Spidey Analyzes Tyler James Robinson Court Appearance and Text Messages in Charlie Kirk Case

because of Tyler James Robinson's belief or perception regarding Charlie Kirk's political expression. What's going on everyone? Welcome to the behavioral arts. My name is Spidey and I use my degree in sociology and psychology, my certifications in criminal interrogation and body language analysis, and my experience as an award-winning mentalist to teach people behavioral analysis and practical psychology on stage and television shows all over the world. This week's case is a doozy. There is so much going on. So Tyler Robinson, the primary suspect in the Charlie Kirk assassination, showed up in court for the first time this week. Now, a lot of news outlets have reported that he was very stoic and non-reactive. And although that's very true for long stretches of this, there are little moments where some emotion and thoughts are coming through, but there's this really massive inconsistency that nobody is talking about. And the only reason I noticed is because I was watching two feeds of this hearing simultaneously. And something didn't add up. And from a behavioral standpoint, that distinction is huge. So, we're definitely going to talk about that. And finally, a lot of you requested that we talk about the text exchange that was released to the public between Tyler Robinson and his roommate/romantic partner. And we're going to talk about those as well, cuz there's a lot going on in there. So without further ado, let's jump right into the footage of his court appearance. >> 5143576, State of Utah versus Tyler James Robinson. >> Could you state your name? >> Tyler James Robinson. >> Thank you for being here, Mr. Robinson. I'm Judge Graph. Mr. Scortis. So Mr. Robinson, you have a right to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, the court can appoint an attorney to represent you. I have reviewed your declaration of financial status and find that you are indigent. I'm provisionally provisionally appointing a rule a qualified attorney to represent you on your case, Mr. Robinson. Uh Mr. Robinson, I also wish to inform you of your right against self-inccrimination. Anything that you say in court today could be used against you and we want to protect your constitutional rights. Mr. Mr. Robinson, at this time you will remain in custody without bail. >> Mr. Scortis, is there any other points that you wish to address? >> No. Thank you very much, your honor. >> There are quite a few moments in this first clip where he is giving away quite a bit. The first one is when the judge says, "Thank you for being here. I'm Judge Graph." and we get a baseline for his acknowledgement. So when he acknowledges, we get this one downward pop with the chin like this. This is something that he's going to do throughout his appearance whenever something is said directly to him and he acknowledges it. And there are a couple of very important details here. One, it's just one pop downwards. That's very important. The chin goes down. Second, he maintains eye contact. So it looks exactly like that. Immediately after the introductions, when things are about to get started, we see him open his mouth, which is rare. And we see him take a deep breath that moves up into the chest. We know that because we see a visible breath. And this usually happens when we're stressed, feeling anxiety, and that makes perfect sense here. The introductions are done. We're about to begin. Here we go. When the judge says to him that he has right to an attorney, again, we get that exact same baseline acknowledgement. Chin down, eye contact, one pop. This is exactly what he does when he goes, "Okay, I understand." Immediately after that, as the judge is saying, "What would happen if he can't afford one?" If you cannot afford one, we see his eyes slowly going downwards and his eyelids even close just a little bit. So, everything is shifting down. Now, as a general rule in body language, when we're excited or happy, things go up. We call these gravitydeying gestures, and it's even in the language, right? I'm jumping for joy. I'm on cloud nine. I'm in the clouds. These are all positive things. And when someone's in a negative mood, we use language that goes the other way, downwards. He's feeling down. He's feeling low. And we see it in the body language as well. Research has shown that we perk up with happiness. We take up more space as well. And with sadness, we take up less space and things come downwards. So, as he's talking about not being able to afford an attorney, we start to see these negative emotions setting in. Things are coming down. Now, here's where things get really interesting, especially because we've established a baseline for acknowledgement. When the judge says, "I've reviewed your declaration of financial status," again, we get that same acknowledgement, one pop downward, eye contact maintained. But as the judge goes on to say that he's going to appoint a lawyer to him, we again see a nod, but it's very different from the acknowledgement nod. This time, the chin goes upwards like this, and we see an eye block, which is a very slow blink as he comes back down. So this is a subtle difference, but for someone who typically acknowledges downwards while maintaining eye contact, this time we have pretty much the opposite of that. Chins going up as we're blocking the eyes. So the research on eye blocking is really fascinating because it shows that we're born with the reflex of doing this. Even children who were born blind eye block in certain moments. And it happens in one of two cases. So think of the eyelids as the garage doors to your thoughts. And either we're trying to keep them in or not let