Document text
COMMENTARY by Candace Owens — "Tyler Robinson BOMBSHELL: Prosecution’s 28‑Page Memo & The TRUTH About Candace Owens vs HIPAA" (published 2026-08-02).
This is third-party opinion/analysis ABOUT State of Utah v. Tyler James Robinson — NOT the court record. It is indexed for comparison against the primary transcripts/filings. Transcript is the YouTube auto-caption track (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c84nB2mzzUQ) — verbatim ASR.
[music] What's going on everybody? You saw the headline. Thank you very much for being here. This show would not be anything without you guys. So, I must state that upfront. But what we got to talk about today is everybody online has a theory about the Tyler Robinson case. Some people say the prosecutors are corrupt. Some say the judge is protecting the state. Others say Candace Owens exposed the truth, while another group says she committed some kind of federal privacy crime by posting Charlie Kirk's medical information. What is missing from most of that commentary is the law. It's always the law that they're missing, right? So, tonight the focus is simple. What is the 28page prosecution document that was just filed in the Tyler Robinson case? And why does it matter? And did Candace Owens violate HIPPA or some other law by releasing what appears to be Charlie Kirk's medical information? Those are the two questions underneath a lot of the emotion online. Once the legal framework is clear, it becomes much easier to judge what the prosecutors are doing, what the judge is doing, and what Candace Owens may or may not have exposed herself to legally. So, for everybody interested in this video, what I'm calling for now, smash that like button, smash that subscribe button. We need that because guys, we have to together come and band and get the truth out there. So, Ju Guu, hey, thank you for always providing me with support on this channel. She is a wonderful lady doing her best. So, thank you very much, Guju. And do what she says. Hit that, you know, like button, subscribe button, everything else. So, guys, what do we got to talk about? Well, subject number one, we've got to lay down what is this 28page document. So, you know, there's some copyright issues with me displaying this document to you guys because a company has the, you know, you know, there seem to be the only company with this document on their website. So, I'm not going to show their website because I don't want to receive some type of email communication from them about displaying their product without their permission. And I don't want to get the 30-day subscription and stuff like that. So, I'm just going to tell you, you guys can put punch into Google yourself 28page document. And it's actually it's titled this. The 28page document is a prosecution brief titled memorandum in support of preliminary hearing bindover in state v. Tyler Robinson. So if you'd like to look it up yourself and to see that document, I encourage you to look it up. Memorandum in support of preliminary hearing bindover. And it, you know, it'll go through it. But that title matters. This is not a trial brief. Again, this is not a trial brief. And it is not a final judgment. It is not a final judgment. Everybody remember that. Not a trial brief, not a final judgment. It is the state's written argument asking the judge to move the case from the preliminary hearing stage into the trial stage. So what is this doing? The prosecution's just asking the judge, "Your honor, we've, you know, presented you with all of this different evidence with respect to this preliminary hearing, and now we're trying to move it to the trial." That's what's going on. At the preliminary hearing, the state does not have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Under Utah law, the burden is probable cause. Enough evidence to support a reasonable belief that a crime was committed and that the defendant committed it. Again, that's the standard for probable cause in Utah and generally a lot of other states. You have to show enough evidence to support a reasonable belief that a crime was committed and that the defendant committed it. Do you believe there's enough evidence to support a reasonable belief that a crime was committed and that this particular defendant Tyler Robinson committed committed it? That's going to be the standard for probable cause here. If the magistrate judge finds probable cause, the defendant is bound over for trial. And that's going to be under Utah rules of criminal procedure 7B, which discusses preliminary examinations and the probable cause bindover procedure. So, anybody that wants to check me. So, in plain English, this is really or the memo is really the prosecution saying based on what came out at the preliminary hearing, the case should keep moving and Tyler Robinson should be required to answer these charges at trial. see what all you guys got to shout in the comments. Hey, again, shout out to you audience members. You guys are wonderful. Um, please hit that like and subscribe button because that is the one way we are going to grow as an audience and to get more people looking for the truth. The lie detector test determined you are telling the truth and that's what we do on this channel. We're always telling the truth. So, what the prosecution says the evidence shows, according to the reporting, you know, and you guys can look this up online yourself, prosecutors argue that Tyler Robinson planned the killing for more than a week, admitted to assassinating Charlie Kirk multiple times, left behind DNA evidence, was captured on surveillance footage, and is tied to the crime through witness testimony and other evidence. The reported charges discussed in the filing include aggravated murder, felony discharge of a firearm, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and committing a violent felony in or excuse me, committing a violent offense in the presence of a child. What an interesting last little charge. Committing a violent offense in the presence of a child. I think he might be convicted for that one. What do y'all think? But it's only if we're able to prove all that other stuff, right? because you know that's just kind of one of the later charges. So the prosecution's language in the memo is especially strong. The state reportedly says this is likely as a straightforward a bind over. Judge Graph had entered orders limiting what attorneys could say publicly about the case. Ballard later gave interviews to media outlets including TMZ because you know you always say something to TMZ and of course they're going to say something crazy and report something crazy. But the judge found no problem with Ballard correcting what prosecutors described as misleading reporting about an ATF ballistics issue. So guys, we've had a lot of stuff online about misleading reporting about the ballistics and the steel neck and the go the bullet can't pass through. Look, go watch my last video. We discussed what bullets and the 30 odd six bullets are designed to do. And the prosecutor would wanted to rebut, I'm sure, some of those ballistics reporting and misinformation that's out there because God knows the amount of misinformation going on on YouTube about bullet theory. So, and none by non-experts, too. Can you believe it? But Ballard, he went further than just, you know, correcting the reporting. He