frustrating.
incredibly long delay in the case and getting frustrated why they wouldn't give him a straight answer back.
Jack Posobic, Human Events Daily, Real America's Voice.
We'll be right back.
Stand in our way and our golden age has just begun.
This is Human Events with Jack Posobic.
Now it's time for everyone to understand what America First truly means.
Welcome to the second American revolution.
All right, folks, Jack Posobic, we are back live here, Human Events Daily, Real America's Voice.
Folks, America is entering its 250th year, and the direction of this country is being decided right now in our culture and our economy, and who we choose to support matters more than ever.
Most wireless companies don't care who you are or what you believe.
They just want your money.
Patriot Mobile is different.
For more than 12 years, they've stood with Americans who believe freedom is worth defending.
Funding the Christian conservative movement when others stayed silent.
And here's the deal you don't have to give up quality or service when you switch to Patriot Mobile.
They deliver premium priority access on all three major U.S. networks, so you get the same or better coverage than you have today.
Do you think switching is a hassle?
It's not.
Keep your number, keep your phone, or upgrade with them.
Their 100% U.S. based customer support team can activate you in minutes.
You still paying off a device?
Patriot Mobile even offers you a contract buyout.
This is a defining year.
We must work together to save our country.
Go to patriotmobile.comslash poso or give them a call 972 patriot.
Use promo code POSO for a free month of service.
That's patriotmobile.comslash poso or call 972 patriot and switch today.
All right, folks, I want to bring in my friend Aaron McIntyre, host of The Aaron McIntyre Show.
How are you, brother?
Republicans Distorting the Facts00:16:08
Doing well.
Thanks for having me.
So we saw this report drop this week and it was kind of a bombshell.
I think ATF report, the Ballistics Daily Mail wrote it up, a much better write-up, I think, than their headline a couple weeks ago.
And even TMZ hitting it now, saying that, you know, they said, look, you know, we can't match the bullet fragments to this gun, but we can essentially match it to this class of gun, given that it is .30 caliber.
We found that it was a .30 caliber bullet.
And so with that, what would you say that makes?
Of the, you know, this latest development in the case.
And obviously, the hearing is in recess right now.
Well, I really hope this just puts any speculation that he couldn't be the killer to bed.
It's very clear what happened here.
It's very straightforward.
A lot of people are trying to make it into something that it's not.
Don't get me wrong.
I understand wanting a thorough investigation.
I think that the public and the family of Charlie Kirk and his friends are owed the truth.
But ultimately, it's very clear that Tyler Robinson was involved in this, that he is the most important suspect that they have.
You have fingerprints, you have this bullet matching.
Obviously, everything else from notes to his lover.
This is a situation where the law is obvious in this case.
And it's time to go ahead and put that into effect so we can settle this.
It's also important that we have this settled because then it allows the Trump administration to go after the wider network of leftist progressives who are pushing this kind of rhetoric, the kind that drove someone into the rage that they would shoot Charlie Kirk.
It's very clear that this is a wider effort by Antifa and other leftist organizations.
to train these people, to encourage these people.
And so getting justice for Charlie and ensuring that we're able to go after a wider network of people who are encouraging this behavior should be everyone's priority.
Yeah, no, I couldn't agree more on that.
You know, we want to, we all want justice for Charlie, but of course, we also want to continue the mission that Charlie gave us, the mission that Charlie laid out save the country, right?
Fix the borders, fix the problems, save what's going on here.
And yet, in this instance, it's inexplicable to me that here we have this team, this defense team, where they're saying, okay, our client is not guilty, he's innocent, we want to fight for him.
But we're also asking for delays.
We're asking for a delay of the preliminary hearing itself, where he would just make his plea, you know, guilty or not guilty, and present probable cause.
It's not the actual trial.
That's still a ways away.
And they're even asking for a six month delay in just the preliminary hearing.
And at one point, you know, I think it was brought up at the hearing today.
They said, well, if you believe your client is innocent, then you deliberately want him rotting in jail for another six months while you prepare for this hearing?
What are you doing?
Well, I mean, obviously they're lying, but that's their job.
They know that he's guilty.
They know that he's going to be completely destroyed in court.
And their only hope, because the facts are so obvious, it's so open and shut, is to really delay things as long as possible, mire them down in procedure.
And also, don't forget that public opinion is a critical part of this.
