Streisand effect, phenomenon in which an attempt to censor, hide, or otherwise draw attention away from something only serves to attract more attention to it. The name derives from American singer and actress Barbra Streisand’s lawsuit against a photographer in 2003, which drew attention to the photo she was suing to have taken off the Internet.

The Streisand Effect describes a situation in which a person or organization’s attempts to suppress information leads to greater attention to the information than it would have received otherwise. Not surprisingly, the term was named after singer Barbra Streisand. Before it was known as the “Streisand Effect,” however, there was a long and fascinating history of failed cover-ups that provide an interesting glimpse into the human psyche and our need to get to the bottom of things.

Origins of the Streisand Effect

Mike Masnick, founder of the website Techdirt, coined the term “Streisand Effect” in 2005, after the singer and actress sued the photographer Kenneth Adelman in 2003 for $50 million. Adelman had taken thousands of photos for his online database for the California Coastal Records Project, a resource that provided pictures of California’s coastal erosion to scientists and researchers, and one of these photos happened to show her mansion in Malibu.

Before Streisand sued, the image in question had been downloaded only six times; afterward, it received over a million views and was reprinted countless times. Streisand ultimately lost the lawsuit and had to pay Adelman’s legal fees.2 Streisand’s concern for her privacy was not unreasonable—she had been stalked before. But in this case, she would have been better off just leaving things alone. So, what causes this effect to play out as it does? We’ll explore the causes, provide some real-life examples, and even provide some guidance on how to avoid it in your own life.

Streisand’s lawsuit was filed against photographer Kenneth Adelman, the founder of the California Coastal Records Project, for which he photographed the coastline of the state from a helicopter and posted the photos to the Internet. Adelman indicated that the images were free for nonprofit use and had been used by government entities for scientific research. Among more than 12,000 photographs of California’s coast was one photograph in which Streisand’s mansion appeared. Streisand, who had in the past been harassed and stalked by fans, sued for $50 million, claiming that the photo violated her privacy and showed how to access her residence.

At the time the lawsuit was filed, the photograph had been downloaded only six times, including twice by Streisand’s lawyers. The lawsuit was highly publicized, and a flurry of interest and activity followed. In the month after the filing, the photo was viewed more than 400,000 times and reposted on news sites and elsewhere on the Internet. Thus, Streisand’s attempts to have the photo suppressed made it exceptionally more visible than it would otherwise have been. Streisand lost the suit and was ordered to pay Adelman’s legal fees for the case. The photo remains widely published on the Internet.

Understanding the Streisand Effect

With the Streisand Effect, if someone tries to hide, remove, or censor information, it can backfire. In fact, it can have the unintended consequence of drawing more attention to the thing they are trying to suppress.

As Cara R. Stewart, founder and CEO of Altalunas International, says, “It’s a classic example of having a legitimate concern but choosing an ineffective or counterproductive way to address it. Barbra Streisand’s concern about her privacy was understandable… However, the tool she chose to manage this—filing a lawsuit—was not only ineffective but actually worsened the situation.”

Moreover, the effects can be even more insidious. “There is also the risk of the erosion of trust in institutions or authorities responsible for the censorship,” says Carly Dober, psychologist and founder of Enriching Lives Psychology. “When people discover that information is being withheld or manipulated, they may become skeptical of the motives and credibility of the censors. This can foster a culture of distrust and encourage individuals to seek alternative sources of information, which may not always be reliable or accurate.”

Factors Contributing to the Streisand Effect

There are several factors that contribute to the Streisand Effect. First, psychologically, when people discover that someone—especially someone famous or well-known—is trying to hide or censor information, people become curious and rebellious. “This is driven by a fundamental human instinct to seek out forbidden or restricted knowledge, amplifying interest and dissemination,” explains Dober. Second, people are also motivated by psychological reactance, where one asserts their autonomy over the suppression of information by seeking out the restricted information.

“When people perceive that they are being denied access to information, their desire to obtain that information intensifies,” says Dober, “driven by a sense of defiance and a need to restore their freedom of choice.”

While the Streisand Effect existed prior to Barbra Streisand’s lawsuit in 2003, the internet, and more specifically, social media, has exacerbated the effect even more. Online communities and social media platforms encourage the rapid spread of content and enable information to go viral.

“When users encounter attempts to suppress information, they are likely to share it widely as an act of resistance, bolstered by a collective sense of injustice,” says Dober. “The social validation and reinforcement from peers further encourage individuals to participate in spreading the censored content. Additionally, the internet culture of digital activism fosters an environment where combating censorship is seen as a moral or ethical duty.”

This all combines to create a powerful set of factors that contribute to people’s responses, and makes the Streisand Effect a reality.

Real-Life Examples of the Streisand Effect

While the Streisand Effect existed before it was named, it has become increasingly likely to happen as more and more people have taken to social media. Here are some examples:

In addition to the above, similar attempts at censorship have been failing long before the existence of social media. Just ask any teenager if they are more interested in a particular band, movie, or TV show that adults claim is inappropriate for them.