told the media that the state had quote ample evidence to prove Robinson's guilt and overcome his presumption of innocence. So again, he used that term ample evidence to describe the overwhelming guilt apparently that Robinson was going to face. So Judge Graph ruled that Ballard knew about the publicity order that was set about a month or two prior, had the ability to comply with it, and intentionally made the statements in question. The court therefore found ballard and civil contempt, required the state to cover the defense fees and costs associated with the contempt proceedings and warned that future violations could bring additional sanctions. At the same time, the judge refused to strike the death penalty or derail the prosecution. And so guys, what is a publicity order? A publicity order essentially tells the parties how to act with respect to the public. publicity, the public, right? And it's generally going to require that the prosecution refrain from certain statements that presume the guilt of the defendant, right? We're not here as prosecutors. I'm not a prosecutor. I'm going to make that clear. But prosecutors should not be trying to convince the court of public opinion, right? They should be trying to prove their case in a court of law. And so, that's going to be the difference is the prosecutor has to really watch its mouth. And um hold on. I I I got a Let's see if I I got it up here. Um Dang, I I lost my I lost a good sound button I had for you guys. But really, I'll tell you this. Judge Graph, he walked he wal he told he told Chris Balor, "When you walk in the courtroom, he said, "I don't want to hear it anymore. >> SHUT UP, BITCH." OH MY GOD. >> That's what the prosecutor had to say to or excuse me, that's what the judge had to say to Chris Ballard. the prosecutor, you're going to comply with the publicity order. I told you to shut up and to not say this to all these different people in the media and you didn't want to comply with that. You wanted to get cute and try to prove your case to the court of p, you know, public opinion rather than in a court of law and I'm going to sanction you for that. And for all the fees that Tyler Robinson had to pay, you know what? The state's going to pay it. So if you're in the state of Utah and you don't want your fees going to Tyler Robinson's attorneys, you know where to look. I told you. So that matters because it complicates the easy online narratives. The state is aggressively arguing that the evidence supports bindover. Again, getting it from the preliminary hearing to the trial, but the judge is also willing to sanction the prosecutor for saying too much in public about the strength of that same evidence. That is not a court acting as a rubber stamp. It is a court allowing the prosecution to press its case while still policing pre-trial publicity to protect Tyler Robinson's fair trial rights. And so guys, a lot of this stuff you see online is um oh, the court is a rubber stamp. It's all fake. Tyler Robinson's a pati. Nobody should believe this court. You've all heard it, right? They all they just act like, you know, it's apparently a Mormon corrupted place in Utah to have a criminal prosecution that it's inherently unfair. There's no, it might as well be a bunch of kangaroo courts we got going on in Utah. That's what I hear most of the time whenever I'm hearing people criticize Utah courts and how things are going in this case. However, what what did we see the judge do in this case? that judge in Utah in the Utah courts. No, they told the prosecution, even though the prosecution thinks there's overwhelming evidence and strength of on its evidence to prove its case, the court still said, "You have to follow the ethical rules and the court's order that say, hey, you're not supposed to comment on this case. You prove your case in the court of law. Don't prove it in the court of public opinion." It's going to be a little bit different for the defense. But I'll tell you this, prosecution needs to watch that because you're going to get yourself in trouble as prosecutors and quite frankly, you have no business doing it. Go prove your case in the court of law. Don't prove it in the court of public opinion. Good lord. Now, we got to transition. What? We got to transition to subject two. What people got wrong about HIPPA. So, anybody been keeping up with this HIPPA story? What do y'all know about it? I've I'm sure the comments will inform you guys on some of the things that I'm about to discuss, but what I'm going to unpack for you is this. There was apparently on Candace Owens show that she shared um medical documentation that had information related to Charlie Kirk, such as a medical number, maybe his birth date, his name, things of that nature, right? um some of those specific details maybe you guys know uh you know some of those things more but that's more or less the allegation is that Candace Owens shared documentation that included medical information of Charlie Kirk and so now we got to discuss what people get wrong about HIPPA because I've seen people online stating that oh Candace Owens violated HIPPA and um Candace Owens you know apparently she's going to go to jail lock her up in the clink. So, the first thing to say plainly for everybody is this. HIPPA does not apply to everybody who touches medical information. Again, let's make that very clear for everybody. HIPPA does not apply to everybody who touches medical information. HIPPA's privacy rule applies to covered entities and business associations. Covered entities are health plans, health care clearing houses, and health care providers that transmit health information electronically in certain standardized transactions. Business associates are outside parties handling protected health information on behalf of those covered entities. So again the covered entities are more or less just the health uh you know entities themselves the health care entities and then the business associates are the ones that help them in processing that uh health information because sometimes these healthcare you know entities use some of these business associates um for purposes of administration and things of that nature. And one of the things I want to do quickly for you guys is p pull up the department of health and human services uh website. You can see that they go over HIPPA on their website. So if you would like to go visit it, go to that link right there on your screen. You can find a summary of the HIPPA privacy rule. And on this page, it's, you know, it covers pretty much everything, guys. It goes, you know, who's covered by the privacy rule, business associates, what information is protected. I would highly encourage you guys to go through that. Um, another thing I wanted to show you all is this covered entities and business associates. Okay, the HIPPA rules apply to covered entities and business associates. Do you see that? It's what a lot of people have been failing to find when they've been looking up research themselves. So, individuals, organizations, and agencies that meet the definition of a covered entity under HIPPA must comply with the rules requirements to protect the privacy and security of health information and must provide individuals with certain rights with respect to their health information. If a covered entity engages a business associate to help it carry