The longer down the road they can push this, the less the court is influenced by calls for justice, and the more they can hope to work in some kind of defense, maybe on mental illness or some other.
aspect of the case that allows them to weasel their way out of this.
They know that momentum and perception is critical.
So they want to make sure that this is as far removed from the event of Charlie's death as possible.
So to make sure that they can get the maximum amount of sympathy or so, you know, make some other kind of case as to why ultimately Tyler Robinson should not receive justice.
So I think that it's not that they have any particular tactical understanding here other than we're screwed and the best thing we can do is make this go as long as possible.
Yeah, there's this old saying in defense lawyering where if you have the law on your side, pound the law.
If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts.
And if you have neither on your side, pound the table.
And it seems that in this instance, the table is what's being pounded.
So when that comes back, we will pick it back up.
But I do also want to get, we have some more breaking news where, and I believe, guys, we have a clip of this of.
Democrat Representative Ayanna Presley.
Guys, let's play that clip now.
I'm very proud of the work, the strategy, the WIP effort by my office and the coalition that we built nationally, resulting in that majority of those 218 signatures to force a vote.
There are 350,000 Haitian nationals in this country.
I represent the third largest Haitian diaspora in the country.
I co chair the House Haiti Caucus.
And for me, this is a matter of keeping families together.
It's the acknowledgement that deporting those Haitian nationals back to Haiti, a country that is politically destabilized, been ravaged by national disasters, the assassination of their president, rampant gang violence, that is a death sentence.
And moreover, to separate families and to threaten several industries where many Haitian nationals make great contributions health care, construction, hospitality.
And so that is why I'm leading this fight.
And we are currently in legislative recess, but when I return to Washington and we are back in session, That discharge petition has seven days to ripen, two days to sort of call the question, to call the vote, if you will.
I have every reason to believe that those signatures will hold, translate to votes.
It will pass the House.
And then we take this fight to the Senate.
So, Aaron, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I've been looking at this hearing all morning, I've been laser focused on it.
This has got to be fake because my producers are telling me something that's absolutely horrific.
That the Republican House voted to require DHS to continue the Haitian temporary protected status until April 2029.
That can't possibly be true, can it?
This is absolutely insane, Jack, on every level, okay?
We had seven Republicans cross the aisle to make this pass.
Seven complete traitors, including, of course, Maria Salazar, the queen of immigration, the person who's pushing amnesty from the right, theoretically, from the conservative party, from the GOP, and six other traitors lined up behind her and pushed this.
And this is absolutely insane for several reasons.
One, the idea that you can't send Haitians back to Haiti because it's dangerous there is absolutely crazy.
Haiti is dangerous because it's full of Haitians.
That's why it's dangerous.
There's nothing magical about the soil.
It's the people of the country that make it dangerous.
So if you bring dangerous people to the United States because the country they created was too dangerous, you just make the United States more dangerous.
And Jack, I know this because just recently a woman was beaten to death with a hammer by a Haitian migrant in my hometown, in my area of Florida.
I have driven past the gas station where that murder took place multiple times.
Times.
This is not some theoretical safety issue.
This is not some abstract question of who is an American.
This is a direct terrorist threat in the United States.
We have people who do not belong here, who are being kept here through this insane quirk of Biden era immigration law, and the Republicans are backing that up.
They are encouraging that to continue.
Now, luckily, it's not all of the Republicans, clearly.
It was a handful, and the Republican Senate has already vowed that they will not pass this.
I hope that they hold to that promise.
And obviously, President Trump would have the option to veto since this is a standalone.
However, ultimately, the fact that we even had seven Republicans willing to make this argument to agree with Presley is absolutely crazy.
And so, you know, you've been outlining some of the contributions of the Haitians to American society there, Aaron.
You know, when we hear about this, you know, you go back to Springfield, Ohio from 2024, which of course became this huge flashback.
Point PolitiFact called it the lie of the year of 2024, number one lie of the year, according to PolitiFact.
And yet, we don't see any significant contributions they're working in, like meatpacking plants and stuff like this jobs that the American people should be doing, but they're not because Haitian scab labor is able to do so and willing to do so for a much lower price than Americans.
Yeah, the very argument that Haitian immigrants are somehow economically necessary is absolutely crazy.
When you look at the statistics, 65% of head of households.