Impact and Implications of the Streisand Effect

The Streisand Effect can have long-lasting consequences for individuals and organizations that attempt to suppress information. For individuals, the attention can lead to increased scrutiny.

“This phenomenon can significantly damage reputations meticulously built over the years,” observes Stewart. Dober concurs, adding, “This damage is not easily undone, as the initial act of suppression can create a lasting impression of dishonesty or untrustworthiness. For individuals, this can affect personal and professional relationships, career prospects, and public perception.”

For organizations, the losses can be great as well. “The Streisand Effect can severely damage brand reputation and erode trust with consumers and stakeholders,” says Dober. “This can lead to a loss of customer loyalty, decreased sales, and a tarnished public image. Additionally, efforts to suppress information can result in increased media scrutiny and regulatory attention.” Dober adds that it can take a long time to recover one’s reputation from this sort of error.

“However, the widespread sharing of censored information can also lead to the dissemination of misinformation if [the censored information is] not properly contextualized,” she says.

Strategies to Mitigate the Streisand Effect

There are many strategies to mitigate or avoid the Streisand Effect. These include:

• Respond quickly: As Stewart says, “A rapid response can prevent the issue from escalating, but it’s equally important to ensure your reactions are thoughtful and well-considered.”
• Practice transparency: Stewart explains that you should be transparent about acknowledging the problem and the steps you will take to address it. “This approach shows that you are not only aware of the issue,” says Stewart, “but are also actively working towards a solution…. This approach doesn’t just mitigate damage; it can enhance a reputation, demonstrating a commitment to ethical practices and responsiveness….”
• Be polite and professional: “It’s easy to become defensive when under fire,” claims Stewart, “but the goal is to acknowledge concerns and focus on resolving the issue constructively.”
• Refrain from litigiousness: Suppressing information via a lawsuit can attract media attention, and by extension, curiosity from the public. “Instead of resorting to lawsuits,” Dober says, “individuals should consider alternative dispute resolution methods, such as mediation or negotiation, to resolve issues privately. By avoiding high-profile legal battles, individuals can prevent drawing additional attention to the information they wish to remain private.”
• Practice emotional regulation: Developing coping mechanisms, like emotional regulation, can prevent people from reacting impulsively when information they’d like suppressed comes out. “Therapy can help individuals develop coping mechanisms for dealing with stress and anxiety related to potential public exposure,” says Dober.
• Develop a strong support network: Your support network should include friends, family, and even professional advisors who can offer emotional support, advice, and practical assistance if a crisis strikes. “This network can help individuals navigate complex situations without resorting to actions that might trigger the Streisand Effect,” Dober observes.

• • Hostility: It is a formal term for intense dislike, hatred, or bad blood, often rooted in prejudice.
  • Legal/Formal Usage: It can describe the “intent” or motivating spirit behind an action (e.g., animus furandi — intention to steal).
  • Examples:
     “The politician’s
    animus
     toward her rival was clear” or “He harbors no personal
    animus
    .”

animus meaning in law

• State of Mind: It represents the subjective intention (the “mind with which a thing is done”) rather than just the physical act itself.
• Specific Legal Terms: It is used to define specific legal intent, such as animus possidendi (intention to possess), animus revocandi (intention to revoke a will), or animus donandi (intention to give).
• Discrimination/Hostility: In civil rights law, “class-based animus” refers to malicious, hostile, or prejudicial intent toward a specific group.
• Criminal Law: Animus helps determine liability, often distinguishing between accidents and deliberate actions (e.g., animus nocendi or the intent to harm). 

• Criminal Law
  • Animus Furandi: The intention to steal; a necessary element for theft charges.
  • Animus Nocendi: The intention to cause harm or break the law, similar to mens rea.
  • Animus Malus: An “evil intention” or general corrupt state of mind.
• Property & Domicile
  • Animus Manendi: The intention to remain in a place permanently; used to determine a person’s legal domicile.
  • Animus Revertendi: The intent to return; used in property law to establish ownership of animals that habitually return home.
  • Animus Derelinquendi: The intention to abandon or relinquish rights to property.
• Civil & Constitutional Law
  • Animus Testandi: The specific intention to make a valid will.
  • Unconstitutional Animus: A doctrine where the Supreme Court invalidates laws if they were passed with a “bare desire to harm” a politically unpopular group.
  • Animus Donandi: The intention to give a gift, which is required for a transfer of property to be legally considered a gift. 

Getty Images

Jesse Louis Jackson Sr. (1941-2026)

Spies, drones and blowtorches: How the US captured Maduro

Key Facts

Getty Images

crucial Quote

“We’re not afraid of boots on the ground,” Trump said Saturday afternoon, in response to a question of whether U.S. troops will have a presence in Venezuela after Maduro’s capture. In a subsequent question about troop presence, Trump said “there would be a presence in Venezuela as it pertains to oil.” He said “we’re going to make sure that country is run properly” and “we’re designating people, we’re talking to people” to run Venezuela. He said Secretary of State Marco Rubio has spoken to Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, who was sworn in to take over for Maduro, and “she’s essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again.” Rodríguez contradicted Trump in an address later Saturday, insisting the Venezuelan government stands firmly behind Maduro, repeatedly calling him Venezuela’s “only president” and calling the attacks “an unprecedented military aggression.”

