Podcasts about Graf

Attorneys representing media organizations are pushing back against Tyler Robinson's renewed effort to keep cameras out of the courtroom for the final day of his preliminary hearing on September 1. They argue that Judge Tony Graf has already rejected the defense's broader objections to electronic media coverage and that Robinson has not shown the kind of specific prejudice necessary to overcome the presumption favoring public access. The media response takes particular aim at the defense's concern that hearsay evidence discussed during closing arguments could taint a future jury pool, pointing out that the evidentiary portion of the preliminary hearing was already open to the public and livestreamed in July. Their position is that shutting cameras out now would do little to contain information that is already public and could instead fuel more speculation and distrust about what is happening in the case.The media attorneys are also opposing Robinson's attempt to keep portions of his camera-ban motion private. They argue that court filings are presumptively public and that Robinson cannot take information already circulating publicly, place it in a court filing and then transform it into confidential material. Their blunt formulation was that “what is public is public,” and they characterized the defense's predictions about the consequences of continued public access as generalized and unsupported. At the same time, Graf has imposed separate courtroom controls for the September 1 proceeding, banning cellphones and other electronic devices for most attendees while allowing attorneys and certain legal staff to use them. The dispute therefore sets up a clear confrontation between Robinson's argument that continued broadcasting risks prejudicing his eventual trial and the media's position that transparency, especially after so much of the proceeding has already been public, is itself an important safeguard.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:'What is public is public': Media attorneys argue in Tyler Robinson hearing | KSL.com

Want To Replace $20,000 + / Month in cashflow? Inside our community Action Academy [w/ over 700 members & $428M in deals done in 2025 alone ] we help high performers escape corporate America through buying small businesses and commercial real estate. Click this link to book a one-on-one discovery call with our membership director and become the next success story on our podcast!Follow Me As I Travel & Build:IG @brianluebbenActionAcademy.com