In the Haitian community, they are on some form of welfare.
That means that they are primarily being taken care of by the government.
They are not contributing economically.
They are draining economically very directly.
So, even in the menial jobs that they are filling, they are not actually supporting the majority of their own families.
There is no economic argument.
There is no safety argument.
None of this makes sense.
The only reason it makes any sense is that these people are playing diaspora politics.
They are trying to gain votes.
from illegals who will be naturalized.
That's it.
There's something very sinister going on.
Right back, Jack Posobic, R. McIntyre Human Events Daily.
Talk about influencers.
These are influencers.
And they're friends of mine.
Jack Kosovic.
Where's Jack?
Jack.
He's done a great job.
All right, Jack Kosovic back live here, Human Events Daily, Real America's Voice.
And we're still on a hearing, a recess in the hearing for Tyler Robinson today.
Want to get to that question of why does the Tyler Robinson defense want to ban courts?
From having cameras, why do they want to ban the world from seeing these hearings?
Why do they want to ban the world from seeing their client if they believe he's innocent?
Why do they want to ban things if you stand for transparency in the Charlie Kirk murder?
How can you be on Tyler Robinson's team and call for a ban of cameras in the courtroom?
That's the opposite of transparency.
That is the opposite.
That is censorship.
That is censorship that is hiding things that is preventing the public from knowing what's going on.
So, you want to be on team censorship.
That's Tyler Robinson's team.
If you want to be on team transparency, team truth, team openness, you must push for cameras in the courtroom.
It's really as simple as that.
And since we are standing for transparency, we are going to make everyone famous here who voted of the Republicans and one who caucuses, who voted to keep the Haitians on temporary protected status.
I'll read the list.
Maria Salazar, Florida.
Brian Fitzpatrick, Pennsylvania.
Mike Lawrence, New York.
Don Bacon, New England, or excuse me, Nebraska.
Gosh.
Carlos Jimenez, Florida.
Nicole Malatakis, New York.
And Kevin Kiley of California, who caucuses with Republicans.
So there you go.
Arm McIntyre, you know, this is the question that I want to ask is, you know, it's not like these congressmen just wake up and say, oh, I'm going to vote this way because whatever, right?
There are actually power structures behind them that want.
These Haitians here in this country and power structures that will take congressmen like Don Bacon, by the way, who's already going to be leaving office, and then provide them with golden parachutes, with jobs, with lobbying contracts, etc., when they leave Congress.
This is really about the powerful underpinnings of our system more so than just these seven people, isn't it?
That's right.
All the incentive structures line up for mass immigration.
First, we have the political incentives, which is if you can court different ethnic diasporas, they become entirely dependent voters.
And because we are still challenging the 14th Amendment and birthright citizenship, if they have children here, basically they're automatically American citizens.
People know that long term, if they cultivate these dependencies inside the United States, they will gain political power.
On top of that, there are powerful financial incentives.
We have big corporations that want cheap labor.
We have A lot of different groups that want new consumers.
There's all kinds of reasons to pack as many bodies from third world nations into the United States for different aspects of our system so that they can ultimately flourish.
However, it consistently hurts the American voter.
And over time, we see that the ruling class who is packing these people into the United States build resentment.
In many cases, we can tell, as for instance in Springfield, Ohio, that they are simply being brought there to spite.
Red state voters.
It is a deliberate effort to dilute the Republican vote in those areas, the support for conservative politics in those areas to destroy ultimately those communities that are still classically American and destroy the American identity to make it easier to control people through propaganda, through pitting each other, pitting them against each other.
But also, we see the buildup of resentment from our different representatives.
We have Don Bacon, and this guy is so insane that on Twitter, after he announced proudly, His support of this bill.
He then went on to mock different conservatives in his comments to the point where he threatened to also extend the temporary protected status of Venezuelans and El Salvadorans, even though El Salvador is now more safe than the United States due to Bacale.
So we have a situation where we have a Republican politician threatening people for the fun of it.
Yes, I'm going to bring more foreigners into your country, even though I know they have no right to be here, and I'm going to keep them here, and there's nothing you can do about it because I hate you.
This is what we're getting from Republicans.
When we have Republicans talking about this, who needs Democrats?
Yeah, and you look at these.
The question, though, of Haiti is such an interesting one because, again, here you have a country that was founded so many ways on wokeness.
