Judge rules on probable cause in D4vd's murder case; judge in Charlie Kirk case hasn't decided
The Utah judge in the capital murder case against Tyler Robinson ordered briefing after a five-day preliminary hearing in early in July. He will hear argument on Sept. 1.
A judge in California ruled Monday that probable cause supports the capital murder case against 21-year-old David Burke, also known as the singer D4vd, for the death of a girl he’s accused of sexually abusing.
A judge in Utah, meanwhile, won’t decide if probable cause supports the capital murder case against Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old accused of killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk, until at least September after hearing evidence in early July.
I’m following both cases, and the difference in judges is demonstrated by their approach to the preliminary hearings. Neither Burke nor Robinson was indicted by a grand jury, which means prosecutors must present evidence to a judge who will decide if the case can proceed.
Burke’s case is with Judge Charlaine Olmedo, a former federal prosecutor who’s been a Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge since 2002. She’s one of several judges assigned to hear long-cause criminal cases at the main criminal courthouse in downtown Los Angeles.
Olmedo heard the prosecution’s evidence against Burke in a hearing that began July 20 and ended Monday (July 27) with her announcing her ruling from the bench. Burke’s lawyers did not call witnesses.
Burke, 21, is charged with first-degree murder, continuous sexual abuse of a child under the age of 14 and unlawful mutilation of human remains.He faces a possible death penalty if convicted of the murder charge under three special circumstances: lying in wait, committing the crime for financial gain and murdering a witness in an investigation.
“The people have met their burden on all counts,” Olmedo said, according to The Associated Press. Olmedo emphasized the low burden of probable cause to support a criminal charge compared to the high burden of beyond a reasonable doubt needed for a conviction.
The judge presiding over the case against Robinson could learn from her.
Judge Tony F. Graf Jr. has been a judge since May 2025. He was a deputy prosecutor in Davis, Utah and Salt Lake counties and served on the City Council in Tooele, Utah, from 2020 through 2023, where he also was a member of the Planning Commission.
He hadn’t yet been on the bench for 18 months when he was assigned what will very likely be the most high-profile case of his judicial career, no matter how many more years he’s on the bench: the capital murder case against Robinson, who is accused of fatally shooting Kirk while Kirk was speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem on Sept. 10, 2025.
Graf presided over a five-day preliminary hearing that began July 6 and ended July 10 with the judge ordering written briefs and scheduling oral argument for Sept. 1.
Chad Grunander, the chief deputy prosecutor in the Utah County Attorney’s Office, pushed back against the scope of the hearing before Robinson's lawyers called a second DNA analyst as a witness. Grunander implied the testimony is far beyond the scope of a preliminary hearing, which is to determine if probable cause supports charges against a criminal defendant.
Grunander cited case law that “bars the magistrate from requiring the prosecution to address or even eliminate alternative inferences that could be drawn from the evidence in favor of the defense.”
“This means that when reasonable inferences from the evidence cut both for and against the state’s case, the magistrate lacks the discretion to choose between them and must leave such a determination to the fact finder at trial,” Grunander said.
That means the defense witness testimony challenging the DNA evidence is essentially useless in a preliminary hearing.
“Even assuming the defense scores points today in calling these witnesses, again the court cannot really weigh those in favor of the defense,” Grunander said. “Of course the defense has the right to call witnesses, but it needs to be within the context of this preliminary hearing.”
It makes sense that Judge Graf served on a city council, because he runs his courtroom like a municipal meeting in how he gives everyone plenty of time to speak and feel heard. Judge Graf told Robinson’s lawyers to call their next witness and did not respond to Grunander’s comments.
When the judge later suggested two hours for argument, Grunander said, “If we have to argue two hours apiece for bind over, there’s a problem.” Attorney Jeffrey Neiman, who represents Kirk’s widow, Erika Kirk, said the family wants “swift justice for Charlie here.”
“I think we obviously know the court needs to make sure they’re balancing all interests here. But I think as soon as the matter could be bound over and this matter could be set for trial, that’s what the Kirk family would like,” said Neiman, a partner with Neiman Mays Floch & Almeida PLLC in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
But Robinson’s lawyers requested written briefs and Judge Graf scheduled briefing to begin July 28 with the prosecution’s filing. Briefs will be 30 pages and 40 pages, followed by a reply, and Grunander said the length of his argument will increase because of the briefs.
The standard for probable cause is low: more likely than not. The judge seems to be missing this. Utah might want to consider a grand jury indictment system if this is what goes into establishing probable cause through a judge.
