Candace Owens Exposes Frank Turek's Military Connections and the Missing Evidence in Charlie Kirk Case

Enjoying this? Share it with someone who needs to see it.

Up Next

Candace Owens Reveals Never-Before-Seen Footage of Terryl Farnsworth After Charlie Kirk Incident

Candace Owens Reveals Never-Before-Seen Footage of Terryl Farnsworth After Charlie Kirk Incident

54:51

Candace Owens Uncovers New Evidence in Charlie Kirk Investigation: Mystery Man at UVU Campus Day Before Shooting

Candace Owens Uncovers New Evidence in Charlie Kirk Investigation: Mystery Man at UVU Campus Day Before Shooting

54:28

Candace Owens Exposes Victor Marx's Suspicious Timeline and Erika Kirk's Will Update Appointment Days Before Assassination

Candace Owens Exposes Victor Marx's Suspicious Timeline and Erika Kirk's Will Update Appointment Days Before Assassination

57:26

Candace Owens Exposes Frank Turek's Military Connections and the Missing Evidence in Charlie Kirk Case

Candace Owens examines disturbing inconsistencies in the Charlie Kirk assassination investigation, including abandoned evidence that was never tested, Officer Bagley's suspicious body camera failure, and the mysterious military connections of Frank Turek's family. She reveals how the FBI decided not to test a backpack, jacket, and gloves found along the shooter's route after being told they belonged to someone on Charlie's security detail, a claim that raises more questions than answers. With new testimony from the preliminary hearing and questions about who was really on that rooftop, Candace continues her investigation into what she believes was a coordinated operation disguised as a lone wolf attack.

July 16, 2026

The Mysterious Abandoned Evidence

New testimony from the preliminary hearing has revealed a troubling detail that was initially overlooked: a backpack, jacket, and gloves were discovered at a bus stop near the library along the same route the alleged Losee Center shooter traveled. Despite being found in a suspicious location and initially flagged for DNA testing, the FBI decided not to test these items. The reason given was that they supposedly belonged to someone on Charlie Kirk's security detail.

Sergeant Jennifer Faumuina from the Utah Bureau of Investigations testified about finding these unattended items at the bus stop. Officers deemed them suspicious because they were away from the courtyard area and appeared to be along the shooter's escape route. The items were sent to the FBI lab for processing, with requests for DNA and other analysis. However, at some point, a decision was made to halt all testing.

During testimony, Faumuina stated she didn't remember communicating to the lab that these items were no longer probative to the case, though she acknowledged that would be fair to say. The confusion deepened when FBI agent Amanda Baker testified about receiving the backpack and its contents. She explained that initially they had no information about the items and began processing them for DNA. Later, as the investigation continued, they were told the backpack "was potentially left behind by a bystander."

The Security Detail Explanation That Doesn't Add Up

The most disturbing revelation came when Amanda Baker's notes indicated that someone at the FBI lab had added information stating the backpack belonged to someone on Charlie Kirk's security detail. Baker herself didn't recall this being her communication and noted it was someone else within the laboratory who had added these notes. This raises critical questions: Who was this person on Charlie's detail? Why were they at a library bus stop that's nowhere near the Losee Center or the amphitheater where Charlie was speaking? Why would they bring gloves on a hot day? And most importantly, why would the FBI accept "they knew the victim" as sufficient reason to stop all testing?

Historically, 70 to 80 percent of homicide victims are killed by people they know. When money and politics are involved, that percentage likely increases even more. The notion that knowing Charlie Kirk should exclude someone from investigation is fundamentally flawed. Standard procedure would be to continue testing to confirm whose DNA is present, to check for gun residue, and to establish a clear chain of custody and explanation for why these items were abandoned along the shooter's escape route.

Officer Bagley's Convenient Amnesia and Dead Body Camera

Officer Bagley's testimony continues to raise red flags. He arrived on the Losee Center rooftop at 12:44 PM, just 21 minutes after Charlie was shot at 12:23 PM. He claims to have found a screwdriver on that rooftop, which was later said to have Tyler Robinson's DNA on it. However, his body camera mysteriously died while he was still on the roof, before he even put up crime scene tape.

Police officers from across the country have written in to express their skepticism about this claim. The Axon Body 4 camera that UVU Police use has a battery life of approximately 14 hours. Officers must dock their cameras at the end of every shift to upload data and recharge. The camera provides warnings when battery life is low—a high-pitched tone and four vibrations at 10 percent battery remaining, and again at 5 percent. There's no way Officer Bagley wouldn't have known his battery was dying if that were truly the case.

Additionally, the Axon system logs and records the specific reason a video stops or a device turns off. This information can be reviewed on the Axon website that police departments have access to. Officer Bagley's 27-minute body camera footage ended at a critically important moment, and his explanation that the battery simply died strains credulity given the technology's specifications.

The Mystery Person on the Rooftop

Perhaps even more concerning is Officer Bagley's testimony about who accompanied him onto the Losee Center rooftop. When asked about an individual in civilian clothing with a gun who was visible on his body camera, Bagley stated he didn't know who the person was. He couldn't identify what agency they were from or even confirm they were actually law enforcement. He simply saw what appeared to be a badge and accepted this person's presence on what he believed was an active crime scene where a shooter had just been.

Ten months after the assassination, Officer Bagley has apparently never attempted to identify this individual or review footage to see who else accessed that rooftop. When asked if he had checked to see whether anyone had been on the roof between the time the person in the prone position jumped off and when he arrived, Bagley said he didn't notice anybody—but admitted he hadn't actually reviewed the video footage to verify this. This represents a stunning failure of basic investigative protocol for a crime scene in a shooting that left Charlie Kirk dead.

