A video explaining that Robinson may not be the shooter.

[Tacenda]

I respect a lot of you on here's opinions and expertise. The question I have is if this guy's analyses could be a reason to open the case up further. He presents that the investigators didn't take specific pictures or take more time searching for clues. Also, why was it bricked over where Charlie died? And if this is as cut and dry as some think. I can't imagine Robinson being able to shoot that gun from so far away and the angle he had. Also if MODS want to shut this down, I understand. But hoping this isn't political, but more a murder mystery post. 

 

Edited September 28, 2025 by Tacenda

[sunstoned]

140 yards is not a long shot.  That is a typical hunting distance.

Edited September 28, 2025 by sunstoned

[Tony uk]

I imagine this has the potential to become the modern JFK talking point. Is there a patsy, different angles, people in frame behaving in a certain way, various groups alleged to be involved. Fact and conspiracy theories abundance of, in equal measure. 

[JAHS]

Candace Owens certainly thinks Robinson was framed.

"Conservative commentator Candace Owens has alleged that US authorities are “lying” about the investigation into the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. In an Instagram post, Owens claimed the accused, Tyler Robinson, 22, was “framed”. She said “no photo or video evidence” places him at the UVU event."

Personally, I think she is going off the deep end with her conspiracy theory.

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

hoping this isn't political, but more a murder mystery post. 

People are creating conspiracies primarily because of the politics around it. Either they want more drama, more reason to be outraged or they don’t want the kid to be the shooter. Or they are drumming up traffic to their stuff to make money, get famous…pretty selfish reasons to mess with people, imo.

It is not respectful to Kirk, imo. 

 It is not a good thing to encourage by publicizing it, imo.

If Tyler Robinson actually denies shooting Charlie Kirk and he and his roommate both say the texts between them are fake, then is the time to start looking for another shooter imo.  And why wouldn’t either or both of them have spoken up before now?  Even if Robinson was crazy enough to confess when innocent, his partner would unlikely be backing him.  And the text info gives significant detail.   And everyone around Robinson, even his parents, are apparently accepting him as a shooter now even if shocked when first confronted by it.

Edited September 28, 2025 by Calm

[gtaggart]

2 hours ago, JAHS said:

Candace Owens certainly thinks Robinson was framed.

"Conservative commentator Candace Owens has alleged that US authorities are “lying” about the investigation into the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk. In an Instagram post, Owens claimed the accused, Tyler Robinson, 22, was “framed”. She said “no photo or video evidence” places him at the UVU event."

Personally, I think she is going off the deep end with her conspiracy theory.

She can’t go off the deep end; she went off long ago.

[The Nehor]

That is not that long of a shot. In fact it is a pretty short shot. With a scope it wouldn’t take much skill at all to make.

If it is a framejob this setup would require a lot of skill and also be incredibly sloppy. There is a human need to believe that what seem to be major events require major and important causes. It is a fault in human reasoning. It is why the JFK assassination is so scrutinized. For such a major event with such a large impact the whole thing seems too mundane and simple.

I don’t think this is similar in impact to JFK but in the short term we can expect a lot of conspiracy talk until the hype dies down and then I expect it to die off.

[Kenngo1969]

Put up or shut up.  It is incumbent upon anyone with an alternate theory of the crime to provide support for it.   No video evidence places Tyler Robinson at the scene?  Mmm-kay.  And, I confess: I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll in Dallas on November 22, 1963.  And while I hope that neither a jury nor any of its constituent jurors is stup!d enough to fall for this garbage, if he gets acquitted, these people have blood on their hands, IMO.

P.S.:  Oh, Lord!  I had an open mind, but I'm not gonna watch an hour and nine minutes of video.  Anybody got a summary?  

Edited September 28, 2025 by Kenngo1969

[MustardSeed]

I personally don’t spend any time looking in to any conspiracy theories.  Fwiw 

[Devobah]

13 hours ago, gtaggart said:

She can’t go off the deep end; she went off long ago.

Which is a shame. I actually really respected her. I thought she would be the future of her party and inspire some good change. 