Links For The Occult Rejectshttps://linktr.ee/theoccultrejectsOccult Research Institutehttps://www.occultresearchinstitute.org/Substackhttps://substack.com/@theoccultrejects?r=7auau0&utm_campaign=profile&utm_medium=profile-pageCash Apphttps://cash.app/$theoccultrejectsVenmo@TheOccultRejectsBuy Me A Coffeebuymeacoffee.com/TheOccultRejectsPatreonhttps://www.patreon.com/TheOccultRejectsBibliographyCurses, Blessings, and Ritual HarmCannon, Walter B. “‘Voodoo' Death.” American Anthropologist 44, no. 2 (1942): 169–181.Faraone, Christopher A. Ancient Greek Love Magic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.Gager, John G., ed. Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.Graf, Fritz. Magic in the Ancient World. Translated by Franklin Philip. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.Ogden, Daniel. Magic, Witchcraft, and Ghosts in the Greek and Roman Worlds: A Sourcebook. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.Stratton, Kimberly B., and Dayna S. Kalleres, eds. Daughters of Hecate: Women and Magic in the Ancient World. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.Tambiah, Stanley Jeyaraja. “The Magical Power of Words.” Man 3, no. 2 (1968): 175–208.Placebo, Nocebo, and Medical CommunicationBarsky, Arthur J., Ralph Saintfort, Malcolm P. Rogers, and Jonathan F. Borus. “Nonspecific Medication Side Effects and the Nocebo Phenomenon.” JAMA 287, no. 5 (2002): 622–627.Benedetti, Fabrizio. Placebo Effects: Understanding the Mechanisms in Health and Disease. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.Benedetti, Fabrizio, Marina Lanotte, Lorella Lopiano, and Luana Colloca. “When Words Are Painful: Unraveling the Mechanisms of the Nocebo Effect.” Neuroscience 147, no. 2 (2007): 260–271.Colloca, Luana, and Fabrizio Benedetti. “Nocebo Hyperalgesia: How Anxiety Is Turned into Pain.” Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology 20, no. 5 (2007): 435–439.Colloca, Luana, and Damien Finniss. “Nocebo Effects, Patient–Clinician Communication, and Therapeutic Outcomes.” JAMA 307, no. 6 (2012): 567–568.Colloca, Luana, and Franklin G. Miller. “The Nocebo Effect and Its Relevance for Clinical Practice.” Psychosomatic Medicine 73, no. 7 (2011): 598–603.Enck, Paul, Fabrizio Benedetti, and Manfred Schedlowski. “New Insights into the Placebo and Nocebo Responses.” Neuron 59, no. 2 (2008): 195–206.Häuser, Winfried, Ernil Hansen, and Paul Enck. “Nocebo Phenomena in Medicine: Their Relevance in Everyday Clinical Practice.” Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 109, no. 26 (2012): 459–465.Inner Speech and DevelopmentFernyhough, Charles. The Voices Within: The History and Science of How We Talk to Ourselves. New York: Basic Books, 2016.Vygotsky, Lev S. Thought and Language. Revised and expanded ed. Edited and translated by Alex Kozulin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1986.Winsler, Adam, Charles Fernyhough, and Ignacio Montero, eds. Private Speech, Executive Functioning, and the Development of Verbal Self-Regulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Rumination and Repetitive Negative ThinkingBrosschot, Jos F., Bart Verkuil, and Julian F. Thayer. “Conscious and Unconscious Perseverative Cognition: Is a Large Part of Prolonged Physiological Activity Due to Unconscious Stress?” Journal of Psychosomatic Research 69, no. 4 (2010): 407–416.Ehring, Thomas, and Edward R. Watkins. “Repetitive Negative Thinking as a Transdiagnostic Process.” International Journal of Cognitive Therapy 1, no. 3 (2008): 192–205.Nolen-Hoeksema, Susan. “Responses to Depression and Their Effects on the Duration of Depressive Episodes.” Journal of Abnormal Psychology 100, no. 4 (1991): 569–582.Nolen-Hoeksema, Susan, Blair E. Wisco, and Sonja Lyubomirsky. “Rethinking Rumination.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 3, no. 5 (2008): 400–424.Smith, Jeannette M., and Lauren B. Alloy. “A Roadmap to Rumination: A Review of the Definition, Assessment, and Conceptualization of This Multifaceted Construct.” Clinical Psychology Review 29, no. 2 (2009): 116–128.Treynor, Wendy, Richard Gonzalez, and Susan Nolen-Hoeksema. “Rumination Reconsidered: A Psychometric Analysis.” Cognitive Therapy and Research 27, no. 3 (2003): 247–259.Watkins, Edward R. “Constructive and Unconstructive Repetitive Thought.” Psychological Bulletin 134, no. 2 (2008): 163–206.Watkins, Edward R. Rumination-Focused Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Depression. New York: Guilford Press, 2016.Self-Talk and PerformanceHardy, James. “Speaking Clearly: A Critical Review of the Self-Talk Literature.” Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7, no. 1 (2006): 81–97.Hatzigeorgiadis, Antonis, Nikos Zourbanos, Evangelos Galanis, and Yiannis Theodorakis. “Self-Talk and Sports Performance: A Meta-Analysis.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 6, no. 4 (2011): 348–356.Theodorakis, Yiannis, Antonis Hatzigeorgiadis, and Nikos Zourbanos. “Cognition: Self-Talk and Performance.” In The Oxford Handbook of Sport and Performance Psychology, edited by Shane M. Murphy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.Affect Labeling, Emotion, and LanguageBarrett, Lisa Feldman. “Solving the Emotion Paradox: Categorization and the Experience of Emotion.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 10, no. 1 (2006): 20–46.Lieberman, Matthew D., Naomi I. Eisenberger, Molly J. Crockett, Sabrina M. Tom, Jennifer H. Pfeifer, and Baldwin M. Way. “Putting Feelings into Words: Affect Labeling Disrupts Amygdala Activity in Response to Affective Stimuli.” Psychological Science 18, no. 5 (2007): 421–428.Lindquist, Kristen A., Lisa Feldman Barrett, Eliza Bliss-Moreau, and James A. Russell. “Language and the Perception of Emotion.” Emotion 6, no. 1 (2006): 125–138.Torre, Jared B., and Matthew D. Lieberman. “Putting Feelings into Words: Affect Labeling as Implicit Emotion Regulation.” Emotion Review 10, no. 2 (2018): 116–124.Self-Distancing and Reflective ProcessingAyduk, Özlem, and Ethan Kross. “From a Distance: Implications of Spontaneous Self-Distancing for Adaptive Self-Reflection.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 98, no. 5 (2010): 809–829.Kross, Ethan, and Özlem Ayduk. “Making Meaning out of Negative Experiences by Self-Distancing.” Current Directions in Psychological Science 20, no. 3 (2011): 187–191.Kross, Ethan, Özlem Ayduk, and Walter Mischel. “When Asking ‘Why' Does Not Hurt: Distinguishing Rumination from Reflective Processing of Negative Emotions.” Psychological Science 16, no. 9 (2005): 709–715.Kross, Ethan, Emma Bruehlman-Senecal, Jiyoung Park, Aleah Burson, Adrienne Dougherty, Holly Shablack, Ryan Bremner, Jason Moser, and Özlem Ayduk. “Self-Talk as a Regulatory Mechanism: How You Do It Matters.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 106, no. 2 (2014): 304–324.Moser, Jason S., Adrienne Dougherty, Whitney I. Mattson, Benjamin Katz, Tim P. Moran, Darwin Guevarra, Hannah Shablack, et al. “Third-Person Self-Talk Facilitates Emotion Regulation Without Engaging Cognitive Control: Converging Evidence from ERP and fMRI.” Scientific Reports 7 (2017): 4519.Affirmation and Counter-IncantationCascio, Christopher N., Matthew B. O'Donnell, Francis J. Tinney Jr., Matthew D. Lieberman, Shelley E. Taylor, Victor J. Strecher, and Emily B. Falk. “Self-Affirmation Activates Brain Systems Associated with Self-Related Processing and Reward and Is Reinforced by Future Orientation.” Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 11, no. 4 (2016): 621–629.Cohen, Geoffrey L., and David K. Sherman. “The Psychology of Change: Self-Affirmation and Social Psychological Intervention.” Annual Review of Psychology 65 (2014): 333–371.Wood, Joanne V., W. Q. Elaine Perunovic, and John W. Lee. “Positive Self-Statements: Power for Some, Peril for Others.” Psychological Science 20, no. 7 (2009): 860–866.Implementation Intentions and ActionGollwitzer, Peter M. “Implementation Intentions: Strong Effects of Simple Plans.” American Psychologist 54, no. 7 (1999): 493–503.Gollwitzer, Peter M., and Veronika Brandstätter. “Implementation Intentions and Effective Goal Pursuit.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 73, no. 1 (1997): 186–199.Gollwitzer, Peter M., and Paschal Sheeran. “Implementation Intentions and Goal Achievement: A Meta-Analysis of Effects and Processes.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 38 (2006): 69–119.Schweiger Gallo, Inge, Andreas Keil, Kathleen C. McCulloch, Brigitte Rockstroh, and Peter M. Gollwitzer. “Strategic Automation of Emotion Regulation.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96, no. 1 (2009): 11–31.Ritual, Identity, and Psychological FormationBell, Catherine. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.Hobson, Nicholas M., Juliana Schroeder, Jane L. Risen, Dimitris Xygalatas, and Michael Inzlicht. “The Psychology of Rituals: An Integrative Review and Process-Based Framework.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 22, no. 3 (2018): 260–284.Rappaport, Roy A. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Xygalatas, Dimitris. Ritual: How Seemingly Senseless Acts Make Life Worth Living. New York: Little, Brown Spark, 2022.Also want to remind people about the website, if you're into reading we have tons of information by multiple contributors, and we got t-shirts up on the site if you're interested. Fun fact, the art is all based on the eyeball. 

