Charlie Kirk: Aftermath, Gravedancing, and Manhunt

[General Disarray]

Little Ben Shapiro is talking about Candace and the hearing. Putting it here for relevance.

 

[The Ancestor]

Why did lance get immunity?

Because I suspect he’ll be the prosecution’s star witness and we’ll get footage of Tyler crying on the stand as Lance talks about how his peepee was too small for his bussy to handle, and he had to shoot someone to satisfy his boyfriend

 

[Lemmingwiser]

0:40

Dna testing on the screwdriver and towel.

5% Tyler, 95% Lance on the first, 11% Tyler, 89% Lance on the second


Edit: correction, this was minutes later clarified to be the reverse, and Tyler was 95% and 89%.

 

[WelfareNiggerQueen]

FBI_DNA_Examiner_says_DNA_ON_SCREWDRIVER_amp_TOWEL_were_ALMOS_FwPd2b.mp4

Dna testing on the screwdriver and towel.

5% Tyler, 95% Lance on the first, 11% Tyler, 89% Lance on the second.

Ewwwwww he used the anal juice cum rag as a shooting mat.

 

[Capgras Delusion]

Finally in regards to the footage, when you watched it, were you 100% satisfied in thinking he could conclusively be identified? Like if you for a second put on a jury cap and would have to convict or not someone based on that video evidence, how certain are you that it's Tyler Robinson?

I've been thinking with my jury cap on this whole time and he's guilty. He's seen in the days leading up to the shooting on campus. He's seen on campus that day. He's seen getting on and off a building before and then after the shooting. It'd be different if all of these pieces weren't together, but they are together. It's way more of a leap in logic to think it's not him rather than it is him. You also have to think, we haven't seen all the video evidence that the court has. There's probably going to be a lot of ancillary video evidence that'll show up as the case goes on.

You have to think with a normie cap on here, not a schizo hat. No normie jury member selected is going to think that there's a government conspiracy to kill Charlie Kirk pinned on Robinson.

Why did lance get immunity?

Because they want him to testify. If anyone knows what was going through Tyler's head in the months, days, and hours leading up to the shooting, it's him. I think the immunity was awarded because the evidence showing his involvement was too flimsy, if evidence even existed.

Even if they found something to charge him with, it's not as big of a crime as murder. Nor would there be a guarantee he wouldn't just clam up making the case harder on themselves. Give him immunity and he'll hopefully sing like a canary, even if that means stretching the truth or downplaying his role to get static off himself. He's way more valuable to the trial than not. It's a common tactic in cases way less high profile than this.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

I've been thinking with my jury cap on this whole time and he's guilty. He's seen in the days leading up to the shooting on campus. He's seen on campus that day. He's seen getting on and off a building before and then after the shooting. It'd be different if all of these pieces weren't together, but they are together. It's way more of a leap in logic to think it's not him rather than it is him. You also have to think, we haven't seen all the video evidence that the court has. There's probably going to be a lot of ancillary video evidence that'll show up as the case goes on

You didn't really answer the question. The question is if the video released in this hearing, what percentage you're certain it matches Tyler Robinson. If I look at that piece of evidence independantly, I'm not sure. Could be him, could be not him. With the cap I find it hard to identify him as a person. I'm asking other opinions because I don't know and am uncertain about that piece of evidence.

If instead of analysing that piece of evidence independantly, your answer is that it's too complicated to think that it might not be him, then you're not really engaging with the question.

As for your last idea, that there's a lot of ancillary video, that's what I've been hearing for 10 months, but specifically that they had the video of him taking the shot and they're were saving it for the court case. Now we learn that that doesn't exist. Sorry if I don't presume not seen and not offered footage in the case will prove something.

 

[Kokonut Kangs Klan]

specifically that they had the video of him taking the shot and they're were saving it for the court case

I haven't heard this, and would like to see your evidence. You're repeating this after having ignored the same objection on the previous page:

I've never seen investigators claim that he was on video taking the shot.