[rpn]

He said he was going to do it, left a note to that effect at home and told his roomie where to find it.    The gun belonged to his grandfather.  He has been shooting it for years.  He admitted he did it.   Of course in our world people claim conspiracies.  I'm inclined when something walks like a duck, talks like a duck, looks like a duck, to believe it is a duck.  

Edited September 28, 2025 by rpn

[webbles]

I was bored and actually watched that video.  His main argument is that because the bullet didn't exit the body and that it also caused a massive expansion inside the body (because of the energy impact), then it couldn't have been shot by the alleged shooter.  The reason is that the angle of shot from the alleged shooter would have gone straight through the neck since there are no bones in the way.  He posits that the real shooter must have been on a different location and that the FBI is either intentionally ignoring it or just incompetent.  I find his argument really weak.  Since he is just estimating the angles and he is basing them off a person who is standing/sitting straight, all of his data could be wrong.  And just saying that because they haven't released everything means they are covering up is also a bad argument.  They never release everything in an active criminal trial.  We'll get all these details in the trial so complaining now is just bad form.

He also says the grain cctv video that was released is faked.  His reasons is that a shadow disappears, some lines come and go, and a person disappears.  The first two are easy to explain as encoding/compression artifacts in the cctv video.  The third is explained by the fact that there is a walkway behind the tree that the person disappears behind and so the person just turned and that is why they "disappeared".

He also mentions that the probability of the bullet actually hitting any bones in the shot from the shooter is so high, it is impossible and so not worth to look at.  This is kind of a fallacy.  Just because the probability is really high doesn't mean it can't happen.  Lots of really rare things happen.  So by automatically throwing out a possibility just because it is really rare ruins his argument.

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, webbles said:

I was bored and actually watched that video.  His main argument is that because the bullet didn't exit the body and that it also caused a massive expansion inside the body (because of the energy impact), then it couldn't have been shot by the alleged shooter.  The reason is that the angle of shot from the alleged shooter would have gone straight through the neck since there are no bones in the way.  He posits that the real shooter must have been on a different location and that the FBI is either intentionally ignoring it or just incompetent.  I find his argument really weak.  Since he is just estimating the angles and he is basing them off a person who is standing/sitting straight, all of his data could be wrong.  And just saying that because they haven't released everything means they are covering up is also a bad argument.  They never release everything in an active criminal trial.  We'll get all these details in the trial so complaining now is just bad form.

He also says the grain cctv video that was released is faked.  His reasons is that a shadow disappears, some lines come and go, and a person disappears.  The first two are easy to explain as encoding/compression artifacts in the cctv video.  The third is explained by the fact that there is a walkway behind the tree that the person disappears behind and so the person just turned and that is why they "disappeared".

He also mentions that the probability of the bullet actually hitting any bones in the shot from the shooter is so high, it is impossible and so not worth to look at.  This is kind of a fallacy.  Just because the probability is really high doesn't mean it can't happen.  Lots of really rare things happen.  So by automatically throwing out a possibility just because it is really rare ruins his argument.

Thanks for enduring it for the rest of us…

[JAHS]

3 hours ago, Devobah said:

Which is a shame. I actually really respected her. I thought she would be the future of her party and inspire some good change. 

So did I.
She seems very intelligent, articulate, and well-spoken. But I think she is getting a little too passionate about a conspiracy theory which may be very wrong.
Wait and see, I guess.

[InCognitus]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

People are creating conspiracies primarily because of the politics around it. Either they want more drama, more reason to be outraged or they don’t want the kid to be the shooter. Or they are drumming up traffic to their stuff to make money, get famous…pretty selfish reasons to mess with people, imo.

It is not respectful to Kirk, imo. 

 It is not a good thing to encourage by publicizing it, imo.

If Tyler Robinson actually denies shooting Charlie Kirk and he and his roommate both say the texts between them are fake, then is the time to start looking for another shooter imo.  And why wouldn’t either or both of them have spoken up before now?  Even if Robinson was crazy enough to confess when innocent, his partner would unlikely be backing him.  And the text info gives significant detail.   And everyone around Robinson, even his parents, are apparently accepting him as a shooter now even if shocked when first confronted by it.

I wish I could give your post at least 30 more upvotes, but alas, it only lets me give you one.

