A medical examiner’s report has firearms experts and ballistics analysts questioning everything about the official narrative of how one of America’s most prominent conservative activists died

The Geometry of Death

On a crisp September afternoon in 2025, Charlie Kirk stood before 3,000 students at Utah Valley University, doing what he did best: sparking controversy. The 31-year-old founder of Turning Point USA was in the middle of his signature “Prove Me Wrong” segment when a single rifle shot tore through the auditorium at 12:20 p.m., silencing one of President Donald Trump’s most vocal allies forever.

Within 24 hours, federal investigators had their suspect: Tyler Robinson, a 22-year-old electrical engineering student who had allegedly perched on a nearby rooftop with a scoped .30-06 rifle. The case seemed open and shut—DNA on the weapon, a confession on Discord, even shell casings engraved with taunting messages like “Hey, fascist! Catch!”.

But then came the autopsy report.

According to multiple influencers who claim to have inside knowledge of the medical examiner’s findings, the bullet entered Kirk’s body just below the jaw at the C2 vertebra, traveled downward through five cervical vertebrae, and lodged near the T1 thoracic vertebra. It’s a trajectory that firearms trainer and ballistics analyst behind the Valhalla Firearms Training YouTube channel says is physically impossible given Robinson’s shooting position.

“If this medical examiner report is true,” he states in a video analysis that has racked up hundreds of thousands of views, “the FBI and the prosecution are—let me put it lightly—because essentially the idea that Tyler Robinson took the shot from where he took it at the angle he took it and caused the damage it did to Charlie with the round that’s used is actually not possible”.

It’s a claim that, if accurate, threatens to transform the most significant political assassination in decades from a closed case into a forensic nightmare that could leave investigators searching for answers—and potentially another shooter.

The Official Narrative

The story federal prosecutors have assembled appears straightforward. Tyler Robinson, raised in a conservative Trump-supporting family in Utah, had undergone a dramatic political transformation during his college years. According to investigators, he shifted from right-wing views to progressive politics, becoming increasingly vocal in his support for LGBTQ+ rights and his criticism of Charlie Kirk’s inflammatory rhetoric.

Robinson’s mother told investigators her son had become “radicalized” in recent months, frequently condemning Kirk’s statements about transgender individuals and mass shootings. In the days leading up to the attack, Robinson had allegedly texted his roommate that he had “endured enough hatred” from Kirk.

The shooting itself was meticulously planned. For more than a week, Robinson allegedly scouted the venue, studying Kirk’s “American Comeback Tour” schedule and identifying the rooftop of the nearby Lucy Center as the perfect sniper’s nest, approximately 100-200 yards from the stage. He equipped his rifle with a $2,000 scope, prepared his ammunition with mocking inscriptions including “Bella Ciao”—the Italian anti-fascist anthem—and waited.

When Kirk made a controversial statement about transgender people and mass shootings during the Q&A session, Robinson allegedly took his shot. The bullet struck Kirk in the left side of the neck near the shoulder. Despite immediate medical response, Kirk was pronounced dead at the hospital.

Robinson was arrested the following day after acquaintances recognized him from surveillance images released by police. His DNA was found on the rifle, on a cloth wrapped around the barrel, and on a screwdriver left at the scene. On Discord, he posted what appeared to be a confession: “Everyone, I have bad news. It was me at UVU yesterday. I’m sorry for everything”.

Federal prosecutors charged him with aggravated murder, illegal discharge of a firearm, and witness tampering for allegedly asking his roommate to delete their text messages. They announced they would seek the death penalty, citing aggravating factors including the political nature of the killing and the presence of child witnesses.

Case closed—or so it seemed.

“Middle School Math”

The problems began when details of the autopsy report allegedly started circulating among conservative media figures with connections to Turning Point USA. Steven Gardiner, a commentator, claimed sources “high up at Turning Point USA” informed him the injury entered “right below the jaw in the C2,” with the bullet crashing “through C2 all the way through C7” before lodging in “that meaty area around T1, the thoracic first vertebrae”.