What We Don’t Know

It is unclear how long the U.S. will administer Venezuela, whether troops will end up being deployed to the country and exactly what the benchmark would be for the U.S. ending its direct oversight. Trump said Saturday that “a group” will run Venezuela, and though he did not state who would fully compose it, he motioned toward Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine and said it would “largely” be them “for a period of time.” It is not known who could lead after U.S. involvement ends, with Trump saying Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado—a Venezuelan opposition leader who voiced support for Maduro’s capture—lacks “the support or respect within the country” to be a successful leader. Trump also did not explicitly state which American oil companies could be involved in the Venezuela’s oil industry moving forward.

What To Watch For

Trump and Rubio suggested the actions in Venezuela should be considered a warning sign for other Latin American countries that have poor relations with the U.S., specifically Cuba and Colombia. “I think Cuba is going to be something we’ll end up talking about because Cuba is a failing nation right now,” Trump said in response to a question about whether there’s a message for Cuba. “If I lived in Havana and I was in the government, I’d be concerned,” Rubio, who is the son of Cuban immigrants, said. Trump also reiterated his comments that Colombian President Gustavo Petro, whom Trump has accused of sending cocaine into the U.S., “has to watch his ass.” Trump also mentioned Mexico in his Fox News interview Saturday morning, claiming Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum “is not running Mexico” because “the cartels are running Mexico.” The president said the U.S. is “very friendly” with Sheinbaum, but “something’s going to have to be done with Mexico.”

Tangent

Trump warned Venezuelan officials in an interview with Fox News “if they stay loyal [to Maduro], the future is really bad, really bad for them,” but said “most of them have converted.” He also dismissed concerns being raised by some lawmakers that he did not seek proper congressional approval for the strikes, telling the network, “they should say ‘great job,’ they shouldn’t say ‘oh, gee, maybe it’s not constitutional.’ You know the same old stuff that we’ve been hearing for years and years and years.”

Key Background

Maduro and his wife were at their home in the Ft. Tiuna military base in Caracas when the U.S. “bombed” and “carried out what we would call a kidnapping of the president and the first lady of the country,” Venezuelan ruling party leader Nahum Fernández told the Associated Press. In addition to Caracas, the U.S. also conducted strikes in the states of Miranda, Aragua and La Guaira overnight, Venezuelan officials said. No U.S. military personnel were killed in the strikes, though Trump suggested several were injured when a helicopter was hit. The strikes follow a months-long U.S. military campaign against Venezuela the Trump administration has said is designed to target drug cartels. The U.S. has conducted dozens of strikes on vessels in the Caribbean it alleges were being used to smuggle narcotics into the U.S., killing more than 100 people. The U.S. military has also built up its presence in the Caribbean, intercepted Venezuelan oil tankers in recent weeks and conducted a drone strike on a dock in Venezuela last month, The New York Times previously reported. The U.S. views Maduro—whom the Trump administration has accused of being a “narco-terrorist”—as a fugitive and offered an award of up to $50 million for information leading to his arrest and/or conviction.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro aboard the USS Iwo Jima after he was captured by the U.S. military overnight Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026.

The White House

On July 22, 2024, the California Supreme Court ruled in Downey v. City of Riverside (S280322) that a bystander could assert a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress (“NIED”) for a traumatic event heard through the phone. In a unanimous 7-0 opinion, the Court held that a bystander could “witness” an accident by hearing it, even if the bystander was not physically present and was unaware of the defendant’s role in causing the victim’s injury at the time of the incident.

Plaintiff Jayde Downey (“Downey”) was on a cell phone call with her daughter, giving her driving directions. During the call, Downey allegedly heard her daughter gasp in fear and shock, followed by the sounds of an explosive metal-on-metal vehicular crash, shattering glass, and rubber tires skidding or dragging across the asphalt. As the sound of tires faded, Downey, hearing no sounds or vocalizations from her daughter, understood that her daughter was injured so seriously that she could not speak. A good Samaritan at the scene confirmed Downey’s fears when he told Downey on the phone to quiet down so he could “find a pulse.”

Downey filed suit against the adverse driver, the City of Riverside, and the owners of a private property adjacent to the intersection where the accident occurred. She alleged that the intersection and the adjacent property created an unreasonable and foreseeable risk of injury. She sought damages for the emotional distress she allegedly suffered as a result of hearing her daughter’s car crash. Downey’s claim was initially dismissed on demurrer, and the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order. Ultimately, the order was further appealed and heard by the California Supreme Court.

