South Carolina pastor charged with allegedly cyberstalking wife more than a year after she died from suicide

(SALT LAKE CITY) — Minutes after publicly identifying the suspect in the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Republican Utah Gov. Spencer Cox condemned social media.

“Social media is a cancer on our society right now,” Cox told reporters during a press conference two days after Kirk was shot and killed during an event at Utah Valley University. “I would encourage people to log off, turn off, touch grass.”

Sen. James Langford, R-Okla., echoed such criticism days later. “Social media is always pushing who’s the angriest, who’s the loudest, who says the craziest thing, that’s what gets repeated over and over and over again,” Langford said during an appearance on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Co., described social media as “deeply corrosive.”

Some experts who spoke to ABC News blamed social media for amplifying public rancor and spreading graphic imagery, but they stopped short of identifying online platforms as a lone, direct cause of political violence. Social media has likely worsened a risk rooted in factors like social discord, inflammatory rhetoric from prominent figures and the availability of firearms, they said.

“Social media is certainly a contributing factor, but it’s like pouring gasoline on a fire — it’s not the fire itself,” Robert Pape, a political scientist and director of the Chicago Project on Security and Threats at the University of Chicago, told ABC News.

On Sept. 10, ​​Kirk was shot and killed while on stage at Utah Valley University for the first stop on his latest speaking tour of college campuses. The alleged gunman, identified by police as 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, was arrested almost 48 hours later and faces several charges, including aggravated murder.

Robinson’s apparent use of the online platform Discord and video games drew attention to whether such online networks may play a role in stoking political violence, though details of their possible impact on Robinson remain limited.

Discord confirmed that two hours before Robinson was taken into custody, he was posting on the platform and allegedly told a small group of friends: “Hey guys, I have bad news for you all … It was me at UVU yesterday. im sorry for all of this.”

FBI Director Kash Patel addressed the Discord message during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, saying that the FBI is investigating “anyone and everyone involved in that Discord chat” with Robinson. Patel said there are “a lot more” than 20 people linked to Robinson on Discord, “and we’re running them all down. … Every single one.”

X did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment. Neither did TikTok. Facebook and Instagram’s parent company, Meta, declined to comment.

A spokesperson for Discord told ABC News the company has not “found or received any evidence that the suspect planned this incident on Discord or promoted violence on Discord.”

“We continue to work closely with the FBI and local authorities, and will continue to deliver prompt responses to their requests for assistance,” Discord added.

Discord forbids “hateful conduct or the use of hate speech” on the platform, the company’s website says. “We define hate speech as any expression that degrades, vilifies, or dehumanizes individuals, incites hostility towards specific groups, or promotes harm based on protected characteristics.”

Last year, a Meta spokesperson told researchers at New York University: “We want our platforms to be a place where people can safely express themselves. That’s why we take action on content, like hate speech, bullying, or harassment, that violates our Community Standards and why we continue to invest in new technologies and methods to help protect people on our services.”

Lisa Hayes, head of safety public policy and senior counsel for the Americas at TikTok, told the NYU researchers the company takes down more than 98% of material posted by hateful organizations and individuals and works with experts “to keep ahead of evolving trends.”

On its website, X says: “We are committed to combating abuse motivated by hatred, prejudice or intolerance, particularly abuse that seeks to silence the voices of those who have been historically marginalized. For this reason, we prohibit behavior that targets individuals or groups with abuse based on their perceived membership in a protected category. “

Video footage of the fatal shooting circulated widely on social media platforms in the immediate aftermath of Kirk’s killing, raising concerns among some observers about the effects that may result from mass exposure to such graphic imagery.

Some experts underscored the elevated risk of political violence created by social media, saying its algorithms favor provocative posts that induce user engagement but exacerbate political division. Additionally, in some cases, social media can largely replace a user’s in-person interactions, leaving them socially isolated, some experts added.

“We are at a very dangerous moment with social media, especially having a large population of highly alienated individuals spending most, if not all, of their time in this virtual space,” Walter Scheirer, a professor of engineering at Notre Dame University who studies online disinformation, told ABC News.

Pape, who regularly conducts surveys on political violence in partnership with NORC, said his research has found heavy users of social media — those who spend six to eight hours on the platforms each day — are more likely to support political violence. However, such individuals are relatively unusual, making up as little as 10% of those who support political violence, Pape said.