In this case, it was an offshoot of the French Revolution, where in the book Unhumans, we wrote that it's part of the French Revolution cinematic universe, that the French government falls.
They make all the slaves in Haiti throughout the empire, give them the freedom immediately.
And in this case, you have the former slaves then raising up.
And remember, they'd already been given their freedom, but they still rose up and killed all the white French people, the men, the women, slaughtered all the children in the country that they could find after performing voodoo rituals, which included Duddy Bookman was the head of this.
And he performed these satanic voodoo rituals, blood drinking of animals and things.
Before they went on this slaughter fest.
Retaining Homicide Experts00:15:44
And for some reason, it's still our fault.
It's still, you know, white people's fault or France's fault or America's fault that Haiti is the way it is.
Why is that, Aaron?
What's going on here?
You know, the wild thing is that Haiti is this incredible little science experiment, this incredible microcosm that we can kind of see all the dynamics play out in.
You're exactly right to say that Haiti was founded on a satanic blood ritual.
People will laugh at that, but that is historically just.
Accurate.
That is exactly what happened.
And of course, it exists on an island, Hispaniola, along with the Dominican Republic.
Now, the Dominican Republic has its problems, but it is nowhere near as bad as Haiti.
In fact, they literally will just shoot anyone from Haiti who tries to get into the Dominican Republic because they know how dangerous it is to have that population bleed over into their country.
So it's not that Haiti is on some island that just can't have a decent country.
We already know that one could exist there.
It is literally this spiritual successor to the satanic blood ritual that.
Honestly, it seems cursed in every way, shape, or form.
And yet, as you say, for some reason, it's America's job to make things right.
Why?
Never is it this explained.
It's not a legacy of colonialism.
We never occupied Haiti.
We don't own Haiti.
We never extracted wealth from Haiti.
All of the classic arguments fall short, but it doesn't matter because for some reason, the Clintons were always to blame, even when they were murdered.
Right.
No, I was going to say we never extracted resources.
However, the Clinton Foundation, there may be some questions there.
Orrin McIntyre, where can people follow you, brother?
I'm on The Blaze, of course, the Orrin McIntyre show.
We have the show on YouTube and on Rumble.
And of course, you can follow me on Twitter at Orrin McIntyre.
All right.
Thank you so much.
Give him a follow, folks.
The hearing is back live.
I want to take you live to that now.
So.
This is one of those things where you're ready when you have to be ready, right?
Based off of my calendar and what I believe I need personally, well, we need the DNA.
So let's focus only on what's before you now.
I would say I need at least four months to finish processing what I have based off of my calendar, my trial calendar.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Kathy Nestor on behalf of Mr. Robinson.
I don't know if you recall, it's been a long time, but when we were first setting this prelim, I mentioned to the court that for the months of February and March, I would not be available.
I was involved in a murder trial in Summit County.
And so for the entire months of February and March, I was not able to work on this case.
The trial ended, I think, March 17th or 18th.
Then I got sick for like 10.
days.
So I have not been able to turn back to Mr. Robinson's case until the beginning of this month.
In the time that I was in trial, we've had seven disclosures from the state.
Many of those disclosures involve thousands and thousands of pages.
One of the biggest disclosures we got was on March 5th while I was in trial, and it consisted of the entire FBI file, which was massive.
That's what I've been focusing on the last two weeks, reading it as fast as my eyes can read it.
because a lot of the reports I think that are going to come out through the SBI originated through interviews with the FBI.
So I've been trying to get my hat around that file and that's just one portion of one of the seven disclosures and there were thousands of pages.
And I think I've made it through the FBI file now but I haven't even touched any of the rest of it.
And as lead counsel I do expect to have at least a portion of the witnesses at the prelim.
I share Ms. Visser's concern about even though there's only 35 exhibits they're going to introduce, that doesn't limit the testimony that's coming in.
And I feel like if I'm going to do a job, a good job, that I need to be able to be familiar with everything that officer has touched and really what the SBI has done generally.
We went to examine physical evidence this past week, this week.
It took us six hours.
We did finish what the SBI has.
However, we still have never seen the gun.
The gun is at Quantico, so we've never been able to look at the gun.
I actually think that's really important for purposes of the hearing.
So I have some concerns about that.
I also have not been able to get into my client's phone.