[Tacenda]

19 hours ago, Calm said:

People are creating conspiracies primarily because of the politics around it. Either they want more drama, more reason to be outraged or they don’t want the kid to be the shooter. Or they are drumming up traffic to their stuff to make money, get famous…pretty selfish reasons to mess with people, imo.

It is not respectful to Kirk, imo. 

 It is not a good thing to encourage by publicizing it, imo.

If Tyler Robinson actually denies shooting Charlie Kirk and he and his roommate both say the texts between them are fake, then is the time to start looking for another shooter imo.  And why wouldn’t either or both of them have spoken up before now?  Even if Robinson was crazy enough to confess when innocent, his partner would unlikely be backing him.  And the text info gives significant detail.   And everyone around Robinson, even his parents, are apparently accepting him as a shooter now even if shocked when first confronted by it.

Makes sense for sure, I was wearing my tin foil hat for a moment.

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, webbles said:

I was bored and actually watched that video.  His main argument is that because the bullet didn't exit the body and that it also caused a massive expansion inside the body (because of the energy impact), then it couldn't have been shot by the alleged shooter.  The reason is that the angle of shot from the alleged shooter would have gone straight through the neck since there are no bones in the way.  He posits that the real shooter must have been on a different location and that the FBI is either intentionally ignoring it or just incompetent.  I find his argument really weak.  Since he is just estimating the angles and he is basing them off a person who is standing/sitting straight, all of his data could be wrong.  And just saying that because they haven't released everything means they are covering up is also a bad argument.  They never release everything in an active criminal trial.  We'll get all these details in the trial so complaining now is just bad form.

He also says the grain cctv video that was released is faked.  His reasons is that a shadow disappears, some lines come and go, and a person disappears.  The first two are easy to explain as encoding/compression artifacts in the cctv video.  The third is explained by the fact that there is a walkway behind the tree that the person disappears behind and so the person just turned and that is why they "disappeared".

He also mentions that the probability of the bullet actually hitting any bones in the shot from the shooter is so high, it is impossible and so not worth to look at.  This is kind of a fallacy.  Just because the probability is really high doesn't mean it can't happen.  Lots of really rare things happen.  So by automatically throwing out a possibility just because it is really rare ruins his argument.

Webbles, you are awesome! I had some family things come up and wasn't able to finish the YouTube, what a lame topic poster I am. But you came in and did what you know best and explained the video where I was not able to do that well at all. 

And your commentary was so helpful as well, thanks!!

[Tacenda]

12 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Put up or shut up.  It is incumbent upon anyone with an alternate theory of the crime to provide support for it.   No video evidence places Tyler Robinson at the scene?  Mmm-kay.  And, I confess: I was the second gunman on the grassy knoll in Dallas on November 22, 1963.  And while I hope that neither a jury nor any of its constituent jurors is stup!d enough to fall for this garbage, if he gets acquitted, these people have blood on their hands, IMO.

P.S.:  Oh, Lord!  I had an open mind, but I'm not gonna watch an hour and nine minutes of video.  Anybody got a summary?  

Webbles did a fine job of the summary, I wasn't on top of it!

[Calm]

3 hours ago, InCognitus said:

I wish I could give your post at least 30 more upvotes, but alas, it only lets me give you one.

I appreciate the thought.   

[Calm]

11 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I personally don’t spend any time looking in to any conspiracy theories.  Fwiw 

I have done a little when they are persistent and widespread because I want to understand how rational people can be convinced by irrational ideas, such as a flat earth given we have numerous satellite pictures from many different sources and other solid evidence (cherry picking evidence mostly by those who don’t understand the science and by a few who do, but err).

Edited September 29, 2025 by Calm

[Chum]

31 minutes ago, Calm said:

I have done a little when they are persistent and widespread because I want to understand how rational people can be convinced by irrational ideas,

I think this is harder to do than you let on here. These conclusions are solidly predetermined but the road to get to one shifts every time sunlight hits it. 

[bluebell]

11 hours ago, Calm said:

I have done a little when they are persistent and widespread because I want to understand how rational people can be convinced by irrational ideas, such as a flat earth given we have numerous satellite pictures from many different sources and other solid evidence (cherry picking evidence mostly by those who don’t understand the science and by a few who do, but err).