Why can't you engage with this question? This should be simple, if we're wrong we're wrong.

 

[Capgras Delusion]

You didn't really answer the question. The question is if the video released in this hearing, what percentage you're certain it matches Tyler Robinson. If I look at that piece of evidence independantly, I'm not sure. Could be him, could be not him. With the cap I find it hard to identify him as a person. I'm asking other opinions because I don't know and am uncertain about that piece of evidence.

I did engage with your question. It's him in the video. In a trial, you do not look at evidence independently. Every piece of evidence either supports or refutes other pieces of evidence and the crime that's trying to be proven or disproven. The legal system is about proving or disproving lines of logic.

With that same logic, if I rob a bank with a mask on, and I get arrested, the prosecutors can't confidently say that it was me because I had a mask on during the crime despite being seen in the area before/after in the same clothes. No, you can't see his face in 4K, but he's pretty obviously wearing the same clothes.

As for your last idea, that there's a lot of ancillary video, that's what I've been hearing for 10 months, but specifically that they had the video of him taking the shot and they're were saving it for the court case. Now we learn that that doesn't exist. Sorry if I don't presume not seen and not offered footage in the case will prove something.

Because this is a preliminary trial. You don't show everything at a preliminary trial. That's why they keep shutting down certain lines of questioning. The whole point of this preliminary trial is to see whether or not there's enough evidence to go to an actual trial, not to prove he's guilty right now.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

I did engage with your question. It's him in the video. In a trial, you do not look at evidence independently. Every piece of evidence either supports or refutes other pieces of evidence and the crime that's trying to be proven or disproven. The legal system is about proving or disproving lines of logic.

With that same logic, if I rob a bank with a mask on, and I get arrested, the prosecutors can't confidently say that it was me because I had a mask on during the crime despite being seen in the area before/after in the same clothes. No, you can't see his face in 4K, but he's pretty obviously wearing the same clothes.

You didn't really read or understand my message if you post that second line. I wasn't making a rhetorical point.

I haven't heard this, and would like to see your evidence. You're repeating this after having ignored the same objection on the previous page:

I can appreciate that. I did catch your question/objection the first time, it's just that it takes a while to dig back through it all.

Here's Andrew Kolvet today basicly agreeing that there is such a video, despite in court prosecution today saying that they don't have it when the judge asked.

https://x.com/AndrewKolvet/status/2074573992774812133

Today they admitted they don't have that:

0:39

More importantly, the prosecution themselves said that they had it all on video, including the shot, back in April:

1:01

 

[Capgras Delusion]

You didn't really read or understand my message if you post that second line. I wasn't making a rhetorical point.

I was trying to illustrate my point, which is apparently pointless with you.

 

[Kokonut Kangs Klan]

I did catch your question/objection the first time, it's just that it takes a while to dig back through it all.

Well, it wasn't me the first time, so I don't think you did m8.

More importantly, the prosecution themselves said that they had it all on video, including the shot, back in April:

I don't agree the twitter shit backs up what you're saying at all (that's all about what they don't have, not what they do have), but this last video is fairly unambiguous, thanks. He literally says "that's all captured on video" about a sequence of events including taking the shot. At best this guy horribly misspoke, and now claiming the footage doesn't exist looks bad. I'm still not leaning in a conspiratorial direction but I hope they don't throw the case with this sort of sloppy shit.

 

[Großmann]

@Lemmingwiser what is your theory on this case?

 

[Fanatical Pragmatist]

Guys he didn't take the shot, he just got up there, pointed the rifle, then got back down and ran off in a panicked hurry.

 

[Lemmingwiser]

@Lemmingwiser what is your theory on this case?

There's too much fuckery for the established FBI narrative to be the true one. There's too many people acting oddly and too much video evidence missing.

I don't have a strong positive claim. I'll do my best constructing it.

