Lawyers for the man accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk are expected to keep questioning the reliability of DNA testing used to link the defendant to the suspected murder weapon when a weeklong hearing resumes Wednesday.
A member of Tyler Robinson’s defense team interrogated a DNA analyst from the FBI on Tuesday about the techniques she used to connect Robinson to a towel wrapped around a rifle found at Utah Valley University, where Kirk was shot in September while speaking to a large crowd.
Defense lawyer Michael Burt cast doubt on the analyst’s conclusions — a theme likely to recur during the five-day preliminary hearing.
“She can’t match Mr. Robinson to the questioned samples,” Burt argued.
Deputy Utah County Attorney Ryan McBride countered that the reliability of the DNA testing could be examined if the case goes to trial. He suggested the preliminary hearing — where prosecutors have a lower burden of proof compared with a trial — was not the time to take up the matter.
“The point is there are explanations that are susceptible to different interpretations and arguments,” McBride said. “Ultimately, we’re going to have an expert hearing where all the literature is going to be before the court and the court is going to determine if it meets the threshold of reliability for admission to trial.”
Prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty. State District Judge Tony Graf will decide at the conclusion of this week’s hearing if they have enough evidence to bring Robinson to trial on an aggravated murder charge.
Robinson has not yet entered a plea and his attorneys have not commented on his guilt or innocence. They have, however, sought to get the death penalty taken off the table, so far unsuccessfully.
Prosecutors must show they have enough evidence for a trial
FBI analyst Amanda Bakker said after Robinson’s roommate, Lance Twiggs, provided a DNA sample for comparison, she was able to rerun her tests and attribute all of the DNA to two people.
Investigators found the towel and suspected murder weapon — a bolt-action rifle with one spent round — in a wooded area near where Kirk was shot.
Jesus fucking christ.
Ask for mob law, get mob law.
I’m not saying I wished him dead. I will say there’s thousands of less deserving people then him that I’ll give a shit about first. Kirk’s fans are the same types that jeered over Renée Good’s death. Tolerance is a two way street.
No no I wasn’t saying against you, I was just shaking my head at the thing in general.
If both sides of the equation felt that way, the world would be a better place.
The right gets very upset when the left refuses to be tolerant, while they scream bloody murder at every step where they could be so.
It’s really hard feeling sympathy with a bully who genuinely wished violence on others.
A lot of people here and on reddit (and the left generally) were wishing him death and celebrating. What Charlie said and stood for I don’t agree with and a lot of it was awful - that doesn’t mean celebrating him being killed is a good thing. It’s awful. The types celebrating it can get fucked - nobody will ever join their side when they celebrate with awful ghoulish glee when someone who didn’t agree with them is murdered in cold blood
idk, the irony of a gun violence advocate dying because of gun violence is pretty funny, if the official story is true. If it way an attempt at making a martyr by the Trump admin, it’s still funny how much of a nothingburger it was. And honestly, I don’t really care if I met your approval. At this point, everyone’s picked their side or is willfully ignorant.
Thank god for the incompetence of these fascists. Twenty years from now we’re gonna be like, “remember when they had a fucking clown to lead them? Anyway, I have to go get my forehead scanned now.”
Sure, all that, I’m also not going to pretend I’m sad about it.