Lance Twiggs' Phone
Testimony about the extraction of Twiggs' phone. Source: @realstewpeters on X, July 9, 2026.
Lance Twiggs is a figure discussed throughout this investigation in connection with Tyler Robinson. In a courtroom clip posted by Stew Peters (@realstewpeters) on July 9, 2026, a witness testified that Twiggs' phone was subjected to a Cellebrite forensic extraction and that the extraction reportedly shows text messages exchanged with Robinson. Twiggs has not been charged with or convicted of any crime in connection with the case; this page treats all claims as reported allegations.
What the testimony says about the phone
According to the witness (identified in the post as Agent Davis), and per the phone-extraction testimony:
- A Cellebrite extraction was performed on Twiggs' phone as part of the investigation.
- The witness personally reviewed that extraction.
- Per the extraction, Robinson and Twiggs exchanged text messages on September 10–11, 2025.
- The first text was reportedly sent on September 10 at 11 p.m.
Why Twiggs' phone matters to the case
The device is significant because it is a second phone — separate from Robinson's — that the state says contains the alleged Robinson–Twiggs message thread. That thread has been a focus of citizen analysis: investigators have catalogued what they describe as internal contradictions in the reported message conversation (see the master investigation notes and Discord evidence), and have questioned why the messages were released as photographs of messages rather than the devices themselves. A confirmed extraction of Twiggs' phone puts the source device at the center of those authentication questions.
The context around the Twiggs family
Reporting on the Twiggs family has circulated publicly, including public-record screenshots about property and a family charity. Those records reflect lawful activity, and — to be explicit — no member of the Twiggs family has been charged with or accused in court of wrongdoing. This site documents that such claims are being made online; it does not adopt them as fact. Readers should weigh the reported family material as unproven citizen commentary.
Open questions
- Under what legal authority (warrant, consent) was Twiggs' phone extracted?
- Does the reported September 10, 11 p.m. first message fit the broader timeline?
- How does a completed extraction of Twiggs' phone reconcile with the prosecution's stated position on not offering forensic-extraction evidence (see Phone Extraction)?
Status: Alive