Tyler Robinson’s defense team suggested during a Tuesday hearing that the Utah County Attorney’s Office had only moved to seek the death penalty because it was clear that was what President Donald Trump wanted.
Richard Novak, an attorney for Robinson (who is accused of assassinating the late Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk), questioned Utah County Attorney Jeffrey S. Gray during a pre-trial hearing aimed at having Gray’s office removed from the case due to a perceived conflict of interest.
At issue was Gray’s decision to seek the death penalty — and the fact that he announced his plan to do so early in the investigation — a move that Novak attributed to “strong emotional reactions” within the prosecutor’s office.
Novak raised several issues that he argued could have driven such an emotional response from the prosecution: the fact that Gray had campaigned on a promise to seek the death penalty in cases he deemed “appropriate,” the fact that the adult child of a prosecutor in Gray’s office had been present at the time of Kirk’s assassination, and the knowledge that President Trump had already declared his wish to see Kirk’s killer face the death penalty.
Gray, under questioning from Novak, said that he’d become aware at some point that a prosecutor in his office had an adult child who had witnessed the shooting, but that they had not discussed it and it had not been a factor in his decision-making process.
Gray also said in a previous filing that the adult child in question had returned to classes after the shooting and had not experienced lasting trauma outside of being scared in the moment.
“Under these circumstances, there is virtually no risk, let alone a significant risk, that it would arouse such emotions in any father-prosecutor as to render him unable to fairly prosecute the case,” Gray said in the filing, arguing that the defense’s claims were rooted in a desire to delay proceedings rather than to pursue justice.
When Novak asked whether Gray had been aware that Trump had posted about the suspect, “I hope he gets the death penalty,” Gray said he knew the president had said that, but that he had not taken Trump’s social media posts into consideration when determining whether or not to seek capital punishment.
Novak also raised the question of campaign promises, and, noting that Gray had run on a promise to seek the death penalty, wondered whether he’d simply been in a hurry to check that off his to-do list.
Gray corrected Novak then, saying that he’d promised to seek the death penalty in cases where it was appropriate to do so — and that both he and Governor Spencer Cox (R) had determined it was appropriate in this case regardless of promises he’d made during his 2022 campaign.
When given a chance to explain why he’d announced the decision to seek the death penalty as early as he did — noting that he had until arraignment to do so — Gray said that his goal had been to limit speculation from social media and the press and to lessen the anxiety felt by the victims, specifically, Charlie’s widow Erika Kirk.
“The longer you delay that decision … the more delay, then it just creates all this unnecessary speculation and everything else,” Gray said, adding that he did it to prevent “unnecessary angst with the families of victims … so Erika Kirk didn’t have to deal with that uncertainty.”
The defense also petitioned the court to bar all video recordings and still photography in the courtroom during the trial.
.png)
.png)