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Tyler Robinson's defense team is asking Judge Tony Graf to block electronic media coverage of the September 1 hearing, arguing that allowing cameras and livestreaming would create an unnecessary risk to Robinson's right to a fair trial. The lawyers contend that the proceeding will center heavily on evidence presented during the preliminary hearing, much of which came into the record as hearsay under Utah's comparatively permissive probable-cause standard and might never be admissible before a trial jury. Broadcasting attorneys discussing that material, they argue, would effectively preserve and distribute potentially inadmissible accusations to a massive audience long before jury selection begins. The defense also says the extraordinary publicity surrounding the case has already demonstrated how quickly courtroom material can spread online and shape public perceptions, pointing to what it characterizes as real-time evidence of developing bias. Robinson's attorneys maintain that cameras add pressure and distraction for lawyers, witnesses and other courtroom participants, arguing that proceedings should remain focused on evidence and legal argument rather than presentation for a national audience. In one of the filing's sharpest lines, the defense declares that Robinson's prosecution “is not and should not be made into a reality TV show.”The filing also builds on the defense's broader argument that extensive media exposure is making it increasingly difficult to preserve an impartial jury pool in a case that has attracted enormous national attention. Robinson's attorneys say witnesses whose statements were admitted as reliable hearsay during the preliminary-hearing process have already faced harassment from media organizations and interested third parties, which they offer as another example of the consequences of unrestricted exposure. Their concern is particularly acute because the September 1 proceeding is not a trial but an oral argument over whether prosecutors have established enough probable cause to bind Robinson over for trial, meaning the public could hear extensive discussion of evidence without the protections and evidentiary restrictions that would apply before a jury. The defense therefore asks Graf to treat the proceeding as a judicial hearing rather than a media event and to prohibit cameras from broadcasting arguments that could become part of the permanent public narrative even if portions of the underlying evidence are later excluded. The request continues a months-long fight over courtroom access, publicity and the balance between transparency and Robinson's constitutional right to receive a fair trial before an impartial jury.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Accused Charlie Kirk assassin Tyler Robinson's lawyers seek camera ban | Fox News