As this is happening, people on the Internet are questioning the prosecution’s evidence and accusing everyone of framing Robinson and manufacturing the video and text message evidence between Robinson and his roommate and romantic partner, Lance Twiggs.
I noticed this in the comments on my Instagram and TikTok coverage of the hearing, and I was struck by how widespread the disbelief is and how much of it appears to be influenced by conspiracy theorist Candace Owens and her unfounded conspiracies about Kirk’s death. Brian Harpole, Kirk’s former head of security, is suing Owens for defamation for inaccurately accusing him of meeting with Erika Kirk at a military base a day before Kirk was killed.
No one mentioned Owens or her supporters during the hearing, but it’s a safe bet Judge Graf’s chambers regularly hears from more than a few people about this case. Let’s hope the vitriol isn’t influencing his already inexperienced approach to this case.
Judge Graf’s inexperience is obvious through his handling of other important issues such as the redaction of courtroom exhibits, as I explain in coverage included below.
New trial: State of Massachusetts v. Lindsay Clancy
Trial began in Massachusetts today (Monday, July 27) for a woman who killed her three young children.
Lindsay Clancy, 35, is charged with murder for the strangulation deaths of her five-year-old daughter, Cora; three-year-old son, Dawson; and 8-month-old son Callan, who were killed on Jan. 24, 2023, in Duxbury.
Clancy was being treated for postpartum mental health issues at the time. Her trial is receiving national attention, and it deals with serious mental health issues. If you or someone you know needs help, you can call or text the new three digit code at 988 to reach a trained crisis counselor. You also can visit 988lifeline.org or dial 800-273-8255 [TALK].
Judge William Sullivan in Plymouth County Superior Court is presiding over the jury trial, which is expected to last six to eight weeks. His clerk swore in the jury today and read the charges before he discussed the logistics of the trial.
“To these indictments, the defendant at the bar pleads not guilty. For trial, places herself upon the country, which country you are. You were sworn to try the issues. If she is guilty, you shall say so. If she is not guilty, you shall say so, and no more. Members of the jury, hearken to hear evidence,” the clerk said.
Plymouth County Assistant District Attorney Shanan Buckingham told the jury in her 20-minute opening statement that Clancy was “dealing with mental health issues” but still made a calculated decision to murder.
“This is not a public debate about women’s mental health and how the medical system treats women. This case is about this defendant, Lindsay Clancy,” Buckingham said.
Clancy “had a means and access to mental health that most people don’t, and she chose to deal with her mental health issues in the worst way.”
“She chose to manipulate her providers, seek out the quick and easy fix when she was feeling depressed and anxious, and when she didn’t get what she expected, she chose an alternate route. She sought a different doctor. She changed medications after days,” Buckingham said.
“She disengaged from treatment when she didn’t like the plan. After only four months in treatment, she made a choice-a deliberate and intentional decision-that she did not want to try anymore. And because no one could take care of her kids the way she wanted them to, she had to take them with her,” Buckingham continued.
Buckingham said “people with mental illness commit crimes every day and are responsible for them.”
“The fact that someone may suffer or have a mental illness, a mental disease, or defect is not the end of the inquiry when it comes to guilt or innocence. It is whether a person can appreciate the wrongfulness or criminality of the conduct and conform their conduct to the law. Do they know what they were doing, and can they control their actions?” Buckingham said. “The evidence in this case, will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this defendant coldly and efficiently executed first Dawson, then Cora, then Callan.”
Clancy’s lawyer Kevin Reddington told the jury the case against her is about women’s health issues.
The prosecutor said in her opening statement that the case is not a referendum on “women having babies and having postpartum psychosis, postpartum depression, but it sure as hell is,” said Reddington, a Brockton-based attorney who has been licensed to practice law in Massachusetts since 1975.
Reddington referenced Plymouth County District Attorney Tim Cruz in the front row of the courtroom and said he “knew when he brought this charge that it was going to kill the soul of this young woman.”
“And they would bring their evidence in front of a jury that she knows that she killed these children. We’ll sit here, listen to their evidence, but I suggest to you that the issue for consideration is what was going on in that woman’s mind,” Reddington said.
You can watch the entire opening statements and all testimony on my YouTube channel or Facebook page. I’m also streaming live each trial day.
Clancy's ex-husband and the father of her children, Patrick Clancy, will continue testifying on the trial's second day, Wednesday (July 29) at 9 a.m. EST.
Thank you for supporting my independent legal affairs journalism. Your paid subscriptions make my work possible. If you’re not already a paid subscriber, please consider purchasing a subscription through Substack. You can find much more of my work on my YouTube channel, as well as TikTok, Instagram and Facebook.