The call that changed it all: California Supreme Court expands standard for bystander claims of negligent emotional distress

For decades, the ruling case for NIED claims in California has been Thing v. La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644, 668. In that case, the California Supreme Court established three elements for bystander NIED claims: (1) the victim was a close relative of the plaintiff, (2) the plaintiff was present at the event and aware that the event was causing injury, and (3) the plaintiff suffered serious emotional distress as a result.

In Downey’s case, the second element of presence was at issue. Defendants argued that Downey had no contemporaneous awareness of the purported dangerous conditions of the intersection and adjacent property. Plaintiff argued that it was unnecessary for her to show contemporaneous awareness of Defendants’ tortious conduct and the causal connection between the intersection and the accident. Rather, Plaintiff argued that auditorily sensing the incident through the phone was sufficient.

The California Supreme Court held that Downey satisfied the second element of awareness and reversed and remanded the judgment of the Court of Appeal. Justice Leondra Kruger stated, “For purposes of clearing the awareness threshold for emotional distress recovery, it is awareness of an event that is injuring the victim — not awareness of the defendant’s role in causing the injury — that matters.” Justice Kruger further clarified, “The emotional trauma that comes from witnessing such an accident exists regardless of whether the plaintiff is aware at the time of the accident of all the individuals or entities that have contributed to the accident through their conduct.”

The California Supreme Court’s ruling in Downey greatly expands the ability of bystanders to sue for NIED claims. While previously, a plaintiff needed to demonstrate a “contemporaneous awareness not only of the injury to their loved one but also of the defendant’s role in causing the injury,” Downey represents a shift of focus to the emotional impact and trauma without necessarily being present at the scene of the incident.

more on Emotional Distress below

source
source

Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), the author of the original USA PATRIOT Act, disagrees.

In a amicus brief filed in support of the American Civil Liberties Union’s lawsuit against the National Security Agency’s bulk collection of U.S. phone records, Sensenbrenner argues that the government has gone far beyond what the legislation authorizes.

Section 215, known as the business records provision, authorizes intelligence agencies to apply for information if “the records are relevant to an ongoing foreign intelligence investigation.”

In practice, the NSA uses section 215 to collect data pertaining to every phone call to, from, and within the U.S. in the name of combating terrorism.

Sensenbrenner and the other members of Congress who enacted Section 215 “did not intend to authorize the program at issue in this lawsuit or any program of a comparable scope,” according to the brief.

The brief goes on to propose this question (emphasis ours):

The NSA is gathering on a daily basis the details of every call that every American makes, as well as every call made by foreigners to or from the United States. How can every call that every American makes or receives be relevant to a specific investigation?“

Filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the brief notes that Sensenbrenner “was not aware of the full scope of the program when he voted to reauthorize Section 215” and would have voted against it if he had known.

In Sensenbrenner’s words: “The suggestion that the administration can violate the law because Congress failed to object is outrageous. But let them be on notice: I am objecting right now.”  source

• The suspect in Charlie Kirk’s shooting death has been identified as 22-year-old Tyler Robinson.
• During a Friday news conference, Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox said Robinson indicated to a family friend that he was connected to the shooting.
• President Donald Trump initially made the announcement about Robinson being in custody during an interview on FOX & Friends.

Charlie Kirk’s killer was arrested overnight in Utah, officials announced Friday morning. Tyler Robinson, 22, is in custody with the help of a family member and will face charges for murdering the conservative political activist earlier this week.

WE AS CHRISTIANS & AMERICANS SHALL FEAR NO MAN, JUSTICE WILL COME ONE WAY OR ANOTHER FROM GOD’S SOVEREIGN HANDS

Here are the latest updates for Friday, Sept. 12, 2025:

Robinson was engineering major, university says

12 p.m. ET: Utah State University announced Friday that Tyler Robinson, the 22-year-old suspect arrested in the killing of Charlie Kirk, “briefly attended” classes there for one semester in 2021.

Robinson was a pre-engineering major and took classes consistent with that major for his one semester, Fox News Digital learned.

New details emerge about Tyler Robinson

11:30 a.m. ET: The Associated Press reported that Tyler James Robinson was admitted to Utah State University on an academic scholarship, according to a video of him reading his acceptance letter posted to a family member’s social media account. A university spokesperson told the AP he attended the school for only one semester in 2021.

Utah state records state Robinson was registered as a voter but not affiliated with either political party.

Mug shot of Tyler Robinson released

10:55 a.m. ET: Officials released a mugshot of Tyler Robinson, the shooting suspect in Charlie Kirk’s death.

Utah governor says Kirk assassination suspect is believed to have acted alone

10:45 a.m. ET: Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox says shooting suspect Tyler Robinson is believed to have acted alone, and the Charlie Kirk investigation is ongoing despite Robinson’s arrest.

FBI Director Kash Patel shares timeline of investigation

10:30 a.m. ET: The first FBI agents arrived on the scene at Utah Valley University some 16 minutes after Kirk was shot on Wednesday, FBI Director Kash Patel said at the news conference.

The bureau released the first photos of the suspect on Thursday morning, followed by the announcement of a cash reward and then the release of video of the suspect climbing down from the roof of a campus building and running away.

