Skip to main content

Tyler Robinson

Overview​

This page consolidates key claims, timelines, and legal notes related to Tyler Robinson in connection with the Sept 10, 2025 UVU incident involving Charlie Kirk. It reflects material drawn from public reporting, social‑media posts, video analyses, and commentary cited throughout this project. Many items are disputed or unverified and are presented as claims for investigation, not as established facts.

Position and core claim (project view vs. official narrative)​

  • Official charging documents and public reporting present Robinson as the primary suspect in Charlie Kirk’s killing.
  • Project materials argue that Robinson did not shoot Charlie Kirk. The reasoning emphasizes an alleged mismatch between the rifle/caliber attributed to him and the observed wound pattern, plus alternative shooter hypotheses (for example, closer shot trajectories and tent/vehicle theories). These are investigative claims, not findings of any court.

Day-of timeline (claimed)​

  • Morning sightings attributed to law-enforcement/campus cameras and residential cameras, as described in publicly discussed doorbell and surveillance footage:
    • 8:07 – Walking on S 800 W toward campus (Ring camera)
    • 8:23 – Driving on W 880 S (WYZE camera)
    • 8:29 – Driving on campus (UVU surveillance)
    • 9:57 – Walking on W 880 S (WYZE camera)
    • Outfit change reported thereafter (to jeans and long sleeve shirt)
    • 11:44 – Walking on W 800 S (Ring camera)
    • 11:49 – Walking on S 800 W toward campus (Ring camera)
  • Time of shot: many summaries cite 12:23 p.m. MDT, while some references mention 12:27 p.m. The first radio report is often cited as ~12:26 p.m. (per police audio references). This discrepancy is one focus of the investigation.
  • Post-incident: online commentary and social‑media posts reference a claimed sighting of Robinson at a Dairy Queen in Orem at approximately 6:38 p.m. MDT, including an address and clothing description. These items are not independently verified here; they are used as leads for the Travel page.

Weapon and ballistics (claims vs. official narrative)​

  • Claimed official narrative item: recovery of a “high-powered bolt-action rifle” (often described in commentary as a Mauser 98 in .30‑06) in a wooded area.
  • Counter-claims on mismatch:
    • Project materials argue that a .30‑06 at distance would be expected to cause a catastrophic exit wound and significant spatter inconsistent with some scene descriptions.
    • Alternative theories suggest a closer shot from the right with a different caliber/energy profile, or a non-rooftop origin. These are hypotheses that require formal forensic testing and disclosure to confirm or reject.

Movements and logistics after the event (claims)​

  • Some media and online posts discuss a map showing locations such as “rifle found” and a nearby construction site where an unidentified person in black was initially suspected but later said not to match Robinson.
  • Commentators question whether there was sufficient time for roof egress, weapon stash/disposal, clothing changes, travel to Dairy Queen, and same-day travel patterns attributed to Robinson. These are analytical questions, not assertions of fact.

Associates and background threads (claims)​

  • References to a partner (“Lance”), shared residence history, and online activity (for example, Discord/Steam) appear in compiled notes. These items remain unverified and should be treated strictly as investigative leads, not as established facts about Robinson or any other individual.
  • Defense team noted in materials: Kathryn N. Nester (lead), Michael N. Burt, and Richard G. Novak. Cost estimates and funding debates are mentioned in commentary but are not official court records here.
  • Court items described in commentary include:
    • Presiding judge: Tony F. Graf (appointed May 2025; reported to have taken over the case in Aug 2025). Prior judge: Robert Lunnen (reportedly retired Aug 1, 2025).
    • Reports of a broad gag order and closed hearings; some commentators allege media access restrictions.
    • Discussion of a possible “jailhouse informant” (Jaxson Thomas Fox); commentary disputes his relevance and credibility. Readers should consult primary court filings and transcripts for authoritative information.

Disputed evidence and investigative questions relevant to Robinson’s culpability​

  • Camera evidence: requests in project materials for full release of TPUSA/UVU footage (including drone and stage-facing cameras) to establish shot origin and Robinson’s precise location/timing.
  • Crime scene preservation: claims that landscaping was replaced or paved within days (including on a Sunday), complicating later forensic checks.
  • Trajectory/acoustics analyses: several independent analyses cited in project notes argue the audio‑visual sync implies a closer shot than the rooftop distance; angles from right-side/tent/tunnel/vehicle are posited.
  • Alternate shooter hypotheses: tent interior, a nearby vehicle, or other elevated positions are discussed as possibilities; all of these remain unproven and require primary-source validation.

Key questions to resolve (non-exhaustive)​

  • Definitive, timestamped pathing for Robinson between 11:45–12:30 (and later in the day), with corroborating video, cellular, and witness data.
  • Forensic ballistics: caliber, bullet recovery(s), entry/exit determination, and medical documentation disclosure under Utah law and the posture of the case.
  • Complete camera archives: campus, event production, and private devices—chain of custody and any deletion/alteration allegations.
  • Chain of custody for any recovered firearm(s) and components, plus prints/DNA and purchase/ownership histories.

Notes​

  • This page aggregates claims, questions, and references appearing in public reporting, social‑media posts, and citizen‑investigator commentary. Items tagged or described as “claims,” “alleged,” or “hypothesized” are not vetted conclusions. Investigators should rely on primary documents (court filings, official releases, unedited footage) wherever possible.
  • Travel and movements – claimed routes, timelines, and travel logistics before and after the incident.
  • Recruitment and intelligence-related claims – allegations and hypotheses about possible intelligence connections; all items are presented as claims, not established fact.
  • Girlfriend – publicly discussed information and claims about Robinson’s girlfriend and what she may have known.
  • Trial and legal proceedings – summaries of public reporting and commentary about the case’s legal process.
  • See the main index and other Level 2 pages (for example, Timeline, Medical, FBI, Planes, and TPUSA) for broader context that intersects with Robinson-focused questions.