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Links For The Occult Rejectshttps://linktr.ee/theoccultrejectsOccult Research Institutehttps://www.occultresearchinstitute.org/Substackhttps://substack.com/@theoccultrejects?r=7auau0&utm_campaign=profile&utm_medium=profile-pageCash Apphttps://cash.app/$theoccultrejectsVenmo@TheOccultRejectsBuy Me A Coffeebuymeacoffee.com/TheOccultRejectsPatreonhttps://www.patreon.com/TheOccultRejectsBibliographyPrimary and Classical SourcesAgrippa, Heinrich Cornelius. Three Books of Occult Philosophy. 1533. Translated by James Freake; edited and annotated by Donald Tyson. St. Paul, MN: Llewellyn, 1993.Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. 2nd ed. Edited by J. O. Urmson and Marina Sbisà. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975. Originally published 1962.Betz, Hans Dieter, ed. The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, Including the Demotic Spells. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.Clarke, Emma C., John M. Dillon, and Jackson P. Hershbell, trans. Iamblichus: De Mysteriis. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.Faulkner, Raymond O., trans. The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead. Revised by Carol Andrews. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1990.Iamblichus. On the Mysteries. Translated by Emma C. Clarke, John M. Dillon, and Jackson P. Hershbell. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003.Searle, John R. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969.Ancient Egyptian and Greco-Roman MagicBorghouts, J. F. Ancient Egyptian Magical Texts. Leiden: Brill, 1978.Dieleman, Jacco. Priests, Tongues, and Rites: The London-Leiden Magical Manuscripts and Translation in Egyptian Ritual. Leiden: Brill, 2005.Faraone, Christopher A., and Dirk Obbink, eds. Magika Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic and Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.Frankfurter, David. “Narrating Power: The Theory and Practice of the Magical Historiola in Ritual Spells.” In Ancient Magic and Ritual Power, edited by Marvin Meyer and Paul Mirecki, 457–476. Leiden: Brill, 1995.Frankfurter, David. Religion in Roman Egypt: Assimilation and Resistance. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998.Graf, Fritz. Magic in the Ancient World. Translated by Franklin Philip. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997.Meyer, Marvin, and Paul Mirecki, eds. Ancient Magic and Ritual Power. Leiden: Brill, 1995.Pinch, Geraldine. Magic in Ancient Egypt. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1994.Ritner, Robert K. The Mechanics of Ancient Egyptian Magical Practice. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 54. Chicago: Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 1993.Smith, Morton. Jesus the Magician. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1978. Use cautiously and comparatively rather than as a consensus account.Ritual Language and Performative SpeechBloch, Maurice. “Symbols, Song, Dance and Features of Articulation: Is Religion an Extreme Form of Traditional Authority?” European Journal of Sociology 15, no. 1 (1974): 55–81.Finnegan, Ruth. Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significance and Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977.Malinowski, Bronisław. Coral Gardens and Their Magic. 2 vols. London: George Allen & Unwin, 1935.Rappaport, Roy A. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Tambiah, Stanley Jeyaraja. “The Magical Power of Words.” Man 3, no. 2 (1968): 175–208.Tambiah, Stanley Jeyaraja. Culture, Thought, and Social Action: An Anthropological Perspective. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985.Oral Tradition, Formula, and TransmissionFoley, John Miles. The Theory of Oral Composition: History and Methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988.Lord, Albert B. The Singer of Tales. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960.Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. London: Methuen, 1982.Parry, Milman. The Making of Homeric Verse: The Collected Papers of Milman Parry. Edited by Adam Parry. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971.Ritual Form, Authority, and TransmissionBell, Catherine. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.Bell, Catherine. Ritual: Perspectives and Dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.McCauley, Robert N., and E. Thomas Lawson. Bringing Ritual to Mind: Psychological Foundations of Cultural Forms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Whitehouse, Harvey. Modes of Religiosity: A Cognitive Theory of Religious Transmission. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, 2004.Xygalatas, Dimitris. Ritual: How Seemingly Senseless Acts Make Life Worth Living. New York: Little, Brown Spark, 2022.Also want to remind people about the website, if you're into reading we have tons of information by multiple contributors, and we got t-shirts up on the site if you're interested. Fun fact, the art is all based on the eyeball. 