Another source claimed to have confirmed the autopsy was completed and that investigators “can tell you exactly where what was severed, what killed him, where the bullet traveled from his neck down through his body. They have it all”.

It didn’t take long for firearms experts to spot the problem.

The Valhalla Firearms Training analyst, who has military and law enforcement training experience, broke down the ballistics using what he called “basically a middle school math problem”. Using anatomical diagrams, a protractor, and footage of the shooting, he demonstrated a series of physical impossibilities in the official account.

Problem One: The Entry Point

If Kirk was sitting upright with his jaw roughly parallel to the ground—as video clearly shows he was—and Robinson fired from a 90-degree downward angle from directly above, the bullet’s trajectory should have struck Kirk’s jaw or teeth before reaching the C2 vertebra at the base of the skull.

“We can see Charlie Kirk does not have his head all the way back like this. He’s sitting pretty much flat looking at the crowd, sort of jaw parallel to the ground as he gets hit,” the analyst explains, overlaying the trajectory line on anatomical images. “The biggest problem I see with that from the angle Tyler Robinson shoots him from is that would have hit him in the teeth or even above the teeth. There is no possible way that this round came from a 90-degree angle and a 90-degree slope and hit the C2 while not blowing through Charlie Kirk’s face. It’s not a thing”.

Moreover, the visible entry wound in video footage appears 2-3 inches below Kirk’s chin, closer anatomically to the C4 or C5 vertebrae—not at the C2 where the autopsy allegedly places the initial impact.

Problem Two: The Physics of Refraction

Even more problematic is the bullet’s alleged path after impact. The autopsy report claims the .30-06 round struck the C2, then traveled downward through C3, C4, C5, C6, and C7 before stopping at T1.

.30-06 Springfield ammunition, developed for military use, travels at velocities between 2,400 and 2,700 feet per second with devastating kinetic energy. When such a round impacts bone, especially the relatively fragile cervical vertebrae of the human neck, it doesn’t gently refract downward—it typically continues on its ballistic path, creating a temporary wound cavity far larger than the bullet itself.

“We’re talking about a .30-06 round traveling at 2,400 to 2,700 feet per second or even less, doesn’t even matter,” the analyst notes. “That then refracts straight down into the T1. Yeah, that’s not what a .30-06 round is going to do. If it hits a human neck vertebrae, we know it’s going to blow right through. But even if there was some weird refraction, bullets aren’t going to refract almost 90 degrees”.

For the bullet to strike the C2 from above and then travel downward through the spine would require the projectile to essentially reverse course mid-flight—a violation of Newtonian physics that no amount of bone density or tissue resistance could produce.

The Body Armor Theory

As word of these inconsistencies spread online, alternative theories emerged. One of the most prominent suggested Kirk had been wearing body armor under his shirt—armor that deflected Robinson’s initial shot upward into the neck.

The theory gained traction when former Navy SEAL Robert O’Neill, famous for his role in the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, weighed in on social media. “That was not an injury wound that we saw. We saw an exit wound,” O’Neill wrote, questioning the shirt movement visible in the video and noting that entry wounds don’t bleed the way Kirk’s injury appeared to.

But the body armor theory has significant problems of its own.

First, Turning Point USA has publicly and repeatedly denied that Kirk wore any protective equipment during the event. For the organization to be lying about this detail would require a conspiracy of silence among Kirk’s staff, security team, and medical personnel—all while the group simultaneously cooperates with federal investigators.

Second, the physics still doesn’t work. “If you’re going to operate under the assumption he has body armor on, you are calling TPUSA nefarious liars,” the Valhalla analyst argues. “Why would they purposefully lie about him having body armor on? That seems bizarre to me”.

But even setting aside the denial, the ballistics of a .30-06 round striking body armor create their own impossibilities. Body armor thin enough to be invisible under Kirk’s fitted shirt wouldn’t be rated to stop a high-powered rifle round. Soft armor stops handgun rounds through fabric deformation; rifle-rated plates are typically ceramic or steel, rigid, and obviously visible.