out its health care activities and functions, the covered entity must have a written business associate contract or other arrangement with the business associate that that establishes specifically what the business associate has been engaged to do and requires the business associate to comply with the rules requirements to protect the privacy and security of protected health information. In addition to these contractual obligations, business associates are directly liable for compliance with certain provisions of the HIPPO rules. If an entity does not meet the definition of a covered entity or business associate, it does not have to comply with the HIPPO rules. See definitions of business associate and covered entity at these things. And I got it up here, guys. So, it was citing 16 or 16103. You see that here? This 45. I pulled it. I already got it ready for you guys. You know how I am. I Hey, I do this. You, if you like what I do, hit that like and subscribe button. Hype this video cuz I need the the subscription counts. I'm trying to get 1,700 subscribers before the 17th of my birthday. So, give me that birthday wish. Hit that like and subscribe button. But title 40, Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulation, section 160.103. What does that provide for? It it goes over definitions and in the definitions we have a business associate which are all those you know um you know subcontractors that receive maintain or create receive maintain or transmit protected health information on behalf of the business associate. Um so basically the people that help out but you guys see this is very comprehensive and it says a covered entity means a health plan a health care clearing house and a healthcare provider who transmits any health information in electronic form and connection with the transaction covered by this subchapter. So guys what is the main takeaway from some of that and then I want to show you this chart. This is a great job by HHS. Shout out HHS. You got to love them public workers. Thank you public HHS workers. But they go they have a chart for you if you would like to see some of this stuff. Um you know health care provider is includes your doctors, your clinics, psychologist, dentists, chiropractors, nursing homes,armacies, health plans, you know, health insurance companies, HMOs, company health plans and blah blah blah. But you get it right now. I want to put myself back up on screen. So guys, let me ask you this. Is Candace Owens a covered entity? Is she a health care provider? Is she a health plan? Is she a health care clearing house? I don't know. I'm not sure Candace Owens is a health plan. She giving me high anxiety and she might be killing me slowly, you know, as they say. Um, so no, I'm not going to say that. I'm going to say she's not a covered entity, nor is she a business associate. She wasn't hired to maintain this information for, you know, health purposes and stuff. she she can just say, "Hey, I'm a normal person or I'm a journalist. This information was given to me. I'm not a covered entity. I'm not a business associate. I don't have to comply with HIPPA. You can't throw me in jail." And guys, if you violate HIPPA, that carries with it criminal penalties That that jail cell closing, that's a that's a criminal penalty. And what's that civil penalty? You going to have to pay that money. So that's no joke. Um but what I want to do now is I want to continue. So the scope of you know HIPPA and all of that is defined in federal regulation as we just saw. We saw the definitions which included the covered entity and the business associate. Um the general rule governing disclosures of protected health information is uh title 45 of the code of federal rule code of federal regulations at section 164502A which provides that a covered entity or business associate may not use or disclose protected health information except as permitted or required by the privacy rule. And so what I want to do that is quickly pull up for you on stage. This is the code section that provides for the proper uses and exceptions to those uses that those covered entities or business associates can use. So, so if a hospital staff leaked Charlie Kirk's medical information to Candace Owens, the most obvious HIPPA issue is on the hospital side, not the commentator side. So, anybody at the hospital, anybody involved with the medical parts and stuff like that with Charlie Kirk, you know, provided him care, kept the information, blah blah blah, they're going to be liable under HIPPA. But Candace Owens is not liable under HIPPA. I'm just saying it now. She is going to be a free woman under HIPPA. Under HIPPA. But that is not the end of the analysis. Do you hear me? You You got to hear me on this. That is not the Need your attention. People say Candice violated HIPPA because posting someone's medical records feels plainly wrong. And the instinct that something serious happened is not irrational. But legally, HIPPA is not a universal rule for everyone who encounters medical information. It is a confidentiality regime imposed on specific regulated actors. So even if Candace Owens is not the same is not the person who technically violated HIPPA, releasing what appears to be private medical documents can still raise serious legal issues. So you're not scott-free, but you might be going you might be good on HIPPA, but you're not scot-free. So let's talk about it. States have their own medical privacy and confidentiality laws that operate alongside HIPPA. So we got HIPPA and then we got laws that operate alongside HIPPA. And there is also common law privacy. Public disclosure of private facts can be a claim when someone publicly reveals highly private information that would be offensive to a reasonable person and is not legitimately newsworthy. So newsworthiness is not a defense. Medical information is a classic example of the kind of private information that can trigger this kind of claim. And again, that kind of claim is public disclosure of private facts. And you know, it's got to be highly offensive to a reasonable person and it's not legitimately newsworthy. Okay, not legitimately newsworthy. So, the legally accurate point is not Candace Owens obviously violated HIPPA. Not not it's not accurate. But it is also not Candace did nothing legally problematic. The better point is that HIPPA most directly targets the leak at the provider level. while other legal theories can become relevant once medical information is pushed into public view. However, guys, there's going to be some issues with some privacy causes of action if somebody tried to, you know, the the state sued, right? Because here's the complication. Charlie Kirk is dead. He died. It's awful. But with that, there are legal consequences when it comes to privacy uh or you know, causes of action that relate to privacy uh tors and stuff like that. So, let's talk about it. Charlie Kirk's death adds another layer. Under the traditional common law rule, privacy tors are personal and generally do not survive the death of a person whose privacy was invaded. So again, Charlie's death adds another layer. Under the traditional common law rule, privacy tors are personal and generally do not survive the death of the person whose privacy was invaded. For any of my lawyers out there, check restatement second of tors section 652A through 652i. So what does