The electronics that we have required an expert to, because they're so massive, we had to all get these huge hard drives shipped to us from our digital expert.
I have not looked at my client's phone, and that concerns me, especially because the states indicated they may call individuals uniquely connected to my client.
I'm not going to say who, because I don't want to commit you guys if you call them or not.
But we've been given the names of some witnesses they may call and what is on my client's phone I think is going to be really important.
She's talking about the family members requesting for four months.
I will tell you I handle quite a few murders in the state.
I think my last murder case that we had a prelim, we continued it I think three times and there was two terabytes.
This case has over 200 terabytes.
So I think in the scheme of preliminary hearings and timing this is not unusual or out of the ordinary for our homicide case in the state especially one this complex so personally asking for a little more time, setting the DNA completely aside.
Even if the court, even if they get up and say, forget it, we're not going to introduce the DNA, even if you say, I'm not going to listen to the DNA, the rest of it is still significant.
I also have some concerns that they, you know, we do have a notice of intent to seek death with an aggravator, so I assume we're going to go forward with that at the prelim.
No one's discussed that.
If that happens, that does require really careful review of the scene itself, which I don't know that we're there yet, but we're close and we definitely have looked at so many videos.
I think I've memorized the face of everybody in the crowd.
But if, if we're going to go forward and the court has to make a decision, if you're binding over on whether or not it's capital, whether or not there's an aggravator, that's a whole other section we have to get into.
So, for all the same reasons, I would ask for four months at least, thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Nestor.
Mr. Burt yes, I've had two primary assignments in the case.
One is dealing with the media litigation, which has taken substantial, substantial amounts of my time.
And I'm responsible for putting the hearing on today and working with the experts.
And so a lot of my time has been devoted to those kinds of preparation issues.
In addition, I've been assigned the task of dealing with all forensic issues at the preliminary hearing.
And those efforts so far have involved me sorting the discovery as it comes in because it's not come in in discrete packages.
Discovery Dump 1 might have some DNA discovery in it, and the next time we get something on DNA is in Discovery Package Number 4.
So part of my process has been going through everything as it comes in to sort of sort and get organized the various areas of discovery.
And so far we have information coming in on the following areas, autopsy experts, canine deployment, crime scene photographs, DNA, fingerprints.
firearms, footwear, laboratory intelligence unit discovery, question documents, state forensics, and trace evidence.
So I have set up files for each of those areas.
I'm uploading and organizing and reviewing discovery as it comes in in each of those areas.
We are retaining experts at the point in time when we feel we have enough information so that we're not paying experts to have to duplicate or do discovery review in batches.
We're taking on the burden of getting it organized so that we're not spending a lot of expert resources on reviewing discovery.
So we have retained the DNA experts and we're stuck on that issue as you've already heard.
We've retained a firearm expert who is awaiting the case files from the ATF.
We just got in the second to last discovery batch the autopsy photographs.
that were produced in September.
I think we got those just in March of this year.
So those are being reviewed and organized so that we can hire a forensic pathologist who will review the autopsy report and prepare us to do whatever cross-examination we need to do on that report.
But we have not yet retained that expert.
So that's kind of an overview and happy to answer any questions.
I don't feel, given the state of discovery and the complexity of some of these forensic areas that I'm in a position to render effective assistance.
The expert, the DNA expert estimated six months.
I think if we got the minimal two categories of information that I outlined for the court, that we could expedite that down to approximately four months so that they'd be prepared in that time period.
Thank you, Mr. Burt.
Thank you.
Mr. Novak.
I've already been told I used too much of the court's time, but I think I can supplement.
No, I appreciate all the efforts of every party, and I know it's important, and so that time is necessary and needed, so I appreciate hearing from you.
I'm not going to represent that I'm responsible for all of the motions and pleadings that have been filed, But I've really devoted.
My time to writing and obviously the court has held many substantive hearings on issues so far.
Obviously, everything that we write is a collaboration, but I think that the vast majority of the time that I've devoted to this case has been the legal writing and frankly, coordinating the mitigation investigation, which I'm not going to talk about beyond saying I speak almost daily with the people involved in our mitigation investigation, reviewing mitigation materials.
That's where I'm focused and obviously that's not part of the prelim.