them come in. So you might see it if somebody's experiencing something really happy or great news. They might close their eyes as they're celebrating because they want to hold on to this emotion. Or when someone gets bad news, you might see it because they just don't want to deal with it. They don't want to focus on this thing. Before we put it all together, let's talk about the chin going upwards. So this could mean a lot of things depending on context. Research has shown that everywhere in the world, universally, when the chin goes up, this happens with pride. When we're fearless or when we're feeling proud, chin goes up. Again, remember positive up, but it's also exposing the neck, showing that we have nothing to fear. That's one place we might see it. Another place we very often see it universally as well is when it's not held, but just a quick pop with a throwaway, like a dismissal of something. Very often associated, especially in the Middle East, with the sound like this. So, like that. It's like a no, I'm I'm good. Just a throwaway. So, in this case, context absolutely matters. Notice how it's happening. just this one pop with this slow blank as he comes back down. And I think the throwaway is exactly what's happening here, especially because we have someone who acknowledges like this. So, this is very different with that eye block. I think what's happening is as he's being told about this courtappointed attorney, he's basically going, "What's that going to do?" Like, you know, I'm I'm in so deep. Like, what what's that guy going to be able to do for me? And then notice how right after that, as the judge concludes this whole thought and says, "Mr. Robinson. We get one more that classic acknowledgement like this. So we had the classic acknowledgement then this different nod and then the classic acknowledgement again. Normally you would expect okay got it. Okay. But here it's more like okay. Okay. So we're getting some negativity between those two acknowledgements. Now I want to throw a quick caveat at this and this whole context because this is an analysis of a reaction. And that's very very interesting for me because of course when we're looking at an interview or an interaction when the person's speaking, we're getting feedback. We have more confidence on our reads because we know what they're saying. We know what's in their head and the behaviors are associated to that thought. With reactions, we're not always certain. What if the thoughts wandered? What if he thought about something else when the guy said attorney? We can't really know. But keep in mind, this is literally my wheelhouse. It's where I got my 50,000 hours of practice of reading people because my career for over 18 years has been to bring people up on stage in front of an audience and I look at what I see and I start feeding things about themselves and I'm looking for these little micro gestures as I'm talking to adjust my read. And my job is to look for those little distinctions, know what they mean, call that meaning out, and have the person go, "Oh my god, how did you know that?" And the audience applaud. So I'm constantly looking for these little shifts and distinctions. So what I do, mentalism is a mix of trickery, but in the cold reading aspect has a lot of exactly this. And if I saw this in a real world context, when I'm doing a reading, someone acknowledging along like this, and then I say something and I get this slow blink with this upwards nod, I would go immediately towards conflict or negativity. I'm sensing some kind of conflict here. There was a negativity. Did you guys get into a fight? And with pretty high confidence, I would go down that path. Something is different in that nod. When the judge says, "Anything you say can be held against you," we see some stuff with the lips. So the lips go downwards like this with a bit of tension. And that happens twice. And this is one of those cases where I can't tell you with 100% certainty what is causing this. I know that online we often see comments from people like, "Oh, this means what this 100% of the time." That's just not how behavioral analysis works. And this is a very ambiguous gesture. Could it be that he's cleaning his teeth? It's possible. There's a family of gestures that are called adapters, pacifiers, manipulators. There's a lot of different names for them in the research, but they're massagike gestures that we do to adapt to stress. So, it could be with the arms, the hands, the face, and yes, sometimes we do with the mouth as well to alleviate some of that tension. But, you know, tension in the lips is also very common with withheld opinion. Like, is there something here that he wants to say, but the judge is saying, you know, don't say anything because it might incriminate you. So, he's kind of holding something in. That's why we're seeing that. There are a lot of possibilities. It's just an interesting note that we're getting this lip activity around that thought. But immediately following that, the judge says, "We want to protect your constitutional rights." And we see from him upward nods again. And I say nods because it's this bit of a bobble. It's not just this one like this. You know, very often he does these one pops here. It's this upwards like this. And I think again it's going upwards because there's a little bit of an element of dismissiveness to this. like, "Yeah, sure. You want to protect my rights? That's that's what we're doing here. That's what this is." And then notice that almost this exact same upwards bobble happens when the judge says that uh he's going to be held in custody without bail. So, it's unlikely that he knew that before this moment. The judge is probably announcing it. It's