I feel like you don’t have to spend very much time in the comments section of any social media to realize that the default setting for us humans is not rationality. 

[JVW]

I regard myself as somewhat of a conspiracy expert. I've been in the deep end of it and come out the other side and take a lot of what I learn with a grain of salt. Because of how my algorithm is set up I was exposed to a lot of Charlie Kirk conspiracy much sooner than I would've like to have been and it really upset me. The worst conspiracy to read are the people who believe that it was all staged and that he isn't really dead but is living on some remote island now living it up. I'll also note that I don't avidly research conspiracies anymore and there are many threads with various Kirk conspiracies that I haven't cared to try and unravel so I don't have any sense of how valid they may be (e.g. Erica Kirk having family ties to Zionists).

There are two things that I've seen the video evidence of, with my own eyes, that I 100% believe to be the truth.

1) There were at least 2, but more likely 3 or 4 different people on different building locations. There is the rooftop that Tyler is seen running across (SW roof), that is a different rooftop than the one that he shot Kirk from. 17 minutes after the recorded video of him running on the rooftop the shot occurs from the rooftop diagonally adjacent (NE roof). It could be the same guy who just booked it with a disassembled, hidden rifle and reassembled it and calibrated the sights, etc. in the timeframe, but it is -possible- that there were two different people on two different roofs. But let's assume it's just Tyler hopping around roofs... At the same time as those two roof instances, there is a recording of a person lying prone on the SW roof. So now we have 2, for sure, distinct individuals on 3 different roofs. The possible 3rd (or 4th, depending on what you believe) person is not visible on a roof. Instead, there is footage aimed at the building under construction behind Kirk on his right. At the exact moment the shot takes place there is a flash of light from inside an open window on an upper floor in the building. I've heard some commentary that the sound the shot made should have echoed if it was fired in an open space, since it didn't echo it implies that the shot originated from within a building. I don't know anything about that. In any event, there is person 1 who may have been on two roofs within 17 minutes, or person 1 and 2 each on a separate roof but recorded on video 17 minutes apart. There is person 2 who was recorded at the same time on a separate roof. And mysterious person 3 that is evidenced not by seeing an actual person, but the flash of light that happens simultaneous to the gunshot from a room in the building under construction. If you want to see what I'm talking about, video explanation and evidence are from timestamp 12:51 to 14:39 of this video https://youtu.be/ZFvXQCQKnH4?si=h0KA_9XMmeVG6JWk (I just spent around 5 minutes looking for the video footage of the flash of light from the open window in the building under construction, couldn't find it. This kind of stuff isn't easy to find, but if anyone really wants to see it I can try and dig it up and post it here in a separate post.)

 

2) There is a really good video examining the footage of the shot frame by frame. I will not link it here because even though the face is blurred and it is only a few frames, it is still really hard to watch. If any of you want to see it just PM me and I can get you the link. What I saw, when seeing the video frame by frame, was a small blood splatter coming out of behind the right side of around his C1 vertebrae. The frame before the hole appears in his neck the skin of his neck is being pushed out in a very extreme and pointed manner to his left. Based on what I've seen with my own eyes I find it hard to interpret in any other way than that the hole in his neck was an exit wound. The angle of the shot based off of the small entrance blood splatter and the exit wound line up with the flash of light from the building under construction.

2b) In addition to this, after having talked to several gun enthusiasts and watching footage of people shooting .308 rifles, there is no way that the bullet was stopped by his bones as Trump said the ME told him. No way. If there was a bullet, just under the skin, stopped by the bone or whatever, as is currently claimed, then it was planted there. Anyways, based off of what I've seen, and PM me if you want to see the same thing I saw, the hole in Kirk's neck was an exit wound.

Those are the two things that I think there is sufficient evidence of that needs to be officially and thoroughly investigated.

Off the top of my head I think the private plane taking off is a dud. I was just at that airport and took a tour of the company that works out of there doing custom interiors for private planes. There's a lot of private planes at that airport. I also think the Dairy Queen image of Tyler was likely not taken at 6:38 PM the day of the shooting for two reasons. 1) the timestamp is cut off and 2) there is a Superman movie poster on display. I don't go to that Dairy Queen that often so I wasn't able to directly verify if the poster was up on the 10th, but that movie came out July 10th. So that poster would have had to have been up for 2 months, which is possible, but I don't think likely. But I could be wrong.