Last year, researchers at New York University and Public Circle Research, a private firm, who reviewed 400 studies related to the topic, found social media is “exploited to facilitate political intimidation and violence.”

“These conclusions are quite different from saying that social media alone causes political violence,” the researchers noted, citing other factors like partisan cable news and attackers prone to violence.

Experts who spoke to ABC News also pointed to other factors behind a rise in political violence, such as hostile rhetoric put forward by public figures and access to guns.

“Social media allows for the amplification of a message that’s already happening. If we look at the rhetoric in the U.S. over time, the language politicians are using to describe their domestic political opponents has gotten much harsher and more aggressive. Social media isn’t the cause of that, but it can amplify those voices,” Thomas Zeitzoff, a professor of justice, law and criminology at American University, told ABC News.

Some experts cited previous waves of political violence, such as a spate of assassinations in the late 1960s, which predated online platforms.

Robert Shapiro, a professor of government and public affairs at Columbia University, questioned whether the removal of social media would meaningfully reduce the likelihood of political violence. “There’s more than enough political conflict out there to provoke violence,” Shapiro told ABC News.

The killing of Kirk comes amid a wave of political violence. Over recent months, a gunman fired more than 180 shots at the headquarters of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a Democratic Minnesota lawmaker and her husband were shot and killed in their home and another Minnesota state lawmaker and his wife were shot and wounded by the same gunman.

During that same period, two staff members at the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C., were shot and killed after an event at the city’s Jewish Museum.

Over the course of the 2024 presidential campaign, then-candidate Trump survived two assassination attempts.

“This is something we’re not used to seeing in our country,” Pape said. “It hasn’t been our normal, but it’s our new normal now.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(NEW YORK) — A new prosecutor has been selected to take over the Fulton County, Georgia, election interference case against President Donald Trump and others after District Attorney Fani Willis’ disqualification.

In a statement on Friday, the director of the agency tasked with finding the replacement said he had chosen someone new: himself.

Pete Skandalakis, the executive director of the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia, said he chose himself to take over the case after he was “unable” to find someone else to accept the job.

“Several prosecutors were contacted and, while all were respectful and professional, each declined the appointment,” he said in a statement. “The decision to assume responsibility for this matter was reached only after careful and deliberate consideration.”

Trump and 18 others pleaded not guilty in August 2023 to all charges in a sweeping racketeering indictment for alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election in the state of Georgia.

The charges, which were brought following Trump’s Jan. 2, 2021, phone call in which he asked Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to “find” the votes needed to win the state, allege that the defendants solicited state leaders throughout the country, harassed and misled a Georgia election worker, and pushed phony claims that the election was stolen, all in an effort for Trump to remain in power despite his election loss.

The selection of a new prosecutor fell to the attorneys’ council after the Georgia Supreme Court in September declined to take up Willis’ appeal of her removal from the case over her relationship with one of the prosecutors on the case.

Skandalakis was facing a Nov. 14 deadline to appoint someone new or the case would face dismissal, according to an order from Fulton County Judge Scott McAfee. Skandalakis said he did not believe McAfee dismissing the case because of the missed deadline would be “the right course of action.”

Skandalakis wrote in his statement that he had “not had sufficient time” to complete a review the case file, saying he received 101 boxes of documents from the DA’s office in late October, and an 8-terabyte hard drive of the case file just last week. He said that by appointing himself to the case he can “complete a comprehensive review and make an informed decision regarding how best to proceed” with the case, whose future is still up the air.

“My only objective is to ensure that this case is handled properly, fairly, and with full transparency discharging my duties without fear, favor, or affection,” Skandalakis said.

Trump this week issued a sweeping pardon to all defendants in the Georgia election case and all other cases involving alleged 2020 “fake elector” plots, although the act was largely symbolic as Trump does not have the ability to pardon state charges.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WEST PALM BEACH, Fla.) — Ryan Routh, who is representing himself as he faces charges of trying to kill Donald Trump on Trump’s West Palm Beach golf course last year, rested his defense at his trial in Florida Monday following some chaotic testimony.

Routh, who lacks any legal education or experience, was cut off multiple times by U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon while questioning the three witnesses he called, two of whom testified about his character.