that mean? That means that the situation cannot be analyzed exactly the same way it would be if a living person's hospital file had been exposed online. So we have living people and these tort theories and dead people in these tort theories. Living people have different rights than dead people just the way it is. The medical provider can still face HIPPA or state law exposure for leaking records. And other theories may still exist depending on the facts in the jurisdiction, especially if surviving family members have their own privacy or emotional distress interest implicated. But the simple version, Charlie can sue for invasion of privacy, does not fit the traditional doctrine. Um, let's see. Do I got any good notes on this? No. Let me just clean some of this up basically as I understand it. So again guys, we have certain privacy uh tors that are personal and do not survive the death of the person whose privacy was invaded. One of those types of causes of action would include public disclosure of private facts such as your medical information, right? However, if you're alive, you have a right to sue. If you're dead, that right died with you. Okay? Your privacy rights don't matter so much when you're a dead person. I mean, what are you going to protect your privacy from the grave? Give me a break. You go, hey, don't do don't do anything you would regret in life if you worried that bad about privacy, right, after your death. But that's the way the law sees it. And everybody should know that. What do y'all think about that? Smash that like button, subscribe button, give me give me them shouts. Give me them shout out up. But here's the cleanest way to explain it. Here's the clean version. If hospital staff leaked Charlie Kirk's medical information, the strongest HIPPA issue is with the hospital and the medical personnel who released it. Candace Owens is probably not a HIPPA violator. Probably not. Definitely not in the technical sense just because she she received or posted the material. But that does not make the situation harmless. posting medical information can still trigger other forms of legal exposure and it absolutely raises serious privacy and ethical concerns. And also before I jump off that point, another thing is this. You could ask, well, could Erica Kirk sue now? Could Erica Kirk sue? You know, because she's the the widow of Charlie Kirk and this information's been leaked. Well, she could sue if some of that information includes like med her own medical information. You know what I mean? Like if there was Charlie Kirk's uh sexual history or something like that and that was in that medical document and she released it and all of a sudden you're seeing the sexual history of a married couple. Yeah, that's going to be a problem. All right, we're going to have problems and Erica Kirk's going to be involved in that. And that's just the truth. Okay, but it doesn't seem like anything like that was released. So, we can cross that out. And if nothing assuming nothing like that was released or involved Erica Kirk and there's no statutes that would protect a widow in that way, I think, you know, there's not going to be much liability. And I looked it up. Um I didn't see anything under Utah law that would, you know, provide for that type of liability for Eric, you know, for Erica Kirk to sue under the public exposure for, you know, Charlie Kirk. Again, your privacy rights died with you when you died. That's just the way it is, guys. I don't make the rules. I don't make them. All right. And you don't don't don't uh what do they say? Don't shoot the don't hate the game. How do they say it, guys? What's that? What's that saying? Don't hate the player, hate the game. I'm just a player in it. So, when you put these two subjects together, the picture becomes much clearer. In the Tyler Robinson case, the state has filed a 28page memorandum telling the judge that the preliminary hearing evidence is strong enough to send the case to trial. That is a serious prosecution move and it shows the state is trying to lock in bindover using the relatively low probable cause standard. So again, probable cause is a low standard. Hey, probable cause the damn police can arrest you. Okay, that's the standard we're dealing with. Basically, was there enough probable cause, you know, to try him at trial, but also we have probable cause to arrest somebody, right? Probable cause, reasonable suspicion, a hunch. Don't test me on my criminal criminal procedural standards. Now, I'll get them right. I'm going to impress you. But at the same time, the judge has shown he is willing to police the prosecution's behavior outside the courtroom by holding Chris Ballard in civil contempt for violating the publicity order. Again, Chris Ballard is prosecutor. That matters for anyone claiming the court is simply acting as an arm of the state. So, if you're just somebody out there who wants to insult Mormons and say they can't run a judicial system um in the state of Utah because of corrupt Mormon influences and this is a corrupt trial and this is blah blah blah. Okay, we're you have no proof of that. You're just talking you talking. Hold on. You talking out your We don't want to hear it. Okay, that's just what it is. We uh in here we we believe in [cheering] USA. Okay. And um I think the judicial system is proving that uh they're going to hold the prosecution to a high standard in its conduct. They're not going to let the prosecution get away with making, you know,formational statements like that to the media that he's not permitted to under the publicity order. You know, prove it in the court of law. Don't prove it to the public. Those public need. Go prove it to them 12 jurors. You need you don't need all of them. You need 12. That's what prosecutor needs to think. On the Candace Owens question, the law is more precise than the internet version of the story. HIPPA is aimed at the hospital, the provider, and the regulated health entities that hold and disclose protected health information. That does not automatically make Candace Owens a HIPPO violator, but it also does not make the publication of medical information legally irrelevant. That is why these stories matter. They force people to separate legal rules from online instinct. And if you want to understand what is really happening here, that separation matters. And guys, that is what we have for that. So, when it comes to the 28 pages, I gave you guys what them 28 pages were, you know what they are? Prosecution saying, "Hey, we want to go to trial. We believe there's enough evidence. We're going to trial. We're ready. We presented it to you. There's probable cause in this a trial. Let's try this out in front of them." Okay? You know, defense is going to oppose. That's what it is. And also, I want to remind you guys, as I did, Chris Ballard, the judge, what did the judge say? >> SHUT UP, That's what the judge told him. He said, "I don't want you talking anymore." Okay? You shut up, prove it in the court of law, and that's going to be the end of it. Okay? That's just the way it is in the state of Utah. And with respect to HIPPA, um, I know some of you guys but Candace Owens did not violate HIPPA, and that's just the truth. >> The lie detector test determined you are telling the truth. >> [applause and cheering] >> But that is not going to be the end of the situation to