Man Who First Confessed to Kirk Tragedy Facing Lengthy Prison Term
A Utah man who falsely claimed responsibility for the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk during a chaotic campus shooting investigation has been sentenced on obstruction charges and now faces significant prison time on separate felony offenses, authorities confirmed Friday.
George Zinn, 71, entered a no-contest plea to a third-degree felony count of obstruction of justice after admitting he falsely told investigators he was responsible for Kirk’s fatal shooting at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, Zinn approached law enforcement and declared, “I shot him — now shoot me,” before later conceding that his claim was entirely fabricated and that he had no role in the killing.
Court records show that Zinn also pleaded guilty to two counts of second-degree felony sexual exploitation of a minor. Investigators discovered explicit images of children on his phone while reviewing evidence during the Kirk homicide investigation.
According to Breitbart News, Zinn faces up to 15 years in prison for each sexual exploitation charge and up to five years for obstruction of justice. His ultimate sentence will be determined by a parole board.
🚨BREAKING: George Zinn, who falsely claimed after the murder that he was responsible for the murder of Charlie Kirk, was sentenced to up to 15 years in prison for obstruction of justice.
— Eli Afriat 🇮🇱 (@EliAfriatISR) January 29, 2026
He was also convicted of two counts of sexual exploitation of a minor after child sexual… pic.twitter.com/GWD9Q8myDR
Witnesses reported that Zinn repeatedly shouted, “I shot him. Now shoot me!” following the shooting. After being “taken to the police station,” Zinn admitted he lied “to draw attention from the real shooter.”
Authorities later arrested Tyler Robinson, 22, who has been charged with the murder of Charlie Kirk. Robinson faces multiple serious charges, including aggravated murder, as prosecutors pursue the case.
Officials said Zinn’s sentencing reflects a broader effort to ensure accountability for crimes uncovered during the investigation into Kirk’s assassination, which drew national attention and heightened political tensions.
Meanwhile, legal proceedings against Robinson continue to unfold. His defense team formally objected last week to prosecutors introducing and publicly displaying a graphic video of Kirk’s shooting during an upcoming pretrial hearing.
In a nine-page filing submitted Jan. 27, Robinson’s attorneys opposed the State of Utah’s request to play a close-up, color video with audio showing moments before, during, and after the fatal shooting, Fox News reported.
The objection comes ahead of a Feb. 3 evidentiary hearing on Robinson’s motion to disqualify the Utah County Attorney’s Office from prosecuting the case, citing an alleged conflict of interest.
Defense attorneys argue the hearing is unrelated to Robinson’s guilt or innocence and instead centers solely on whether a prosecutor’s family member personally witnessed events at Utah Valley University on Sept. 10, 2025 — potentially creating an actual or apparent conflict.
Prosecutors have already submitted still images and diagrams depicting Kirk’s location and the proximity of witnesses, materials the defense does not oppose. According to the filing, those exhibits are sufficient to address the narrow legal questions before the court.
Lawyers for Tyler Robinson, the man accused of killing Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, are asking a Utah judge to block video of the fatal shooting from being introduced as evidence at a hearing scheduled for Feb. 3. https://t.co/0TtOTNQotM
— FOX 5 Atlanta (@FOX5Atlanta) January 29, 2026
The defense further contends the video has no probative value for resolving the disqualification motion and should be excluded under Rule 403 due to the risk of unfair prejudice.
Attorneys described the footage as “graphic and likely highly disturbing,” warning that playing it in open court could result in immediate national and international broadcast coverage.
They argue such exposure would irreparably harm Robinson’s constitutional right to a fair trial in what they emphasized is a capital case.
“This is the most momentous judgment a jury can be asked to make,” the defense wrote, citing prior Utah Supreme Court precedent stressing the need to protect capital proceedings from bias and undue prejudice.