Retain A Blast Expert And An Acoustics Expert
:::caution Legal Disclaimer Tyler Robinson is charged, not convicted, and is presumed innocent. Nothing on this page states as fact that any living person committed a crime, destroyed evidence, or acted improperly. Court filings in this case are subject to a gag order and sealing, so the public record is incomplete by design. :::
The One Thing We Would Do Differently
Retain and notice two experts absent from the public record — an explosives specialist on shaped-charge effects at chest range, and an acoustician on the recorded report and its direction of arrival.
A theory of the case is only as good as the witness who can say it out loud to a jury. On the public record, the defense has noticed three forensic experts, all of them government examiners called to expose the weakness of the State's own work: Bakker on DNA, Karner on toolmarks, Oliver on DNA statistics. That is a sound negative strategy. It has no affirmative expert in it at all.
Two are missing. An explosives expert who can testify to what a small shaped charge does at chest range — the overpressure field, the fragment pattern, the burn signature, the residue it leaves and how long it persists. And an acoustician who can analyse the recorded audio for the number of reports, their spacing, their spectral signature, and their direction of arrival relative to the microphone and the claimed firing position.
Acoustic direction-of-arrival analysis is a mature discipline. It has been used in contested shooting cases for decades. If the recorded sound did not originate from the Losee Center roof, that is an expert conclusion a jury can be given, not an internet argument.
What The Defense Team Did Instead
The three noticed defense experts were used to establish what the State cannot prove: that the ATF could neither identify nor exclude the seized rifle as the source of the recovered jacket fragment, that the DNA is a mixture with policy limits on interpretation, and that transfer and error rates are real.
That is a competent probable-cause posture. It is also purely defensive. Nothing in the noticed expert set gives a jury an alternative account of how Charlie Kirk died — and at some point in a capital trial, a jury that has been told the State is wrong will want to be told what happened instead.
Where This Belongs In The Case
| Stage of the case | When that stage runs | Status of this step |
|---|---|---|
| Defense expert retention | Any time; work product is confidential | Unknown — not disclosed |
| Expert notice under the scheduling order | After bind-over, before trial | Still fully open |
| Rule 702 admissibility hearing | Before trial | Still fully open |
| Trial — defense case | No trial date set | Still fully open |
Witness Or Discovery Target
| How it would be done | Target | Took the stand? | Status on the public record |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expert never retained publicly | Explosives and shaped-charge specialist | No | None noticed publicly |
| Expert never retained publicly | Forensic acoustician | No | None noticed publicly |
| Expert retained — used defensively | Karner, ATF toolmarks | Yes — July 9, 2026 | Called by the defense; comparison inconclusive |
| Discovery demand never made publicly | All original audio recordings of the event with metadata | n/a | No public subpoena |
The Questions That Were Not Asked
- How many discrete reports are present in the recorded audio, and at what spacing?
- What is the direction of arrival of the first report relative to the recording device?
- Is the spectral signature of the recorded report consistent with a rifle discharge at the stated distance, or with a near-field detonation?
- What overpressure and fragmentation pattern would a small shaped charge produce at chest range in an open canopy?
- How long does energetic residue from such a charge persist on fabric, soil and concrete under Utah September conditions?
- What physical signatures would distinguish that event from a single rifle round, and are any of them present in the record?
Why A Defense Attorney Would Want This
Experts are how a theory becomes evidence. Without them, everything on this site about the mechanism of death stays outside the courtroom permanently, no matter how strong the underlying analysis is, because a lawyer's argument is not evidence and a jury is instructed to that effect.
There is also a threshold reason. Utah, like every state, requires an alternative-perpetrator or alternative-mechanism defense to be more than speculation before a judge will let it in front of a jury. An expert report is precisely what converts speculation into an admissible theory. Without one, the alternative-perpetrator notice fails at the threshold and every foreign-nexus subpoena downstream of it becomes irrelevant.
The Honest Counterargument
Defense expert work is confidential and need not be disclosed unless the expert testifies. It is entirely possible that both experts have been retained, have reported, and have told counsel the audio and the physics are consistent with a rifle round — in which case the correct professional decision is to bury the reports and never mention them again. That scenario is indistinguishable from the outside.
Expert notice is also not yet due. The case has not been bound over. Noticing an affirmative expert before the State has committed to its trial theory hands the prosecution months to prepare a rebuttal witness, and experienced capital counsel routinely wait.
Sources On This Site
- Demo of a Shaped Charge
- Six Forensic Physics Phenomena
- Mic Explosion Video Analysis
- Gun & Bullet — acoustic direction
- Ballistics — ATF Inconclusive & CBLA
:::danger Theoretical Exercise Only This page is a theoretical exercise. It is a written simulation of how an idealised defense attorney might approach this case. We make no claim that there is any problem with the current defense attorney, with any member of the defense team, or with any decision they have made.
Real capital defense is conducted under a gag order, with sealed filings, and on the basis of full discovery that the public has never seen. Counsel of record know facts we do not. A step described here as "not on the public record" may already have been taken privately, may have been considered and rejected for good reason, or may not yet be due at this stage of the case. Silence in the public record is not evidence of a failure.
Nothing here is legal advice, a criticism of any licensed attorney, or an allegation of professional misconduct. :::
This website's author is @HolonCitizen on X and YouTube/@HolonCitizen. Follow me there.