Tyler Robinson's defense filed its written bindover argument on August 11, 2026, responding to the state's 28-page memorandum asking Judge Tony Graf to order Robinson to stand trial. The defense filing was submitted after the five-day preliminary hearing, during which Robinson's lawyers challenged several important parts of the prosecution's evidentiary presentation, particularly the reliability and interpretation of forensic evidence. During that hearing, the defense called FBI and ATF forensic witnesses and questioned the reliability and subjectivity of portions of the DNA analysis, while also emphasizing that Robinson had not emerged as an investigative suspect until he surrendered. The defense had previously highlighted the ATF finding that the bullet jacket fragment recovered during the autopsy could not be conclusively identified as having been fired from the rifle authorities linked to Robinson. Those issues formed the factual backdrop to the defense's argument against bindover.The central defense position was that prosecutors were asking the court to move Robinson into a capital murder trial even though significant weaknesses remained in the evidence used to identify him as the shooter and connect the recovered weapon to the killing. That stood directly against the prosecution's position that Robinson's alleged admissions, DNA evidence, surveillance footage and witness testimony made the bindover determination exceptionally straightforward. Importantly, the dispute was not about whether the state had proven Robinson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; Judge Graf was deciding whether prosecutors had presented probable cause sufficient to send the seven charges to trial, a considerably lower legal threshold. Robinson's defense was therefore attempting to persuade Graf that weaknesses exposed during the preliminary hearing were substantial enough that the state had not satisfied even that standard, while prosecutors argued that Robinson's alleged admissions and the corroborating forensic and video evidence easily cleared it. The state is scheduled to file its rebuttal on August 18, with oral arguments before Graf set for September 1.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Tyler Robinson's defense filed its written bindover argument on August 11, 2026, responding to the state's 28-page memorandum asking Judge Tony Graf to order Robinson to stand trial. The defense filing was submitted after the five-day preliminary hearing, during which Robinson's lawyers challenged several important parts of the prosecution's evidentiary presentation, particularly the reliability and interpretation of forensic evidence. During that hearing, the defense called FBI and ATF forensic witnesses and questioned the reliability and subjectivity of portions of the DNA analysis, while also emphasizing that Robinson had not emerged as an investigative suspect until he surrendered. The defense had previously highlighted the ATF finding that the bullet jacket fragment recovered during the autopsy could not be conclusively identified as having been fired from the rifle authorities linked to Robinson. Those issues formed the factual backdrop to the defense's argument against bindover.The central defense position was that prosecutors were asking the court to move Robinson into a capital murder trial even though significant weaknesses remained in the evidence used to identify him as the shooter and connect the recovered weapon to the killing. That stood directly against the prosecution's position that Robinson's alleged admissions, DNA evidence, surveillance footage and witness testimony made the bindover determination exceptionally straightforward. Importantly, the dispute was not about whether the state had proven Robinson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; Judge Graf was deciding whether prosecutors had presented probable cause sufficient to send the seven charges to trial, a considerably lower legal threshold. Robinson's defense was therefore attempting to persuade Graf that weaknesses exposed during the preliminary hearing were substantial enough that the state had not satisfied even that standard, while prosecutors argued that Robinson's alleged admissions and the corroborating forensic and video evidence easily cleared it. The state is scheduled to file its rebuttal on August 18, with oral arguments before Graf set for September 1.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Let's be real: Modern dating culture can suck. Between ghosting, confusion over when to have sex, the commodification of our love lives, and people throwing up old photos on Tinder, Feeld, or Bumble, it's not always clear how to make it work.But Freya isn't playing by the rules anymore. Instead of sticking with the apps, which can leave both men and women feeling dejected, she's running a full-blown, 3-month public campaign to find a boyfriend ... and she's inviting her entire audience along for the ride.What's equally as cool is that she's challenging herself on an essentially daily basis to approach men in the wild. We get all up into how this is going for her (how do you approach a guy at the grocery store? What if he's got headphones in? What if he's taken? How does she handle rejection?), and her strong and well-made points about how we could all "do" dating better.We also dig into the wildest event she's said yes to (hint: 250 people were watching); what happened on her fourth lap around a park after 3 failed attempts to talk to a cute guy walking his dog; and why the little note cards she's been handing out to strangers might be the most old-school-meets-radical dating move going right now.And a distinction we both come back to: the difference between dominating, being passive, and leading (and why "leading" is the one that actually works).Work with usReady to go deeper than the podcast and take action? Jason and I help you break old patterns and transform your sex & love life for good. To see if you're a fit for our flagship program, Pillars of Presence, book a call here. Start anytime. (https://evolutionary.men/apply/)—Mentioned on this episode:Please Her In Bed (Melanie's streaming course on how to talk about sex with women in a way that actually helps them to open up): www.pleaseherinbed.comFind Freya a Fella (Freya's crowdsourced-boyfriend campaign): freyagraf.comThe Labia Lounge (Freya's podcast on sex and dating, for all genders)The Man Cave (the org where Freya facilitates workshops for teenage boys on healthy masculinity, emotional literacy, boundaries, and consent)---Memorable quotes from this episode:"This is not an empowering place to be that we find ourselves in.""The bar is very low. It's very close to the ground.""'No one's ever done that. Like, good on you.'""I literally massage vaginas for a living.""That's basically a precursor to being in a relationship with a man who doesn't make effort.""97% of women did not mention anything about how hard a man got, or how long he lasted. And 0% mentioned him having a six-pack.""I want love, I love love, I'm not ashamed to admit it.""Don't be afraid to write a note -- it's adorable."

