Up Next

Candace Owens Investigates Mysterious Men Who Removed Camera After Charlie Kirk Shooting and Finds No Blood

Candace Owens Investigates Mysterious Men Who Removed Camera After Charlie Kirk Shooting and Finds No Blood

53:10

Candace Owens Uncovers Federal Operation Behind Charlie Kirk Assassination as Mainstream Media Launches Coordinated Attack

Candace Owens Uncovers Federal Operation Behind Charlie Kirk Assassination as Mainstream Media Launches Coordinated Attack

59:53

Stephen Gardner Backs Official FBI Narrative on Charlie Kirk While Trigger Matt Questions the 306 Bullet Theory

Stephen Gardner Backs Official FBI Narrative on Charlie Kirk While Trigger Matt Questions the 306 Bullet Theory

34:42

Gray Hughes and Gary Melton Discuss On-Site Investigation of Tyler Robinson's Attack on Charlie Kirk

Categories: Investigation
October 19, 2025

Gray Hughes and Gary Melton traveled to Utah Valley University to conduct a firsthand investigation of the Tyler Robinson case. The pair walked the exact routes Robinson took, secured never-before-seen surveillance footage from a local resident, examined the rooftop where the shot was fired, and analyzed the terrain that made the attack devastatingly easy to execute. Their investigation reveals critical details about access points, line of sight, escape routes, and planning that contradict many online narratives. They discuss UVU's denial of TPUSA's security requests, the culpability of the university, and how misinformation has plagued the case from conspiracy theories to false claims about the investigation.

Firsthand Investigation at Utah Valley University

Gray Hughes Investigates and Gary recently traveled to Utah Valley University to conduct an on-site investigation of the Tyler Robinson attack on Charlie Kirk. Their investigation included walking the exact routes Robinson took, examining the rooftop where the shot was fired, and analyzing the terrain and access points. Gray arrived on Sunday and spent Monday walking Tyler Robinson's route twice, logging approximately 16,000 steps that day.

One of the most significant discoveries came when Gray knocked on a door in the neighborhood and was invited inside by a resident who provided previously unreleased surveillance footage. The homeowner loaded multiple clips onto a thumb drive and even took Gray to various locations around the neighborhood, including the construction house area. This footage later appeared on TMZ and other outlets without any attribution to Gray, who was the original source.

The Rooftop Access and Line of Sight

The investigation revealed just how easy it was for Robinson to access the roof of the Losee Building. The route involved walking through a tunnel, entering a parking garage, walking down a utility road, entering the Losee Building, exiting the back, and climbing a set of stairs to reach the roof. From there, Robinson only needed to step over a three-foot wall to reach his shooting position.

Gray discovered finger marks still visible on the roof where Robinson had jumped up. These marks matched evidence stickers visible in earlier photographs from day two of the investigation, confirming they had remained undisturbed. Gray also identified a two-inch evidence sticker on a ledge where Robinson's footprint was likely collected.

The most critical aspect requiring planning was confirming line of sight from the rooftop to where Charlie Kirk would be speaking under the tent. While Google Earth could provide some indication, definitively knowing there would be a clear shot would have required Robinson to physically visit the location. The proximity of everything at the scene was far closer than aerial views suggested, making the successful execution of the attack disturbingly straightforward.

Surveillance Footage Timeline

The investigation pieced together a comprehensive timeline based on multiple surveillance cameras. Gray obtained footage showing a vehicle at 8:23 AM and Robinson walking with a maroon shirt at 9:58 AM. Through shadow analysis using 3D Studio Max and a daylight system, Gray determined that footage initially timestamped as 8:08 AM was actually from 10:08 AM, likely due to a two-hour offset in the camera's time settings.

Gray timed his own walk from the house with surveillance footage and found it took exactly 10 minutes, matching the intervals between Robinson's appearances on various cameras. This suggests Robinson walked through the tunnel at approximately 10:14 AM during what appears to have been a dry run. Later surveillance shows Robinson at 12:02 PM entering the parking garage, with cameras capturing him on the stairs at three or four different points. At 12:15 PM, he was seen on the roof, and at 12:17 PM, he climbed over the wall. Approximately five minutes later, he stood up and ran to the corner where the shot was fired at approximately 12:23-12:25 PM.

The Escape Route

Surveillance footage captured Robinson's entire escape. After firing the shot, he ran across the roof, jumped off into a wooded area, and disappeared from view. Because cameras showed he did not continue down the road, law enforcement knew he had entered the woods, where they subsequently found the rifle and black towel. Robinson had changed clothes during this time.

Gray identified two potential parking locations where Robinson could have left his vehicle. Both spots offered concealment behind fences and trees with minimal camera coverage. The first location was near the house that provided the surveillance footage, positioned where Robinson could have changed clothes behind an open passenger door without being seen. The second location was closer to the final attack route, which would have made more sense if he had moved his vehicle after the dry run.

The terrain proved hillier than Google Earth suggested, raising questions about how Robinson navigated back to his vehicle through unfamiliar neighborhoods and construction areas. Text messages indicated he had been planning the attack for over a week, though it remains unclear how much time he spent physically surveying the area versus using Google Earth.