I think the likeliest explanation is that discord was used to find someone like Lance Twiggs and Tyler Robinson. People who would be willing to help someone else murder Charlie Kirk. They would have said they need an old rifle and promise to get it back. Instead they made sure to frame Tyler Robinson and blackmail Lance. Considering Lance is a tranny, he's probably blackmailable over CP or something like that. Same for George Zinn, btw, who probably worked as a decoy.

The public needs an easy explanation, so they gave them one. You can see how well it works. People struggle to even answer questions about any part of evidence and instead just keep parroting that it must be Tyler and only Tyler.

The initial plan was to have Tyler Robinson shot as he was caught. The first "confession" read that way, that he wanted to die. Easier and neater that way. (Note that confession is purely the words of Lance Twiggs). However, Tyler was just not quite braindead enough to fall for it. When his image was circulated and when some part of the plan didn't go as promised, he understood to some degree he was framed. His family loved him enough to protect him. This was the fatal flaw in choosing Tyler Robinson. He may have become a lefty, but his parents were right wing. More importantly, they had family police connection. So they figured out a way for him to turn himself into custody peacefully. That's why after he was apprehended, they needed a new confession, and the online messages were found. The problem is that the time stamp of the online messages is after he was in custody and this will become a problem for the prosecution.

The original FBI and media messages made it seem like his parents had turned him in, and that he confessed to them. I don't think there's any evidence to support that and it also wouldn't explain why he didn't confess during interrogation. I think the above scenario is more likely.

In essence, I think Tyler's guilty of wanting to aid the assassination of Charlie Kirk and that he's being framed for the full guilt of it. And I think Lance is guilty of helping to frame Tyler.


There's also plenty of things I don't know and am unsure about. Not that I'm sure about the above. It just seems more likely when examining the evidence that is available.

 

[Capgras Delusion]

The public needs an easy explanation, so they gave them one. You can see how well it works. People struggle to even answer questions about any part of evidence and instead just keep parroting that it must be Tyler and only Tyler.

Man, sometimes the easy explanation is the actual explanation.

I think the likeliest explanation is that discord was used to find someone like Lance Twiggs and Tyler Robinson. People who would be willing to help someone else murder Charlie Kirk. They would have said they need an old rifle and promise to get it back. Instead they made sure to frame Tyler Robinson and blackmail Lance. Considering Lance is a tranny, he's probably blackmailable over CP or something like that.

How would they have randomly found them on discord? Do you know how discord works? Robinson barely had a public presence online. Twiggs kind of did, but nothing comparable to most people his age. There are people they could've manipulated to just straight up kill Kirk rather than attempt this patsy plan. The feds have groomed people into murder before, it wouldn't be the first time.

There's too much fuckery for the established FBI narrative to be the true one. There's too many people acting oddly and too much video evidence missing.

The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. They're acting oddly because they fucked up the investigation and don't want to admit they fucked it up. It's like Columbine. A lot of shit is wonky because the investigation was fucked up. It doesn't mean there's a conspiracy though. If anything, their ineptitude kinda proves that they're incapable of pulling something like this off.

 

[Kokonut Kangs Klan]

The initial plan was to have Tyler Robinson shot as he was caught. [...] However, Tyler was just not quite braindead enough to fall for it. [...] So they figured out a way for him to turn himself into custody peacefully.

What does "not falling for it" mean to you, like he protested the plan? Why wouldn't they just shoot him anyways then, especially if he's starting to argue about things? He sounds like an unnecessary loose end in this scenario when they could've just been done with him, what if he speaks up during his sham trial? I don't see the point of letting him live, glowies wouldn't need the distraction of a trial so badly because like you said the public is already happy with easy explanations.

 

[Rem-3]

We do not have a confession.

There's two supposed confessions. Let's look at them. One is from Lance saying there was a note, now destroyed, that was a confession. Lance has immunity and can't be questioned.
The other confession is supposed online confession that happened after Robinson was in custody.

