Candace Owens criticized Tyler Robinson’s hearing when it began in Utah, calling it a “show trial” and questioning the prosecution’s evidence. She mocked Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erica Kirk, and accused her supporters of spreading a sentimental narrative. Prosecutors presented DNA evidence, witness testimony and videos related to the 2025 killing of Charlie Kirk. Judge Tony Graf will decide whether the case contains enough evidence to proceed to trial.
As the main court hearing begins in Utah, Candace Owens has reignited the controversy over the Tyler Robinson case. When Robinson appeared in court for the first time with Charlie Kirk’s widow, Erica Kirk, and his parents, Owens said prosecutors were relying on unexamined evidence and that emotion rather than justice was driving the proceedings, sparking another round of public debate over the high-profile case.
Tyler Robinson’s hearing begins as Candace Owens questions the evidence
Tyler Robinson held his preliminary hearing on July 6 in Utah, an important step in the criminal case surrounding the fatal shooting of political commentator Charlie Kirk in September 2025. It was also the first time Robinson came face to face with Charlie Kirk’s family, including his widow, Erica Kirk.Before the court proceedings began, conservative commentator Candace Owens shared a lengthy post on X, criticizing both the legal process and the public narrative surrounding the case.
“Today Tyler Robinson’s mock trial begins,” Candice wrote. “Evidence such as text message confessions will be allowed in the courtroom, although Tyler’s defense was not allowed to examine those messages to determine if they had been tampered with or who actually sent them. Remember, the FBI and ATF did not have to turn over key evidence despite multiple discovery requests because the judge ruled it was not necessary at this point.
“Owens also challenged how witness testimony was presented during the hearing.“The testimony of the key witness from Lance Twiggs will be heard, but cross-examination of Lance Twiggs is not permitted because the judge has ruled it is not necessary at this point. Today is about emotion. You will hear the Fed’s narrative in the absence of any ability for the defense to meaningfully dispute it.”Her comments quickly gained attention online, adding another layer of controversy to a case that has remained under intense public scrutiny since Charlie Kirk’s death.
Tyler Robinson’s hearing focuses on the evidence before the judge’s decision
Owens continued her criticism by targeting Erika Kirk and social media personalities supportive of the prosecution’s case.“What you can expect (apart from Erika’s tears) is an orbit of paid influencers trying to convince you that unvetted evidence is ‘overwhelming’ and ‘undeniable’. Sit back and watch the spectacle. The real trial will come later. Charlie’s army is growing. In the end, the truth will prevail.”While Owens questioned the fairness of the proceedings, prosecutors prepared to present a wide range of evidence before Judge Tony Graf. The hearing is a preliminary examination rather than a full trial, meaning prosecutors only need to prove probable cause rather than prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.According to court filings, prosecutors intend to introduce DNA evidence that allegedly links Robinson to the suspected murder weapon, investigators’ testimony, autopsy results, witness statements, and surveillance video related to the shooting.
Prosecutors are also allowed to rely on hearsay evidence during this stage under Utah law.Judge Graf had previously denied a defense request to limit public access, allowing members of the media and the public to attend the hearing.The case stems from the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk on Sept. 10, 2025, during a student question-and-answer event at Utah Valley University in Orem. Authorities allege Robinson shot the 31-year-old political activist during the event.Once both sides have finished making their presentations, Judge Graf will decide whether prosecutors have presented enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial. This decision will not determine Robinson’s guilt or innocence but will determine whether the prosecution has met the legal threshold required for the next stage of the criminal process.