LiveNOW from FOX: Mark Astor on What to Expect from the Tyler Robinson Preliminary Hearing

Outlet: LiveNOW from FOX  |  Appearance Type: Video Interview

Last reviewed July 9, 2026 by Mark Astor, Florida attorney.

AT A GLANCE

Mark Astor, a former prosecutor, told LiveNOW from FOX that the five-day preliminary hearing for Tyler Robinson is only about whether there’s probable cause for the case to proceed, not guilt or innocence, that he doubts Erika Kirk will testify at this stage, and that the hearing also protects the defense’s ability to prepare a full case before trial.

SETTING THE SCENE

On July 6, 2026, Mark Astor joined LiveNOW from FOX host Josh Breslow to discuss day one of the preliminary hearing for Tyler Robinson, the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University.

The hearing opened in Provo, Utah, with Erika Kirk and other Kirk family members present in court for the first time.

Mark walked through what a preliminary hearing actually does, what kind of evidence the state is expected to present, and how the process protects Robinson’s right to a fair trial.

THE BREAKDOWN

Mark walked through the basics first. A preliminary hearing gives the judge a first look at the evidence. It’s also the defense’s first real chance to see the witnesses, test their credibility, and look for holes they can use later, whether to suppress evidence or challenge it at trial. Clearing this hearing is the state’s first hurdle before the case can move forward at all.

Five days isn’t unusual for a case with this much evidence, he said. Law enforcement testimony, surveillance video, DNA evidence, material posted online, and statements Robinson allegedly made to witnesses all have to be presented. There’s no reason for the state to rush. Prosecutors will roll the evidence out at their own pace, and the court will decide afterward whether there’s probable cause.

That’s the only question at this stage. Guilt or innocence isn’t on the table yet. That gets decided later, by a jury. Right now the judge only has to decide whether the evidence clears a fairly low bar, enough for a reasonable person to believe Robinson may have committed the crime.

Mark doesn’t expect Erika Kirk to testify. The state doesn’t need her to establish probable cause, he said, and he expects her to be there mainly in support, showing Robinson she isn’t going anywhere. He’d be surprised if she takes the stand at this stage.

He also wouldn’t be surprised by heavy security given how high-profile and polarizing the case is. Whatever people think of Charlie Kirk, Mark said, Robinson still has to get a fair trial. That protects any future conviction from being thrown out later on appeal.

On cameras in the courtroom, Mark pointed to a balancing act courts have already worked through, both at the trial level and on appeal. The judge has to weigh Robinson’s right to a fair trial against the public’s right to watch an open proceeding. For now, the court has decided the cameras stay. That could change if circumstances shift.

He closed on why the hearing matters beyond this week. Part of its purpose is giving defense attorneys a real look at the state’s full case, so they can prepare properly for trial. If Robinson is convicted down the line, Mark said, that preparation is what stands between a conviction that holds up and one that gets challenged for ineffective counsel.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

The following questions are drawn directly from Mark Astor’s analysis during this segment.

KEY LEGAL TERMS REFERENCES IN THIS SEGMENT

Preliminary hearing: A pretrial proceeding where a judge reviews the state’s evidence to decide whether there’s enough for the case to move forward. It isn’t a trial and doesn’t determine guilt. Utah R. Crim. P. 7B

Probable cause: The legal standard used at a preliminary hearing. The judge only needs to find that a reasonable person could believe the defendant may have committed the crime, a much lower bar than the standard used at trial. Utah R. Crim. P. 7B(b)

Effective assistance of counsel: A defendant’s constitutional right to a properly prepared defense. Preliminary hearings help protect this right by giving defense attorneys full access to the state’s evidence before trial. U.S. Const. amend. VI (Cornell LII)

Open proceedings: The practice of allowing courtroom cameras and public access to a trial or hearing. Courts weigh this against a defendant’s right to a fair trial before deciding whether to allow it. Utah Code Jud. Admin. 4-401.01

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• A preliminary hearing only decides whether there’s probable cause for the case to proceed, not guilt or innocence.
• Astor doesn’t expect Erika Kirk to testify at this stage, since the state doesn’t need her testimony to establish probable cause.
• Cameras are allowed in the courtroom for now, a balance courts have already worked through between Robinson’s fair-trial rights and the public’s right to an open proceeding.
• Astor says the hearing also protects Robinson’s right to effective assistance of counsel by giving the defense full access to the state’s evidence before trial.

INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

The following is a transcript of Mark Astor’s appearance on LiveNOW from FOX, July 6, 2026.

ANCHOR (Josh Breslow):

My name is Josh Breslow, and there on the right-hand side of your screen, you’re taking a live look outside of the courthouse over in Provo, Utah. That’s where in just a matter of minutes, day one will get underway of that preliminary hearing for Tyler Robinson, the man accused of assassinating Charlie Kirk on the campus at Utah Valley University. Now, I want to pop this up on your screen, coming in from Matt Finn over at Fox News. It says, breaking, Erika Kirk arrives to court in Provo, Utah for that preliminary hearing in the murder of her husband. This is the first time that Erika Kirk and family members of Charlie Kirk are appearing in court. Again, this is going to be a 5-day hearing in the case. I want to bring in Mark Astor, criminal defense attorney, to discuss what we can expect and how this is expected to play out. Mark, thank you so much for taking the time to be here with us.

MARK ASTOR:

You’re welcome. Thanks for having me.

JOSH BRESLOW:

Of course. And first off, I want to start by asking you, we’re talking about a 5-day preliminary hearing. So what should we expect to happen here? What is the purpose overall?

MARK ASTOR:

Well, so the first thing to understand is this is going to be the first opportunity that the judge has had to see any of the evidence. It’s also going to be the first opportunity really for the defense attorneys to review all of the evidence, to see who the witnesses are going to be. What are they going to testify to? How credible are they going to be? Are there any holes in the case that they can use to potentially suppress evidence or to give them an opportunity to discredit any evidence at the trial. So this is the first hurdle that the state has to get over in order to get the case moving forward.

JOSH BRESLOW:

5 days, is that pretty standard? Is it because it’s a high-profile case and a lot of motions have been filed ahead of time? Is that kind of what you would expect?

MARK ASTOR:

Well, I, I think in a high-profile case like this, yes. I mean, we have a lot of evidence here. You know, we have, we have law enforcement that were on the scene. We have surveillance video. We have DNA evidence. We have other evidence that was supposedly posted online. We have witnesses that apparently Mr. Robinson made statements to. And so the state’s going to take their time and they’re going to roll this evidence out slowly. There’s no rush for the state here. So they’re going to produce this evidence. They’re going to put the witnesses on. They’re going to show the court the evidence they have. And then the court’s going to make a determination as to whether or not there’s probable cause for this case to move forward.

JOSH BRESLOW:

So it’s not really about determining guilt or innocence at this point. It’s more so about deciding whether or not things move forward.

MARK ASTOR:

Correct. I mean, the court is not going to decide, is he guilty or not guilty? That’s going to be left to a jury at some point in the future. The judge is going to look at the evidence and say, yep, there’s a… there’s a reasonable person would determine that there’s sufficient evidence to believe that Mr. Robinson may have committed the crime, and then the case can move forward. So that’s what we’re really determining here. Is there sufficient evidence just to get the case moving forward? That’s it. Very minimal standard here.

JOSH BRESLOW:

And Erika Kirk, this is a statement on behalf of Charlie Kirk’s immediate family, his parents, Robert and Catherine, who are expected to be there, as well as his wife Erika and his sister Mary. This is the first time that Erika Kirk has been there in the courtroom. Do we expect, and I know this is kind of all up in the air, but do we expect that we’re actually going to get any testimony from Erika Kirk here?

MARK ASTOR:

I would doubt she’s going to testify. There’s no reason for her to testify. The state doesn’t need her to prove probable cause. So I would imagine she’s going to sit there. She’s going to be supportive, obviously, of the state’s case. She wants to let Mr. Robinson know, hey, I’m here, I’m not going anywhere, and I’m here to make sure that justice is done. But I would be shocked if she testifies. There’s no reason for her to do so, not at this point anyway.