possible that, you know, whoever's representing him was privy to this information. But regardless of that, upon hearing it, we see again that upwards nod like this twice. And this time it's followed with a hard swallow. So again, it's connected to a negative thought. But basically, we keep seeing how in moments of actual acknowledgement, it's just that downwards one pop. And then in more negative emotions or in conflict motions, we're getting more of these upwards ones. I do want to talk about a few things here contextually, and one of them is what he's wearing. So that's a vest that they put on suspects who are on self harm watch. So it restrains the arm so he can't hurt himself. So that's what he's wearing. maybe lets us know that he either alluded to self harm or they have reason to believe that, you know, he might be thinking about that and they have him wearing this thing. Now, some people online have speculated because he's wearing this vest that he might be sedated or medicated and maybe that's why we're not seeing too many reactions. But I think what those people are doing is that they're connecting this kind of vest to psychiatric facilities. But that is not where he's coming from. And so I asked a lot of my friends who do exactly this for a living, work with courts, prisons, jails, at evaluating criminals. And they all said with zero disagreement that it's very unlikely that he's sedated or medicated. First and foremost, because he hasn't been evaluated psychologically and he's not in some kind of psychiatric hospital. Secondly, and this is huge, it opens the door for mistrial or an appeal. If somehow there's an adverse effect, he reacts, something happens, they could blame it on the medication and throw the whole case out and that's a really slippery slope. There is very little reason to believe that he is medicated or sedated. And that's not coming from me. That's coming from friends of mine that I asked who would really know this kind of thing. Now, we're going to move on and look at his reactions to some of the details of this case that are giving us quite a bit of information and this huge inconsistency in the way that this was reported that is so frustrating. But before we do, do me a huge favor. Hit that subscribe button, turn those notifications on for more behavior analysis and practical psychology content. And do me a huge favor and take a second to like this video because it really helps with the growth of the channel. >> We have filed a pre-trial protective order on behalf of Erica Kirk. We would ask the court to review that. It should be in your queue, your honor, and sign that. >> Thank you. I have reviewed the pre-trial protective order and will be grant issuing uh this pre-trial protective order in favor of Erica Kirk. >> Is there any other business that we need to address today? Council, >> uh just for the court's information, we did file just recently within the last few minutes a notice of intent to seek the death penalty that was filed uh by Utah County Attorney Jeff Gray. So that should be in the court's file. Um, >> okay. So, this one's going to be quick, but notice what happens with his eyes when Erica Kirk is brought up. That is Charlie Kirk's wife, now widow. And you'll notice with Tyler, the moment that the name is brought up, his eyes go to the left like this. And this is something he very often does when he's trying to recollect or remember data. So, often when dates come up, notice how his eyes go to the left. Or when people come up, he does this as well. And I know there are a lot of sources that say like, "Oh, this way is real recall." So when you see someone, you know, go that way, it's a lie and this way I I don't really know. But all that has been disproven. Even the people who first said that in a book, we're like, "No, no, it's really not reliable." And you need baseline. So yes, if you know that someone every time they recall, go this way and now all of a sudden they're going that way. You can ask yourself some questions, especially if there's other stuff going on. But there is no consistent pattern that has shown that this always means truth. That always means deception. Think about it. If that was the case, trials or interrogations would take seconds, not days or weeks. Because the moment somebody went the way whatever lie is, that's it. They're lying. End of story. Now, in this case, immediately after that, after this left movement, he comes back for a little bit and then the eyes go downwards like this. And again, this is associated to some kind of negative emotion. And it's a really good example here of an emotion, but again, not being 100% sure what that emotion is connected to because he's not talking. So, we don't know exactly what's in his head because what's being discussed is the protective order against Erica Kirk. So, is this negative feeling towards Erica Kirk? Is it towards the protective order? Is it towards what happened to her? The position she's in? It's really hard to know, but there is a moment of negative there. The thoughts go downwards. Now, notice what happens when the prosecutor says that they just filed a couple of minutes ago a request to go after the death penalty. And if we look at Tyler, all we see is that upwards bob like this. And this is where I love behavioral analysis because we looked at the details of his head bobs. And we know that acknowledgement is more like this. And this tends to happen in negative moments. So, we could see that there and go, okay, it's happening again. But besides that, there really isn't much going on with him. Like imagine if you were on trial and the prosecutor said for the first time that they're going to go after the death penalty. You