So if we were shifting to fulsome preparation for the preliminary hearing over, say, the next 30 days, I would have to basically put aside all the writing that needs to be done and direction of the mitigation investigation and figure out where, with my colleagues, they need me to fill in so that we are all constitutionally effective.
it comes to the preliminary hearing.
And so, if as it relates to what you are maybe assigned to as it relates to the preliminary hearing, how much time would you need?
I think the estimate of my colleagues of four months is appropriate, and I also think that what we are all saying is whatever time our DNA experts need once they see.
The data that Mr. Burt so eloquently explained to your honor we don't have That's really gonna be the controlling time period We're not in other words we're not gonna say oh the the our DNA experts are ready, but council are not because I think that six-month estimate by our expert which was provided in a declaration Is gonna be the outer limit,
but that's gonna be from when they actually get the data and as Mr. Burt said there may be a refinement of that once they see the The data that's available to them.
I mean, that was sort of a, you know, a best assessment based on past experience, not based on what the data in this case presents in terms of the challenges for analysis.
Thank you, Mr. Nubb.
Thank you.
All right.
Anything just turning to the state, any benefit of the record that's needed?
I would just add, you know, I haven't seen everything in the file either.
That doesn't stop me from being prepared.
This is a massive file.
Probably, I don't know, 70, 80% of the file is running down leads that did not lead to any fruitful evidence.
And so a lot of what this is is categorizing evidence.
And the core evidence that's required of the preliminary hearing has been provided, has been provided for a long time with the intent that I could help the defense.
And this is exactly what I said in my letter that I wrote to them with the witness and exhibit list.
I provided very explicitly the witnesses we would call, the Bates numbers of the reports that talked about the witnesses that we would call, including the Bates numbers of the reports of the witnesses we would use 1102 statements for.
I included all of the exhibits, the Bates numbers for those exhibits, the dates on which those exhibits were provided for the defense.
I see no reason why the defense can't review that material.
We could probably review it in an hour or two with them, and they could sit down, look at those exhibits, look at those reports, and be prepared for the preliminary hearing, Your Honor.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you to all parties.
I appreciate that guidance.
I made note of it.
As indicated before, we will take another brief recess.
We just need to get technology set up to ensure that it's seamless as you're making your presentations.
And so we'll break, come back at the 1 o'clock hour.
Council also uses time to prepare.
So when we start at 1, we're ready to jump in.
We'll start with defense.
And that way we can be efficient with our time.
Thank you.
Court is now in recess.
Okay, so that was the end of the first part of the hearing regarding the delay, asking for delay.
They were originally going for six months.
I think now they pushed that down to four months, and they're now going to be in another recess as they prepare some of the technology for the next part of the hearing, which is going to be relating to media access, that is camera access to the courtroom.
Turning Point USA Continues00:03:32
And I remember, just to reiterate, and I know I've said this before, but it bears repeating.
This is About transparency in the Charlie Kirk trial.
Tyler Robinson's team does not want transparency.
They do not want cameras.
They do not want broadcasting.
They do not want the world to see their client.
They do not want the world to see this case.
You believed your client was innocent.
Why wouldn't you want that transparency?
It's really as simple as that.
Well, and as amazing as it is, you know, we're sitting here covering live in real time the.
Preliminary hearings, pre preliminary hearings in the murder trial of Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA.
Yet Turning Point USA's mission continues.
And in fact, it even continues today in Arizona, where Charlie lived.
And there is a huge event tonight coming up just in a couple of hours.
And of course, we're going to cover it live on Real America's Voice.
It's Build the Red Wall.
Andy Biggs, who's running for governor of Arizona, possibly the next governor of Arizona, will be there.
As well as keynote speech by President Donald J. Trump.
That's Turning Point USA and Turning Point Action event.
That's going to be at Dream City Church, a place where Charlie spoke many, many times.
And our own Brian Glenn is there on the scene.
Brian, how are you?
Hey, Jack, good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
So tell me, you know, what's the event shaping up like?
How's the crowd look?
How are the people?
Give us the vibe, put us in the room.
This is our Dream City Church.
This is a venue that we have frequent a lot of GOP, Arizona Republican campaign, even some faith conferences as well.
In terms of the crowd, massive turnout today here at Dream City Church for Bill the Red Wall.
This is very much a political event, even though I'm sure it has a nice kind of a faith element to it.
Now, talk about transparency you just spoke of in that trial, and I 100% agree with you.
We also need transparency in our elections.