 

“If he had body armor on so small that you couldn’t see it through that tiny little shirt, it wouldn’t be strong enough to stop a .30-06 round to begin with,” the analyst continues. “But we’re in hypothetics here. That then refracts off the body armor, comes all the way up here at a 90-degree angle to hit this C2, and then re-refracts straight back down into the T1”.

He demonstrates the trajectory with diagrams, showing a bullet path that would require the projectile to act like a pinball—bouncing off body armor, ricocheting upward nearly 90 degrees, striking the C2 vertebra, then somehow reversing direction to travel downward through the spine. “Guys, bullets are not pinballs. They don’t do this, okay?” he emphasizes. “Changing total direction in almost 180 degrees is not possible. This is Newtonian physics says that’s not a thing”.

Even O’Neill’s observations about the shirt movement raise more questions than they answer. “Why was his shirt moving from right to left?” the former SEAL asked, noting that witnesses reported hearing shots “from my left to right, from his right to left, immediately shut down”.

Those witness statements—quickly silenced according to O’Neill—point toward perhaps the most controversial alternative theory.

The Second Shooter Hypothesis

If the autopsy trajectory is accurate and Robinson’s position is confirmed, only one scenario makes the ballistics work without requiring bullet trajectories that defy physics: a shot from behind and above Kirk’s position.

The Valhalla analyst walks through this possibility with the same methodical approach. “Now, if he gets shot from the back up or right, and again, we don’t know what that angle would be because this is all hypothetical, right? We don’t know where that shooter was,” he explains.

Positioning a shooter on a balcony or rooftop behind Kirk—at an angle of approximately 10-15 degrees—would create a trajectory that enters beneath the skull at the back of the head, strikes the C2 vertebra first, and exits through the visible wound location on the left side of Kirk’s neck. The bullet would travel at the expected refraction angle, creating cavitation damage through the C4, C5, C6, and C7 vertebrae as it passes.

“That actually works perfectly ballistically, anatomically to have created that initial impact into the C2,” the analyst notes.

But this scenario has one fatal flaw for the prosecution’s case: it would create an exit wound, not an entry wound. If the bullet exited Kirk’s neck, there would be no projectile recovered inside his body—yet the autopsy report allegedly confirms finding the bullet lodged near T1.

A third possibility, raised by the YouTube channel Peak Prosperity, suggests the shot came from a much more horizontal angle—perhaps 45 degrees from the front rather than straight down. This trajectory could potentially strike Kirk beneath the jaw and create the observed wound location, with refraction downward through the spine making more physical sense than a vertical shot.

Yet this theory also struggles to explain how the bullet would strike C2 first rather than the lower cervical vertebrae where the visible wound appears.

The Evidence That Doesn’t Fit

The forensic contradictions become even more puzzling when examined alongside the physical evidence that does point to Robinson.

Law enforcement’s case appears overwhelming on its face. FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed on Fox News that DNA recovered from the towel wrapped around the suspected murder weapon matched Robinson’s DNA. Additional DNA was found on a screwdriver discovered on the Losee Center rooftop—the confirmed shooting location.

The rifle itself, a Mauser-type bolt-action hunting rifle chambered in .30-06, had been given to Robinson as a gift by his grandfather. Robinson’s father confirmed to authorities that the description of the suspected murder weapon matched the rifle given to his son.

Text messages recovered from Robinson’s phone showed he had expressed concern about the weapon to his roommate: “I worried what old man do if didn’t bring back grandpa’s… I don’t know if it has a serial, but it wouldn’t trace to me”. After police released images of the weapon, Robinson’s roommate reached out asking for a picture of it.

