Judge for Charlie Kirk shooting case holds prosecutor in contempt but keeps death penalty on the table

By Andi Babineau, Nicki Brown, CNN

(CNN) — A Utah judge in the case against the man accused of killing Charlie Kirk ruled Friday to hold a prosecutor in civil contempt for violating a pretrial publicity order but opted to leave the death penalty in place as a possible outcome in the murder trial.

The defense’s contempt motion stemmed from comments prosecutor Christopher Ballard, also a spokesperson for the Utah County Attorney’s Office, made to media outlets this spring about an inconclusive ballistics report mentioned in a defense filing.

While trying to clarify the results of the report to reporters, Ballard also referenced the strength of the state’s case against Tyler Robinson – statements the judge on Friday found risked prejudicing the jury pool.

“Those additional public statements possessed a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing the proceedings by communicating the prosecutor’s assessment of the defendant’s guilt,” Judge Tony Graf said in issuing his ruling.

Still, Graf stopped short of granting a defense request that he prohibit the state from seeking the death penalty if Robinson is convicted at trial.

Graf said he would consider additional measures during jury selection to address any potential effects Ballard’s comments could have on the jury pool. The defense will also be allowed to recoup legal fees related to the contempt proceedings, he said.

The decision to keep the death penalty on the table was a blow to Robinson, 23, who faces charges of aggravated murder, felony use of a firearm, obstruction of justice, witness tampering and committing a violent act in the presence of a child in connection with the fatal shooting of Kirk, a high-profile conservative activist, on a Utah college campus last September.

Robinson has yet to enter pleas.

Graf’s decision was initially expected Monday, when he ruled on separate motions related to the admissibility of hearsay evidence during Robinson’s upcoming preliminary hearing and a motion to quash a subpoena for a key out-of-state witness the defense wanted to call.

At the start of Monday’s hearing, Graf said because both parties had “submitted additional briefing” on the matter following a June 12 evidentiary hearing, “the court requires additional time to complete this thorough review.”

Those documents related to the defense’s request that Graf eliminate the death penalty in the case if he found prosecutors in contempt for speaking to the media about ballistics evidence.

Prosecutors filed a written objection to the request, calling it “grossly disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.”

“To the extent the Court finds that the prosecution could have made a better statement, it certainly is not a misstep that warrants the drastic and never-before-imposed remedy of reducing the aggravated murder charge to a first-degree felony,” the document says.

Robinson’s defense fired back a day later, calling the state’s objection “uninvited” and saying the court did not request nor authorize “any written post-hearing briefing.”

Robinson’s defense attorneys suggested lesser penalties could include ordering Ballard to attend a continuing education program or a referral to the state bar association.

Comments stem from report about inconclusive ballistics results

The judge’s pretrial publicity order – issued in September and amended in December – prohibits the parties from making public comments about the case except under certain circumstances.

However, Ballard spoke with reporters this spring after news outlets began reporting on an inconclusive ballistics report referenced in a defense filing. The filing states the US Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives “was unable to identify the bullet recovered at autopsy to the rifle allegedly tied to Mr. Robinson.”

Prosecutors argued the defense’s characterization in the filing omits an important piece of the ballistics report’s conclusion: The ATF was also unable to exclude the bullet as coming from the rifle.

Ballard said his comments were not about specific evidence but rather the circumstances that can lead to an inconclusive result.

“The goal of these interviews was to respond to the specific media inquiries that were being generated by the misinformation” in the filing, Ballard said.

Graf ruled Ballard’s statements about the report were protected under a stipulation allowing comments if a lawyer believes there is a “substantial undue prejudicial effect of recent publicity not initiated by the lawyer or the lawyer’s client.”

However, in a statement in March to TMZ, Ballard also referenced the strength of the state’s case, saying prosecutors had “ample evidence” against Robinson they believed would help them overcome his presumption of innocence at trial.

The judge held Ballard in civil contempt for these comments, finding they ran afoul of the court’s publicity order.

“Further commentary concerning the overall strength of the prosecution’s evidence did not materially assist in correcting specific misimpressions,” Graf said Friday. “Rather, those additional statements induced a separate subject – the prosecutor’s assessment of the ultimate merits.”

This story has been updated with additional information.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.