Judge rules Trump Jan. 6 pardon excludes pipe bomb case

A towel and screwdriver recovered in the investigation into Charlie Kirk’s killing contained DNA from suspect Tyler Robinson and his former romantic partner and roommate, Lance Twiggs, investigators testified this week.

Robinson, 23, is accused of fatally shooting Kirk, 31, during a Turning Point USA event at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025. Prosecutors are seeking to show probable cause at a preliminary hearing that began Monday and is expected to last all week.

Sgt. Jennifer Faumuina of the State Bureau of Investigations testified Tuesday that investigators recovered a screwdriver from the roof of the campus’ Losee Center, where authorities allege Robinson fired the shot. She said investigators also found a Mauser 98 bolt-action rifle wrapped in a dark towel in nearby woods. The rifle had been modified to fire .30-06 rounds, consistent with bullet fragments recovered during Kirk’s autopsy, she testified.

Faumuina said the towel and screwdriver contained DNA consistent with the same two males: Robinson and Twiggs. Both men provided buccal swabs that investigators used to develop DNA profiles.

Later Tuesday, FBI forensic analyst Amanda Bakker testified that Robinson was likely the majority contributor in mixed DNA samples found on both items. Twiggs was identified as the minority contributor.

It was not clear from testimony what the screwdriver was used for.

Authorities have said Robinson confessed to Twiggs in a handwritten note and text messages. Twiggs, who is cooperating with investigators, has not been charged.

Earlier Tuesday, David Hull of the Utah Department of Public Safety returned to the stand as prosecutors played surveillance video they said showed Robinson moving around campus before and after the shooting and arriving and leaving in his Dodge Challenger.

During Bakker’s testimony, prosecutor Ryan McBride objected several times to defense questioning, arguing it went well “beyond the scope of determining probable cause.” Judge Tony Graf Jr. later asked defense attorney Michael Burt how much longer he planned to continue that line of questioning. Burt said he had one more question. “I’ll hold them to that,” McBride said, prompting laughter in the courtroom.

Robinson has not entered a plea. If the judge finds probable cause, the case will proceed toward trial on multiple charges, including aggravated murder, which carries a potential death penalty.

United Airlines must face a proposed class-action lawsuit after a federal judge rejected the airline’s bid to dismiss claims from passengers who said they paid extra for window seats that had no windows.

The lawsuit, which also names Delta Air Lines, alleged the airlines failed to disclose during booking that some window seats on Boeing 737s, 757s, and Airbus A321s sit beside blank cabin walls instead of windows.

U.S. District Judge James Donato in San Francisco rejected United’s argument that “window seat” referred only to a seat’s location, not to an outside view. He also rejected United’s argument that federal law barred the claims, saying the airline’s ticketing terms, boarding passes, and reservation screens promised window seats to customers who paid for them.

“As part of our regular review of united.com and the United App to enhance the customer experience, in 2025 we added more detail to our seat selection process, so customers can have more information about what to expect when they choose a seat.,” United said.

Delta is also seeking dismissal of a separate lawsuit against it.

Passengers filed the proposed class actions in August, suing United in federal court in San Francisco and Delta in federal court in Brooklyn, New York.

In November, attorney Carter Greenbaum, who at the time represented plaintiffs against United and Delta, told Reuters that United’s position was “contrary to the reasonable expectations of countless passengers who unknowingly paid extra money for windowless window seats. Consumers deserve better than empty promises and United’s word games.”

United said in court filings that it never promised window seats would include an outside view, even though booking screens and boarding passes identified them as window seats.

“The word ‘window’ identifies the position of the seat—i.e., next to the wall of the main body of the aircraft,” United said, according to Reuters. “The use of the word ‘window’ in reference to a particular seat cannot reasonably be interpreted as a promise that the seat will have an exterior window view.”

Plaintiffs said they paid extra for such seats for reasons including reducing anxiety, easing motion sickness, and viewing scenery.