Did palatir own site where charlie kirk gun found
Executive summary
There is no reporting in the provided sources that Palantir — the data‑analytics company — owned or controlled the site where the rifle used to kill Charlie Kirk was recovered; available accounts uniformly place the shooting at Utah Valley University and describe investigators recovering a rifle from the campus/nearby area [1] [2] [3]. None of the cited stories link Palantir to ownership of the building, roof, or property where the weapon was found, and the only Palantir mention in the search results is an unrelated discussion about an ICE‑facing Palantir app on Hacker News [4], which does not establish any connection to the crime scene.
1. What the reporting actually says about where the gun was found
Contemporary news accounts and official statements situate the assassination at an outdoor event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, and report that investigators located the rifle believed to be used in the killing during their campus search and follow‑up efforts; Reuters and PBS describe security footage and campus locations tied to the shooting and say the rifle was found in the search for the suspect [2] [1], and local coverage likewise reports recovery of the weapon as part of the investigation [3].
2. No source links Palantir to ownership or control of the site
Among the assembled sources there is no factual claim tying Palantir to the ownership, control, surveillance, or management of the building or roof from which the shot was fired; the reporting focuses on campus security, the crowd, surveillance footage, and the recovered rifle without mentioning Palantir as a landowner or site operator [1] [2] [3].
3. Where the Palantir reference does appear — and why that’s different
The only item in the search results that mentions Palantir is a Hacker News thread linking to a Star Tribune piece about a Palantir application used in ICE operations [4], which is an entirely different subject — federal immigration enforcement tools — and does not provide evidence that Palantir owned or ran any physical site connected to the Kirk killing; that reference therefore cannot be used to establish ownership or presence at the crime scene [4].
4. What investigators say about the weapon and chain of custody (and why that matters)
Law‑enforcement briefings and follow‑up reporting concentrate on forensic links — for example, the FBI saying DNA on a towel wrapped around the suspected rifle matched a suspect and descriptions of the weapon as a potentially decades‑old Mauser that may be untraceable — rather than any private company’s involvement with the property where it was found [5] [6] [2]. Those forensic details are central to the criminal case but do not imply corporate ownership of the location where investigators recovered the rifle [5] [6].
5. Alternative explanations and reporting limitations
Because none of the supplied reports mention Palantir in connection with the site, the question of whether Palantir owned the site is unaddressed by the available sources; absence of evidence in these articles is not affirmative proof that Palantir had no involvement, only that the public reporting collected here contains no such claim or documentary link [1] [2] [3] [4]. Establishing ownership would require property records, university statements, or investigative reporting that are not present in the provided set.
6. Bottom line and recommended next steps for verification
Based on the provided reporting, the responsible conclusion is that there is no evidence tying Palantir to ownership or control of the location where the rifle was recovered; the scene is consistently described as Utah Valley University campus property and investigators recovered the rifle there or nearby [1] [2] [3]. To confirm ownership or any corporate involvement would require checking county property records, statements from Utah Valley University or local authorities, or reporting that specifically addresses property ownership — none of which appear in the cited sources [1] [2].