JOSH BRESLOW:

Yeah, I mean, this is, of course, the statement that she’s put out. We have heard from her so many times, especially since she took over Turning Point USA. Sadly, there’s been many threats that have been made against her, so she hasn’t necessarily gone to all of those events out of fear. So do you expect that security in a situation could potentially be a little bit tighter, maybe because of that?

MARK ASTOR:

Oh, I wouldn’t, I wouldn’t be shocked if there’s, if there’s armed guards everywhere. I mean, this is a high-profile case. Certainly Mr. Kirk was, was, was a controversial character and whether you agree with him or didn’t agree with him, we got to make sure that Mr. Robinson gets his… gets a fair trial, gets his day in court so that if there’s a conviction, that the conviction stands. Because if he is convicted, at some point another court is going to look at this and say, okay, was this handled appropriately? Did we do anything that may have impeded Mr. Robinson’s right to a fair trial?

JOSH BRESLOW:

Does that kind of change things when you’re talking about a preliminary hearing like this where cameras are allowed inside the American people and people everywhere really are able to watch this play out and see that evidence presented. How does that kind of factor into the case versus maybe if this was happening behind closed doors in private?

MARK ASTOR:

Yes, I know this is something the court’s already addressed. I believe an appellate court has also addressed it. And the, and the judge who’s hearing this case really has to do a bit of a balancing act. Number, you know, number one, we want to make sure that Mr. Robinson gets a fair trial. But number two, the public has a right to see this case. This is supposed to be an open proceeding. And I think the court’s going to say, okay, I think he can get a fair proceeding, so I’m going to allow the cameras in. But obviously, if that changes, the court is free to take another look at this. But for right now, this case is going to be an open proceeding.

JOSH BRESLOW:

All right, Mark, thank you so much for taking the time to discuss this here. Anything that we missed? Anything that you want to add before I let you go?

MARK ASTOR:

Yeah. So I think, I think what’s important for folks to understand is that if there’s a conviction in this case, at some point somebody’s probably going to say the defense attorneys didn’t do their job. So part of the, the preliminary hearing process is giving the defense attorneys a chance to see what the case is all about so they can prepare for trial. This is what this is really about. If you’re the defense attorney, you’re not expecting to win this hearing. You’re expecting the court’s going to find this probable cause, but you want to make sure that you are ready to go to trial. You’re ready to put your best foot forward so when or if Mr. Robinson is convicted, somebody doesn’t say, oh, you know what, these guys didn’t do their job. So that… this is also part of the process, making sure that Mr. Robinson gets effective assistance of counsel.

JOSH BRESLOW:

All right, Mark Astor, thank you so much for taking the time to join us. I’m sure we’re going to have you back as, again, we’re talking about a 5-day hearing. Thank you again.

MARK ASTOR:

You’re welcome.

ABOUT MARK ASTOR

Mark Astor spent the early part of his career as an Assistant State Attorney in Palm Beach County, Florida, where he prosecuted thousands of criminal cases and served as Chief of two County Court Divisions.

He brings that background into his role as a legal analyst, which is why producers at FOX News, LiveNOW from FOX, and local CBS and ABC affiliates call him when a complex criminal case needs a clear explanation.

His law practice is a different matter. Mark Astor and Astor Simovitch Law focus exclusively on behavioral health law: helping Florida families navigate Marchman Act petitions, Baker Act proceedings, and the legal intervention process when a loved one is in a mental health or addiction crisis and refuses help.

If that’s the situation you’re in, schedule a free confidential consultation or call us at 561-419-6095.

A NOTE ON MARK ASTOR’S MEDIA COMMENTARY

Mark Astor’s appearances as a legal analyst cover a wide range of legal cases in the news. This commentary draws on his background as a former prosecutor and his 30-plus years of courtroom experience.

It does not represent the services offered by Astor Simovitch Law, which does not handle criminal defense matters. For criminal defense needs, please consult an attorney who practices in that area.