Graphic footage capturing the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk during a speech at a Utah college campus spread rapidly online, amassing millions of views within hours.

Now, lawyers representing the man accused of killing Kirk are asking a state judge to prevent those videos from being shown at a court hearing set for Tuesday. The defense is also requesting that television and still cameras be excluded from the courtroom, contending that coverage by what they describe as “highly biased” media outlets threatens the fairness of the proceedings.

Prosecutors, joined by attorneys for news organizations, have urged District Judge Tony Graf to keep the hearing open to the public. Legal scholars, however, say the defense’s concerns are not unfounded. Media exposure in widely followed cases like that of Tyler Robinson can have a measurable “biasing effect” on prospective jurors, according to Cornell Law School professor Valerie Hans.

“There were videos about the killing, and pictures and analysis (and) the entire saga of how this particular defendant came to turn himself in,” said Hans, who specializes in jury research. “When jurors come to a trial with this kind of background information from the media, it shapes how they see the evidence that is presented in the courtroom.”

Robinson, 22, faces an aggravated murder charge in connection with the Sept. 10 shooting of Kirk at Utah Valley University in Orem, and prosecutors have indicated they will pursue the death penalty.

Roughly 3,000 people were present at the outdoor rally where Kirk, a co-founder of Turning Point USA known for energizing young voters to support President Donald Trump, was speaking when he was shot.

Under Utah law, prosecutors must prove the presence of aggravating factors to obtain a death sentence, including that the crime was particularly heinous or cruel. The graphic videos circulating online could become relevant to that determination.

Viewing such footage could lead people to conclude, “‘Yeah, this was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel,’” Hans said.

The challenge of selecting an impartial jury is further complicated by the intense political discourse surrounding Kirk and the influence of his organization during Trump’s 2024 election campaign.

Even before Robinson was taken into custody, speculation spread about the identity of the shooter and his political beliefs, said University of Utah law professor Teneille Brown.

“People are just projecting a lot of their own sense of what they think was going on, and that really creates concerns about whether they can be open to hearing the actual evidence that’s presented,” she said.

As the case has progressed, Robinson’s attorneys have increasingly alleged media bias, at one point accusing news outlets of attempting to read lips to determine what their client was saying privately to his lawyers during court appearances.

Those concerns intensified after a television camera operator zoomed in on Robinson’s face as he spoke with his attorneys during a Jan. 16 hearing. The move violated courtroom rules, leading the judge to halt filming of Robinson for the rest of that session.

“Rather than being a beacon for truth and openness, the News Media have simply become a financial investor in this case,” defense attorneys wrote in a motion seeking to seal portions of their claims regarding media conduct. Making those filings public, they argued, “will simply generate even more views of the offending coverage, and more revenue for the News Media.”

Prosecutors have acknowledged the extraordinary public attention on the case but maintain that it does not justify limiting public access to the courts. Transparency, they argued, must be preserved regardless of the circumstances.

“This case arose, and will remain, in the public eye. That reality favors greater transparency of case proceedings, not less,” Utah County prosecutors wrote in a filing.

The defense is also attempting to have local prosecutors removed from the case, asserting a conflict of interest because the daughter of a deputy county attorney involved in the prosecution attended the rally where Kirk was killed.

Prosecutors responded that they could introduce video evidence at Tuesday’s hearing to show that the daughter is not a critical witness, noting that many others captured the shooting on camera.

According to prosecutors, one of those recordings depicts the moment the bullet struck Kirk, followed by blood flowing from his neck and Kirk collapsing from his chair.