'Hit the Intended Target': Tyler Robinson Defense's Stunning Death Penalty Argument

We are less than one month away from the grim first anniversary of the Charlie Kirk assassination, and the legal back-and-forth is ramping up as the defense team for alleged shooter Tyler Robinson makes an unusual case for why the death penalty should be off the table.

Let's note right off the bat that this is not an admission of guilt from Robinson, but rather a legal argument made by the defense in new court filings. A preliminary hearing for Robinson was held last month in Provo, Utah, and a probable cause hearing is scheduled for September 1. At this point in the proceedings, he has yet to enter a plea.

And that's where these new defense filings come in.

Robinson's attorneys are now trying to knock out one of the aggravating factors prosecutors are using to pursue the death penalty – and the argument they're making is a doozy.

In essence, Robinson's defense team is saying the shooting did not place the thousands of other people at Charlie's September 10, 2025 event at Utah Valley University in grave danger because the shooter successfully hit the person he was aiming at.

Or, as the lawyers put it, the shooter “hit the intended target.”

Lawyers for the man charged with killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk say he shouldn’t be eligible for the death penalty because the shooter “hit the intended target” during the assassination last year at a Utah event attended by thousands of people.
Defendant Tyler Robinson’s attorneys say prosecutors have not proven that others who attended Kirk’s event at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10 were endangered by the shooting — a potentially aggravating factor under state law that would make it a capital crime.

Accused Charlie Kirk killer Tyler Robinson lays out wild reason why he should avoid death penalty https://t.co/VZuxksQ2HP pic.twitter.com/5SkIsfSyLL
— New York Post (@nypost) August 12, 2026

Andrew Kolvet, a spokesman for Turning Point USA and longtime executive producer of The Charlie Kirk Show, had some thoughts on the defense's argument, calling it "unreal."

NEW: In a response to the state’s motion for probable cause, Tyler Robinson's defense argues this shouldn't be a death penalty case because Robinson didn't intend to kill anyone other than Charlie:

"The apparent defense strategy here isn't to prove that Tyler Robinson didn't… pic.twitter.com/imhhm8bNTY
— Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKolvet) August 12, 2026

NEW: In a response to the state’s motion for probable cause, Tyler Robinson's defense argues this shouldn't be a death penalty case because Robinson didn't intend to kill anyone other than Charlie:
"The apparent defense strategy here isn't to prove that Tyler Robinson didn't kill Charlie Kirk, but that he didn't intend to kill anyone else, and that therefore, this should not be a death penalty case."
"Robinson's lawyers argued the state has failed to establish probable cause that the shooter knowingly created a great risk of death to another other than Charlie Kirk and himself."
Unreal.

It may be a perfectly legitimate legal argument that Robinson's team is making, but it looks like the reasoning has landed with a thud to those looking in from outside the courtroom. The defense is essentially asking the court to view the alleged precision of a fatal shot as a reason to spare the accused shooter from the harshest possible punishment. Whatever its legal merits, it's certainly an eyebrow-raising argument to make.

(EDITOR'S NOTE: Charlie Kirk was our cherished Salem Media colleague. RedState will be providing full coverage of the September 1 hearing and any other legal proceedings that follow until there is justice for Charlie.)

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy RedState's conservative reporting that takes on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.