A US judge has ordered the release of a previously secret court hearing transcript in the assassination case of Charlie Kirk.
This development has reignited global media attention, including strong interest from the UK public following the killing of a major political figure.
The ruling concerns the criminal case against Tyler Robinson, a 22-year-old man accused of murdering the conservative activist during a public speaking event in Utah earlier this year.
Why was the court hearing about Charlie Kirk held in secret?
The closed hearing, held on October 24, focused on courtroom security, specifically whether Tyler Robinson should be allowed to attend future court sessions without physical restraints and in civilian clothing.
Judge Tony Graf ruled that the hearing should initially remain private due to safety concerns and the sensitive nature of courtroom procedures.
However, during a 20-minute video hearing this week, the judge confirmed that transparency outweighed secrecy in this instance.
A redacted transcript is now expected to be released by the end of Monday, with audio recordings to follow within two weeks.
“The public has a right to understand how judicial decisions are made, provided safety and legal fairness are protected,” Judge Graf said during the video hearing.
What exactly will be released to the public?
The judge confirmed:
- A written transcript of the closed hearing will be made public
- Certain security-related sections will be redacted
- Audio recordings will be released later, subject to court processing times
This decision comes amid growing concerns about court transparency, especially in cases involving politically sensitive figures like Charlie Kirk.
Who is Tyler Robinson, and what charges does he face?
Tyler Robinson is facing seven felony charges, including:
- Aggravated murder
- Discharge of a firearm causing serious injury
- Obstruction of justice
- Two counts of witness tampering
- Violent offence committed in the presence of a child
The charges relate to the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk during a speaking engagement at Utah Valley University on 10 September, an event attended by thousands of people.
Robinson did not appear on camera during the recent hearing but confirmed his presence verbally when addressed by the judge.
Why is this case being followed closely in the UK?
Charlie Kirk was a globally recognised conservative activist and co-founder of Turning Point USA, a political organisation that also has followers and critics in the UK.
UK audiences are following the case closely due to:
- The political implications surrounding the killing
- The use of extreme courtroom security measures
- The potential application of the death penalty, which remains legal in some US states but has long been abolished in the UK
Utah is one of only five US states that still permit execution by firing squad under specific legal conditions.
What role is Charlie Kirk’s family playing in the trial?
Charlie Kirk is survived by his wife, Erika Kirk and their two young children.
Erika Kirk has taken an active role in the legal process and has been formally appointed as the official victim representative in the case.
She has also publicly supported cameras in the courtroom, arguing that openness is essential to prevent misinformation.
“We don’t want conspiracy theories filling the gaps left by silence,” she previously stated.
Why are defence lawyers concerned about media coverage?
Robinson’s defence team has repeatedly raised concerns about prejudicial media coverage, particularly after photographs of the defendant in shackles appeared in the press.
BREAKING: Utah Judge Tony Graf Rules Transcript and Audio From Closed-Door Hearing in Charlie Kirk Assassination Case Can Be Released With Redactions pic.twitter.com/kuA3tYfo19
— therealstateofamerica (@stateofamerica1) December 30, 2025
Defence lawyer Staci Visser criticised what she described as a breakdown of courtroom controls: “We don’t want the chaos that is out in the media in this courtroom.”
The defence argues that excessive exposure could influence potential jurors and undermine Robinson’s right to a fair trial.