“Just last night, the suspect was taken into custody at 10 p.m. local time,” Patel announced.

Utah governor says Kirk’s assassination ‘is an attack on all of us’

10:26 a.m. ET: Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox said some people have asked why there have been so many resources dedicated to investigating Kirk’s killing when there’s violence around the country, but the governor said it is “much bigger than an attack on an individual. It is an attack on all of us.”

The Republican said Kirk’s killing is “an attack on the American experiment” and values, and “cuts to the very foundation of who we are.”

Details of messages on bullet casings revealed

10:25 a.m. ET: Bullet casings discovered by authorities had several inscriptions engraved on them, Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox said. The casing that had been fired read: “notices bulges OwO what’s this?”

• Cox said there were three unfired casings:
• One read, “hey fascist! catch!” with an up arrow symbol, right arrow symbol, and three down arrow symbols.
• Another one read: “oh bella ciao bella ciao bella ciao ciao ciao,” Cox said.
• The third fired casing read: “if you read this you are gay lmao.”

Kirk assassination suspect indicated to a family friend that he was connected to the shooting

10:15 a.m. ET: Utah Gov. Spencer J. Cox opened the news conference on the latest developments in Charlie Kirk’s assassination with the statement, “We got him.”

Cox told reporters that Kirk assassination suspect Tyler Robinson indicated to a family friend that he was connected to the shooting.

The president talked about learning the news of Kirk’s assassination

9:50 a.m. ET: Near the end of his Fox News interview, President Donald Trump said he’d been holding a meeting about building the new White House ballroom when his aides interrupted.

“They came in and they said, ‘Charlie Kirk is dead.’ I didn’t know what they meant. I said, ‘What do you mean, dead?’” Trump said.

“‘Charlie Kirk was shot.’ And they thought it was dead because it was so horrific.”

Trump said he swiftly ended his meeting. “I just told these people, “Get out, you gotta go.”

Suspect in custody in connection with Charlie Kirk shooting is 22-year-old from Utah, AP source says

9:25 a.m. ET: The suspect in custody in connection with the assassination of Charlie Kirk is a 22-year-old from Utah, a law enforcement official told The Associated Press.

Authorities have identified the suspect as Tyler Robinson, said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the ongoing investigation.

A news conference is scheduled with the latest on Charlie Kirk investigation

9 a.m. ET: State and federal officials in Utah are planning to hold a news conference on the investigation.

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox and Public Safety Commissioner Beau Mason, FBI Director Kash Patel and FBI Special Agent in Charge Robert Bohls are expected to attend.

Trump says Charlie Kirk shooting suspect in custody

8:15 a.m. ET: Trump confirmed the news during a Friday morning interview with FOX & Friends.

“I think, with a high degree of certainty, we have him in custody, right in custody. Everyone did a great job,” Trump said. 

“I just heard about it five minutes before I walked in. As I’m walking in, they said, ‘Looking real good.’ They have the person that they wanted.”

Sources told FOX News Friday that the suspected shooter was taken into custody in Southern Utah.

Federal investigators and state officials on Thursday had released photos and a video of the person they believe is responsible. Kirk was shot as he spoke to a crowd gathered in a courtyard at Utah Valley University in Orem.

More than 7,000 leads and tips had poured in, officials said. Authorities have yet to publicly name the suspect or cite a motive in the killing, the latest act of political violence to convulse the United States.

Video shows alleged gunman fleeing the scene

Dig deeper:

Law enforcement showed new video during a news conference on Thursday evening showing the alleged gunman fleeing from the scene after Kirk was shot.

In the video, a person wearing dark clothing is seen running across a rooftop and then climbing down the side. He is then seen running away from the scene.

Who was Charlie Kirk?

The backstory:

Kirk was the founder and executive director of Turning Point USA. Turning Point was founded in suburban Chicago in 2012 by Kirk, then 18, and William Montgomery, a tea party activist, to proselytize on college campuses for low taxes and limited government.

Kirk appeared alongside Trump on stage at political events, and was also a frequent commentator on Fox News, CNBC, and FOX Business News. He was the youngest speaker at the 2016 Republican National Convention.

Kirk played a major role in Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign. He was credited with turning out the younger vote for Trump.

Tyler Robinson named suspect in Charlie Kirk shooting, how he was caught

Robinson was identified by his father in photographs released by auhtorities.

Authorities have taken into custody the person they suspect of shooting and killing conservative activist Charlie Kirk on Wednesday at a Utah university campus event.

Tyler Robinson, 22, was taken into custody in St. George, Utah, on Friday, authorities and sources told ABC News.

Robinson’s father recognized him as the person being sought by police after authorities distributed photographs.

The father initially told Robinson to turn himself in. Robinson initially said no, but later changed his mind, officials said.

The father then called a youth pastor, who is also a U.S. Marshals task force officer. The officer advised the father to have Robinson stay in place.

At a press conference on Friday, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said Robinson had become more political in recent years, and engaged in a conversation with a family member about Kirk’s visit to the Utah Valley University campus the night before.