Routh declined to testify in his own defense. Closing arguments are scheduled for Tuesday morning. 

Judge Cannon ended the day by warning Routh that she will bar him from further addressing the jury if his closing argument is “disconnected” from the evidence in the case.

“Any argument you make … must be reasonably tied to the admitted evidence. Do you understand?” Cannon asked Routh, telling him that any deviation will “cause a problem.”  

“Yes, Your Honor,” Routh said. 

‘Give it your worst’

Routh argued Monday that the witnesses testifying about his character would show the jury he was incapable of killing Trump — though it risked opening the door to prosecutors introducing potentially damaging information about him. 

“Give it your worst,” Routh told Judge Cannon after she warned of the dangers of using character witnesses. “We can analyze every moment of my life. We are here to ascertain the truth; we are going to give the jury everything.” 

Routh then called to the stand his longtime friend Marshall Hinshaw, who told the jury that he has known Routh for twenty years as both a friend and coworker. 

“Is it safe to say you knew everything in my life, and I know everything in your life?” Routh asked. 

“I think so,” Hinshaw said. 

“Is it your personal opinion of me that I am peaceful and gentle, and nonviolent?” Routh asked. 

“I would say so,” Hinshaw said. “I would not expect you to harm anyone, Ryan.”

Routh proceeded to ask Hinshaw about how he treated his employees, his involvement in his community, whether his ex-wife was “not the easiest person to work with,” and his parenting style. 

“Would you say I was a decent parent?” he asked. 

“Absolutely,” Hinshaw said. 

“You are not aware of me hitting or spanking my children?” Routh asked. 

“No, maybe the other way around,” Hinshaw said. 

“On the worst days when everything was falling apart, was I calm or patient?” Routh asked. 

“Everyone looked up to you and respected you in that circle,” Hinshaw said before Cannon intervened.

“This must cease,” the judge said. “I am going to ask you to wrap up.”

“You always took care of people,” Hinshaw said. “You were the No. 1 person in my phone … you were great for me.” 

During a brief cross-examination, a federal prosecutor sought to highlight that Hinshaw stopped seeing Routh regularly after 2017. He also asked if the allegations against Routh — including that he allegedly vowed to kill the Trump so he “cannot get reelected” — would change his impression of his longtime friend. 

Hinshaw largely stood by Routh and pushed back when prosecutors sought to highlight Hinshaw’s rap sheet of larceny offenses. 

“Like many people in America, I got addicted to drugs,” Hinshaw explained to the jury. 

When Hinshaw concluded his cross-examination, he briefly flashed Routh the peace sign while leaving court. 

‘You have always been a jolly person’

Routh’s second witness was Atwell Milsun, a longtime friend of Routh’s son Oren. 

“Would you consider me to be gentle, and peaceful and nonviolent?” Routh again asked. 

“I have never seen you as a violent person,” Milsun said. “Under stress, you have always been a jolly person.”

Routh then asked Milsun about Routh’s involvement in the community, including his helping employ others, lending people money, and assisting with community projects. “We are not talking about the police,” Routh joked. 

“Did I do enough?” Routh asked Milsun about his involvement in the community. 

“You did everything you could,” Milsun said. 

Judge Cannon susequently cut off Routh’s questions, saying, “It’s crossed the line many times.” 

‘I am not going to guess that’

Routh began his defense with a meandering direct examination of a firearms expert who tested the weapon allegedly used for the assassination attempt. 

Routh attempted to focus his questions on the low likelihood that his assassination attempt would be successful because of issues with his weapon and the location of his alleged sniper perch. 

Michael McClay, a Marine Corps veteran and expert in sniper tactics, noted that the firearm — a Chinese-made variant of the AK-47 — would routinely misfire, that the rifle’s scope appeared to be secured with a combination of putty, tape, and glue, that Routh was poorly camouflaged, and that hitting a target from 300 yards away would be difficult. 

“Is there any way you could put a chance of success rate?” Routh asked. 

“With the severity and seriousness of this, I am not going to guess that,” McClay responded. 

“I respect that,” Routh said. 

Despite McClay testifying as a defense witness, he appeared to be confused by many of Routh’s questions and declined to answer at times. 

“Did you suffer mental anguish from being shot at?” Routh asked McClay, a veteran who saw combat. 

