Graphic Video of Charlie Kirk Shooting Admitted Into Evidence

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: I'm going to go ahead and grant the publishing of Plaintiff's Exhibit 7.1 in Courts and that the media may capture that. Let's go ahead and do so. [00:00:19] Speaker 2: Scroll up. Slowly scroll down. [00:00:30] Speaker 1: All right. You may proceed. [00:00:44] Speaker 2: Did you admit Exhibit 7.1? [00:00:46] Speaker 1: It is admitted into evidence and it was published. [00:00:50] Speaker 2: Have you personally watched Mr. Phillips' video? [00:00:54] Speaker 3: I have, yes. [00:00:55] Speaker 2: Okay. And what does it depict? [00:00:59] Speaker 3: It's a graphic video. Mr. Phillips was positioned towards the front of the crowd and it does depict the moment that Mr. Koch is shot. [00:01:09] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:01:10] Speaker 2: And independent of the 1102 statement prepared by Mr. Phillips, you watching that video, do you recognize at least the location of this video? [00:01:19] Speaker 3: I do. It's consistent with the event that Mr. Koch was presenting at UVU on September 10th, 2025. [00:01:25] Speaker 2: Chair, so at this point the State would move to introduce or would move to admit what's been marked State's Exhibit No. 7. We would simply ask that it be admitted. We would ask, however, that it not be published beyond that. [00:01:40] Speaker 1: Ms. Nester. [00:01:41] Speaker 2: Due to the graphic nature and the sensitive nature of the video. All right. [00:01:46] Speaker 4: So as to the admission, the same issues that we raised as to the 1102, we would raise as to the difficulty of authenticating when the individual is not here present. And all the same concerns that we raised about the 1102 itself, Your Honor. [00:02:04] Speaker 1: Thank you. All right. Considering the... [00:02:10] Speaker 4: I'm sorry. May I add one more? I apologize. And also under Rule 403, we think it's more prejudicial than probative. And we would raise it for that reason as well. [00:02:19] Speaker 1: Any final response, Mr. Sturgeon? No, Your Honor. All right. And this is Exhibit 7, is that correct? [00:02:27] Speaker 2: Correct. Exhibit 7, Judge. [00:02:29] Speaker 1: All right. I will admit Exhibit 7 into evidence based off the foundation that's laid. The 1102 is tied directly to this. And so for admission purposes, it is admitted. I am not going to authorize publication in the courtroom or obviously through media. But I will have it played on my screen. And so I view it. And I just want to make sure. And please, Council, given the graphic nature of it, please guard your screens. Because I believe we all should be viewing this. This is evidence. And I want to make sure that you all are seeing what I see to ensure that that is accurate. And it's a fair representation of the exhibit that you are familiar with. So whatever you need to do, I'll give you a moment. And if you could, just give me a thumbs up if you're ready to proceed. Again, I want to act in a way that is dignified and respecting the rights of all persons. And for those reasons, I just want to make sure we are safeguarding to ensure this is not captured. All right. To defense. Ready to proceed? [00:03:45] Speaker ?: Yes, sir. [00:03:45] Speaker 1: All right. To the state. [00:03:48] Speaker 2: Yes, sir. [00:03:48] Speaker 1: All right. Go ahead. And let's play exhibit 7. Is there a sound? [00:04:00] Speaker ?: There is, sir. [00:04:01] Speaker 1: All right. Let's make sure that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes playing of exhibit 7. You may proceed. [00:04:57] Speaker 2: Thank you, Judge. Agent Holt, any more video? Did you collect it? Either you or another agent with the SBA? [00:05:04] Speaker 3: Yes, we were able to collect video. TPUSA had a videographer, Visual Impulse, who was taking coverage of the event. And they provided video to us that they had captured on September 10th of 2025. [00:05:22] Speaker 2: And do you know who or how that video was collected from Visual Impulse? [00:05:27] Speaker 3: Yeah, Mr. Farnsworth originally provided, I believe, a flash drive to Lieutenant O'Brien with one of the local agencies. And a short time after that, on September 10th, he provided downloadable versions, electronic versions to Agent Mortensen. And an 1102 was collected from him on May 6th of 2026. [00:05:50] Speaker 2: So an 1102 was prepared by someone with Visual Impulse? [00:05:54] Speaker 3: Yes, Terrell Farnsworth was the individual that prepared it and in preparation for this, I spoke to him personally regarding that statement. [00:06:02] Speaker 2: And do you know what his association is with Visual Impulse? [00:06:05] Speaker 3: I believe he's the owner-operator or the director of the company. [00:06:11] Speaker 2: And then who collected that 1102 statement from Mr. Farnsworth? [00:06:15] Speaker 3: It was Agent Mortensen who collected it. [00:06:18] Speaker 2: Okay, and you know that because Agent Mortensen told you or... [00:06:21] Speaker 3: