← Security Team
Perimeter & Rooftop Failures
The clearest physical security failure on September 10, 2025 — under either the official or alternative theories — is that an attacker reportedly used an overlooking elevated position without being stopped. The charging narrative places the shooter on the Losee Center rooftop in a prone firing position ~150 yards from the courtyard stage.
Affidavit rooftop timeline (official narrative)
| Time (MT) | Alleged action |
|---|---|
| 11:52 | Movement toward Losee |
| 12:15 | Roof access via southeast stairs / walkway |
| 12:23 | Shot fired |
| 12:24 | Flight from roof toward wooded area |
Surveillance stills from 12:23:29–12:23:54 map movement to the northeast corner in 25 seconds. Pre-shooting video (one hour before) shows a prone all-black figure on the same roof — see Black Clothing Suspect.
UVU campus police gap
The investigation file states UVU provided six campus police officers — about one quarter of the department — for crowd control and event oversight under Chief Jeff Long. That contingent reportedly:
- Did not conduct thorough inspections of nearby rooftops or buildings
- Engaged no drones for airspace monitoring
Full campus-police context: UVU campus police.
Brian Harpole's pre-event warnings
Brian Harpole publicly criticized UVU police for failing to secure rooftops as promised. The file states he texted Jeff Long about rooftop concerns before the event. His interviews (Shawn Ryan Show, Salt Lake Tribune) are primary sources for that dispute — distinct from unverified conspiracy claims about Harpole himself.
"Beyond Charlie's bubble"
Posts report a jurisdictional split: campus police treated drones, airspace, and rooftops as outside the private detail's close-protection perimeter — "beyond Charlie's bubble." Critics argue no single party owned the high ground between:
- Integrity Security Solutions close protection, and
- UVU's limited perimeter monitoring.
That characterization comes from social posts and the visible outcome, not a formal after-action review released publicly.
Lighter hybrid vs. prior events
The arrangement combined a last-minute Integrity detail with six campus officers and reportedly no Orem police on-site beforehand. Multiple sources describe it as lighter than Kirk's prior tour stops — see No Counter-Snipers.
Ballistics angle tension
If the shot truly came from Losee, ballistics commentary argues a 5–9° downward angle would likely strike face/jaw rather than the observed neck/chest path — feeding alternative location theories on Shooting Locations. That does not by itself prove rooftop security should have stopped a different weapon type.
Key questions
- Who was contractually responsible for rooftop clearance — TPUSA, Integrity, or UVU?
- What did Harpole's texts to Long say, and what was Long's written response?
- Was the pre-shooting prone figure ever flagged to security leadership?
- Why were drones not deployed for overwatch at a high-profile outdoor event?
Citizen Investigator Claims on X
Rooftop-gap posts usually restate three attributed points rather than producing new primary video:
- Promise vs delivery — @IngrahamAngle (November 20, 2025) and Harpole’s own interviews claim campus/local police said rooftops would be handled and then were not. That is a public coordination dispute.
- Staffing arithmetic — Accounts such as @BDPelton (July 2026) note ~six UVU officers, no rooftop detail from Integrity, and known death threats — arguing the high ground was an obvious unowned zone.
- Pre-shot roof figure — @ProjectConstitu and related threads emphasize the all-black prone figure on the roof roughly an hour before the shot (cross-link Black Clothing Suspect), asking why security leadership never flagged that presence in real time.
Separately, the master investigation file tracks Officer Bagley’s bodycam reportedly dying on the roof when LE later processed the scene — an after-the-fact documentation gap about screwdriver / “sniper pad” discovery, not the same as pre-shot perimeter failure, but often cited in the same “rooftop opacity” bundle.
Official Narrative vs Competing Claims
| Issue | Official-path framing | Competing investigator framing |
|---|---|---|
| Shooter location | Losee rooftop prone position (~150 yd) | Alternate acoustics / grey van / closer shot (see Shooting Locations) |
| Who failed | Coordination failure between campus PD and private detail | “No one owned the roofs by design” — unproven intent claim |
| Pre-shot roof video | Not dispositive of final shooter ID in charging theory | Evidence of a tactical all-black actor ignored after the FBI pivot |
| 5–9° angle tension | Still consistent enough for charging narrative per prosecutors | Geometry favors non-Losee origin for neck/chest wound path |
Timeline Claims (As Reported)
| Time (MT) | Claim | Source type |
|---|---|---|
| ~1 hour pre-shot | Prone all-black figure on Losee roof | Citizen video / Project Constitution commentary |
| Pre-event | Harpole texts Chief Long re rooftops | Harpole interviews + file notes |
| 11:52–12:15 | Affidavit path toward roof access | Charging affidavit narrative |
| 12:23 | Shot | Multiple cameras / official timeline |
| Post-shot LE | Bagley bodycam died on roof (file claim) | Investigation-file / GRAMA-adjacent discussion |
This website's author is @HolonCitizen on X and YouTube/@HolonCitizen. Follow me there.
Interesting
- The detail founder's father is described as a lodge past master and former trooper.
- The federal scramble to recover Kirk's cross necklace reads as a residue hunt.
- Five independent lines of evidence converge on the exploding-mic conclusion.
Related Areas
Images
