Diane Simms

Christian pursuing the truth, Freedom Loving Nationalist, Constitutionalist. I believe in a government of the people, by the people and for the people

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@violettspark 100

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@ronsterd89 3 and if he has naturally curly hair, number 4. Number 2 is ok but should be saved for when he gets a little older.

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

I think the guy in this ad looks a lot like Jeffrey Epstein. What do you think?

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@Gosleepriya 173

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@baharkarakrt 150

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@Murk441 Her life

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@ronsterd89 Both

[Mikki Willis Official @MikkiWillis]

Case closed! Tyler Robinson was the lone shooter. The evidence is overwhelming. Move along!

Why do so many social media influencers want this case closed? They claim the evidence presented during the preliminary hearing was “crystal clear,” “damning,” and “conclusive.”

They are either seeing what they want to see, or they are lying.

I’ve been thoroughly investigating the Charlie Kirk assassination since the day it happened. This is the first time I’ve said anything publicly about the case. I couldn’t care less about being the first to break a story or about the clicks and cash that come with it. I care about accuracy. My track record speaks for itself.

What’s happening on social media right now is identical to what happened during COVID. Anyone who dared to seek information about the safety and efficacy of an experimental mRNA injection was labeled a science denier and shamed into solitude.

Ask questions about the public assassination of Charlie Kirk and you’re “crazy,” “a grifter,” or “a Candace cult member.”

To conclude that Tyler Robinson acted alone requires setting aside a number of glaring details that, at a minimum, warrant further scrutiny. These are just a few:

THE OTHER GUNMAN
An eyewitness videotaped an individual on the roof of the Losee Center, dressed in all-black tactical gear, including a face mask and helmet. This witness reported seeing what appeared to be a smaller/shorter rifle than the one later associated with the case.
He stated that he observed the individual run across the roof, set up, and take the shot at 12:23 p.m. The weapon he saw appeared to be a smaller rifle than what authorities later highlighted. He noted the sound as a “sharp crack,” not a big hunting rifle boom. The witness reported these details to authorities, but to date no one has followed up.

DISPATCH AUDIO
911 audio was broadcast shortly after the shooting. Dispatch relayed the suspect description to officers: “He’s on top of the building on the far north side, just east of the library… He’s going to be wearing all black, black long gun, black tactical helmet, a black mask, possibly wearing a tactical vest and jeans.”

DESTRUCTION OF THE CRIME SCENE
The lawn where Charlie Kirk was shot was paved over just four days later. The crime scene was excavated and covered with concrete on a Sunday. Dan Merrell was hired to pave the area. When he arrived at the scene, approximately 10 inches of topsoil had already been removed. Merrell stated on camera that someone coordinating the work told him, “The governor and the FBI said they want this done by Monday.”

DNA DISCREPANCIES
Forensic testimony indicated that DNA recovered from the towel wrapped around the rifle belonged to two individuals. One profile was identified as Robinson’s roommate, Lance Twiggs, while Robinson was identified only as a possible contributor to DNA found on the towel and on a screwdriver recovered from the rooftop. ATF forensic biologist Kaitlyn Oliver testified that Tyler Robinson’s DNA sample was “the most degraded.” What this could mean is that Lance Twiggs was the last to touch the rifle.

INCONCLUSIVE FRAGMENTS
During the preliminary hearing, ATF examiner Samantha Karner testified about a bullet jacket fragment pulled from Kirk’s autopsy compared against test-fires from the Mauser bolt-action rifle. Her analysis concluded the fragment “could not be identified or excluded” as having been fired from the rifle, with the report stating “the result of the comparison was inconclusive.” She testified she was “unable to say one way or another” due to a lack of microscopic marks on the bullet jacket fragment.

THE UNFIRED BULLET
During cross-examination, the defense asked investigator David Hull about a bullet found on a rooftop other than the rooftop where Robinson is alleged to have fired the fatal shot. Hull said he “believed” there was an unfired bullet found on another building, not the Losee Center. He said the area wasn’t treated as part of the crime scene because the bullet “was accounted for as an ejected cartridge from an officer who had cycled his rifle.” When pressed on specifics, Hull said he could not identify the building, could not recall the type of round, didn’t know when it was found, and didn’t know where it currently was.

ENHANCED SURVEILLANCE VIDEO
Judge Graf agreed to play an “enhanced” UVU surveillance video showing the person alleged to be Robinson on the rooftop—but ruled it would be shown only to people physically present in the courtroom.
As if following a script, conservative influencers who were in the courtroom that day echoed the same talking points. They claimed that the footage was clear, high-definition proof showing Robinson taking the shot—framing it as “undeniable.” However, others who were in the courtroom strongly refute these claims.
Brandi Siciliani posted on X “I was in the courtroom today. There is no high-quality, zoomed-in footage showing anyone taking a shot. The video shown is the same distance as the footage of ‘Tyler’ jumping off the roof… I have no idea why people are claiming otherwise. They know the video isn’t going to be released publicly, so they’re misrepresenting what was actually shown in court.”

As a filmmaker, I know a thing or two about video technology. 4K resolution alone doesn’t overcome the physics of distance and digital zoom. 4K refers to the sensor/output resolution (roughly 3840×2160 pixels), not how much detail exists on a subject 100+ yards away. If the subject occupies a tiny fraction of the frame, you only have a small number of actual pixels covering that person. Zooming in digitally (enlarging in post-production) doesn’t add resolution—it just makes the existing pixels bigger. It can improve visibility of shapes and colors, but it doesn’t recover facial detail or other identifying features that weren’t resolved at capture.

Not even AI can be trusted to upscale pixelated video. Enhancing a blurry face with AI can produce a coherent, convincing face that doesn’t match the actual person—because the model is filling gaps with statistically likely features, not real ones.

And… exhale.

These are just a few of the outstanding details that, in my opinion, should warrant deeper investigation into the murder of Charlie Kirk.

What you’re witnessing is a psychological operation cunningly deployed to further divide us and stop us from asking questions.

Beware of anyone pushing to close this case prematurely. We must never allow politics to thwart the pursuit of truth and justice.

This case holds the power to kill critical thinking or pull back the curtain to reveal the inner workings of “fifth generation warfare.” Which way it goes is entirely up to us, the people.

“And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”

Mikki Willis
Investigative Filmmaker

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@saniyafatma1278 I like the idea of taking the door off better than bagging it all up and not giving it back

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@QuickGuess 8

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@BholanathDutta 60

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@UchennaF28384 90

[Diane Simms @Dms444Simms]

@UchennaF28384 0