1 / 5

Defense attorneys Kathryn Nester, left, and Staci Visser, right, speak with Tyler Robinson during a hearing in Provo's 4th District Court on Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025. Robinson is accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk.

Rick Egan, The Salt Lake Tribune

2 / 5

Tyler Robinson, accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk, appears during a hearing in 4th District Court in Provo, Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025.

Rick Egan, The Salt Lake Tribune

3 / 5

Defense attorney Richard Novak, top, speaks with Utah County Attorney’s Office general counsel Christopher Ballard, right, during a hearing for Tyler Robinson in Provo's 4th District Court on Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025. Robinson is accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk.

Rick Egan, The Salt Lake Tribune

4 / 5

Defense attorneys Kathryn Nester, left, and Staci Visser, right, speak with Tyler Robinson during a hearing in Provo's 4th District Court on Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025. Robinson is accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk.

Rick Egan, The Salt Lake Tribune

5 / 5

Fourth District Court Judge Tony Graf presides over a hearing for Tyler Robinson in Provo on Thursday, Dec. 11, 2025. Robinson is accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk.

Rick Egan, The Salt Lake Tribune

❮ ❯

The man charged with killing Charlie Kirk made his first in-person court in Provo’s 4th District Court Thursday for a hearing.

Tyler Robinson, 22, of Washington, Utah, attended the court proceedings in a shirt and tie with his hands shackled. His parents and brother were in attendance, sitting on the front row of the gallery.

Robinson faces seven criminal charges, including aggravated murder, after he allegedly shot and killed Kirk, a conservative activist, with a rifle at a Sept. 10 event at Utah Valley University in Orem.

The purpose of the hearing was to discuss three motions pertaining to public access to the case.

For the first hour-plus of the hearing, a motion to determine if an Oct. 24 audio of a closed hearing and an Oct. 24 transcript should be released to the public was argued in a closed session. Judge Tony F. Graf said he would make the decision on the matter at a 10 a.m. oral hearing on Dec. 29.

Also delayed by Graf until the Dec. 29 hearing was his decision on a motion from media intervenors to receive notice of closed or sealed court information.

“I would rather do it right and take more time, than to be rash, and miss the mark,” Graf said.

Graf did make a decision on a motion from the state to amend a gag order issued to limit case publicity, by providing clarity to the court’s pretrial and trail publicity order. The order prohibits attorneys from permitting a witness to make extra judicial statements that would violate rule 3.6 — which establishes guidelines to ensure a fair trial.

The state was seeking clarification on the use of the word “witness” in the order.

“The state asserts that are there are over 3,000 lay witnesses of the alleged homicide, the state does not know if it must inform each potential witness or each potential and possible witness of the prohibitions in order, or whether the order applies only to witnesses who are members of the attorney’s teams, such as investigators or experts,” Graf said.

Graf clarified that the word witness applies to all witnesses on the defense or prosecution team who the defense prosecution has a “good faith belief” that they will asked testify at the trial.

Also during the proceedings, Graf found there was a violation of the standard decorum order, after the defense argued that a media pool video stream had broken the order by showing Robinson’s shackles.

Graf ordered the camera to be moved away from the defense table and warned that further violation of the order would result in the termination of the broadcast of court proceedings.

“I simply want to put all parties on notice, to the press, to all parties, that this Court takes this very seriously. While the court believes in openness and transparency, it needs to be balanced with the constitutional rights of all parties in this case,” Graf said.