Other weird things, the person taking down the camera in the tent situated behind Kirk pretty much right after it happened. The text exchange between lovers that conveniently provides evidence for: the lone gunman theory, the motive, the weapon used, etc. all tied up in one neat little text exchange that could very well have been AI assisted or generated. The 12 registered Israeli cell phones near Kirk at the time of the event (https://stateofthenation.info/?p=34395. Netanyahu's denial of association not once but... four times.

A lot of the weirdness I think will be resolved as the court case unfolds. Will they show or release a bunch of text history of Tyler to reinforce that the text is legit and not AI influenced? Do they really have the bullet that was shot? Do they really have the evidence to prove that Tyler pulled the trigger? What will his lawyers ask? Unfortunately, due to how we've seen other conspiracies unfold, Tyler is a dead man walking, and he is the lone gunman. This story can unfold in no other way. I read a comment somewhere that I thought was really funny, but also very true. "Now gun experts can know how architects & engineers have been feeling for the past 24 years."

Anyways, hope you had fun reading all of this. If you have any questions about any other conspiracy crap you've come across related to Kirk, or just in general, hit me up and I'll give you my two cents on it.

 

[webbles]

8 hours ago, JVW said:

1) There were at least 2, but more likely 3 or 4 different people on different building locations. There is the rooftop that Tyler is seen running across (SW roof), that is a different rooftop than the one that he shot Kirk from. 17 minutes after the recorded video of him running on the rooftop the shot occurs from the rooftop diagonally adjacent (NE roof). It could be the same guy who just booked it with a disassembled, hidden rifle and reassembled it and calibrated the sights, etc. in the timeframe, but it is -possible- that there were two different people on two different roofs. But let's assume it's just Tyler hopping around roofs... At the same time as those two roof instances, there is a recording of a person lying prone on the SW roof. So now we have 2, for sure, distinct individuals on 3 different roofs. The possible 3rd (or 4th, depending on what you believe) person is not visible on a roof. Instead, there is footage aimed at the building under construction behind Kirk on his right. At the exact moment the shot takes place there is a flash of light from inside an open window on an upper floor in the building. I've heard some commentary that the sound the shot made should have echoed if it was fired in an open space, since it didn't echo it implies that the shot originated from within a building. I don't know anything about that. In any event, there is person 1 who may have been on two roofs within 17 minutes, or person 1 and 2 each on a separate roof but recorded on video 17 minutes apart. There is person 2 who was recorded at the same time on a separate roof. And mysterious person 3 that is evidenced not by seeing an actual person, but the flash of light that happens simultaneous to the gunshot from a room in the building under construction. If you want to see what I'm talking about, video explanation and evidence are from timestamp 12:51 to 14:39 of this video https://youtu.be/ZFvXQCQKnH4?si=h0KA_9XMmeVG6JWk (I just spent around 5 minutes looking for the video footage of the flash of light from the open window in the building under construction, couldn't find it. This kind of stuff isn't easy to find, but if anyone really wants to see it I can try and dig it up and post it here in a separate post.)

I watched between those time stamps.  I can't tell what is in the first video that he is showing since he goes through it too fast and doesn't have enough context.  But the image that he shows and says it has a prone person on top of the Sparks Building is actually showing the shooter on top of the correct building (Losee Center).  If you match up the angle of the camera at UVU, it matches up with showing the Sparks Building just to the right and the Losee Center in the background with the guy on top.

[JVW]

16 hours ago, webbles said:

I watched between those time stamps.  I can't tell what is in the first video that he is showing since he goes through it too fast and doesn't have enough context.  But the image that he shows and says it has a prone person on top of the Sparks Building is actually showing the shooter on top of the correct building (Losee Center).  If you match up the angle of the camera at UVU, it matches up with showing the Sparks Building just to the right and the Losee Center in the background with the guy on top.

Thanks, so now we can drop the number of people on buildings by a max of 1.