Cox also described what was engraved on the casings found on the scene.

The first casing, according to Cox, said “Notices Bulge OWO what’s this??”

The other three unfired casing said: “Hey fascist! CATCH!” with an arrow symbol pointing up, then to the right, and then three arrows pointing down, “O Bella ciao, Bella ciao, Bella ciao, Ciao, ciao!,” and “If you read this, you are GAY Lmao.”

When law enforcement identified Robinson, they also interviewed Robinson’s roommate who showed them a message between Robinson and his roommate.

“The content of these messages included messages affiliated with the contact Tyler, stating a need to retrieve a rifle from a drop point, leaving the rifle in a bush,” Cox said. “Messages related to a to visually watching the area where a rifle was left, and a message referring to having left the rifle wrapped in a towel. The messages also referred to engraving bullets and a mention of a scope and the rifle being unique. Messages from the contact Tyler also mentioned that he had changed outfits.”

Cox said Robinson arrived on campus driving a gray Dodge Challenger, which matched his vehicle he arrived in on campus.

He also thanked Robinson’s family, “who did the right thing.”

FBI Director Kash Patel said that law enforcement caught Robinson within 33 hours of the shooting and was on scene within 16 minutes.

“This is a very much an ongoing investigation, as the governor said, and we will continue to work with state and local authorities to develop the investigation to provide them the evidence they need for their ongoing prosecutions,” Patel said.

Authorities and a former FBI agent previously said they believed the subject to be a college-aged individual with an apparent proficiency in handling a high-powered rifle and likely knew the layout of the university where the homicide occurred.

President Donald Trump initially announced the arrest, stating on “Fox and Friends” on Friday morning, “I think with high degree of certainty, we have him in custody.”

During a news conference on Thursday evening, state and federal officials released video of the person of interest jumping down from the roof of a building on the campus.

Beau Mason, commissioner of the Utah Department of Public Safety, said the suspect was wearing “distinct clothing” that could help in his identification, including Converse sneakers.

He said the person seen in the video jumping from the roof left shoe impressions and a palm print.

“We are investing everything we have into this and we will catch this individual,” Mason said at the news conference.

Authorities had received more than 7,000 tips and leads and completed some 200 interviews, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox said.

During a news conference on Thursday morning, Robert Bohls, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Salt Lake City field office, said investigators believe they have recovered the weapon used in what the governor of Utah on Wednesday called a “political assassination.”

Bohls said the weapon, a high-powered bolt-action rifle, was found discarded in a wooded area near Utah Valley University (UVU) in Orem, and is being analyzed at an FBI laboratory for any clues that can identify the gunman.

More specifically, multiple law enforcement sources with knowledge of the investigation told ABC News that the weapon is an older model imported Mauser .30-06 caliber bolt-action rifle that was found wrapped in a towel in a wooded area near the school. The sources said a spent cartridge was discovered in the chamber of the gun.

The gun and cartridges recovered are to be flown to the FBI’s main laboratory in Quantico, Virginia, for the most technologically advanced forensic analysis, law enforcement sources told ABC News. The focus is to look for any latent fingerprints and DNA, the sources said.

Investigators also collected a footwear impression, a palm print and forearm prints for analysis, Bohls said.

Mason said that investigators are also studying “good video footage” of the shooter that they have used to track his movements before and after the shooting.

Following Thursday’s news conference, the FBI in Salt Lake City released surveillance images of the person of interest wanted in connection with the shooting. The images show a person who appears to be a white male, wearing all dark clothing, including a dark long-sleeved collarless top with what appears to be an image on the front that includes an American flag. The man in the images is also wearing a dark ball cap and sunglasses.

The FBI announced a $100,000 reward is being offered for information leading to the capture of the suspect.

Mason said investigators believe the suspect arrived at the UVU campus at 11:52 a.m. local time, about 28 minutes before Kirk, the CEO and co-founder of the conservative grass roots organization Turning Point USA, was shot. He said the deadly shot was fired from a building a substantial distance from where Kirk was speaking to a crowd, authorities estimate was about 3,000 people. He did not disclose which building the shooter fired from.

“We have tracked his movements onto the campus, through stairwells, up to the roof, across the roof to the shooting location,” Mason said. “After the shooting, we were able to track his movements as he moved to the other side of the building, jumped off of the building, and fled off of the campus into a neighborhood.”

He said investigators combed the neighborhood for the suspect and contacted residents with doorbell cameras to analyze.

“The individual appears to be of college age,” said Mason, adding that the person of interest “blended in well with the college institution.”

Brad Garrett, a retired FBI agent and an ABC News contributor, said the evidence investigators have shared so far paints a picture of a suspect who planned the shooting down to the last detail, including discarding the possible murder weapon along his escape path.

“He probably did that [because] he didn’t want to be seen carrying a weapon, running through a neighborhood, or walking through a neighborhood,” Garrett said.

Garrett said the discovery of the weapon is a major clue that will give investigators additional leads to track down.