Surveillance footage tracked Robinson’s movements throughout the day of September 10, 2025. Cameras captured him arriving on campus at 8:29 a.m. in a gray Dodge Challenger. At 11:50 a.m., he reappeared on video moving through a grassy area into a parking lot. Three minutes later, he stopped at the top of some stairs and pulled out his phone before proceeding into a pedestrian tunnel.

At 12:02 p.m.—just 21 minutes before the shooting—Robinson was seen walking on the north side of the Losee Center. Thirteen minutes later, surveillance showed him ascending the stairs next to the building. By 12:22 p.m., investigators say Robinson was on the roof, lying prone, facing the location where Kirk stood 430 feet away.

The timeline is meticulous. The evidence is damning. And yet the ballistics don’t work.

The Inscribed Bullets and Internet Culture

Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the physical evidence—one that has spawned its own cottage industry of amateur internet sleuths—involves the messages inscribed on the cartridges found at the scene.

Initial reports suggested the engravings were anti-fascist slogans or “transgender ideology,” feeding into the narrative of Robinson as a politically radicalized leftist targeting a conservative icon. The reality, revealed after an FBI briefing on September 12, proved far stranger.

The spent cartridge case bore the inscription “Notices bulges OwO what’s this?”—a reference to furry online roleplay culture. The three unfired rounds carried increasingly absurdist messages: “Hey fascist! Catch! ↑→↓↓↓” (referencing a cheat code from the video game Helldivers 2 used to summon a 500-kilogram bomb), “Oh bella ciao bella ciao bella ciao ciao ciao” (the Italian anti-fascist anthem, though also prominent in the Netflix series Money Heist and video games), and “If you read this, you are gay LMAO”.

The engravings paint a picture of a 22-year-old steeped in internet meme culture and online communities—forums where irony, sincerity, and radicalization often blur together in ways older generations struggle to parse. They suggest planning and premeditation, yet also a dark humor that seems incongruous with the gravity of political assassination.

But they don’t explain how the ballistics work.

The Prosecutorial Dilemma

As Tyler Robinson’s case moves toward trial, prosecutors face a challenge that no amount of DNA evidence, surveillance footage, or inscribed bullets can overcome: basic physics.

“If the prosecution thinks it is going to—unless they have some crazy evidence we don’t have, but let’s say this medical examiner’s report is true and they’re going to go with the official narrative—they walk into that courtroom against the Menendez brothers legal team, one of the best legal teams they could put together, and you walk in there with some stuff an eighth grader can disprove through basic math and a protractor…” the Valhalla analyst trails off before concluding bluntly: “Good luck. Good luck finding this kid guilty”.

The reference to “the Menendez brothers legal team” isn’t hyperbole. Robinson has indeed assembled a formidable defense team, drawing comparisons to the high-profile attorneys who defended Lyle and Erik Menendez in their 1990s murder trials. If the defense can demonstrate to a jury that the autopsy trajectory is physically impossible given Robinson’s shooting position, reasonable doubt enters the equation regardless of how much DNA ties him to the weapon.

Federal prosecutors announced their intention to seek the death penalty, citing aggravating factors including the political nature of the assassination and the presence of children among the 3,000 witnesses. The charges against Robinson include aggravated murder, illegal discharge of a firearm, and witness tampering for allegedly asking his roommate to delete their text messages.

Yet legal experts consulted by the New York Post have identified what they describe as “weak spots” in the prosecution’s case. While the article doesn’t elaborate on specific vulnerabilities, the ballistic contradictions raised by independent firearms experts would certainly qualify.

The Political Firestorm

The forensic questions have become inseparable from the political controversy that erupted in the assassination’s aftermath. President Trump, who had considered Kirk among his closest allies, used his Truth Social platform to announce Kirk’s death at 2:40 p.m. on September 10—barely two hours after the shooting.

What followed was a crackdown that civil liberties advocates describe as unprecedented. The Trump administration launched what it called an effort to “uproot and dismantle these terrorist networks” that allegedly led to the assassination. Right-wing organizations and government agencies initiated what critics characterize as a campaign of mass firings, disciplinary actions, and harassment against individuals perceived as celebrating Kirk’s death or making critical comments about him.

