You never know where these videos will end up. Everything discussed here comes from footage I watched on my phone—especially two major clips: one showing a gun on camera during the Charlie Kirk incident, and another suggesting the involvement of Lance Twigs, the boyfriend. Initially, both seemed insignificant, but after reviewing them on a larger screen, there’s more substance than I thought—especially in the second clip. This might be what Candace Owens was referencing when she said she wanted to find “the guy with the ponytail,” possibly Lance Twigs.

Key Figures: Tyler Robinson and Lance Twigs

Tyler Robinson, the accused, was a straight-A student whose family insists he’s innocent and has never confessed. In contrast, Lance Twigs was kicked out of his family home for problematic behavior, described as a troubled youth, and has disappeared since the shooting—no one has seen or heard from him. Crucially, Twigs allegedly had access to Robinson’s devices and Discord account. If the video evidence is genuine, Twigs could have been directly involved or even framed Robinson, possibly planting the gun, messages, and misleading the police.

The “David Taber” Mystery

Candace Owens pointed out another suspicious figure: the man who cheered after Charlie Kirk was shot, known only as “David.” Someone online identified him as David Taber, though his real name may be Matt Taber. Despite being widely discussed, the FBI hasn’t publicly addressed him, raising questions about investigative priorities.

Phil Lyman’s Bizarre Behavior

Phil Lyman, a Utah gubernatorial candidate, appeared in several odd videos regarding the shooting. In one, he claims not to have seen the incident; in another, he describes witnessing it. His inconsistent statements and peculiar body language have fueled speculation about possible staging or scripted interviews. Clips show him interacting with witnesses and seemingly orchestrating retellings of the event, adding to the confusion.

Viral Footage: Security or Suspect?

A widely shared video shows a man with a gun running from the crowd after the shooting. Some claim he was the first to flee, gun in hand, and remains unidentified. However, upon closer inspection, this individual is likely a security guard responding to the chaos, not the shooter. The editing of these viral clips often distorts context, fueling online conspiracy theories.

Lance Twigs: The Man on the Roof?

Another video—possibly 30 minutes after the shooting—shows a man matching Twigs’ description walking out of the UVU campus, hiding his face upon noticing the camera. While it’s impossible to confirm his identity, the behavior is suspicious and may warrant further investigation. Candace Owens’ focus on “the guy with the ponytail” could be referencing this person.

The Role of Online Outrage and Extremism

The aftermath of the shooting unleashed a wave of extreme online reactions, from calls for violence against politicians to deranged social media posts. One teacher allegedly celebrated Kirk’s assassination and targeted Republican students, creating a hostile environment at a local school. Such incidents highlight the toxic polarization and the challenges of separating fact from viral fiction.

The Power and Pitfalls of Viral Content

The incentive online is often to confuse, not clarify. Deceptively edited clips, unverified rumors, and emotionally charged commentary spread rapidly, making it difficult to discern truth from misinformation. Even well-meaning creators can inadvertently amplify false leads or distract from the real investigation.

Conclusion: What Do We Really Know?

The Charlie Kirk shooting remains under intense scrutiny, with multiple theories, suspects, and viral clips muddying the waters. While some figures—like Tyler Robinson and Lance Twigs—are central to the investigation, much remains uncertain. The role of security personnel, the behavior of witnesses, and the spread of online outrage all complicate the search for truth.

As the case develops, it’s crucial to critically examine evidence, question viral narratives, and avoid jumping to conclusions based on incomplete or misleading information. Justice demands patience, rigor, and a commitment to facts over speculation.