say the least because is there going to be privacy tors that come up? I doubt it because Charlie Kirk is dead and the privacy tors that he held like public disclosure of private facts died with him and I don't think Eric Kirk has any rights to you know prohibit publication of medical information of Charlie Kirk now that he's dead especially in that context and the documents presumably did not state anything to do with Erica Kirk in fact one of the things we have to remember most of all is that Candace Owens does have her first amendment right. She's the first amendment cannot be ignored. People can publish what they want. Okay? When you got medical documentation, you're going to publish it. Uh just make sure you're not any type of health care provider or a covered entity or a business associate, right? Make sure you're just not in that category and you maybe won't go to jail or have to pay civil fines for it. So with that everybody, we've gone over the subjects we need to tonight and I'm going to take your questions. We're doing Q&A. Q&A. Let me put up the banner for us so everybody can see what we got. Q&A. If you got questions, put questions in all caps. And again, everybody, please like, subscribe. I would very much appreciate that. I I need all those likes and subscribes that I can get. Hey, 1700 before the 17th. That's what we're going for. I'm going to try to quickly go through your stuff. Hey, shout out to the contributors to the channel tonight. Riri, thank you for the two jewels and the 10 jewels. And Bridget, Ashley, appreciate the 550 jewels and the stay hydrated. You know, I really do got to stay hydrated when I do this show. You wouldn't believe it. I'll be like, my lips will be getting dry and everything. I need a water assistant. Hey, Riri, shout out to 10 more jewels. Always the best. And we got shine bright like a a dashund. That's that dog, right? I don't know if I said that right. Gave us a thousand. Jules said goat trophy or we gave us a goat trophy. Appreciate that. Shadowi goats. Then we got a Crim defense lawyer here. Love to join you sometime. Whole truth. Please do. I would love to discuss this with you since you're an attorney because uh you know attorneys are going to have some good theories to give and you know I'm sure you probably got some perspective or some nuance and analysis that maybe I didn't touch on tonight and that's why we need you. So please reach out to me via email. My email's located on my channel. Um love to hear from you and I love to hear from all of you. If you guys got feedback, leave it in the comments because I some you know I try to go through the comments like subscribe but also hey write me an email. Let me know what's going on. Refer me to your to your friends or something. All right, we got Lauren Turner giving us a silver star. Appreciate that, Lauren. Hey, Lark or Lark Scar or Lark Skyark. Okay, interesting name. Shout out to got an Uncle Lert. Appreciate that. Then we got Tom Birmingham says, "Messianic cults killed Charlie Kirk. This coverups pathetic." Um, well, I appreciate the $2, but I don't know if there's mess messianic cults going around. I think, you know, who's the I mean, I guess their messiah was what? Jesus Christ and Joseph Smith, right? If we're talking Mormons, that's the mess, you know? But, I mean, that is what it is. We're not getting into religion too much on this channel, guys. Religious doctrines. Well, that's why we got the First Amendment, guys. That's why we got the Now, we're going to go through some of Here we are. We got some finally at the Oh, dude, you guys are wonderful for contributing to the channel. I love seeing your comments um as we go through. So, very much appreciated to you all. We got Monica. Hey, shout out Monica. Always appreciate your contributions, too. Says, "You're awesome, Nicholas. Your videos help me today." Oh, We got Maurice Ryder says, "Thanks for your videos. They are very informative. I will need to watch this on replay because I've got to go. Doesn't mean I didn't want to stick around to listen." No. Hey, shout out Maurice Ryder. You'll be back. I need I need that Terminator. I'll be back for a sound button. Shout out Maurice. Appreciate your contribution. Yeah, my cat attitude says or my catitude says, "Is there really memos that are 28 pages?" Seems more like a legal doc. Sorry to be pedantic. Well, if we go to the document, you look it up, it does say memorandum. Um, well, I got the official document name. Give me a second. I'll tell you that document name. You can look it up. Verify for yourself. says memorandum in support of preliminary hearing bindover. And guess what? Ultimately, all moving documents come with memorandums. When you write a moving document, typically has the same couple parts. You've got like a notice. You got to notice the moving document. You typically have a declaration in support of the moving document. You have um the memorandum in support of the moving document. So, or you know, just a memorandum in support of the motion. I said moving document. Yeah, you got a notice in support of a notice of motion and motion, a declaration in support of the motion, a memorandum in support of the motion, and then you have a proposed order that comes with that motion. Sometimes there's a separate statement, too, that you know addresses certain things that need to be addressed separately. However, here, if you look it up online, there is a memorandum in support of preliminary hearing bindover. I doubt they noticed that now that I think about it, but that's a criminal context. I don't want to jump too much into that. But yes, there are plenty of legal documents that are called memorandums and you do file memorandums um in support of motions. Um and then typically you have like opening briefs. Like briefs are typically a term you reserve for more like appellet courts, but no, memorandums are perfectly uh fine. And 28 pages is long though. I don't think I've ever wrote a memorandum that long. I only get like in in California you only get like 20 25 depending on the type of document you're filing. But you really got to like those pageionation requirements, you better stick to them. And you know what another thing is? In California, if you write a a memorandum that is over 10 pages, so if it's I mean, if it cuts on to the 11th page, right? Even the last word, if it's on the 11th page, you are required to have a table of contents and a table of authorities. I noticed on that 28 page memorandum, the prosecution didn't even have a table of contents or a table of authorities. I was like, dude, what are you doing? like how am I supposed to you know what I mean? I got to go through all of like your headings and stuff like that. Like give me a table of contents, table of authorities, please. He did. And he had a lot of authority to Got Nancy Pulley says, "You're doing great work for us now." Shout out Nancy. Thank you very much. Jackie Bolan says, Dwayne Manel says, "Damn, California internet sucks." Am I I wonder how how bad was I frozen, guys? Was I Was I way bad at times? I'm sure it was bad sometimes. Like, you know, the internet can get a little shaky. I'm using a wireless connection. I don't use wired. I thought I thought the future came with wireless stuff and then the more tech I get, it's like the more they want me to wire things back up, I'm like, "Guys, Oh, it