The Screwdriver That Makes No Sense

The screwdriver found on the rooftop has never made logical sense within the official narrative. When and why would Tyler Robinson have taken it out? The eyewitness who filmed the person on the rooftop and observed military-style movements has maintained he never saw a towel or a screwdriver. Multiple viewers who claim to have military training have confirmed that the movements captured on video indicate formal tactical training.

None of the influencers who claim to have seen "4K HD overwhelming" footage from the preliminary hearing mentioned seeing the screwdriver being taken out or used. When did this happen? For what purpose? The influencers who insist they can identify Tyler Robinson with absolute certainty from enhanced footage have been conspicuously silent about this detail. If they can enhance footage to see a person's face clearly enough to make a positive identification, they should be able to show the moment the screwdriver was removed and explain its purpose.

Frank Turek's Pentagon Connection

Frank Turek's story about being on FaceTime with his son and daughter-in-law during the shooting has always seemed suspicious, but new information makes it even more so. Turek claims he was FaceTiming with his 35-year-old son Spencer during the event, put the phone in his back pocket when the shot rang out, and the phone remained there until he reached the hospital—meaning his son and daughter-in-law heard the entire emergency response.

What hasn't been widely discussed is that Frank Turek has two sons who both served as captains in the Air Force. His son Zach, who goes by his middle name, was working at the Pentagon at the time of the shooting, serving as deputy division chief of the Joint Staff. His other son Spencer worked as a branch chief pilot for the Air Force. Why would Spencer be available on a Wednesday afternoon at 2:23 PM Eastern Time to FaceTime and watch Charlie Kirk take questions on an obscure college campus in Utah? More importantly, why didn't anyone think to contact Zach at the Pentagon when a potential assassination had just occurred?

Frank Turek maintains that he simply sat in the back seat praying while his adult son listened via FaceTime. He didn't call 911—nobody has claimed responsibility for making that call. He didn't contact his son at the Pentagon. He didn't try to alert any of his extensive military and government connections. He just prayed. This story becomes harder to believe with each retelling, especially given Frank's family background of military intelligence operations.

The Hollywood Heroes Book and Superhero Narratives

Interestingly, Frank Turek and his son Zach co-authored a book titled "Hollywood Heroes: How Your Favorite Superhero Movies Reveal God." The book makes the argument that Christians are particularly drawn to cinematic themes of sacrifice, especially when a superhero sacrifices their life for others—a parallel to Christ's sacrifice. This becomes relevant when examining the initial narrative pushed about Charlie Kirk's death: the "man of steel" imagery, the "30 odd 6" Superman reference, the "modern-day miracle" language, and the emphasis on Charlie supposedly saving lives even in death.

The initial tweet from Andrew Kolvet read exactly like a superhero script designed to appeal to Christian sensibilities. The entire framing was calculated to make questioning the official narrative seem like an attack on something sacred. The psychological operation appears to have been designed specifically to manipulate Christian audiences into accepting the government narrative without critical examination.

The Influencer 4K Contradiction

One of the most telling aspects of this case is the contradiction around video evidence. Five days after the assassination, Dan Bongino appeared on Megyn Kelly's show and repeatedly stated that the footage was "too grainy" for the FBI to make clear determinations about certain details, including the screwdriver. He emphasized that while the FBI has tools to enhance footage, the grainy quality was limiting their analysis.

Fast forward to the preliminary hearing, and suddenly influencers are claiming they saw "crystal clear" "4K HD" "overwhelming" evidence that definitively identifies Tyler Robinson. How did footage that was too grainy for the FBI assistant director to work with five days after the event suddenly become crystal clear months later? The logical answer is that it didn't—or that it was manipulated. If the footage was enhanced to the degree these influencers claim, that would be worth investigating as potential evidence tampering.

The Pattern of Amnesia and Tech Failures

A consistent pattern has emerged in this investigation: whenever critical evidence should exist, there's either amnesia, technical failure, or convenient destruction. Officer Bagley's body camera died at a crucial moment. Sergeant Faumuina doesn't remember communicating that evidence should not be tested. FBI agent Amanda Baker found notes in her file that she didn't write and doesn't remember receiving. The phone call to 911 that Brian Harpole claims was made cannot be found in public records, and nobody will say who actually made the call.

These are classic signs of government involvement in covering up evidence. As one viewer commented: "There are always strong signals when the United States government has a hand at play: unexplainable tech failures, seizure of cameras, authorities finding overwhelming evidence, and security measures magically failing in the exact way to make the event possible."

Why The Investigation Continues

Despite intense pressure, character attacks, and attempts to paint questions as "demonic" or "conspiracy theories," this investigation continues because the official narrative doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The initial story relied on Christians accepting it on faith—being told that questioning a widow or asking about evidence was somehow un-Christian. But Christianity doesn't demand blind acceptance of government narratives, especially when those narratives are filled with contradictions and missing evidence.

The full trial is scheduled to proceed in September, assuming the judge doesn't dismiss the case. When that happens, more evidence will have to be presented publicly. The influencers who claim to have seen definitive proof won't be the only ones with access. Testimony will be cross-examined more thoroughly. The mysterious person on the rooftop with Officer Bagley might finally be identified. The abandoned backpack and its contents might actually be tested. And perhaps the surveillance footage from the bus stop where the evidence was found will finally be reviewed.

Until then, the questions remain: Who was on Charlie Kirk's security detail and why were they at that bus stop? Who added the notes to Amanda Baker's file? Who was with Officer Bagley on the rooftop? Why did his body camera fail? When was the screwdriver planted and by whom? And most importantly—who actually killed Charlie Kirk, and why?

Video Transcript

Link copied to clipboard!