And, you know, Jack, every time I come to Arizona, it reminds me of what happened in 2020, the Stone election, all the discrepancies in the election.
Then I fast forward to the midterms and what happened there with the gubernatorial race between Katie Hobbs and Kerry Lake, some of the discrepancies there.
Then I fast forward to 2024 when we did see a big turnout here in Arizona and President Trump won, not by much, but did win the state.
So now our eyes are on the midterms and on 2028.
And their efforts to get the Republican vote, the young conservative vote out here in Arizona.
Andy Biggs, as you spoke of, Congressman Andy Biggs from this state running for governor and presumptively would be the Republican nominee, but that's still to be decided.
Then, of course, you've got some other down ballot races as well.
You've got some empty congressional seats here in Arizona that people are trying to fill.
Jay Feely, ex NFL player, is in one of them.
There's some other great candidates as well.
So all eyes, Jack, are on the great state of Arizona.
That's right.
Former Philadelphia Eagle, by the way, A.J. Feely.
There, by the way.
I figured you'd know that.
Fly, Eagles fly, right?
Do I know that, please?
No, I think we drafted him.
I have to go check, but I want to say I think we got him out of the draft rather than trade.
Arizona Races and Candidates00:07:31
But, Brian, that's incredible.
What time is it expected to kick off?
Okay, we have a little bit of pre-show action that takes place at around 12 o'clock local time here, so not too far from where we're sitting right now.
President Trump is scheduled to speak at 2 p.m. local time.
That'd be 5 p.m. East Coast time.
So I obviously have all that.
Andy Biggs and a couple of Erica Kirk scheduled to speak as well.
So we've got a great list of speakers.
Of course, President Trump capping it off at 2 p.m.
Jack?
Incredible.
So, of course, we will provide that coverage here on Brill America's Voice.
We'll go back to Brian as the event continues.
Thanks so much, man.
Thank you, Jack.
Appreciate it.
Thank you.
All right.
Now, guys, I want to say producer Russ, I believe he's on.
Stand by, Russ.
You there, man?
Yes, sir.
I'm here.
Oh, there he is.
What's up, man?
Wow, excellent lighting.
I gotta say, thank you, thank you, thank you.
I worked on it all last night.
He really did, folks.
He's not even joking.
I'm not, just got to get you in, just got to get you in, you know, on this Tyler Robinson.
You know, kind of, I know you were watching, you know, from behind the scenes as well, but you know, this, these delay tactics, I mean, to my mind, it seems like they're treading water there.
um but you know throw it to you you know what's your take having watched this as well I mean, yeah, they're definitely treading water.
I'm sorry, I'm moving my mic.
They're definitely treading water.
And it's, it, it honestly, what it kind of came down to for me is just like, aren't these guys lawyers?
Like, isn't this literally their job?
Like, all we were listening to there, like for the last couple of minutes was, was them just complaining about their workload.
And it's like, didn't we, didn't we go to how many years of schooling to do, to do the lawyer thing?
They do.
It's like the dog ate my homework.
It was like the dog ate my homework.
So why?
You know, oh my gosh, I was so busy.
And by the way, we've talked about that other high-profile trial, right, that Kathy Nestor took.
And she's, by the way, no one's forcing her to take these trials.
She's the one who's choosing these high-profile trials as, you know, working with the public defender's office.
So that was the Moscow mule mother who killed her husband.
She lost that trial, by the way, that she's referring to up in Summit County in Utah, which is another.
Very high profile trial.
And we covered that in full, where Kathy, which by the way, she talked about having to prepare for that case, but she didn't even put up a defense in that case.
There was no defense in brief.
There was no defense witnesses.
There was none of that.
She just argued about the evidence.
She argued and cross examined witnesses and eventually didn't put up her own defense side of the case.
And she, I believe, three hours was all it took for the jury in that case.
To come back and find her client guilty in that case.
And yet she's claiming that, oh, I couldn't possibly work on this case because I was so busy with that other case, phoning it in there too.
I mean, I think this is literally going to be the exact same thing.
I think they're going to try to push it as much as possible.
And then she's going to just, they're just going to, you know, show their belly because this needs to be on air.
This trial needs to be on air.
This trial needs to happen ASAP.
Because everybody, Charlie deserves justice.
Erica deserves justice.
Everybody deserves justice.