says we're getting the on the chat. Oh, interesting. I didn't know that. Oh, I'll watch it back and try to see what happened. Oh, we got my catitude. Thank a shout out for the question in all caps. It helped me with my eyes here. Says, "What can happen to Candace over releasing the rooftop shooter video the judge prohibited uh from anyone seeing outside the court? Please tell me there will be ramifications." I doubt that Candace Owens faces any civil or criminal liability for disclosing that tape. A I'm not really sure how she got her hands on that tape, but she got her hands on it, right? Okay. I don't know how she did, but she got her hands on it. And again, it's going to be different if the prosecution releases it after being instructed not to release it or talk about it versus Candace Owens. The question is, how did Candace Owens get her hands on it? If she got her hands on it through the prosecutor, well, Candace Owens is more or less an agent of the prosecutor and she, you know, would be, you know, there there could be some potential liability is acting as an agent of the prosecutor and releasing that and knowing you're involved in violating the publicity order. Maybe we got conspiracy to commit or con conspiracy to violate the publicity order. But guess what? There's no evidence of that. There's no evidence that Candace Owens got this document. Um, you know, or excuse me, this this video from the prosecutor. So, for that reason, you know, her her her rules are a little bit different. She's not she doesn't have to stay with that publicity order the same way. So, I'm gonna say it's okay. And uh you know what I think about when I think of that little video? He's just running across the top of that video. Or he's doing a little tiptoeing. What do you guys got? What do you guys got? Hey, no, shout out to Mmanos says, "Make sure you guys hit that like and subscribe button." I appreciate you guys supporting me and doing that and getting Again, hit that like and subscribe Hey, Van Cruz 13 says, "Need a summary of what I missed." Hey, Van Cruz, make sure you uh watch this video back. Hey, that watch time helps me out, too. Even Hey guys, just leave the video on play. Step away. Just let it run through. You know what I mean? Keep that video going. Mandy says, "So, who feels like an FBI visit is coming?" Hey, Mandy, look here. Here, look at YOUR DOOR. >> FBI, OPEN UP. >> Watch out. That FBI is coming. And when the FBI comes, they're going to throw We got Kathy Cole Cord says, "But not We got baby gone wrong says llol. This is what desperate sounds like. Cry HIPPA. Well, you know, uh hey people, I understand why they thought that. You know, anytime you release medical information, you could get in trouble. Just some people aren't always so quick. We got Chem before the storm says, "Is this channel anti or proTpa?" I [music] don't know. We could be anti-TSA or we could be prota. You know what? I think we're going to just be uh we're going to be neutral We got TX mother bird Texas motherbird 63 says his medical records or his medical record number being shown on social media. I mean uh you know it's not not good but again privacy tors died when the you know the individual died. So, oh, we got uh Mosceli John says, "Mr. Nicholas, sir, I think where everyone is going off the railroad bridge, is there strong mistaken assumption that this is a news item, so the public has a right to everything? What do you think?" You know, I think the public, yeah, definitely has a right to a lot. You You got me there. It's just the thing is like taking that, you know, the public has a right to everything. That's not the law, right? And the way I'll prove that is this. Okay. Does the the public have a right to the all the prosecution's information? Does does the public have a right to know that there's quote ample evidence to support uh you know, a criminal conviction? because you know judge judge graph he chastised the prosecutor for going you know going down that direction and speaking to the media about quote ample evidence. So and clearly you know prosecution he's been forced to be quiet and shut up so much that it's like you see all the theories taking off online and the fire that's spreading all these lies. I mean you know what they say the a lie will get get her halfway around the world before the truth even gets its boots on. That's kind of what you see. So, I think there's a little bit of that going on where public opinion is a little bit quicker to say, "Oh, he's innocent. He's framed. He's a psy blah blah blah." Um, but if the public had a little bit more information, quote, everything, maybe they wouldn't think that. But I think you make a good point. I think the public should know about most things. You know, that's what keeps um, you know, a lot of integrity in our system and the trust in it. So, I see your Megan says, "That's an interesting bit of info, Nick. Different for live or dead?" Indeed. That's one of the things you got to remember when you study for the bar is privacy tors when an individual dies versus when he's alive. I had that come up and that's the only reason I remembered it because I was like, "Well, could she be held liable for anything outside of HIPPA for having done that?" And then it brought me to the privacy tors and the disclosure of medical information. But there's dead and there's alive. Unfortunately, he is dead. We got Bonnie Joseph says, "Erica wanted this to be Got Marlene says, "How does a son of the South wind up in a New Jersey law school?" Well, I put it to you like this. I had my my best two scholarships were to Rutgers and to Tennessee. I visited both and the university administration at Ruters just struck me uh in a more personal, you know, approach and, you know, really had like true one- on-one conversations with me that really persuaded me a lot. And also, I liked the idea of being in a market like New York City. You know, I was speaking Spanish and learning Portuguese even up there eventually. Um, but that was a lot of the draw was just a little bit more of like some of the opportunities to learn other languages and stuff. And then also too, I went to Tennessee. They were just like, "Oh, we're Tennessee. Why don't you want to come here?" Blah, blah, blah. And I was just like, "I didn't come here for undergrad. You better I'm here. You are here to impress me, okay? I got to pay the money, you know, ultimately." So, but it didn't work out that way. But University of Tennessee is a great law school. I've known a lot of good like lawyers that come out of Tennessee and um I'll just put it to you like this. If they were on the other side, I' I'd be like, "Oh man, I know they're going to be bringing the case uh in a good way for their clients." We got Mosley John again. So Nicholas, just uh to ask cluh clarity, you are making a distinction between the general common law of privacy versus a special Utah statute. What about Arizona? I cannot answer your Arizona question if you live in Arizona. Not here to provide legal advice to anybody. Um and then also too with respect to the common law privacy versus uh you know again public disclosure of private facts is a common law tort. There's a couple other privacy tors as well. Um, intrusion into privacy and things like that, but again, those are going to be generally, as I understand, when you're alive. Um, and each state