The widow and parents of Charlie Kirk filed a court motion Wednesday demanding a Utah judge require that all evidence in the accused assassin’s preliminary hearing be displayed in real time for everyone present in the courtroom, arguing that victims have a right to meaningfully observe the proceedings rather than simply attend in name only.
Tyler Robinson, 23, is charged with assassinating the conservative activist and Turning Point USA founder outside a “Prove Me Wrong” event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, on Sept. 10, 2025. A preliminary hearing began Monday to determine whether the case will proceed to trial on charges including aggravated murder, which carries the potential death penalty.
In a supplemental notice filed Wednesday, Erika Kirk, Charlie Kirk’s widow, asked Fourth District Court Judge Tony Graf to require all evidence admitted during the remaining hearing days be shown openly to everyone lawfully present. The filing also asks the court to republish exhibits from the first three days that were never displayed publicly.
“The Victim’s Family’s position is simple,” the filing reads. “At a minimum, every exhibit entered into evidence during the preliminary hearing must be visible to every person lawfully present in the courtroom. To receive evidence in a manner shielded from those seated in the courtroom is not transparency. And in the absence of transparency, speculation and conspiracy theories related to the tragic assassination of Mr. Kirk will continue to proliferate in the public domain, breeding doubt and distrust in the judicial system.”
The filing specifically covers a 4K video of Kirk’s shooting that was admitted into evidence during testimony. According to a Kirk family representative, the filing does not seek to release the evidence to media outlets but simply to ensure it can be seen by those lawfully present in the courtroom.
The Kirk family traveled to the courthouse after waiting 10 months for the hearing, only to find they could not view certain evidence as it was presented. Attorneys wrote that the family was “present in body” but denied the ability to “meaningfully observe the preliminary hearing.”
The filing invokes Utah law, arguing that crime victims and their representatives are guaranteed the right to be informed of, present at, and heard during criminal proceedings. Those protections, the filing argues, are meaningless if victims cannot see the evidence.
“The right ‘to be present’ is hollow if the victim or his representative is physically in the room but is prevented from seeing the evidence the Court is receiving,” the document states. “A right to attend that does not include the ability to perceive what is happening is not meaningful presence at all.”
