The Daily Populous Friday January 16th, 2026 evening edition
Authored by cnn.com and submitted by yoo_wtf

Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old man accused of killing Charlie Kirk, is expected to appear in a Utah court Friday afternoon for what could be a consequential hearing in the case.

Robinson’s defense attorneys allege a conflict of interest exists at the Utah County Attorney’s Office and will be arguing to have the entire office disqualified from prosecuting the case – the latest development on the road to a state trial for the killing of the prominent conservative activist.

The defense team first addressed the potential conflict of interest during an October 24 hearing that was at the time sealed to the public: An attorney’s 18-year-old child was at the September 10 Utah Valley University event where Kirk was shot, according to court documents.

“A family member of one of the attorneys was present at the incident,” defense attorney Richard Novak told the court, according to a redacted transcript from the hearing. “Law enforcement were actually deployed to the area with her safety and status in mind.”

The attorney’s name has been redacted from public documents.

The daughter, a student at the university, was about 85 feet from where Kirk was seated, according to the documents.

The county attorney’s office will argue no conflict of interest exists because the attorney’s daughter, referred to as “adult child (AC)” in court documents, “did not see Charlie get shot,” and “did not see anyone [in the crowd or elsewhere] with a gun.”

The attorney’s office won’t be calling the daughter as a witness in the case because “nearly everything [AC] knows about the actual homicide is hearsay,” a document filed by the attorney’s office says. “And because Mr. [Dpty Atty] has no conflict of interest, the County Attorney’s Office also has no conflict of interest requiring disqualification.”

The defense also implies in its motion to disqualify that the attorney’s office’s decision to pursue the death penalty so quickly in the case may have been related to the alleged conflict of interest.

“The rush to seek death in this case evidences strong emotional reactions” by the prosecution, the motion says.

In Utah, prosecutors have 60 days after an arraignment to file notice of intent to pursue the death penalty against a defendant.

The attorney’s office pushed back on that assertion in their response, saying “there is nothing unusual or untoward about filing a death penalty notice before a preliminary hearing.”

The evidence and circumstances of the case “justify the death penalty,” and a delay “would have been unnecessarily unsettling and painful to Charlie Kirk’s loved ones and does not promote justice for anyone,” the court filing said.

Robinson will not be arraigned until after his preliminary hearing, which is scheduled to begin on May 18 and last three days. He has not yet entered a plea.

The brazen killing – seen by students in person and many more people in videos that spread swiftly online – took place as Kirk was speaking at the Utah university last year and was followed by an intense, 30-plus-hour manhunt for a sniper who authorities said fired the fatal shot from a nearby roof.

Robinson, who surrendered to police a day after the shooting, is facing a flurry of charges, including aggravated murder, felony use of a firearm, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering. Several of the charges also include victim targeting enhancements and the aggravating factor of having committed a violent offense in the presence of a child.

A charging document laid out the key evidence against Robinson, including DNA on the suspected murder weapon and a confession.

A bolt-action rifle, towel, a used cartridge casing and three unused cartridges were discovered in a wooded area near the crime scene, and DNA on several of those items was consistent with Robinson’s, according to the document. The cartridges were engraved with phrases from internet memes and video games.

The following day, Robinson, his parents and a family friend went to the Washington County Sheriff’s Office to turn himself in, the document states. His parents had recognized their son from the surveillance photo, it said.

Tsquared10 on January 16th, 2026 at 08:26 UTC »

That's an insane swing to try and get the entire office removed from the case. I see 0% chance that happens.

DrexellGames on January 16th, 2026 at 08:21 UTC »

Based on the article, it looks like the defense has filed a motion asking the judge to disqualify the prosecution team. The judge has not ruled on the request, and the case remains ongoing since he hasn't entered a plea deal.

yoo_wtf on January 16th, 2026 at 08:03 UTC »

> Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old man accused of killing Charlie Kirk, is expected to appear in a Utah court Friday afternoon for what could be a consequential hearing in the case.

> Robinson’s defense attorneys allege a conflict of interest exists at the Utah County Attorney’s Office and will be arguing to have the entire office disqualified from prosecuting the case – the latest development on the road to a state trial for the killing of the prominent conservative activist.

> The defense team first addressed the potential conflict of interest during an October 24 hearing that was at the time sealed to the public: An attorney’s 18-year-old child was at the September 10 Utah Valley University event where Kirk was shot, according to court documents.

> The defense team first addressed the potential conflict of interest during an October 24 hearing that was at the time sealed to the public: An attorney’s 18-year-old child was at the September 10 Utah Valley University event where Kirk was shot, according to court documents.

> “A family member of one of the attorneys was present at the incident,” defense attorney Richard Novak told the court, according to a redacted transcript from the hearing. “Law enforcement were actually deployed to the area with her safety and status in mind.”

> The attorney’s name has been redacted from public documents.

> The county attorney’s office will argue no conflict of interest exists because the attorney’s daughter, referred to as “adult child (AC)” in court documents, “did not see Charlie get shot,” and “did not see anyone [in the crowd or elsewhere] with a gun.”

> The attorney’s office won’t be calling the daughter as a witness in the case because “nearly everything [AC] knows about the actual homicide is hearsay,” a document filed by the attorney’s office says. “And because Mr. [Dpty Atty] has no conflict of interest, the County Attorney’s Office also has no conflict of interest requiring disqualification.”

> The defense also implies in its motion to disqualify that the attorney’s office’s decision to pursue the death penalty so quickly in the case may have been related to the alleged conflict of interest.

[Source]