can be different, right? And then some, you know, I don't I didn't I looked up a Utah statute where like, let's say a widow could potentially recover or try to stop this. I couldn't find one. So maybe Utah or Arizona has one, Tennessee, California, I don't dude. Yo, Tom, I'm going to kick you, bro. You got one more chance. All right. I'm I'm doing this out of kindness. You keep it up and you're gone. You saw what I did yesterday or not yesterday, but the other day. I'm giving you an fair opportunity. Now, don't say I didn't warn you. We want you to be around here. We do. But you don't It seems like you want to push some things that uh you want to be a pain in the ass and we're not going to We got CA Polyca. Calpaly CA. Hey, shout out Calpaly. Says, "Nicholas, you remind me of a young Trey Gouty." I think I'm better looking at Trey Gouty, don't you think? No. Shout out Trey Gouty. He's a good guy. Trey Gouty. He's uh I've followed him for a couple years actually. He went from being a good politician to having his own media stuff. I just got to do the media stuff before I'm a politician, Penny Whitmore says, "Legal schmegel. Get to the truth." >> The lie detector test determined you are >> That's what it is. Legal schmegel. Yeah, you know, shout out again, Larky Lark for uh thanks for a great live We got Lisa Eders says, "Counselor, you're breaking down the legality of a fight. Valiant effort wasted on the low IQ." Well, uh you you're going to say they're low IQ. >> Lie detector test determined that was a lie. It's a lie detector test, guys. It's not me. We're going to make sure the evidentiary rules in on this show permit lie detector test results. It's just weird how those results always seem programmed. Wink. Hey, shout out guys. Appreciate the compliments. Nick is awesome. Appreciate it. Kathy. Nick knows what he's talking Oh, Mosley, I see your comment about being disappointed. I don't know why that is the case. You got a good you got a good looking suit, though. I need to call you up about where you what men's warehouse you Ju, we got a super chat question. Let me check my super chats again real quick, guys. Got Americana says, "Clutch. Appreciate that. 30 jewels. Very nice. High five. Please and thank you. Hey, thank you and please more. Americana with gold with a gold coin. Shout out Americana. Thank you very much. We got Sam the Sham says, "Unk alert." I guess a little bit I am turning into a bit of an unc, right? I turned 30 this month. Oh my gosh. 30 years old, guys. My 20s are over. I got a little over two weeks left. Give me advice on what I should do. Tell me what I should do in the comments now that I've got two a little over two weeks left of being in my 20s. Is this the time to engage in irresponsible conduct before I turn 30? Let me know. We got Nikki B says, "Will the judge kick the cameras out of the court because of someone leaking the video?" No, I don't think that will play much um on the judge's analysis on whether to allow u you know videos into the courtroom. I think when the judges typically allow videos and cameras into the courtroom, it's because media companies make motions to allow their cameras in there. So, you'll have like local CBS news or local ABC, NBC, and stuff like that. They're going to file these motions as nonparties to stream the case. Now, the judge can review those motions, and the judge is gonna say, "Okay, you can stream the case, but I don't want you doing A, B, C, D." And the judge can pretty much control this how the judge wants. Again, Utah might be have its own little rules and stuff, but generally, you know, most courts and, you know, especially in California, it's like, you know, the judge can say, "Hey, we don't want the face of the person shown. We don't want the jury shown." Right? That's always going to be followed. Don't show the jurors. You know, if you're a media company and you dare show a juror, oh, dude, you might you're going to be held in like civil or criminal contempt because the judge is going to bring you back in the next day and say, "Mia company, I said don't show the jurors. You showed the jurors. What is your reason for that? Oh, you don't have one." And then what's going to you're going to jail for violating. And if it was intentional, oh, you're gonna be in trouble, so don't do it. Um, but no, with respect to like leaking that video ultimately, you know, I I just I you know, yeah, I don't see the uh connection, I suppose. Like, yeah, there's been a leaked video before. I mean, if I guess if you want to call it a leak, we don't even know if it was a leak, right? Leak implies wrongdoing. I don't know if that was wrongdoing. Maybe this video came from a completely correct source, right? We don't know. I don't know. Um, so assuming, you know, there's just been like a quote leak previous, I don't think that means like you can't then permit cameras into the courtroom. That's a little bit different of an analysis. One's like permitting cameras in the courtroom versus one is like evidentiary analysis, I suppose. I hope get back to it, guys. Appreciate your Yeah. The pants maestro says question. An attorney can't entice someone to break a law to report the data. Right. An attorney can't entice someone to break a law. Yes. An attorney cannot entice someone to break a law to report the data. Um, I'm not allowed to counsel any clients on breaking the law. That would be a violation of like ethical rules and professional rules applicable to me as an attorney and I'm sure to any Utah attorney under their, you know, governing rules as well. So, don't be counseling anybody to engage in fraud or crimes because you will likely lose your license. We got two goats and a dog says super good, Nicholas. Thank you. Hey, uh, two goats and a dog. Shout out. Appreciate that. Violence and poetry. Wow. It's like an oxymoron. Violence and poetry. Although I guess poetry can be violent and that's like poetic in some way. But says she says question or maybe it's a man says question sir on a scale of one to 10 how loud do you think Candice would shriek and call foul if TPUSA decided to publish all of their correspondence with Candace? Um I mean yeah I think that'd be is it one-sided? Is it all of it? I'm sure you know TPSA's probably got not the you know there's some communications that maybe they're like that don't look so good. We should probably say that a little different. You know, maybe it's not bad, but you know, I mean, good lord, if I looked at your text messages right now, were all of them going to be good? Are you going to look good in every single one? I doubt it. Same thing with Candace, right? She might not look good in all of them. Um, but that's a little bit of a non-issue. You know what I mean? Just got to let things work themselves out. And then two, if they released them, I mean, they have a right to do it. Then maybe Candace Owens will release uh her side of the messages so we get some Pantsmeister says, "A journalist can't entice someone to break a law for the benefit of their report though, right?" Um, no. You can't gen like, you know, for example, I can't be like, "Hey, I want you to go I'll pay you a hundred bucks to go enter this government building and pull out their secrets." Like, no. you're pretty much considered, you know, conspiring to commit a crime at that point. You know, that's you're paying somebody to do