The Different Backpacks

Analysis of the surveillance footage revealed what appears to be two different backpacks. In the earlier footage, Robinson appears to be carrying a blue or different-colored backpack, while later footage shows a black backpack. While lighting conditions could account for the color difference, the shape also appeared different. The explanation could be that Robinson used one backpack for reconnaissance containing water or other supplies, and a separate operational backpack pre-packed with the change of clothing, towel, and other items needed for the attack.

UVU's Denied Security Requests

A significant revelation came from a video released by Turning Point USA stating that they had requested permission to use their own drones for security surveillance and requested to provide security for the rooftops. Utah Valley University denied both requests and claimed they would cover the rooftops themselves. This denial raises serious questions about UVU's culpability in the attack.

The walkway where Robinson positioned himself extends back to the computer science building. Anyone on that walkway or looking out windows from the computer science building would have had a clear view of someone lying in the prone position at the edge of the roof. The fact that this area was not covered by law enforcement, especially after denying TPUSA's security requests, represents a significant security failure. No normal pedestrian in areas accessible to the public could see Charlie Kirk from those locations, which is likely why Robinson chose that specific position.

The Crime Scene and Construction

One persistent source of controversy involves the construction that took place at the amphitheater shortly after the attack. According to Stephen Gardner, hundreds of law enforcement personnel processed the crime scene. The scene was held for three full days (September 10-13), with construction beginning on September 14, a Sunday.

Following NIJI standards for processing high-traffic crime scenes, the work needed to be completed quickly and efficiently because it was an active university. Once law enforcement released the crime scene, it was no longer officially a crime scene but rather a location with blood and traumatic reminders for students. The decision to renovate the area appears to have been motivated by returning the space to normal for students by Monday, not destroying evidence or covering anything up.

The amphitheater area held the least potential for evidence compared to other locations like the rooftop, the wooded area where the rifle was found, and the routes Robinson traveled. Arguments that the jury would need to visit the exact crime scene ignore practical realities—maintaining a crime scene indefinitely while cases work through years of trials and appeals is neither reasonable nor standard practice.

Addressing Misinformation

The investigation consistently encountered misinformation circulating online. Claims included that Robinson's parents said the person in surveillance footage was not their son (no official source supports this), that Robinson had a congenital defect causing a limp (no evidence exists), and that special keys and access were required to reach the rooftops (demonstrably false, as the investigators easily accessed the roof).

Gray emphasized that approximately 98% of misinformation surrounding the case has come from private individuals online rather than from government sources. While healthy skepticism of official narratives is warranted, the investigation found that conspiracy theories about camera guns, hidden snipers, palm guns, and other alternative explanations had no evidentiary support.

The approach emphasized starting with available evidence rather than forming a preferred narrative and then searching for supporting evidence. Probable cause documents, charging documents, and surveillance footage formed the foundation of the analysis. Text messages between Robinson and Lance Twiggs, while appearing somewhat contrived, indicated prior knowledge and planning discussions, though many messages were redacted from public release.

The Strength of the Case

Gray, who has covered thousands of cases, described this as one of the strongest cases he has ever seen from an evidentiary standpoint. The surveillance footage timeline, physical evidence, witness statements, and Robinson's own actions create approximately 30 strong evidentiary points. Dismissing the case requires attacking each of these points with conspiracy theories.

The only remaining significant question involves ballistics—specifically why the bullet did not exit Charlie Kirk's neck. This represents the primary gap in publicly available information, though it does not undermine the overall strength of the case against Robinson.

Security Considerations and Charlie Kirk's Role

Discussion of security failures must account for the dynamic between security personnel and their clients. While the security team clearly lost their protectee, the full context of what recommendations they made and which Charlie Kirk accepted or rejected remains unknown. Similar to diplomatic security situations where ambassadors and dignitaries sometimes override security recommendations, civilian clients have even more control over their security arrangements.

Charlie Kirk consistently received death threats and understood he was assuming significant risk by continuing to speak at events. The investigation suggests he likely would have proceeded with the event regardless of security restrictions, viewing it as refusing to give in to terrorism. This does not excuse security failures, but it provides context for understanding the decisions made.

The security personnel involved will likely find it difficult to continue in that profession after losing a client, regardless of other circumstances. However, the most significant failure appears to be UVU's denial of additional security measures requested by TPUSA and their failure to adequately cover the rooftops they claimed they would secure.

The Broader Impact

The case has had ripple effects beyond the immediate investigation. Narratives promoted by Candace Owens and others suggesting Israeli involvement have created division within the Republican Party, which has historically been supportive of Israel. Combined with existing criticism from the left, these theories have created what some describe as a precarious situation for Jewish people who may feel they have diminishing support from either political side.

While criticism of Israel and its government is legitimate and necessary, especially regarding U.S. foreign aid when the country carries $37-38 trillion in debt, the specific conspiracy theories around this case lack evidentiary foundation. The investigation found no credible evidence linking Israel or any foreign government to the attack.

The emphasis throughout remains on examining evidence objectively, avoiding both unquestioning acceptance of government narratives and reflexive embrace of alternative theories promoted online. The physical investigation at the scene, combined with analysis of surveillance footage and official documents, provides the most reliable foundation for understanding what occurred.

Comments

Be the first to comment on this video.

Video Transcript

Link copied to clipboard!