Tyler Robinson’s lawyers pressed a Utah judge on Tuesday to impose broad secrecy on the upcoming preliminary hearing in the high-profile murder case, arguing that the saturation of news coverage had already compromised the defendant’s right to a fair proceeding. The motions, argued before state District Judge Tony Graf in Provo, seek to seal evidence and bar reporters and the public from parts of a five-day hearing that begins July 6, after the judge last month refused to ban cameras from the courtroom.
“The media frenzy surrounding this case has repeatedly misrepresented Mr. Robinson and threatens to taint the jury pool before trial has even begun,” defense attorney Richard Novak told the court, according to the Associated Press. Novak asked Graf to close the portions of the preliminary hearing that would present the most detailed evidence yet in a case that has spent eight months mired in pretrial access fights rather than substantive proceedings.
Graf said he would issue a written ruling by June 1.
The defense separately moved to sanction deputy Utah County attorney Christopher Ballard, alleging that Ballard made out-of-court statements that amounted to “expressions of opinion as to Mr. Robinson’s guilt.” Novak characterized the prosecutor’s comments as a “media tour” that violated ethical rules against pretrial publicity. Graf did not immediately rule on that motion.
The preliminary hearing is a critical stage in Utah criminal procedure: prosecutors must convince a judge that they have enough evidence to warrant a trial. Ballard’s office has not yet disclosed the full scope of evidence it intends to present, but the hearing is expected to be the first public airing of the prosecution’s case against Robinson, who is accused of killing Charlie Kirk, the prominent conservative commentator and Turning Point USA founder, in an incident whose details remain largely shielded by pretrial secrecy.
The defense has argued since the early stages of the case that the intense media interest has made a fair trial in Utah unlikely. The camera-access dispute was the first flashpoint. Graf denied the defense’s request for a blanket camera ban, ruling that the public and press have a constitutional right to observe court proceedings and that the defense had not provided sufficient evidence that cameras would cause specific prejudice. The sealing and closure motions are the next front in a battle over how much of the preliminary hearing the public will see.