Robinson’s prior text messages to Twiggs: ‘I had enough of’ Charlie Kirk’s ‘hatred’  ‘I am’ the shooter  One America News Network 7%

7/9/2026, 5:05:58 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 19 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Confirmation Bias, and Begging the Question, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 25.5% saturation with 137 hits. Analysis detected 877 faulty-reasoning hits from 537 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 22.9% and a BS Rank of 7% (20,477 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 93.60% of the article peer group.

A photograph which prosecutors say shows a text message exchange between Tyler Robinson, who is accused in the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk, and Robinson’s roommate and romantic partner Lance Twiggs, is displayed during a preliminary hearing at the Fourth District Courthouse on July 9, 2026 in Provo, Utah. 
(Photo by Spenser Heaps  Pool/Getty Images) 
OAN Staff Sophia Flores 
5:33 PM  Thursday, July 9, 2026 
In text messages read on day 4 of the five-day preliminary hearing with Tyler Robinson  the 23-year-old man accused of fatally shooting Charlie Kirk  Robinson revealed to his then-roommate and romantic partner, Lance Twiggs, that he was the killer. 
On Thursday, in a packed Fourth District court in Provo, Utah State Bureau of Investigation Agent Brian Davis took the stand to read text messages exchanged between Robinson and Twiggs on September 10, 2025 , the day of the assassination. 
According to evidence, Robinson’s automated text to Twiggs  “drop what you are doing, look under my keyboard”  was likely triggered because Robinson did not expect to survive the incident. 
Under the keyboard, investigators later recovered a handwritten note that read, “I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I’m going to take it.” 
Later, realizing that the automated message was sent, Robinson followed up, stating “F**K I TRIED TO DELETE THAT.” 
The following excerpts from at least 15 pages of courtroom-displayed text threads show Robinson explicitly admitting responsibility for the shooting as he attempted to retrieve the murder weapon. 
“I am still okay my love,” Robinson wrote before stating he needed to grab his gun. 
“I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age. 
I am sorry to involve you,” the text message continued. 
“You weren’t the one who did it right????” 
Twiggs texted back. 
“I am, I’m sorry,” Robinson admitted. 
Here are images of the text messages exchanged between Tyler Robinson and Lance Twiggs which includes his confession and attempt to retrieve his rifle. pic.twitter.com/CLd6pW2xAO 
- Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKolvet) July 9, 2026 
Beyond text message admissions, Agent Davis detailed the timeline of how Robinson eventually wound up in handcuffs. 
According to Davis, at approximately 8:30 p.m. on September 11 th , investigators received word that an individual involved in the Utah Valley University (UVU) shooting was going to turn himself in at the Washington County Sheriff’s Office in St. 
George. 
Davis was then directed to travel to St. 
George. 
Along with other investigators, he immediately traveled to St. 
George where he observed Robinson inside of a room upon his arrival. 
“I was told he arrived there about 9 p.m. that evening. 
 He’d come there with his parents and a family friend,” Davis continued. 
After interviewing Robinson’s parents and family friend, Mike Mitchell, he formally arrested Robinson at 4:00 am on September 12 th . 
He then took the accused assassin to Utah County Jail to be booked. 
Stay informed! 
Receive breaking news alerts directly to your inbox for free. 
Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts 
What do YOU think? 
Click here to jump to the comments! 
Sponsored Content Below 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 15.3%One America News Network: 4.6%Confirmation Bias15.3%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 2.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 3.9%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 5.2%One America News Network: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.2%This article: 5.8%One America News Network: 0.9%Hindsight Bias5.8%This article: 5.8%One America News Network: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias5.8%This article: 21.8%One America News Network: 15.3%Framing Effect21.8%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 1.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 4.3%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 25.5%One America News Network: 11.8%Negativity Bias25.5%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 3.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 3.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 1.9%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 5.3%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 2.0%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.7%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 2.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.4%One America News Network: 6.3%Appeal to Authority7.4%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 1.8%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 1.1%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 5.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.7%One America News Network: 1.1%Bandwagon0.7%This article: 4.3%One America News Network: 10.0%Appeal to Emotion4.3%This article: 12.3%One America News Network: 1.7%Begging the Question12.3%This article: 5.8%One America News Network: 3.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.8%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.2%One America News Network: 0.6%Burden of Proof5.2%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 4.8%One America News Network: 1.6%Anecdotal4.8%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 5.2%One America News Network: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)5.2%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.3%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.7%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 11.2%One America News Network: 1.7%Unattributed Quote11.2%This article: 12.3%One America News Network: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection12.3%This article: 8.9%One America News Network: 5.2%Biased Writer Voice8.9%This article: 1.1%One America News Network: 1.1%Indoctrination1.1%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%One America News Network: 3.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.7%One America News Network: 1.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.7%

537 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers23%attributed speech413writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 49 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageTyler Robinson • 16 words • 0.0% coverageTyler Robinson • 13 words • 0.0% coverageTyler Robinson • 10 words • 0.0% coverageLance Twiggs • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageTyler Robinson • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageAndrew Kolvet • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageBrian Davis • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageBrian Davis • 11 words • 100.0% coverageBrian Davis • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Tyler Robinson

36%flagged-word coverage
45 attributed words36% of attributed speech82% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Quote-first Misdirection-16.0 ptsWriter: 16.0%Tyler Robinson: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-11.9 ptsWriter: 11.9%Tyler Robinson: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-11.6 ptsWriter: 11.6%Tyler Robinson: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -6.1 ptsWriter: 6.1%Tyler Robinson: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-1.5 ptsWriter: 1.5%Tyler Robinson: 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.