Prosecutors plan to play statements from Tyler Robinson's roommate in court 7%

By HANNAH SCHOENBAUM18% MATTHEW BROWN18%

7/9/2026, 4:37:01 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Overconfidence Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 17.4% saturation with 104 hits. Analysis detected 557 faulty-reasoning hits from 596 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 22.9% and a BS Rank of 7% (19,815 of 21,180 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 93.60% of the article peer group.

Tyler Robinson, who is accused in the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk, listens during a preliminary hearing at the Fourth District Courthouse in Provo, Utah, Thursday, July 9, 2026. 
Spenser Heaps/AP Photo/Spenser Heaps 
PROVO, Utah (AP)  Utah prosecutors plan to play audio clips in open court Thursday of law enforcement officials interviewing the roommate of the man accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk. 
Defense attorneys fought against the public release of the statements from Tyler Robinson’s roommate and romantic partner, Lance Twiggs. 
They said prosecutors would characterize the statements as a confession, undermining Robinson’s right to a fair trial if the statements are broadcast by the media. 
Robinson is charged with aggravated murder and has not entered a plea. 
He turned himself in a day after the fatal shooting of Kirk, a close ally of President Trump credited with helping galvanize young voters for the Republican in the 2024 election. 
Twiggs spoke to authorities on Sept. 12  two days after Kirk was assassinated while speaking to a crowd of thousands at Utah Valley University  and again on April 20. 
He was given immunity for the statements, meaning what Twiggs said cannot be used against him in a potential criminal case. 
State District Judge Tony Graf will decide at the conclusion of this week’s preliminary hearing if prosecutors have enough evidence to bring Robinson to trial. 
Robinson’s attorneys have not commented on his guilt or innocence but have sought to get the death penalty taken off the table, so far unsuccessfully. 
Attorneys for the media and for Kirk’s widow, Erika, who has attended this week’s hearing, had urged the judge to make Twiggs’ statements and other evidence public. 
“To not be transparent, to not be open and let the world see what happened will create doubt and distrust in the judicial system,” Kirk family lawyer Jeffrey Neiman told Graf Wednesday. 
Neiman filed a request late Wednesday for all evidence against Robinson to be displayed openly and in real time during this week’s hearing. 
Neiman wrote that Erika Kirk and Kirk’s parents had waited 10 months for the hearing but at times have been denied the chance “to meaningfully observe” it. 
The judge said in response that not all evidence would be openly displayed and he needs to protect the rights of both victims and the defendant. 
Investigators say Robinson went to a rooftop near where Kirk was speaking and shot him once through the neck as the activist was taking questions from a crowd of several thousand people. 
Kirk was declared dead after being taken to a hospital. 
Investigators found the suspected murder weapon  a bolt-action rifle with one spent round  wrapped in a towel in a wooded area near where Kirk was shot. 
Robinson’s lawyers earlier this week questioned the reliability of DNA testing used to link the defendant to the towel and gun. 
A member of Tyler Robinson’s defense team interrogated a DNA analyst from the FBI about the techniques she used to connect Robinson to the evidence. 
Defense lawyer Michael Burt cast doubt on the analyst’s conclusions. 
“She can’t match Mr. 
Robinson to the questioned samples,” Burt argued. 
But forensics expert Lawrence Quarino said law enforcement agencies use “extremely reliable” tests to determine the probability that a person matches with DNA found at a crime scene. 
DNA testing “is the gold standard in forensic science,” said Quarino, a professor and director of the forensic science program at Cedar Crest College in Pennsylvania. 
Brown reported from Billings, Montana. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 3.5%Hannah Schoenbaum: 4.9%Boston Globe: 3.0%Confirmation Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 1.2%Hannah Schoenbaum: 2.2%Boston Globe: 3.3%Availability Heuristic1.2%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.1%Boston Globe: 0.8%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.7%Boston Globe: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias9.1%This article: 4.2%Hannah Schoenbaum: 6.5%Boston Globe: 5.1%Framing Effect4.2%This article: 4.5%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.2%Boston Globe: 0.5%Loss Aversion4.5%This article: 4.4%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.6%Boston Globe: 0.6%Status Quo Bias4.4%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.2%Boston Globe: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.3%Boston Globe: 2.1%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 4.2%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.4%Boston Globe: 1.2%Pessimism Bias4.2%This article: 17.4%Hannah Schoenbaum: 5.6%Boston Globe: 7.7%Negativity Bias17.4%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.1%Boston Globe: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 1.0%Boston Globe: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.4%Boston Globe: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Hannah Schoenbaum: 1.5%Boston Globe: 0.8%In-Group Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.1%Boston Globe: 0.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.6%Boston Globe: 4.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.4%Boston Globe: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.5%Boston Globe: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.3%Boston Globe: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 1.4%Boston Globe: 0.7%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.1%Boston Globe: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 14.6%Hannah Schoenbaum: 2.5%Boston Globe: 3.9%Appeal to Authority14.6%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 1.1%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.7%Boston Globe: 2.9%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.2%Boston Globe: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.4%Hannah Schoenbaum: 4.5%Boston Globe: 5.5%Appeal to Emotion5.4%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.5%Boston Globe: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 4.2%Hannah Schoenbaum: 1.1%Boston Globe: 0.6%Burden of Proof4.2%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 2.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.5%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.5%Boston Globe: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.5%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.0%Boston Globe: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.7%Hannah Schoenbaum: 1.5%Boston Globe: 1.3%Unattributed Quote0.7%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 1.7%Boston Globe: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 5.2%Hannah Schoenbaum: 1.9%Boston Globe: 2.0%Biased Writer Voice5.2%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.1%Boston Globe: 0.7%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.4%Boston Globe: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 5.2%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.6%Boston Globe: 0.1%Politically Right Leaning Bias5.2%This article: 0.0%Hannah Schoenbaum: 0.1%Boston Globe: 0.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

596 words analyzed.

Speakers

5speakers36%attributed speech384writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageSpenser Heaps • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageTony Graf • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageJeffrey Neiman • 32 words • 0.0% coverageJeffrey Neiman • 23 words • 0.0% coverageJeffrey Neiman • 27 words • 0.0% coverageTony Graf • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Burt • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Burt • 4 words • 100.0% coverageMichael Burt • 7 words • 0.0% coverageLawrence Quarino • 28 words • 0.0% coverageLawrence Quarino • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Lawrence Quarino

100%flagged-word coverage
54 attributed words25% of attributed speech35% writer coverage
0%5.0%10.0%Biased Writer Voice-8.1 ptsWriter: 8.1%Lawrence Quarino: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -8.1 ptsWriter: 8.1%Lawrence Quarino: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.