Tyler Robinson's defense filed its written bindover argument on August 11, 2026, responding to the state's 28-page memorandum asking Judge Tony Graf to order Robinson to stand trial. The defense filing was submitted after the five-day preliminary hearing, during which Robinson's lawyers challenged several important parts of the prosecution's evidentiary presentation, particularly the reliability and interpretation of forensic evidence. During that hearing, the defense called FBI and ATF forensic witnesses and questioned the reliability and subjectivity of portions of the DNA analysis, while also emphasizing that Robinson had not emerged as an investigative suspect until he surrendered. The defense had previously highlighted the ATF finding that the bullet jacket fragment recovered during the autopsy could not be conclusively identified as having been fired from the rifle authorities linked to Robinson. Those issues formed the factual backdrop to the defense's argument against bindover.The central defense position was that prosecutors were asking the court to move Robinson into a capital murder trial even though significant weaknesses remained in the evidence used to identify him as the shooter and connect the recovered weapon to the killing. That stood directly against the prosecution's position that Robinson's alleged admissions, DNA evidence, surveillance footage and witness testimony made the bindover determination exceptionally straightforward. Importantly, the dispute was not about whether the state had proven Robinson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; Judge Graf was deciding whether prosecutors had presented probable cause sufficient to send the seven charges to trial, a considerably lower legal threshold. Robinson's defense was therefore attempting to persuade Graf that weaknesses exposed during the preliminary hearing were substantial enough that the state had not satisfied even that standard, while prosecutors argued that Robinson's alleged admissions and the corroborating forensic and video evidence easily cleared it. The state is scheduled to file its rebuttal on August 18, with oral arguments before Graf set for September 1.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

yler Robinson's defense filed its written bindover argument on August 11, 2026, responding to the state's 28-page memorandum asking Judge Tony Graf to order Robinson to stand trial. The defense filing was submitted after the five-day preliminary hearing, during which Robinson's lawyers challenged several important parts of the prosecution's evidentiary presentation, particularly the reliability and interpretation of forensic evidence. During that hearing, the defense called FBI and ATF forensic witnesses and questioned the reliability and subjectivity of portions of the DNA analysis, while also emphasizing that Robinson had not emerged as an investigative suspect until he surrendered. The defense had previously highlighted the ATF finding that the bullet jacket fragment recovered during the autopsy could not be conclusively identified as having been fired from the rifle authorities linked to Robinson. Those issues formed the factual backdrop to the defense's argument against bindover.The central defense position was that prosecutors were asking the court to move Robinson into a capital murder trial even though significant weaknesses remained in the evidence used to identify him as the shooter and connect the recovered weapon to the killing. That stood directly against the prosecution's position that Robinson's alleged admissions, DNA evidence, surveillance footage and witness testimony made the bindover determination exceptionally straightforward. Importantly, the dispute was not about whether the state had proven Robinson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; Judge Graf was deciding whether prosecutors had presented probable cause sufficient to send the seven charges to trial, a considerably lower legal threshold. Robinson's defense was therefore attempting to persuade Graf that weaknesses exposed during the preliminary hearing were substantial enough that the state had not satisfied even that standard, while prosecutors argued that Robinson's alleged admissions and the corroborating forensic and video evidence easily cleared it. The state is scheduled to file its rebuttal on August 18, with oral arguments before Graf set for September 1.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

yler Robinson's defense filed its written bindover argument on August 11, 2026, responding to the state's 28-page memorandum asking Judge Tony Graf to order Robinson to stand trial. The defense filing was submitted after the five-day preliminary hearing, during which Robinson's lawyers challenged several important parts of the prosecution's evidentiary presentation, particularly the reliability and interpretation of forensic evidence. During that hearing, the defense called FBI and ATF forensic witnesses and questioned the reliability and subjectivity of portions of the DNA analysis, while also emphasizing that Robinson had not emerged as an investigative suspect until he surrendered. The defense had previously highlighted the ATF finding that the bullet jacket fragment recovered during the autopsy could not be conclusively identified as having been fired from the rifle authorities linked to Robinson. Those issues formed the factual backdrop to the defense's argument against bindover.The central defense position was that prosecutors were asking the court to move Robinson into a capital murder trial even though significant weaknesses remained in the evidence used to identify him as the shooter and connect the recovered weapon to the killing. That stood directly against the prosecution's position that Robinson's alleged admissions, DNA evidence, surveillance footage and witness testimony made the bindover determination exceptionally straightforward. Importantly, the dispute was not about whether the state had proven Robinson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; Judge Graf was deciding whether prosecutors had presented probable cause sufficient to send the seven charges to trial, a considerably lower legal threshold. Robinson's defense was therefore attempting to persuade Graf that weaknesses exposed during the preliminary hearing were substantial enough that the state had not satisfied even that standard, while prosecutors argued that Robinson's alleged admissions and the corroborating forensic and video evidence easily cleared it. The state is scheduled to file its rebuttal on August 18, with oral arguments before Graf set for September 1.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Das Wichtigste am Donnerstag: 65 Jahre nach dem Bau der Berliner Mauer mahnen Politiker, die Erinnerung wachzuhalten. Der britische Rechtspopulist Nigel Farage bekommt es mit Graf Mülleimergesicht zu tun. In Sachsen-Anhalt lehnt die AfD Hilfe vom BSW ab. Und es ist Linkshändertag.

