The recent assassination of Charlie Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA, at Utah Valley University has sparked widespread scrutiny over the security measures in place during the event. Brian Harpole, the head of Integrity Security Solutions and a veteran law enforcement officer, stated that the tragedy exposed preventable flaws in how the event was secured.
Harpole claimed his team repeatedly expressed concerns about the exposure of rooftops, restrictions on drone usage, and the lack of sufficient officers in the days leading up to the Sept. 10 event. Despite these warnings, the team was assured that the rooftop areas were covered by law-enforcement, a claim Harpole stated he took at face value.
The security team, which included 12 members, had prepared for potential threats and implemented measures like concentric zones and barricades. However, they were confined to a 30-meter radius around the stage, unable to provide full coverage due to jurisdictional limitations. Harpole also noted that the local Orem Police Department, which had access to drones and a SWAT unit, was never requested for assistance despite a mutual-aid agreement.
The incident has prompted a comprehensive review by the university, with officials confirming an internal investigation into the security procedures and the circumstances surrounding the shooting. UVU has also announced plans to hire additional police and security managers to enhance campus safety. This tragic event has raised important questions about the coordination between private security and law enforcement during large public events like campus gatherings.
Harpole emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability, stating that his decision to speak publicly was to ensure that lessons are learned from the tragedy. He believes that clear lines of authority and collaboration between all parties are essential to prevent similar incidents in the future. UVU has reaffirmed its commitment to safety, with officials stating that a third-party analysis will be made public to provide insights into improving campus security.
As the investigation continues, questions remain about how the security team was limited in its abilities and whether more could have been done to prevent the attack. The case has also raised broader concerns about the role of private security in protecting public figures and the potential for jurisdictional gaps to contribute to such tragedies.