“Hit the target and did not endanger others”: the defendant’s claim in the murder of Charlie Kirk

Lawyers for Tyler Robinson, the defendant in the murder of Charlie Kirk, argue that he should not receive the death penalty because the single shot hit its intended target and did not endanger others. The prosecution demands the death penalty, claiming he fired from a sniper position above a crowd. The hearing is on September 1.

Lawyers for Tyler Robinson, the defendant in the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, argue that he should not receive the death penalty, as the single shot he fired hit the target he intended and did not endanger others. His attorneys, who represented him in a document filed in court this week, argue that the state has not proven that the act created a “high probability” of the death of another person, as required by Utah law to justify the death penalty. The prosecution, on the other hand, demands the death penalty, claiming that Robinson fired a high-powered rifle from a sniper position above a crowd of thousands, and loaded four bullets so he could fire again if he missed. Kirk was shot and killed on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University in Orem, during a campus political debate event. The expected hearing on September 1 will decide whether there is sufficient evidence to bring Robinson to trial. Robinson, a 23-year-old from Utah who previously worked as an electrician’s apprentice, has not yet given his official response to the charges.