The political violence has escalated on both sides. Kirk’s memorial service, held at State Farm Stadium on September 21, drew tens of thousands. Conservative media outlets have framed the assassination as evidence of left-wing terrorism, while progressive activists point to Kirk’s own history of inflammatory rhetoric about transgender individuals and immigrants.

Social media has fractured Americans’ understanding of the event itself, with different communities consuming entirely different narratives about what happened and why. In some online spaces, Robinson is portrayed as a radicalized terrorist; in others, as a folk hero who struck back against fascism; in still others, as a patsy in a larger conspiracy.

The ballistic evidence—or rather, the lack thereof—fuels all of these narratives.

The Unanswered Questions

As October 2025 arrives and Robinson’s case moves toward trial, fundamental questions remain unresolved.

Is the autopsy report accurate? The information circulating online remains secondhand, filtered through influencers claiming connections to Turning Point USA or law enforcement. Until the medical examiner’s report becomes public—likely during trial proceedings—its contents remain unverified. The Valhalla analyst is careful to note this caveat repeatedly: “We are operating under massive assumptions here that this information is true. It is correct. Because I’ll tell you, when it comes to an autopsy report, one, it’s private. Two, it’s evidence for a massive murder trial”.

If the autopsy is accurate, how do prosecutors explain the trajectory? The prosecution has not publicly addressed the ballistic challenges raised by independent analysts. They may possess additional evidence—perhaps medical testimony explaining how the wound pattern could be produced by Robinson’s shooting position—or they may plan to challenge the autopsy interpretation itself. Without access to the full case file, observers can only speculate.

Could there have been a second shooter? No evidence has emerged suggesting another gunman. All physical evidence—DNA, palm prints, footprints, forearm impressions on the roof —points to Robinson alone. Surveillance footage tracks only Robinson’s movements to and from the shooting location. The “second shooter” theories remain purely speculative, driven by the ballistic impossibilities rather than positive evidence of another individual.

Why would Robinson confess if he didn’t do it? The Discord message—”Everyone, I have bad news. It was me at UVU yesterday. I’m sorry for everything”—appears damning. Yet false confessions, particularly in high-pressure situations involving young people, are well-documented in criminal justice literature. Robinson allegedly confessed to family members who then contacted authorities , suggesting possible coercion or misunderstanding. Defense attorneys will certainly scrutinize the circumstances of that confession.

What about the note? FBI Director Patel disclosed the existence of a note found at Robinson’s residence expressing an intention to “take out” Kirk. Patel stated the note was destroyed but that forensic evidence related to it was retained. The destruction of such a crucial piece of evidence—and the vague reference to “forensic evidence” being preserved—raises its own questions about chain of custody and investigative procedures.

The Tunnel Theory and Other Alternatives

Among the more exotic theories circulating online is the suggestion that a shooter could have fired from within the pedestrian tunnel that surveillance footage shows Robinson entering at 11:53 a.m.. Proponents of this theory note that an upward angle from below could potentially create the trajectory needed to strike Kirk’s C2 vertebra while producing an entry wound at the observed location.

The Valhalla analyst briefly mentions this possibility: “Well, maybe if the tunnel theory works. I don’t know. That one seemed weird at the time”. The theory requires a shooter positioned significantly below Kirk’s level—perhaps 30-40 feet lower in elevation—firing upward at roughly a 38-degree angle to intercept the C2 vertebra.

The problems are obvious: Robinson was tracked via surveillance leaving the tunnel and ascending to the roof. No evidence places a different shooter in the tunnel. The upward trajectory would require the bullet to then reverse direction and travel downward—the same physics violation that plagues the official narrative.

What the Experts Say

Professional forensic pathologists and ballistics experts have been notably quiet about the controversy, perhaps reluctant to comment on an ongoing criminal case or unwilling to weigh in based on unverified autopsy details.