would expect some kind of reaction to that, right? Eyes opening up in fear, looking around, some kind of pacifier adapter, like, "Oh my god, they're going after the death penalty." And with him, we're just getting this upwards nod, which we know he often does in negative moments. But besides that, like, he's keeping it together pretty well. So, I don't know what that is. Is it that he doesn't care? Is it that he doesn't want to show weakness? That he's keeping it together like really well besides this slight nod that we know is negative because we've been watching him really close. I don't really know what this is, but he's keeping it together pretty well. The defendant, Tyler James Robinson, committed criminal homicide in the physical presence of a child younger than 14 years of age with knowledge that a child was present and that may have been seen or heard the commission of c of the criminal homicide. Victim targeting enhancement in violation of Utah code annotated 76-3-203.14 sub 2. Tyler James Robinson intentionally selected Charlie Kirk because of Tyler James Robinson's belief or perception regarding Charlie Kirk's political expression. That concludes reading of the information. Mr. Robinson, this case is set for September 29th at 10:00 a.m. It will be a waiver hearing. >> So, there isn't much to talk about here. And that's the whole point that there isn't much to talk about. Throughout the reading of the charges, he was very, very stoic. And I first saw this in short form on social media, I think Instagram, and I was looking at and I was wondering that the clip that I saw, was this a picture of him while the judge is talking because there was stretches where we barely see anything out of him. So, the event was mentioned, the children were mentioned, and throughout this entire thing, we're getting nothing. And all this is very interesting to me because there are a lot of theories out there. You know, some people believe he did this. Others believe he must have had some other people helping him with this. Some people believe he had nothing to do with this. But despite all that, whatever the case, I would expect to see some kind of emotional reaction to what's being said here. Like for example, I know that almost anyone I've talked to about this event, regardless of where they fall on the political landscape, when they think about the children, Charlie Kirk's children, being there and witnessing that, almost everyone gets a sad reaction to that. And I anytime I think about it, I think about my own family and my own kid and this kind of thing happening. And I get really sad about that as well. So what like even whether he did this, whether he didn't do this, whether you know there was other people, why is there nothing happening when the kids are coming up? It's possible. It's very possible whether somebody else advised him or he thought of this himself that he's under the impression that he shouldn't react to anything cuz it could be an admission. So he told himself just sit there, glaze over, give him nothing because otherwise they can use it against you. Or those guys on YouTube will look at your body language are going to be like, "Oh, look, there's guilt there, so he must have done this." So I don't know, maybe he's making a conscious effort to not give any reactions. And that's exactly where this gets really interesting and frustrating. and I discovered something that no one else has talked about and I don't blame them because what happened to me was very specific. So what happened is I first saw it on Instagram and I said, "Wow, this guy's not giving him anything." And then when I was going to do this analysis, I went on YouTube and I searched for the whole footage and I came across the version on ABC News and as I was watching it, I saw something completely different. Watch this. Tyler James Robinson intentionally selected Charlie Kirk because of Tyler James Robinson's belief or perception regarding Charlie Kirk's political expression. That concludes reading the information. Mr. Robinson, >> please tell me you noticed the difference in this version when the judge said that Tyler intentionally selected Charlie Kirk because of his belief or perception of Charlie Kirk's political expression. As he's saying that, as he's saying because of Charlie Kirk's political expression, we see Tyler nod downwards the same way he does when he acknowledges things. And in that moment, I'm looking at that going, "Wait a second." like this whole time he was stoic and this one moment during this slip up where he's going, yep, that's why I did it. >> Burk's political expression that >> but there was a little voice in my head that was like wait a second I saw this on Instagram earlier and he never acknowledged anything. I was looking specifically for that so there's no way I would have missed that. So I took both clips. I took the ABC News one that I was watching that has tons of views online and then I compared it directly to another one that I found that was from a news source in Salt Lake City and I synced up the audio to where the judge is saying the same thing and I looked at Tyler and it wasn't the same thing. In the local one, in the Salt Lake City one, all the charges are read. He doesn't react. And then when the judge says that concludes the charges or whatever, when he's done, when he's concluded, that's when we see the acknowledgement like this. So Tyler goes, "Good. Okay, we're done. I get it. Acknowledge." So I'm going to play them side by side. I'm going to show you this clip. And on the right, the little box, that's ABC News. And you'll even hear that the audio is synced. And on the left is the one from the news station from Salt Lake City. And