Heuer, Christine www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Studio 9

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

yler Robinson's defense filed its written bindover argument on August 11, 2026, responding to the state's 28-page memorandum asking Judge Tony Graf to order Robinson to stand trial. The defense filing was submitted after the five-day preliminary hearing, during which Robinson's lawyers challenged several important parts of the prosecution's evidentiary presentation, particularly the reliability and interpretation of forensic evidence. During that hearing, the defense called FBI and ATF forensic witnesses and questioned the reliability and subjectivity of portions of the DNA analysis, while also emphasizing that Robinson had not emerged as an investigative suspect until he surrendered. The defense had previously highlighted the ATF finding that the bullet jacket fragment recovered during the autopsy could not be conclusively identified as having been fired from the rifle authorities linked to Robinson. Those issues formed the factual backdrop to the defense's argument against bindover.The central defense position was that prosecutors were asking the court to move Robinson into a capital murder trial even though significant weaknesses remained in the evidence used to identify him as the shooter and connect the recovered weapon to the killing. That stood directly against the prosecution's position that Robinson's alleged admissions, DNA evidence, surveillance footage and witness testimony made the bindover determination exceptionally straightforward. Importantly, the dispute was not about whether the state had proven Robinson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; Judge Graf was deciding whether prosecutors had presented probable cause sufficient to send the seven charges to trial, a considerably lower legal threshold. Robinson's defense was therefore attempting to persuade Graf that weaknesses exposed during the preliminary hearing were substantial enough that the state had not satisfied even that standard, while prosecutors argued that Robinson's alleged admissions and the corroborating forensic and video evidence easily cleared it. The state is scheduled to file its rebuttal on August 18, with oral arguments before Graf set for September 1.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Day one of Tyler Robinson's preliminary hearing on July 6, 2026, largely centered on prosecutors beginning to construct a timeline of Charlie Kirk's killing at Utah Valley University and establishing the authenticity of the surveillance footage and investigative records they intended to use against Robinson. Former UVU police officer Chris Bagley described the moment the gunshot rang out during Kirk's September 10, 2025 event and the chaos that followed, while Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent David Hull walked the court through the enormous video-review effort undertaken after the shooting. Hull testified that investigators examined hundreds of hours of surveillance footage and ultimately tracked a person they believed was Robinson moving around the UVU campus at several different points that day. Prosecutors introduced surveillance recordings from multiple locations as they attempted to connect the person seen approaching the campus, moving toward the area surrounding the Losee Center, and later leaving the area to Robinson. Three separate videos depicting Kirk being shot were admitted, although Judge Tony Graf determined that their graphic nature warranted restricting their display to the attorneys' and judge's monitors rather than broadcasting them throughout the courtroom. Kirk's widow, Erika, and his parents left the courtroom while the videos were reviewed. Prosecutors also introduced Kirk's autopsy report through Hull, which listed his cause of death as a gunshot wound to the neck and the manner of death as homicideThe defense spent much of the first day attacking the manner in which the prosecution was getting its evidence into the record rather than attempting to disprove the entire prosecution theory at that stage. Kathryn Nester and Robinson's attorneys repeatedly raised hearsay, foundation and authentication objections, arguing that investigators were being permitted to introduce reports, statements and records created by other people without those individuals appearing personally to testify. Judge Graf overruled most of those objections, reflecting the substantially lower evidentiary threshold governing a Utah preliminary hearing, whose purpose was only to determine whether probable cause existed to send Robinson to trial rather than whether prosecutors could prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. One significant exception involved an edited compilation of surveillance footage, which Graf declined to admit in that form and required prosecutors to replace with the underlying unedited material. Hull's testimony also revealed the scope of the prosecution's surveillance theory: investigators claimed Robinson had appeared on or around the UVU campus multiple times on September 10 and that they were attempting to stitch those appearances together into a continuous identification of the alleged shooter. By the end of day one, prosecutors had established the killing itself, the medical cause of Kirk's death, the existence and authenticity of substantial video evidence and the beginnings of their effort to identify Robinson as the person captured in that footage. They had not yet presented many of the pieces expected to become more consequential later in the hearing, including the rifle and DNA evidence, Robinson's alleged communications and admissions, and testimony concerning his roommate Lance Twiggs.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Welcome to another episode from the HOZ Comedy Podcast with Joey. Podcaster Drew Graf joins the boys for an honest conversation about creating content, building a podcast, and why stand-up comedy isn't for everyone. The crew talks about Drew's personal journey, upcoming wedding plans, the challenges of running a group podcast, unforgettable guests, and the differences between podcasting and performing on stage.They also dive into Kill Tony, comedy preferences, and what it takes to build a successful show while staying authentic. It's a fun, insightful episode full of laughs and behind-the-scenes stories. Remember to listen laugh and share.

