← Law Enforcement
Officer Bagley — Body Cam Died on Roof
Clip narrating reported testimony about Officer Bagley's body cam ending while he was still on the roof. Source: @JOKAQARMY1 on X, July 6, 2026.
A citizen-journalist clip posted by @JOKAQARMY1 on July 6, 2026 narrates what it presents as courtroom testimony from Officer Bagley, and raises a question about why his body-worn camera footage from the day of the shooting reportedly ended while he was still on the UVU rooftop. Everything below is reported and framed as an open question — none of it establishes wrongdoing.
The Reported Testimony
According to the narration and the audio in the clip, Officer Bagley was asked about his body cam footage and gave the following account:
- His body cam footage "appears to end while [he was] still on the roof," according to the questioner reviewing it.
- Asked why, he reportedly said he believed the battery had died — "it was just right at that moment."
- Asked whether he ever turned it back on, charged it, or swapped in a new battery that day, he reportedly said no — that he "didn't go back" because it was "too chaotic."
- The recording is described as 27 minutes and 35 seconds long, starting when he was "at the holding flags" and ending while he was still on the roof, before crime-scene tape had been put up.
- It is described as the only body cam footage he had that day.
The Screwdriver Reference
The clip states that, at the point the footage reportedly ends, Officer Bagley found a red and black screwdriver, and that a photograph of the screwdriver was admitted into evidence. The narrator raises this to question whether the discovery is documented on camera, noting the still image exists in the record.
How the Poster Frames It
The poster treats the "battery died" explanation with skepticism, asking "how many times Officer Bagley's body cam died after 27 minutes of being on the job," and grouping it with what the poster calls "so many other incidences in this Charlie Kirk assassination case."
That skeptical framing is the poster's opinion, not an established fact. Body-worn cameras genuinely running out of battery mid-shift is a common, well-documented occurrence, and Utah law (Utah Code § 77-7a-104) requires an officer to document in a written report any time a camera is not activated — a paper trail that could independently confirm or refute the account. Nothing in the clip establishes that Officer Bagley intentionally stopped recording or that any footage was destroyed. This page presents the reported testimony and the open questions it raises, not a conclusion.
Why It Matters
The rooftop of the Losee Center is where the charging narrative places the shooter, and gaps in the on-scene recording record are a recurring theme investigators raise across the case — see the broader pattern of missing body cam and surveillance footage. Related documented body-cam questions include Washington County's reported claim of zero surrender footage and the UVU campus police rooftop coverage.
Status: Alive