Jeff Wenninger, a former LAPD Metropolitan Division officer now consulting with Law Enforcement Consultants, discussed the unusual forearm print evidence with CNBC but didn’t address trajectory questions. Patrick McClain, a Texas criminal defense attorney and former Marine Corps judge, similarly focused on the novelty of forearm print evidence rather than ballistic analysis.

The silence from mainstream forensic experts leaves the field to independent analysts like the Valhalla Firearms Training channel, firearms enthusiasts on Reddit and Twitter, and various conspiracy theorists—each working with incomplete information and reaching wildly different conclusions.

What’s clear is that someone with professional ballistics training has identified what they consider fatal flaws in the prosecution’s narrative, and those concerns haven’t been publicly addressed by law enforcement or prosecutors.

The Trial Ahead

Tyler Robinson’s trial promises to be among the most closely watched criminal proceedings in recent American history. The forensic evidence will finally become public. Expert witnesses will testify about wound ballistics, bullet trajectories, and the physics of .30-06 rounds impacting human tissue and bone. The medical examiner who performed Kirk’s autopsy will explain the findings in detail and face cross-examination from defense attorneys armed with protractors, anatomical diagrams, and YouTube videos.

If the ballistic contradictions prove irreconcilable—if the prosecution cannot explain how Robinson’s shot from above could have produced the wounds described in the autopsy—the case could collapse despite overwhelming evidence tying Robinson to the weapon and the scene. Reasonable doubt doesn’t require proving innocence; it merely requires demonstrating that the prosecution’s account is physically impossible.

Conversely, if prosecutors produce evidence that reconciles the trajectory—perhaps testimony showing the autopsy details circulating online are inaccurate, or expert analysis explaining how the wound pattern could occur despite the apparent geometric impossibilities—Robinson faces execution for the assassination of one of America’s most prominent political figures.

The stakes extend beyond Robinson’s fate. If he is convicted on evidence that firearms experts consider physically impossible, it undermines confidence in the justice system’s ability to evaluate technical evidence. If he is acquitted despite DNA evidence and surveillance footage placing him at the scene with the murder weapon, it raises the specter of a killer walking free because forensic pathologists couldn’t adequately explain their findings to a jury.

And if the ballistic evidence truly is impossible—if Tyler Robinson could not have fired the shot that killed Charlie Kirk from the position where all evidence places him—then the most disturbing question remains: who did?

Conclusion: The Murder That Doesn’t Make Sense

A year ago, Charlie Kirk was among the most polarizing figures in American politics—beloved by conservative activists, reviled by progressives, impossible for anyone to ignore. His assassination on September 10, 2025, shocked a nation already reeling from political violence and deepening ideological divides.

The case against Tyler Robinson should have been straightforward: a politically radicalized college student, meticulous planning, overwhelming forensic evidence, a confession. Instead, it has become a referendum on expertise itself—on whether YouTube analysts with protractors can challenge FBI investigations, whether basic physics can trump DNA evidence, whether the truth of what happened that September afternoon in Utah can ever be definitively established.

“So what’s the real story? Don’t know. We don’t know, guys,” the Valhalla analyst admits near the end of his video. “There’s some very compelling things with a lot of different theories, but again, if I—I’ll just say this to wrap the video up. If the prosecution thinks it is going to unless they have some crazy evidence we don’t have, but let’s say this medical examiner’s report is true and they’re going to go with the official narrative… this thing, you know, again, no idea if this medical examiner report’s actually true or not, but if it is, oh my god, this just made things infinitely worse for the FBI”.

As Robinson’s trial approaches, only one thing is certain: the bullet that killed Charlie Kirk has created mysteries that extend far beyond the six inches of tissue and bone it traversed. Whether those mysteries can be resolved—or whether they will deepen into conspiracy theories that outlive everyone involved—remains to be seen.

The geometry of death, it turns out, may be the most important evidence in the most important trial of the decade. And right now, the math doesn’t add up.