It would make sense for Lance to destroy the note, after all there was still a great chance Tyler could have gotten away with it.
After he got caught, it also made sense that he tried to save his own ass by confession.
Lance has immunity probably as a byproduct of him being a schizophrenic faggot, that could kill himself at any second if he was to go to jail. He is way more useful this way, since this way hes probably willing (or atleast more willing) to cooperate.

And let's not forget, having the footage of him on top of the building right before and right after the man supposedly took a shot, but not of the shot, is suspicious. Like why is it missing?

Because we dont usually put security chameras in rooftofs. Is someone during the shooting, in the first 20 seconds of it going to try and record tve shooter?
It is not suspicious at all that we don't have video of Tyler shooting. All eyes were put on charlie as he, unexpectedly, got shot. That's the only reason we have footage of it.
Tyler shot and then inmediatly tried to run away. What time was there to record him?

Is it soo hard to believe that there could have been a larger conspiracy that he was a patsy in?

Not really, but its harder and more complex explanation than to believe it was just Tyler.
I go by Occam.

inally in regards to the footage, when you watched it, were you 100% satisfied in thinking he could conclusively be identified? Like if you for a second put on a jury cap and would have to convict or not someone based on that video evidence, how certain are you that it's Tyler Robinson?

More of a cumulative case. The footage is not compelling evidence by itself, nor is it supossed to. It just serves to corroborate the case, as it matches whatever other proof may be presented in the trial

 

[I'm a Silly]

We don't. What would be a good place for it?


You're technically correct and good of you to point out.

In case you didn't know, we have a bit of video from behind as well:

https://youtu.be/5-HUyv9LyMg?t=209

From back in March.

33:13 if it won't cue properly

 

[Lemmingwiser]

I was trying to illustrate my point, which is apparently pointless with you.

I just don't think you were engaging with the question. I'll give it a second try. You are confident that the video shown today shows Tyler Robinson. Can you screencap the moment where you positively identify him, visually?

What does "not falling for it" mean to you, like he protested the plan? Why wouldn't they just shoot him anyways then, especially if he's starting to argue about things?

He figured he was getting punked at one point, and used a family connection in law enforcement to turn himself in safely. He didn't give them a clear chance to shoot him. Not sure what you mean by arguing things? It's not like FBI or whomever was with him at the time.

what if he speaks up during his sham trial?

I mean that's why I think he's guilty to a degree. It's the same tactic smart scammers do. Better to scam someone who thinks they're scamming you. Classic way of doing it. If he speaks up, he also indicts himself about the guilt that he genuinely has.

I don't see the point of letting him live

Plans don't always go perfect. And they won't let him live, he'll get the death penalty.

Because we dont usually put security chameras in rooftofs.

There is video of the man on the rooftop. Surveillance camera.

More of a cumulative case. The footage is not compelling evidence by itself, nor is it supossed to. It just serves to corroborate the case, as it matches whatever other proof may be presented in the trial

I guess even people that have an opposite view sometimes don't find the footage convincingly Tyler either.

 

[Kokonut Kangs Klan]

He figured he was getting punked at one point, and used a family connection in law enforcement to turn himself in safely. He didn't give them a clear chance to shoot him.

They could've shot him at UVU, but they let him flee the scene or he somehow evaded them? I'm not sure when this clear chance would've been set to occur if not in the immediate aftermath, I think this is the only reasonable option that works with your theory, and it sounds more like feds shitting the bed than the tranny figuring anything out.

And then the feds continue shitting the bed with contradictory statements about video evidence, that's not just one plan going wrong but repeated incompetence. It seems unlikely feds would just keep fucking up after the hit went wrong, that's when they would start taking the situation seriously. This seems like something conspiracy theorists like to do, expecting the mastermind to become flustered instead of more cautious when the cracks start showing. But maybe glowies are completely retarded, what do I know.

Not sure what you mean by arguing things? It's not like FBI or whomever was with him at the time.

That's fine, I didn't know what you meant by not falling for it, this was just a guess at your intended meaning.