“Where did it come from? It could very well be registered or purchased by this shooter. We’ll have to see,” Garrett said. “Was it stolen? Whatever it might be, the ATF [the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives] will help them immediately, and they probably already know what that is.”

WE HERE AT GOOD SHEPHERD NEWS MEDIA BELIEVE ITS IS OUR OPINION BASED ON THE VIDEO BELOW THAT THE KILLER HAD PARTNERS ON THE INSIDE

Its with our deepest regrets to reports such a heinous evil crime, our Christian Brother CHARLIE KIRK has PASSED, Our prayers go out to our  heavenly father to take Charlie Kirk into heaven, to forgive him of any transgressions he may have done so that he may be in heaven with you father, IN JESUS MIGHTY NAME, AMEN

Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist and close ally of President Donald Trump, was shot and killed Wednesday at a Utah college event in an act that drew renewed attention to the threat of political violence across the United States.

The death was announced on social media by Trump, who praised the 31-year-old Kirk, the co-founder and CEO of the youth organization Turning Point USA, as “Great, and even Legendary.”

“No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie,” Trump posted on his Truth Social account.

The suspected shooter has not been arrested, Orem, Utah, Mayor David Young said. A person who was taken into custody by law enforcement at the university where Kirk was speaking was not the suspect, according to a person familiar with the investigation who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Videos posted to social media from Utah Valley University show Kirk speaking into a handheld microphone while sitting under a white tent emblazoned with the slogans “The American Comeback” and “Prove Me Wrong.” A single shot rings out and Kirk can be seen reaching up with his right hand as a large volume of blood gushes from the left side of his neck. Stunned spectators are heard gasping and screaming before people start to run away. The AP was able to confirm the videos were taken at Sorensen Center courtyard on the Utah Valley University campus.

“We are confirming that he was shot and we are praying for Charlie,” said Aubrey Laitsch, public relations manager for Turning Point USA.

Kirk was speaking at a debate hosted by his nonprofit political organization. Immediately before the shooting, Kirk was taking questions for an audience member about mass shootings and gun violence.

“Do you know how many transgender Americans have been mass shooters over the last 10 years?” an audience members asked. Kirk responded: “Too many.”

The questioner followed up: “Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?”

“Counting or not counting gang violence?” Kirk asked.

Then a single shot rang out.

The event had been met with divided opinions on campus. An online petition calling for university administrators to bar Kirk from appearing received nearly 1,000 signatures. The university issued a statement last week citing First Amendment rights and affirming its “commitment to free speech, intellectual inquiry, and constructive dialogue.”

Last week, Kirk posted on X images of news clips showing his visit to Utah colleges was sparking controversy. He wrote, “What’s going on in Utah?”

Trump and a host of Republican and Democratic elected officials decried the shooting and offered prayers for Kirk on social media.

“We must all pray for Charlie Kirk, who has been shot. A great guy from top to bottom. GOD BLESS HIM!” Trump posted on Truth Social.

The shooting comes amid a spike in political violence in the United States across all parts of the ideological spectrum. The attacks include the assassination of a Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband at their house in June, the firebombing of a Colorado parade to demand Hamas release hostages, and a fire set at the house of Pennsylvania’s governor, who is Jewish, in April. The most notorious of these events is the shooting of Trump during a campaign rally last year.

Former Utah congressman Jason Chaffetz, a Republican who was at the event, said in an interview on Fox News Channel that he heard one shot and saw Kirk go back.

“It seemed like it was a close shot,” Chaffetz said, who seemed shaken as he spoke.

He said there was a light police presence at the event and Kirk had some security but not enough.

“Utah is one of the safest places on the planet,” he said. “And so we just don’t have these types of things.”

Turning Point was founded in suburban Chicago in 2012 by Kirk, then 18, and William Montgomery, a tea party activist, to proselytize on college campuses for low taxes and limited government. It was not an immediate success.

But Kirk’s zeal for confronting liberals in academia eventually won over an influential set of conservative financiers.

Despite early misgivings, Turning Point enthusiastically backed Trump after he clinched the GOP nomination in 2016. Kirk served as a personal aide to Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, during the general election campaign.

Soon, Kirk was a regular presence on cable TV, where he leaned into the culture wars and heaped praise on the then-president. Trump and his son were equally effusive and often spoke at Turning Point conferences.

Charlie Kirk Shot at Utah University Multiple Times – PRAYERS for CHARLIE KIRK

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

CAUTINON THE VIDEO BELOW IS THE REAL VIDEO, ITS DISTURBING AND VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED. DO NOT LET YOUR CHILDREN SEE THIS VIDEO

Charlie Kirk, a well-known right-wing political activist, was reportedly shot in the neck at an event at Utah Valley University on Wednesday.

The university confirmed the shooting in a post on X, writing:

“Today at about 12:10 a shot was fired at the visiting speaker, Charlie Kirk. He was hit and taken from the location by his security. Campus police is investigating, a suspect is in custody.”

Bystanders told the Deseret News that Kirk was shot during a Q&A with students.