look at when that nod hits on ABC. It's an acknowledgement to the charge on the Salt Lake City one. It's an acknowledgement to we've concluded >> because of Tyler James Robinson's belief or perception regarding Charlie Kirk's political expression. That concludes reading the information Mr. Robinson >> to clarify in the beginning they were both synced and it seemed like the responses that he was giving were timed well with what was being said. And then at this moment I realized that the clips were out of sync. So I'm watching one of them and I'm watching him not react throughout and only react when it's done to acknowledge, okay, we're done. And that one, by the way, is on a network called KUTV2 News that's in Salt Lake City. But then on ABC News, one of the biggest news platforms of the country, I'm seeing this report that's been seen by tons of people out there. And when he's being told, when the judge is saying the motive for having done this, which is political expression, we're seeing an acknowledgement. And listen, you don't need to be a body language analyst to see that acknowledgement, right? The judge is saying that Tyler specifically chose Charlie Kirk because of his political beliefs. You're seeing the guy in that moment acknowledge it like this, the way he's acknowledged other things before. Seriously, what are we doing here? The year is 2025. Why does this footage look like it was filmed on a potato from the 17th century? Everything is choppy. Everything is laggy. So, what I did is I looked at both clips and tried to listen and look at the judge to see which one is more synced with his audio. And in both cases, it was again super laggy, pixelated, choppy. But it does seem like the one on KUTV makes a little more sense with the way that the judge is moving when he's speaking and the way like he puts the papers down. It looks like it makes a little bit more sense. and lines up with him finishing and Tyler just acknowledging that that concludes the charges. But I have no way of knowing that for sure. I don't know where that lie came from. And even if the judge seems synced, how do I know for sure that the feed that we're getting from Tyler is at the right time? Who's to say which of the two got it right when you have two news outlets playing the same audio, the same footage, but the guy who's on trial in one of the most high-profile cases right now in all of America, and we can't see what the guy's reaction is. Why are we even filming this? All right, thanks for listening to my rant. I hope some of you connect with why this frustrates me as much as it does, especially considering what I do for a living. But overall, we have someone where we're getting these little bits in the beginning of acknowledgement versus more negative or throwaway feelings. Then we're having someone who's pretty non-reactive for a long stretch while the charges are being read. We're not seeing any emotional spikes in places where we would expect them. Surprise, fear, a little bit of anger, maybe some sadness. These are all universal, so we would see little signs of them. We're not seeing those, which indicates to me that he's making a very conscious effort to not let anything slide because even if you weren't much of an emotional person, we would still see slight reactions to stuff. So, it takes a lot of conscious effort to not give anything. So, I think that's what's happening. But now, let's move on to this text exchange between him and his roommate, who's also a romantic interest. And a lot of people are talking about this text exchange and some weird elements to it. So, let's go through them and I'll kind of highlight a couple of things that's out there people are talking about that I agree with and then some other things that I noticed that are very bizarre to me from a behavioral standpoint about these texts. Okay, so the roommate's name is reportedly Lance Twigs and these are their texts. And on some news sources, it's presented like actual texts and then on other sources it's almost like it's retranscribed into a conversation. And there are signs there that there have been some modifications which we'll talk about in a second. But let's kind of read through this to get a bit of a vibe as to what's going on. So it starts with Tyler saying, "Drop what you are doing. Look under my keyboard." And then there's a note there that says that the roommate looked under the keyboard and found a note that stated, "I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk and I'm going to take it." So, there was a note that declared this. And the roommate comes back with, "What?" with all these question marks. You're joking, right? More question marks. Then Tyler responds with a bunch of details about where he is and he's got to go get his rifle. And he says, "To be honest, I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age. I am sorry to involve you." In a moment, we'll come back to some of the wording here that's interesting. But I really want to talk about something that immediately for me was a question mark. And it's the fact that he's saying, "I had hoped to keep this secret till I died of old age." So, first of all, if he wrote a letter that we saw above that he left for the roommate to reveal his plan, and if at this point he wasn't caught yet, because we know that at this point when they're texting, they weren't on to him yet. He hadn't confessed yet. Why is he confessing? If he had hoped to hold on to this secret, why isn't he? What is forcing him to let the roommate in on it at this point? We're not getting a motive for letting him in on it. Then we have the roommate saying, "You weren't the one who did it, right?" And we know that there was a note under