Alicia Graf Mack is only the fourth ever director of the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater. It's a company with a huge significance for dance history – and especially for Black America. Alicia danced with them from 2005-14, and was mentored by Ailey's own star dancer, Judith Jamison. Previously a principal ballerina at Dance Theatre of Harlem, more recently she was Dean & Director of Dance at Juilliard School. Now at Ailey, Alicia must maintain the company's legacy and nurture new works that connect with today's audiences. The company is fired by lyrical dance, and also by a commitment to social justice and as a platform for Black artists. We speak to Alicia as the company prepares to visit Sadler's Wells in London. Ailey at Sadler's Wells, 15-19 September 2026: https://www.sadlerswells.com/alvin-ailey-american-dance-theater-legacy-new-works/Ailey: ailey.orgAlicia Graf Mack's website: https://www.aliciagrafmack.com/aboutWhy Dance Matters is a dance podcast featuring inspiring conversations with extraordinary people from the world of dance and beyond. Hosted by David Jays, editor of Dance Gazette, this podcast explores how dance shapes lives and why it matters to us all. Brought to you by the RAD, which inspires the world to dance, these insightful stories will surprise and delight. Tune in and discover more on our website. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Brodie Brazil breaks down the re-signing of forward Collin Graf.

Following last Friday's announcement of a new contract with The Sharks, Collin Graf met with the media on the morning of Tuesday, August 4th to discuss the new deal, and more.

(Insight Meditation Society - Retreat Center)

(Insight Meditation Society - Retreat Center)

(Insight Meditation Society - Retreat Center)

(Insight Meditation Society - Retreat Center) Mindfulness of body and use of anchor

(Insight Meditation Society - Retreat Center) Mindfulness of body and use of anchor

(Insight Meditation Society - Retreat Center) Mindfulness of body and use of anchor

Compass Hardware in Charlestown, RI, is the subject of this week's program with Skip Graf, General Manager. We talk about his role in this over 60-year-old, locally owned institution. It's an amazing story of what originally started as a store that mostly sold coal to what has become a very diversified establishment. For more information, you can go to www.compasshardware.com

What will Macklin Celebrini, Will Smith, and Collin Graf's next contracts look like? Hart Levine, founder of Puckpedia, shares his thoughts. Levine also spoke on how the Darnell Nurse and Jacob Trouba additions could affect the San Jose Sharks' cap situation in the future, what's taking so long for the Graf deal to get completed, and how the Leo Carlsson offer sheet “changes the landscape” for RFAs around the NHL. (00:02:27) Hart Levine on How Leo Carlsson Offer Sheet Changes Things (00:17:09) Expectations for Macklin Celebrini Contract? (00:25:20) Sensible Will Smith Contract? (00:33:03) What's Taking So Long With Collin Graf Contract? (00:43:16) How Will Darnell Nurse and Jacob Trouba Affect Sharks' Future Cap? (00:49:25) How Else Could San Jose Sharks Have Improved Defense? (00:55:56) Thoughts on New AGM Jeff Kealty (01:05:38) On Celebrini NHL 27 Cover (01:10:24) San Jose Sharks' 2026-27 Schedule Reaction (01:20:07) Sharks' Path to Playoffs? The San Jose Hockey Now Podcast is sponsored by Bring Hockey Back and Bladetech Hockey! Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

(Common Ground Meditation Center)

(Common Ground Meditation Center)

Megyn Kelly starts the show by discussing "feckless" Judge Tony Graf showing zero confidence from the bench in Tyler Robinson hearing, how he's delaying a probable cause ruling despite extensive evidence presented in court, Lance Twiggs' statements about the bullet engravings and Robinson's political views, additional evidence surrounding the events leading up to Kirk's assassination, and more. Then, Megyn is joined by legal experts Dave Aronberg and Viva Frei to discuss Lance Twigg's video testimony in the Tyler Robinson hearing, why he was seemingly downplaying his "trans" identity, his comments about Robinson's political views, and more. Plus, Megyn is joined by Mark Eiglarsh and Jonna Spilbor, hosts of “Positively Legal,” and Matt Murphy, co-host of "In The Well," to discuss the defense challenging the DNA evidence in the Tyler Robinson case, what the evidence could mean for the prosecution, the alleged surveillance footage of Tyler Robinson, text messages between Robinson and Lance Twiggs, the engraved cartridge casings recovered in the case, what the evidence may reveal about Robinson's alleged motive, and more.    Subscribe to MK True Crime to find ALL the shows: Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mk-true-crime/id1829831499 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4o80I2RSC2NvY51TIaKkJW YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@MKTrueCrime?sub_confirmation=1 Frei- https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/  Sundays for Dogs: Upgrade your dog's food without the hassle—try Sundays for Dogs and get 50% off your first order at https://sundaysfordogs.com/MEGYN or use code MEGYN at checkout. Quo: Make this the season where no opportunity slips away. Try QUO for free PLUS get 20% off your first 6 months when you go to https://www.Quo.com/MK Supersure Insurance: Upgrade your business insurance to a year-round SuperAgency at https://Supersure.com/Megyn DailyLook: https://dailylook.com to take your style quiz and use code MEGYN for 50% off your first order.     Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKelly Twitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShow Instagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShow Facebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at:https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.