His condition was not immediately known.

Kirk is the CEO and co-founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point USA. The organization also confirmed he was shot, according to the Associated Press.

Videos posted to social media from Utah Valley University show Kirk speaking into a handheld microphone while sitting under a white tent emblazoned with the slogans “The American Comeback” and “Prove Me Wrong.”

A single shot rings out, and Kirk can be seen reaching up with his right hand as a large volume of blood gushes from the left side of his neck. Stunned spectators are heard gasping and screaming before people start to run away.

A spokesperson for the university told the New York Times that Kirk was struck by a suspect who had fired from the Losee Center, a building about 200 yards away. The suspect had been taken into custody, she said, and was not a student.

President Donald Trump responded to the shooting, writing in a post on Truth Social:

“We must all pray for Charlie Kirk, who has been shot. A great guy from top to bottom. GOD BLESS HIM!”

At a Turning Point USA event in 2023, Kirk said gun deaths were “unfortunately” worth it to defend the Second Amendment.

According to Newsweek, he said:

“You will never live in a society when you have an armed citizenry and you won’t have a single gun death … I think it’s worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational.”

Lawmakers quickly sounded off after conservative activist Charlie Kirk was shot during an event on his “American Comeback Tour” at Utah Valley University on Wednesday afternoon.

Prayers for Kirk’s recovery as well as condemnation of political violence poured in from both Democrats and Republicans minutes after the news broke.

“This is a good time to pray,” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, said on X, adding that he was monitoring the situation.

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., “Please join us in praying for our good friend, Charlie Kirk.”

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk speaks during the Turning Point Action’s The Believers Summit in West Palm Beach, Florida on July 26, 2024. (REUTERS/Marco Bello)

Rep. Eugene Vindman, D-Va., a first-term Democrat, wrote online, “Political violence has NO place in our society. I am closely monitoring the events in Utah.”

“The attack on Charlie Kirk today is a horrific act of political violence. Praying for his safety and for his family in this trying time. We must reject and condemn political violence in all its forms,” Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., said in a statement.

The top Democrat in the House, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York similarly condemned the violence.

“Political violence is NEVER acceptable. My thoughts and prayers are with Charlie Kirk and his family,” Jeffries wrote in a statement.

The top Democrat and Republican in the Senate both sounded off with similar sentiments in the minutes after Kirk was shot.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks with reporters at the Capitol in Washington on June 2, 2025.  (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

“There is no place in our country for political violence. Period, full stop. Please join me in praying for Charlie Kirk,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., wrote on X.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote on the site, “Political violence has no place in America. This shooting is horrifying, and I’m praying for Charlie Kirk and his family.”

Kirk also got support from former Rep. Gabby Giffords, D-Ariz., who left Congress after she was shot and nearly killed in a political assassination attempt in 2011.

“I’m horrified to hear that Charlie Kirk was shot at an event in Utah. Democratic societies will always have political disagreements, but we must never allow America to become a country that confronts those disagreements with violence,” Giffords wrote.

She added that she and her husband, Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., are praying for Kirk’s recovery.

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., condemned gun violence after the shooting on Wednesday.

Former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., also wished Kirk well after the shooting. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

“The horrific shooting today at Utah Valley University is reprehensible. Political violence has absolutely no place in our nation. All Americans should pray for Charlie Kirk’s recovery and hold the entire UVU community in our hearts as they endure the trauma of this gun violence,” Pelosi wrote in a statement.

Ellen Treanor, Associate Vice President of Strategic Communications Management at Utah Valley University, told Fox News that a suspect was in custody after Kirk’s shooting.

A White House official, meanwhile, told Fox News that the tragic event was being monitored in the situation room and by Secretary of State Marco Rubio in his role as National Security Advisor. source

OUR DEEPEST CONDOLENCES TO THE FAMILY, CHARLIE HAS PASSED
OF CHARLIE KIRK OUR PRAYERS AND THOUGHTS OUR WITH YOU, YOUR FAMILY AND HIM AND HIS CHILDREN

Conservative activist Charlie Kirk dies after being shot at Utah college event

The Rosenhan experiment was conducted by a psychologist named David Rosenhan, and it’s been considered to be one of the most striking studies in the field since then.

Rosenhan experiment

In 1973 a bombshell study appeared in the premier scientific journal Science. It was called “On Being Sane in Insane Places.” Its author, a Stanford psychology professor named David Rosenhan, claimed that by faking their way into psychiatric hospitals, he and eight other pseudo-patients had proven that psychiatrists were unable to diagnose mental illness accurately.

Psychiatrists panicked, and, as a result, re-wrote what’s known as “psychiatry’s bible”—the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM. The study and the subsequent overhaul of the DSM changed the field forever. So it was a surprise when, decades later, a journalist reopened Rosenhan’s files and discovered that the study was full of inconsistencies and even blatant fraud. So should we throw out everything it revealed? Or can something based on a lie still contain any truths?

On being sane in insane places – Rosenhan, D.L. (1973)