“I don’t wish to answer that,” McClay said. 

The main thrust of Routh’s direct examination of McClay was Routh’s suggestion that the assassination attempt would have failed due to his own incompetence and his being a self-described “coward.” Prosecutors had argued that Routh planned his attempt for months and set up a sniper’s perch with body armor to ensure that he would be able to shoot Trump.

“If someone is not dedicated to their mission 100%, is an exit plan vital to those who are cowards?” he asked McClay. 

“I don’t understand,” McClay said. 

“In your experience in the military, does it take a special type of person to take another person’s life?” Routh asked, prompting Judge Aileen Cannon to cut off the question.

After Judge Cannon criticized Routh for the “tenor” and “clear impropriety” of the question, Routh unsuccessfully argued that the question demonstrates he would not follow through with the assassination attempt. 

“This whole case revolves around intent and state of mind … whether someone has the capacity [to kill],” Routh argued. 

Prosecutors briefly cross-examined McClay to highlight how the weapon’s misfiring could be attributed to testing done on the gun after the shooting. The FBI used acid to try to recover the gun’s serial number, which had been scratched off.

‘That information is relevant’

Because Routh called two witnesses who spoke about character, prosecutors said they may seek to elicit testimony about some of Routh’s other alleged bad acts, including his alleged calls to kill politicians, like Trump, as well as his neighbors in Hawaii; racially offensive statements he allegedly made; and statements prosecutors say he made about his assassination plans in which he allegedly said he was “not going to go down easy for law enforcement” and that he would “shoot first.”

“If the defendant is going to try to develop he is nonviolent, that information is relevant,” prosecutor John Shipley said.

Routh, in earlier court filings, broadly described his defense strategy as emphasizing his “gentleness, peacefulness, and nonviolent caring for humanity.” 

Among the exhibits Routh planned to use were a design for a DIY skatepark, videos and photos showing him recruiting and fundraising for the Ukrainian military, a photo of a flash mob he organized, and a church bulletin from 1980 when he was awarded an Eagle Scout award.  

At the conclusion of Routh’s defense, federal prosecutors suggested they might not present a rebuttal case but said they have not made a final decision. 

Judge Cannon — who has repeatedly clashed with Routh over his unusual courtroom tactics — curtailed much of Routh’s defense by blocking many of his proposed witnesses, including an ex-girlfriend and several Palestinian scholars, and prohibiting him from arguing that his actions were justified or that he would not have followed through with the assassination attempt.  

Routh’s unorthodox defense case follows seven days of testimony from 38 witnesses called by federal prosecutors seeking to prove Routh came within a few hundred yards of killing then-candidate Trump on Sept. 15. Jurors heard from the Secret Service agent who said he spotted Routh hiding in the bushes of Trump’s golf course with an assault rifle, the man who illegally sold the gun to Routh, and a series of law enforcement witnesses who tied Routh’s fingerprints and DNA to the gun abandoned at the crime scene. 

FBI agents also testified that Trump would have been less than 130 feet from Routh had Routh not been spotted by a Secret Service agent. Routh’s rifle, they argued, can hit a target ten times that, and the shot could have been made without a scope. 

Two brothers who worked with Routh also testified about receiving a box from him in April 2024 — five months before the alleged assassination attempt — that contained wires, pipes, and bullets. After Routh’s arrest, the brothers said they opened the box to find a 12-page letter that prosecutors argue amounts to a confession from Routh. 

“This was an assassination attempt on Donald Trump, but I failed you. I tried my best and gave it all the gumption I could muster. It is up to you now to finish the job; and I will offer $150,000 to whomever can complete the job,” the handwritten letter said.

Routh has argued that the letter does not describe the alleged assassination attempt. 

At the conclusion of the government’s case on Friday, Routh argued that prosecutors had failed to prove their case and that Judge Cannon,  who previously oversaw and dismissed one of Trump’s criminal cases, should toss the case. Routh claimed that the area in the bushes where he was allegedly found was a public area where anyone could carry a gun. 

“They maybe proved that someone was outside the fence with a gun, but the gun was never fired,” Routh argued.

Judge Cannon denied Routh’s motion, concluding that prosecutors have provided enough evidence to let the jury decide the case. 

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.