it, right? That's it's a criminal agreement. So, you're it's not protected by the First Amendment. Frogosaurus says, "And as a as an attorney, he needs to step off his opinions on religion." Hey. Uh, hey, Frogosaurus. Last I checked, we got the And um you know it'll be all right. But we respect your opinion too. I'm sure you got a strong one on religion. Seems Says, "Are you the Lincoln lawyer?" Does anybody know what the Lincoln lawyer is? Is that Is that uh Is that >> Make America great again? >> Is that the Lincoln lawyer? I don't know. says, "Cal Polycier says, "Nicholas, if you were given the chance to join the Mcronone legal team, would you?" Well, I guess you're saying for this case, I don't think it's very possible for me to join on this case anyway. And if they wanted to pay me for something, like, we'll see, you know? Uh, I don't know what they want me to do that somebody they can't do. You know what I mean? Like, why why are you hiring me? Why can't you just go hire somebody else? You know what I'm saying? Um, but if it was like a different thing in the future, I'd be open to it. Shoot, that'd be good for my legal career. Are you kidding me? Hey, I represented uh a foreign president. They'd be like, "Wow, look at Nick Brooks. He's come a long way." Moses John says, "Thank you for honoring our First Amendment with the national anthem. I am tempted to stand up. Shout out John. Guju says, "I'm having fun." Hey, shout out Guju. She's the best. She's a a Monica says, "It was easy to share your videos when people asked me about Candace's lawsuits, so I appreciate you breaking or you doing breakdowns of them. Very care are very helpful." Yeah. No, thank you very much. Please uh if you guys share this with anybody, send me an email and who you share it with. It just interests me. You know what I mean? Like where you guys are sharing it and what you like. So, thank you very much for letting me know. We got Sherry Jess. Hey Sherry, I saw what you said earlier about you don't trust the government. Now you say the deep state can cover up whatever it wants. Hey Sherry, you you going to be a fence rider or you going to pick a side? All right. We don't like fence riders. Okay. I mean, I say that now, but I'm a little bit of a fence writer myself. So, I'm joking with you here. I'm just putting you in a spot to reveal something about yourself. It's just a rhetorical thing I'm doing. But I just want to put this to you. All right? You can say, "I don't like government. I don't like government." Sherry, that's what everybody says. Okay? But you got to pick a politician sometimes. You got to toughen up. Pick a sometimes a lesser of two evils and live with it. Okay? Cuz if you don't have a government, what do you have? Anarchy. You want to live in anarchy? I don't like the government. Okay. Well, I don't some I don't like the government sometimes either. Got to deal with it though and its procedures. And guess what? The deep state I mean, you know, that's that's I'm just going to put it to you like this. That's a that's a bit of a right-wing adjacent thing to describe like all these liberal deep state people blah blah blah. All right. Well, you know what? You're the deep state. You you've Donald Trump has been in office now for what, 12 years? or not 12 years, but he's been in politics for like 11 years now. Over over a decade. We've I've heard his name in politics. So, you know, people talk about deep state, deep state. All right. Well, I mean, when does it ever become like you're the deep state? You know what I mean? When does it cross over from like you were no long you you were criticized in the deep state and then you are the deep state? When when does the when does this deep state become thin state and thin state becomes deep state? Thin, thin state, deep state, deep state, thin state, one state, two state, three state, four state, deep state, five state. You see what I'm saying? This is a little ridiculous. Juju got 300 likes. Thank you very much, everybody. This is to for you. I love all of you contributing with the likes and subscriptions. It helps me a lot. We got Angie RW says, "Question. Since there is an active murder case open on Charlie, couldn't she get in trouble for sharing his medical record number because of that?" Um, you know, I'm not I don't think so. You know, again, like HIPPA, we've discussed that she's not going to be liable for that. There's no I don't think there's a law a statute that says you can't release somebody's medical report number that you've acquired legally and validly, you know. Well, not even legally invalidly part, right? But no, I I just I don't really see the active murder investigation stopping press members, you know, because then the state could just be like, "Yo, it's under investigation. Don't you say a word about it." It's like, "Well, I got first amendment rights, man. You can back off. I'm with Sherry now. I don't like the government. Sherry, where you at? [cheering] Sherry, we need to we need to get after Sherry's going to be a good defense attorney. She's going to look at the prosecutor and say, "You are an arm of the state, an arm of the deep state, and we're we're going to pump. We're going to drain the swamp. We're going to drain the swamp of the deep state. Man, I got I got all those I got all those words ready to go. Y'all, my my political language is up there. Hey, again, hit that like and subscribe button, share button, hype it up. Please hype up this video. Yeah, those hypes really help me out actually. And turn on notifications. We got Nick and Shelly says, "Uh, if you're pro Erica, see a doctor." >> What's up, doc? >> I think some of you guys, what's up, We got Irish Paul says, "Yan, no topic. >> I'm tired of this, GRANDPA. >> THAT'S TOO DAMN BAD." >> WELL, HEY, Irish Paul, that's too damn All right, still going through your guys say, uh, J, I have to hit you up about like if you got if if you know how to sort questions and stuff, that would be great because then I could just go through like sorted questions rather than just looking up the questions myself. So, if you know how to do that feature, please let me know. And also, if I just got to invite you to this studio as it is, please I'll I'll do that. You can do whatever you need to do. Star in the doc or star in certain comments and stuff so I can make sure I Yeah, Pink Lona says, "Hello, greetings Okay, Yeah, Jim Key Island says, "Excellent information." Thank you, Jim. Appreciate Or wait, no, we got don't play places. You should record Lady Luck laughing to play. Yeah, I really should. I'll use that as a sound effect. That's pretty good. I have to get her permission on it. Got Fred Limum says, "Excellent. Appreciate you, Fred. That's very nice of you." Oh, hold on, everybody. Then we got uh Guju says, "Hit that like and subscribe button again." I appreciate All right. Well, hey everybody. Can you believe it or not? We have gotten through the comments. So, thank you all for being here. Like, subscribe, leave a comment regarding what you think of this case and some of my conclusions. Was I right? Was I wrong? You never know. And um share this video with somebody you love, somebody that would find this video interesting. And until ex. And again, this channel would be nothing without you all and with your contribution. So, thank you very much and have a wonderful evening. [music]