The Accused Assassin's Defense of the cold blood assassination of Charlie Kirk, doesn't want to show the video, it could bias the Jury,the judge and others. I think everybody needs to see(in the court room) the results of heinous activity perpetuated by a accused far left assassin.

"The video is graphic and likely highly disturbing to any person who views it, negatively impacting Mr. Robinson's right to a fair trial.

The story is based on a Foxnews Report

The motion will be denied

Everyone involved in the trial needs to see(Exhibit 4.1) what Leftist violence has turned to ,heinous ,a cold blooded, point blank execution, captured on video, and then the accused's own lawyers desperately begging the court not to let anyone ,judge, jury, or public ,actually watch it because it's too disturbing.

"Exhibit 4.1 is graphic and likely highly disturbing to any person who views it, negatively impacting Mr. Robinson's constitutional right to a fair trial"

22 minutes ago, riclag said:

then the accused's own lawyers desperately begging the court not to let anyone ,judge, jury, or public ,actually watch it because it's too disturbing.

"Exhibit 4.1 is graphic and likely highly disturbing to any person who views it, negatively impacting Mr. Robinson's constitutional right to a fair trial"

Its a pretty standard motion. Does the probative value of the evidence outweigh the prejudice derived from the introduction of the evidence?

I think the medical examiners report might be more instructive.

"Exhibit 4.1 is graphic" & the accused is on trial in Utah,as well as inhumanity of Anarchist ideology.

Lets hope for the best outcome.

4 hours ago, riclag said:

"Exhibit 4.1 is graphic" & the accused is on trial in Utah,as well as inhumanity of Anarchist ideology.

Lets hope for the best outcome.

Now comes the ridiculous searching for loopholes. Hideous on the surface pushing forward a Hail Mary attempt to disqualify the Prosecutors.

7 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I think the medical examiners report might be more instructive.

Not in a death penalty case. The video of him getting shot is perfectly admissible. Want me to explain to you why?