The family of Charlie Kirk has officially filed a wrongful death notice against the state of Utah and Utah Valley University, following the tragic incident that resulted in his death last year. The notice, which paves the way for a possible lawsuit, was lodged on behalf of Kirk’s estate as well as his parents, Robert and Kathryn Kirk, alongside his widow Erika Kirk and their two young children. This filing came just one day before the anniversary of Kirk’s fatal shooting.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(jpeg)/charlie-kirk-090726-ef81dc39153c4208953189e34dfc41dc.jpg)
The legal document, dated September 9, accuses Utah Valley University and its police department of severe negligence that allegedly contributed to the circumstances leading to Kirk’s death. D. Loren Washburn, the attorney representing the Kirk family, claimed that the school’s actions constituted “stunning failures and reckless decisions,” which created a “foreseeable danger” for Kirk. He further described Kirk as a significant public figure, noting his connections to high-profile personalities, including former President Donald Trump and influential politicians in Utah.
In response to the allegations, a spokesperson for Utah Valley University stated that the institution had received the wrongful death notice and would handle the matter following its established protocols. Sharon Turner, the spokesperson, emphasised the university’s commitment to supporting its community during this difficult time. The Utah Office of the Attorney General has directed inquiries regarding the case to the university itself.
The incident occurred during an outdoor event on September 10, 2025, when 23-year-old Tyler Robinson is alleged to have shot Kirk from a nearby rooftop. Prosecutors have charged Robinson with multiple serious offences, including aggravated murder and unlawful discharge of a firearm. His trial is pending, and he could face the death penalty if convicted of the charges.
During the hearings leading up to the trial, Kirk’s parents and widow were present in the courtroom as evidence was brought forth. Among the points raised by Washburn were serious claims about the university police department’s failure to adequately assess the risks of holding an event in that particular location. He highlighted that there was neither a meaningful risk assessment conducted nor a written security plan for “The American Comeback Tour” event, where Kirk was a prominent speaker.
In his notice, Washburn pointed to the dangers inherent in the campus environment, specifically referring to unsecured rooftops that presented a potential threat. He made an alarming connection to a previous incident where a rooftop sniper targeted Trump during a campaign event, suggesting that the university should have been aware of the heightened risks surrounding politically charged events.
The notice also details a specific lack of security resources at the event, indicating that the university president, Astrid Tuminez, declined a proposal from campus police to increase on-site security personnel to more than six officers for the event, which attracted thousands of attendees. This, according to Washburn, significantly compromised the safety of those present.
Compounding the university’s failures, Washburn highlighted that the institution failed to seek help from nearby law enforcement from Orem and Provo. He argued that this lack of coordination ultimately delayed the response required after Kirk was shot, forcing him to be transported to a hospital in a private vehicle rather than an ambulance.
In an alarming exchange between university officials shortly before the event, a Turning Point USA representative raised concerns regarding access to rooftops near the event area. The university police chief, Jeffrey Long, reportedly assured that the situation was under control, leading to further questions about the adequacy of the planning undertaken for the event.
The wrongful death notice encapsulates considerable grief and frustration from Kirk’s family, as they seek accountability for what they perceive as preventable oversight that culminated in a tragic loss. The filing serves as an early step in what could be a drawn-out legal process that may further illuminate the responsibilities of institutions in ensuring public safety during high-profile events. With the trial for Robinson approaching, the implications of this case could ripple through the local community and beyond, raising important questions about security practices at educational institutions hosting large gatherings.