Prosecutors Detail Poor Shooting Practice by Man Accused in Charlie Kirk Death to Support Death Penalty Case

Utah prosecutors have filed a response opposing the defense team’s effort to remove the death penalty as a potential punishment, arguing that the defendant’s documented inability to consistently hit targets during practice created substantial danger to spectators. According to prosecutors’ court filing released Tuesday, the man accused in the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk “seldom hit the bullseye and sometimes missed the target completely” when practicing with the weapon allegedly used in the attack.

The state contends that firing from a rooftop toward a crowd of thousands constituted a knowing risk to bystander safety, which would satisfy an aggravating factor required to pursue capital punishment at trial. Defense attorneys previously argued that only a single shot was fired from above the assembled crowd, struck the intended target in the neck, and harmed no bystanders, making the death penalty unjustifiable.

Prosecutors further accused the defense of violating ethical obligations by misapplying evidentiary standards during the preliminary hearing phase. They asserted that judges must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the state when evaluating whether probable cause exists, meaning that shooting across a large crowd could reasonably be inferred to endanger those assembled.

The defendant, who traveled from southern Utah to Utah Valley University in Orem during a Turning Point USA event in September 2025, has not yet entered a plea. Judge Tony Graf Jr. is expected to issue a final decision on September 1 regarding whether sufficient probable cause exists to proceed to trial.