Yeah, I mean, and there's no question about that.
There's no question.
And look, like, here's the thing with the ATF report that came out this week.
And I know we talked about it last night on Thought Crime, but I'll just reiterate because people keep asking me about it.
And then Daily Mail put up their report.
And then TMZ even weighed in as well.
So everyone just coming out saying, hey, the report says what it says.
And now we have the full piece.
And it says that we couldn't.
So, and this is what the Daily Mail's original headline got so bad.
They said they couldn't tie it to that exact.
Gun, but if you read the full report, it says, Well, we can tie it and match it to that class of guns, that class of rifle, given that it's 30 caliber.
So, for them to say there's no match, that's just not true.
It does match.
It's just that it matches the class.
It was too small.
The fragments were too small to be able to match it specifically to that one rifle.
It's like saying, Okay, we have a fingerprint that's a partial, but we can't say it's Tyler Robinson, but we can say that it's a 22 year old white male.
Right, like that's a class that's a descriptor, but it's not exact.
And so, there's a lot of people, and I think that I think that the there's people who you know have a lot of egg on their face from having you know said, Oh, there's no match, there's no match.
Well, actually, it does match as it turns out, it actually does match, does match that class, it does match the situation.
They're pushing for delay after delay.
And the fact of the matter is, the report says what it says, and you know, we we get to look at that and say, Okay.
You know, this is information that's been out there, or at least that's been known since September, but it's at least finally starting to come out into the public consciousness.
And when you look at that report, this is all coming out, you know, shortly here because the hearing is scheduled, at least as far as we know, scheduled for next month.
But who knows because we can see.
But, you know, Russ, I'll just throw it to you.
You know, you watched this just as I did.
Did it seem like, did it seem to you like the judge was buying it?
Did it seem like he was picking up what they were putting down?
No, I honestly think he's just tired of it.
It looked like he was just tired of listening to these people complain and was just like, in the same way.
I think he just, his reaction is very much the same as us as the audience.
Like, what?
Like, what do you mean?
So, yeah, that's kind of what I'm.
He didn't look like he was buying it at all.
And there were so many times where he was asking them a direct question, they wouldn't give him a direct answer.
Why do you need this much time?
Why do you need this much time?
Because remember, we're not even talking about the actual trial here.
This is a preliminary hearing.
This is just probable cause.
That's all we're establishing.
This isn't a trial.
There isn't a jury.
There isn't none of these things.
None of these things are coming out.
It's just the hearing to present the evidence.
They're saying, we haven't got the evidence yet.
Well, okay, fine, but let's present it.
So that it's presented in public, it's presented in court, we could get past that phase and then move to the phase where we're giving all the files, all the data, et cetera.
And none of us are saying that we don't want a fair trial.
In fact, I was even thinking about this this morning, right?
That if that ATF report came back and said, okay, the autopsy found a 22, you know, or a 9 millimeter bullet fragment or something, that would be, right, evidence of not matching.
But that's not what it found.
That's not what came out.
It was 30 caliber, right?
We said we can tell it was some sort of 30 caliber.
It wasn't 22, it wasn't 9mm, it wasn't 5.56, it wasn't something else.
It was 30 caliber, right?
And so you can't sit there with intellectual honesty and say that, oh, there's no match.
Well, there is a match, just a match to the class.
The Ballistics Match Found00:01:05
It's a general match.
Russ, by the way, we have one minute left.
We'll let people know that Russ is in a bit of a transition phase, though thankfully not gender, even though he does have the trans flag behind him.
In terms of his lighting, it's blue and orange.
It's blue and orange, I swear.
Yeah, no, it's definitely pink on my end.
But that's okay.
No, I support you.
I support you, you know, because I'm cool like that.
You know, let us know your new pronouns.
And, but Russ is moving to a different phase with, you know, a different role with the organization.
So it's still going to be in the mix, not working on the daily show, but still going to be in the mix.
So, Russ, just want to say congratulations and thank you.
Five incredible years working day in, day out, Human Events Daily.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
Appreciate you, Jack.
Travel.
Travel, where do we go, man?
We have Rome, Utah, traveled just all over LA, Super Bowls.
We did the halftime show.
We did quite a bit, quite a bit.
But Russ is still going to be in the mix.
So, ladies and gentlemen, as always, you have our permission to lay ashore.