He provided it to me. And then, as I mentioned, I subsequently spoke to Terrell Farnsworth personally regarding his statement. Okay. [00:06:34] Speaker 2: You had a chance to look at Mr. Farnsworth's 1102 statement? [00:06:38] Speaker 3: I have, yes. Okay. [00:06:40] Speaker 2: And again, does that statement include an advisory that any statement that he provided would be used at preliminary hearing in lieu of his life testimony? [00:06:50] Speaker 3: Yes. [00:06:51] Speaker 2: Did it also include a warning that a false statement would potentially be punished by a class A misdemeanor? [00:06:57] Speaker 3: It did, yes. [00:06:58] Speaker 2: Okay. I'm going to have exhibited on your screen what's been marked State's Exhibit 8.1. Let me know when that comes up. [00:07:09] Speaker 3: That's come up. [00:07:13] Speaker 2: I think it's a single page, is it not? [00:07:16] Speaker 3: I believe it is. [00:07:18] Speaker 2: Put it on the top screen. Put it on the top screen down slowly. Can you see it at Agent Hall? [00:07:30] Speaker 3: Yes. [00:07:30] Speaker 2: You do recognize that? I do, yes. Okay. And again, that is what? [00:07:43] Speaker 3: It's the 1102 statement that was provided to me, completed by Mr. Farnsworth from Visual Impulse, who is the videographer for TPUSA for the events that they do. Okay. [00:07:55] Speaker 2: Judge, the state would move to admit State's Exhibit 8.1. [00:08:00] Speaker 1: Ms. Nester. [00:08:02] Speaker 4: Thank you, Your Honor. At this point, we renew our objection. This is hearsay. This statement is hearsay. We have constitutional concerns for the reasons we raised in our standing objection. We also would like to cross-examine Mr. Farnsworth about whether or not and to what extent these videos may have been altered in any way. It is clear that clips were being made out of the larger videos because he sent, even his own statement says he sent larger videos and this is just a small portion of them. So, obviously, someone made clips and we don't know who, we don't know how, we don't know what they did. And for those reasons and the reasons on our standing objection, we would object to the admissibility of it. And as well, the – I don't have a redacted version of 8.1, but I assume there is one. There is personal information on this one. Do you have a – okay, I don't have that one. All right, and we would object to publication just on our concerns for fair trial, the same issues. I'll just read that. Yeah, gotcha. Excuse me? Yeah, I think so. Thank you. And for all those reasons, we would object to its admissibility, its publication, and its ability to be filmed by the media, Your Honor. [00:09:31] Speaker 1: Ms. Nestor, I just wanted to check. Did you get a copy of the redacted version? [00:09:35] Speaker 4: I was just handed it. [00:09:36] Speaker 1: Okay, I just wanted to make sure that you had copies. [00:09:39] Speaker 4: Thank you, Your Honor. [00:09:40] Speaker 1: So, okay, thank you. Mr. Sturgill, would you like to respond? [00:09:43] Speaker 2: Sure, Judge, thank you. With regards to the admissibility of the statement, Judge, I think the foundation has been laid that this statement was collected in compliance with Utah Rule of Evidence, 1102, subsection B8, it constitutes reliable hearsay. It's a statement that's been made by a declarant that's written and is under oath, or not under oath, but pursuant to a notification of the declarant that a false statement made is punishable. I think there's been foundation to support that. In addition, Judge, Article 1, Section 12 of the Utah Constitution makes it very clear that the state at preliminary hearing can rely upon reliable hearsay. [00:10:24] Speaker 1: All right, anything further before I make my ruling? [00:10:27] Speaker ?: All right, Your Honor. [00:10:28] Speaker 1: Thank you. Applying the same analysis from the previous exhibits as it relates to the written statement under Rule 1102, and also under the Utah Constitution, Article 1, Section 12, in that last paragraph, I will overrule the objection and admit states exhibit 8.1. Let me hold off on that final phrase. If you could scroll down to the state representative and just stop right there. Thank you. I just want to make sure I fully review it before I make that ruling. And if you could continue scrolling down, and just go ahead and scroll down to the end. I don't believe there's anything else, but I want to make sure. Thank you. So I do rule that, overrule the objection, and states exhibit 7, I'm sorry, 8.1. Is admitted into evidence, and may be published, well. [00:11:53] Speaker 2: Judge, let me speak with regards to that. With regards to the 1102 statement prepared by Mr. Farnsworth, in its redacted form, we believe that the presumption is this is a public record, and that it should be published both here in court, and made available to the public by virtue of the camera. [00:12:10] Speaker 1: Ms. Nestor. [00:12:14] Speaker 4: I just stand on the objection I made before, Your Honor. [00:12:17] Speaker 1: Thank you.