the keyboard that said, "I had the opportunity to take out Charlie Kirk. Now on the news, Charlie Kirk, you know, has been shot." And the roommate is asking, "You weren't the one who did it, right?" But this this is fine. This could be just like, you know, they're in denial. They're uncertain. Whatever. I'll let that go. And he goes, "I am. I'm sorry." And then the first question the roommate asks is, "I thought they caught the person." There's no, "Oh my god, are you okay? Holy Where are you? What's going on?" There's no panic. For somebody who started with what with that many question marks, right? So, this is someone who's explosive, expressive, now they're just asking these simple questions that are even about to get reduced to one-word questions. It's kind of inconsistent. You know, why isn't that panic continuing? Then Tyler responds with a mini novel with details about what his plan was and you know what he was intending on doing. Uh and this includes sentences like my drop point and uh there's one vehicle lingering. So we're getting this kind of thing. So then we have this like one word why. And then Tyler goes why did I do it? And the roommate goes yeah. So again we we've reduced it to these one-word questions now. And it's almost like instead of going like oh my god why did you do this? what's what's going on through your head? Like more panic, more questions, more it's just why. And Tyler is the one who has to expand on that. Why did I do it? Yeah. So, you know what? Let me give you my my theory now. Let's operate under the assumption that they have the right guy. I know that there are a lot of theories out there, but let's just operate under the assumption that Tyler is in fact the person who did this. And let's operate under the assumption that these text exchanges are legit. And in a moment, we'll talk about some other theories there, but let's for now just assume that they are. Right? If all those things are true, my theory is that this entire text exchange is a piece of fabricated theater to communicate to an onlooker that the roommate did not know about this plan. That's why we're getting these insane amount of details. That's why we're getting styles of communication that aren't that standard, you know, like first we have panic, then it's like why? And it's almost like Tyler is realizing that the roommate forgot their line. Like no, you were supposed to say why did I do that? So he improvised and go why did I do it? And the room goes, "Uh, yeah." And then he responds with another paragraph of motive and more details about exactly where he is and what's going on. And you would expect him to be in a panic and just, you know, he's probably shaking. He's nervous. You would expect short replies saying, you know, trying to get out of here. See you soon. Don't worry, everything's fine. You would expect these brief things, but we're getting mountains of explanations here. Then again, the roommate asks a short question. How long have you been planning this? That's the next line in this little theater. And then Tyler again goes into a flood of detail. But let's look at some of these details. So we have there is a squad car parked right by it. Not a police car, a squad car. Then again, the use of the word vehicle. As I got to my vehicle, I'm worried what my old man would do if I didn't bring back grandpa's rifle. So old man. Then again, all these very specific details of exactly what's going on. And grandpa's worried about the gun and what he's doing with the gun. All these details. And then the line for me that I just can't ignore, which is since Trump got into office, my dad, and my dad is in brackets, has been pretty diehard MAGA. So again, we'll talk about all this in just a second. And then at the end, we have this exchange, you're all I worry about, love, to which the roommate responds, I'm much more worried about you. So this is the first time we're actually seeing worry in this one line. No exclamation points, no punctuation for someone who started with a ton of punctuation. And then Tyler says, you know, don't talk to the media. don't take interviews and you know if the police come just lawyer up. And I guess this kind of relates back to what I was questioning earlier. I guess he's thinking if they find the rifle and they trace it back to him, maybe they're going to go talk to the roommate. But all that would take so much time. Like does he not understand that he'll probably get to the roommate before they do? If he's leaving now, he'll probably be able to get the roommate before they do and they'll be able to have these conversations. But he's still sending all this by text. He's like, "I was hoping to keep this till I die of old age, but then why did you spill the beans right now? You don't have any reason to believe that they're on to you. They interviewed the wrong guys. Nobody's on to you." And by his own admission, it looks like he's about to walk away from this whole thing. So already that to me was a little unclear. And then there's literal evidence that the text exchange has been in some way modified because first of all, there's ellipses all over the place, that little dot dot dot. And that's fine. Maybe they removed certain things because it's evidence or it's it's part of the investigation. That's okay. But then the part where he talks about his dad, the my dad is in those brackets that we use to specify something in journalism usually. So if the person said like he and then you know we're referencing this in an article, we we replace the he with whoever that he is in these types of brackets. So, we know that there's been some kind of modification. And it would be nice to know like how much like how much of this was changed? How