- Tyler Robinson seeks to bar the public from attending part of his April 17 court hearing.
- Robinson argues media coverage threatens his right to a fair trial.
- He says he plans to present evidence of prejudicial media and privacy violations as he seeks to ban cameras and microphones from his court hearings.
PROVO — Tyler Robinson and his attorneys now want to kick the public out of part of a court hearing next month — a hearing where they will argue that cameras and microphones should be banned from the courtroom.
The defense team doesn't want the media to report about what the team considers to be harmful and prejudicial media coverage of the capital murder case so far.
"Specifically, Mr. Robinson seeks to take evidence in a closed setting regarding the unfairly prejudicial and misleading media coverage and the improper statements of government officials in order to avoid republicizing the same. Mr. Robinson also asks this court to take evidence regarding the privacy violations detailed in the 'motion to exclude cameras' in a closed setting, to, again, avoid reiterating the violative material," Robinson stated in his motion filed late last week.
"This request is based upon the 'realistic likelihood of prejudice' to Mr. Robinson's right to a fair trial and reliable penalty phase."
Robinson is seeking to close portions of the April 17 court hearing.
Robinson, 22, is charged with capital murder and faces a potential death sentence if convicted of killing Charlie Kirk, 31, on Sept. 10 on the campus of Utah Valley University. His defense contends that electronic media coverage threatens Robinson's due process and his rights to a fair and impartial jury.
In his motion to close portions of the hearing scheduled for April 17, Robinson argues that "the republication of the significant number of harmful media materials would materially impact the integrity of the proceedings. ... This was demonstrated by the fact that media representatives have already used public information and filings obtained from the criminal case to question government officials involved in the case."
Robinson and his defense team say they plan at the April hearing to "present evidence demonstrating the harmful and prejudicial media coverage of this case thus far. While there is simply not enough time to present all of what is referenced in the 'motion to exclude cameras,' the compilation anticipated will highlight the most egregious and most concerning media coverage impacting Mr. Robinson's case."
He also argues that bringing up the alleged egregious conduct in court and having it reported by the media "threatens Mr. Robinson's right to a fair trial and reliable penalty phase by recirculating unduly prejudicial (and in some instances incorrect) coverage out into the potential jury pool, becoming part of the ever-growing narratives existent in both primary and secondary coverage of the case," the motion states.
First Amendment attorneys have argued that there has never been a case in Utah in which a defendant was found to have received an unfair trial because of pretrial publicity, even though there have been many high-profile criminal cases in Utah before Robinson's.
Robinson says he further plans to provide the court on April 17 "with evidence detailing the private information he argues was publicized by government officials in violation of Utah and federal law," the motion continues. "It is anticipated that the individuals will offer testimony as to these facts and, as witnesses both to the issues presented and potentially future hearings, their safety and privacy are paramount."
Most recently, 4th District Judge Tony Graf denied a motion by Robinson to have the Utah County Attorney's Office disqualified from prosecuting the case because a daughter of the county attorney's chief deputy was among the estimated 3,000 people in the audience when Kirk was shot.
Another hearing is scheduled for March 13, during which arguments are expected to be heard regarding which motions and court filings should be public and which, if any, should remain sealed.
