Local Police Reportedly Told Not to Interview Witnesses (Claims)
:::caution Legal Disclaimer Nothing on this page is a claim of fact that any living person or organization knew of, planned, participated in, or covered up any crime, or acted illegally, immorally, or unethically. This page documents questions and allegations raised in public commentary — not findings of fact. All persons and organizations named are presumed innocent; the allegations referenced are unproven and have not been established in any court. Tyler Robinson is charged, not convicted. :::
This page catalogues a reported cover-up mechanism raised in public commentary about the killing of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University on September 10, 2025: the claim that local police were directed not to interview witnesses, and were separately tied up at a distant location, so that the on-scene witness record was suppressed at the source before formal statements were taken. These are attributed allegations, not established facts. Tyler Robinson is charged, not convicted.
The claim
The central allegation, circulated by Project Constitution (@ProjectConstitu) under the framing "FBI Ordered Local Police Not to INTERVIEW Witnesses," rests on police-radio traffic and eyewitness accounts. Proponents argue that if officers were told to stand down from interviewing, then the raw, first-hand witness statements — the material from which formal reports and any federal Form 302 (FBI interview report) would later be written — never entered the record in an untainted form. The related FBI witness coordination page carries the broader documentation.
The radio line
The specific quote proponents rely on is a police-radio transmission rendered as: "As per SBI and FBI, we've been given clear direction NOT to interview." Skeptics of the official narrative read this as an order flowing down from federal and state investigators to hold local officers back from talking to witnesses. It is a short radio snippet whose full context — which unit, about which witnesses, and for what stated reason — is not established from the clip alone.
The distant "decoy" location
A second thread alleges that police were drawn away from the campus and tied up for roughly two hours at a location described as an Urban Pioneer Cafe / SMBB (Sorenson Molecular Biotechnology Building) area — reported to be about 43 minutes north of UVU. In the circulating account, the FBI reportedly wanted local PD to "stand by there" with a man there (discussed in connection with a "pellet gun" or distraction figure), which proponents argue pulled officers off the scene and away from witnesses at the critical window. The geography and purpose of that deployment are disputed and not independently confirmed here.
The construction-crew witness
Commentary cites a construction-crew witness, referred to as "Mr. Hope," who reportedly described the man he saw — "black sunglasses ... a black C-mask ... a black trench coat, black cargo pants ... a small backpack ... long, greasy black hair." According to the account, Mr. Hope said the photo the officers showed the crew on the Wednesday "did not seem to look like" the image the FBI later released to the public on Thursday. This is presented as a reported witness recollection, not a verified identification; see the black-clothing suspect page for the parallel description.
The eyewitness who filmed the shooter
Proponents also point to an eyewitness who reportedly filmed the rooftop shooter and, as relayed by Candace Owens, stated "Tyler Robinson is NOT the guy" — arguing the gun and outfit "don't match." According to the framing, that eyewitness was reportedly never formally deposed. This is an attributed, contested claim from a living person's account, not a finding; Tyler Robinson is charged, not convicted, and this site does not assert who did or did not fire any shot.
Why it matters
If officers were genuinely directed away from interviewing witnesses, and were simultaneously tied up off-site, the earliest and least-rehearsed witness accounts — the record most resistant to later shaping — could have been lost or never formally captured. That is why the episode is catalogued here under Cover Up (Possible): as an unresolved question about how the witness record was gathered, not as a proven act of obstruction.
Counterarguments, skepticism, and innocent explanations
Ordinary, lawful explanations account for the same facts and should be weighed seriously:
- De-confliction. In major cases, a single lead agency routinely controls witness interviews so that accounts are taken once, consistently, by trained investigators. "Do not interview" can mean "the lead agency will handle it," not "suppress it."
- Preventing contamination. Keeping multiple agencies from independently questioning the same witnesses reduces the risk of inconsistent or leading interviews that a defense could later exploit.
- Radio snippets lack context. A single transmission does not reveal scope, which witnesses, or duration, and can be misread when quoted in isolation.
- Resource allocation. Officers being deployed elsewhere in a fast-moving multi-location response is common and not, by itself, evidence of a decoy.
- Presumption of innocence. The SBI, FBI, and every named official are living public institutions and persons, charged with nothing, and are presumed innocent. Nothing here is a finding of wrongdoing, and Tyler Robinson is charged, not convicted.
Sources
- Project Constitution (@ProjectConstitu) video, "FBI Ordered Local Police Not to INTERVIEW Witnesses," and the quoted radio line "As per SBI and FBI, we've been given clear direction NOT to interview," as captured in mid-2026 research.
- Circulating account of PD being tied up roughly two hours at an Urban Pioneer Cafe / SMBB location reported about 43 minutes north of UVU.
- Reported construction-crew witness "Mr. Hope" account, including that the photo shown to the crew Wednesday "did not seem to look like" the FBI's Thursday public image.
- Statement relayed by Candace Owens attributing to a filming eyewitness the words "Tyler Robinson is NOT the guy," with the outfit and gun said not to match.