much of the original are we seeing? How much was left out in those points? Because that might help bridge certain gaps. Was the roommate freaking out more, asking more questions that I would expect to see. So, I don't know what's missing. But the bigger point about this line, you know, ever since Trump got into office, my dad has been pretty diehard MAGA, is that he's calling this person my love. He's texting him a confession. They live together. They're obviously very close. These are conversations that they've had. The roommate would know that the dad has been pretty diehard MAGA. This is something Tyler would have complained about. It just seems so like these are the things that we need to say so people won't know that this was premeditated and that you knew about this before it happened. And then the last thing about this is something that there's a lot of talk about online. And I didn't initially notice all of these, but I definitely noticed some of these. I noticed that he used the word my old man and vehicle to talk about his car. But some other people online noticed some other odd terms like drop point or till I died of old age. And let me tell you what I think this is. I think it once again contributes to this whole twoerson text theater for us. So, think about how in a movie sometimes you see a character call someone and we're only seeing this one person and when the phone picks up, they go, "Hey, John." No, no, no. Whatever. Like, they say what it is. Or, "Hey, mom." No. And that's not for that conversation cuz usually when we call a friend, we go, "Hey, man. What's going on?" Like, we know who it is. They know who we are. This is for us, the viewers, to understand context. And this conversation is very similar to that. There are these things that doesn't make sense that he would be saying to Lance, but are there for us as outsiders to go, "Oh, okay. This is the the fiction. This is the theater that we're supposed to accept." I also believe based on these texts, if Tyler in fact sent these texts, that he's a bit of an outcast, a bit of a loner, and you know, it's been reported that he spent enormous time online. So, probably a little antisocial. And I don't think he's a trends setter. I think he's a bit of a follower. And I don't think he knows what cool is. So he picks up these terms like a lot of these terms. It's like he watched some war movie or police movie and picked up like squad car and vehicle and drop point. And he's using that in his language because he thinks that's what cool is. And then he watched some old movie where someone said my old man and until I die of old age. And he worked that into his little scripture into his little theater. Because if we don't look at it through that lens, this exchange between a guy who's on the run and his roommate who's also his romantic partner doesn't make sense. It doesn't make sense that this is the conversation that they would have. Sorry, there's a lot of scattered thoughts. But another thing that's missing from these texts is any form of celebration. Right? This person probably had a lot of conversations with their roommate about how much they hate Charlie Kirk and how they wish somebody would do something about it. And if he's the one who did this, he's probably quite proud of himself for having finally done it. You would expect the text to be like, "Oh my god, I finally did it." Or, "I did it for us." Or some kind of celebration of this big thing that he did for them. We're not seeing any of that. And another thing that doesn't make sense, this person is suspected of having shot and killed a public figure in broad daylight at a crowded event with security and having gotten away with it. By the way, one shot. So, this person has some kind of tactical capacity, some kind of planning skill, and you're telling me that that person is going to send paragraphs of details like this over text to their roommate? Like, again, it just the level of meticulousness doesn't match. So, look, there are a lot of people out there who believe that this entire text exchange is fake. It's fabricated. I don't know at which stage. I don't know by who, but it's a popular theory out there. And if you believe that, of course, everyone's entitled to believe whatever they want. Personally, I tend to stick to not jumping to massive conclusions, but just being cautious when things are weird. And to me, this exchange seems very unlikely for a 22-year-old guy on the run with his roommate and romantic partner. Now, does that mean that the whole thing is fake and completely fabricated? Does it mean that parts of it are fake and edited for whatever reason? Does it mean that it's not fake, but the intention of it is different than what we think? Like, like Tyler had some kind of intention for these texts? I can't tell you with certainty, but all I could tell you is something doesn't add up with these texts. But I'm really excited to hear what you guys think in the comments. Let's try to keep it respectful. A lot of different theories going out and I don't think anything is invalid or 100% for sure confirmed. So, let's try to stay away from that certainty. But, let me know in the comments what you think. Why do you think this text exchange reads as weird as it does? Do you think it's been fabricated, edited, or is it a real exchange between the two with some kind of motive? What do you make of his behavior in the courtroom and that stoicism when the charges are being read? What do you make of that lack of synchronicity between two news sources where we're seeing different reactions at different moments? That one just blew my mind. Let me know in the comments what you think of all this and I will see you on the next