An independent review found Utah Valley University lacked a robust security plan and failed its own major-event rules the day Charlie Kirk was shot and killed on campus, gaps the Kirk family says demand real accountability.

A 158-page independent review released Friday concluded Utah Valley University did not put a serious security plan in place for the Turning Point USA event where Charlie Kirk was shot and killed on Sept. 10, 2025. Investigators found the school’s actions were “significantly inconsistent” with its own policies for major events.

The outdoor TPUSA gathering drew several thousand people to a campus courtyard. The New York Post reported that the review stopped short of finding bad faith, yet still catalogued planning failures that “warrant attention” for future campus events.

Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, was killed during the outdoor program. The review said the event carried clear risk factors: a high-profile speaker, expected protest activity, uncertain crowd size, and an open setting near elevated vantage points.

Campus courtyard left open to elevated threats

Investigators described the site as “surrounded by buildings, elevated areas, pedestrian routes, and multiple vantage points.” That layout made line-of-sight checks, elevated-position review, building access control, arrival and departure planning, crowd control, protest management, and fixed-post assignments especially important.

None of that formal work was completed. The report found no comprehensive written Security Assessment or Event Action Plan. There was no line-of-sight assessment, no protective-operations review, no pre-event briefing, and no structured walk-through with all key security stakeholders.

Coordination with Kirk’s private security team and outside law enforcement was also unclear. Day-of staffing started with only three university law enforcement officers. A university policy chief later raised the number to six after seeing the size of the crowd.

Related criminal proceedings have continued in the months since, including a Utah judge’s order sending the accused killer to trial.

UVU deferred the key calls to TPUSA

The review traced the trouble back to planning months earlier. In an August 2025 meeting, some university officials raised concerns about an outdoor site and suggested other locations. A TPUSA representative insisted Kirk speak in the campus courtyard because he had used that space before and the group knew the ground.

Breitbart reported that school officials specifically flagged major risks at the outdoor Fountain Courtyard, including open access and high-ground vulnerabilities. TPUSA representative Maycee Crofts pressed ahead with the courtyard and with the group’s own ticketing system. That choice left university officials unsure how many people would actually show up. UVU’s police chief texted Kirk’s security adviser before the event, but no meeting followed.

The independent reviewers were blunt about the result. They wrote that the university should have kept decision-making authority over venue selection, ticketing, access control, and other conditions needed for campus safety. “In our assessment, those decisions were consequential,” the report said.

“The September 10 TPUSA event presented several characteristics that warranted a more formal event security planning process,”

the investigators stated. They added that while some coordination occurred among university stakeholders, UVUPD, UVU Event Services, and TPUSA representatives, the club event still lacked the written plans the risks required.

TPUSA and Kirk’s private security team did not take part in the review.

Family presses for accountability as the university answers

Kirk’s family has already moved toward a wrongful-death claim. Earlier this month they issued a notice accusing the school of “reckless decisions,” including the absence of emergency first responders they say hastened his death.

Family attorney Brett Parkinson put the responsibility squarely on the institution. “The buck stopped with UVU leadership and law enforcement,” he said in a statement obtained by the Associated Press. “Justice for Charlie and his family requires true accountability for UVU’s fatal shortcomings that day.” Legal observers have also examined whether Utah immunity rules could still block that claim.

Utah Valley President Jon Anderson answered the review by saying the school must “learn from the findings of this review, and follow through on its recommendations.” He also claimed “meaningful progress in strengthening campus safety over the past year.”

The Washington Examiner noted the same core finding: employees did not “act in bad faith or in willful and wanton disregard” for safety. That conclusion sits beside the documented shortfalls and the family’s sharper charge of fatal failure.

Separate court filings in the murder case have included an agent’s account of the accused gunman’s alleged texts describing motive. Preliminary hearing exchanges also drew rebukes after a defense attorney labeled Kirk “hateful,” a moment covered in earlier reporting on the case.

Taxpayers, meanwhile, face a mounting bill for the defense of the man charged in the killing, a cost tracked as the $10 million defense tab continues to grow.

The report does not accuse any UVU employee of deliberate malice. It does show a university that deferred critical security choices, skipped its own major-event playbook, and left a high-profile outdoor event with thin staffing and no full written plan. When a campus hosts thousands for a controversial speaker, the minimum standard is clear command, clear posts, and clear control of the ground. Utah Valley University did not meet that standard on Sept. 10, 2025. The family is right to demand the school answer for it.