Portions of Tyler Robinson’s motions filed by his defense team in his capital murder case will remain private for now, while larger parts of his court filings will become public.
On Friday, 4th District Judge Tony Graf announced his decisions on four motions filed by Robinson that seek to keep the court documents out of public view. The judge ruled the majority of those motions do not qualify as “private.”
At issue was whether motions filed by Robinson on Jan. 9 “with exhibits,” a motion to exclude cameras from the courtroom and a reply to the motion to exclude cameras should remain private, as well as whether portions of Robinson’s next hearing on April 17 should be closed to the public. Robinson argued that the Jan. 9 motion should be remain sealed because it addresses evidence that has not yet been officially admitted in court and could taint a potential jury pool.
“We are concerned it will sway people’s opinions one way or another,” argued defense attorney Staci Visser.
But after listening to two hours of testimony, Graf ruled Friday that Robinson had not adequately stated why the evidence listed in the Jan. 9 motion — which the judge described as being mainly technical, scientific testing of collected evidence — is of such a nature that it would prejudice a jury and he denied the motion to keep it private.
As for the motion to exclude cameras from the courtroom, Graf said he is sensitive to the pre-trial publicity that the case has generated, including conspiracy theories. Robinson and his attorneys again argue that Robinson’s right to due process and a fair trial needs to be protected by preventing misinformation from being regurgitated. But a lot of the so-called sensitive information listed in their motion, such as media interviews and photographs, is already public, the judge said.
“The public already has access to the majority of information contained in the motion,” Graf said.
Thus, Graf said he was only partially denying Robinson’s request to keep that motion sealed. He gave the defense until March 30 to file a substitute redacted motion in which information that is determined to be “private” can remain redacted.
The defense’s reply that was filed, also in relation to their attempt to keep electronic media out of the courtroom, was determined by Graf to contain no private information and the motion to keep that record sealed was denied.
Robinson filed a motion on Jan. 16 to keep cameras and microphones out of the courtroom. Now that the issue of whether the motion should remain private has been addressed, the actual merits of whether cameras should be allowed in the courtroom during Robinson’s legal proceedings will be debated during his next hearing on April 17.
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.