Two Arkansas sisters have found themselves at the center of national outrage after a video captured them vandalizing a memorial for Charlie Kirk, the assassinated co-founder of Turning Point USA. Kerri Rollo, 23, and her sister Kaylee, 22, were filmed destroying candles and shredding signs set up to honor Kirk on the Benton County Courthouse steps. The footage went viral within hours, sparking widespread condemnation, social media backlash, and legal consequences that quickly upended their lives.
In the aftermath of the incident, the sisters launched a GoFundMe campaign seeking $18,000 to cover legal fees, claiming their First Amendment rights had been violated. “My sibling and I are being doxxed online and my sibling was fired from their job,” Kaylee wrote in the campaign, appealing to supporters to help them navigate the legal and personal fallout. “Please help my sibling while they look for another job and stand against the tyranny that is creeping into the country,” she added.
Kerri, 23, flashes the camera two middle fingers while her sister Kaylee Rollo, 22, looks on while they vandalize a Charlie Kirk memorial at the Benton County Courthouse in Arkansas.
Despite the sisters’ characterization of themselves as victims of censorship, the video tells a very different story. In the footage, Kerri, who uses they/them pronouns, repeatedly shouts expletives directed at Charlie Kirk. “F–k Charlie Kirk,” Kerri yells, flipping two middle fingers at the camera. They kick over candles, tear apart signs, and encourage Kaylee to film the destruction. “Film all you want,” Kerri says defiantly. “Charlie Kirk died as he lived, promoting violence,” they add, before storming off with their sister.
The actions drew swift attention from law enforcement. On September 17, the Benton County Sheriff’s Office confirmed that both sisters had been arrested for first-degree criminal mischief. Kerri’s arrest led to immediate professional consequences; they were fired from a local Arkansas restaurant. Kaylee faced personal repercussions as well: her boyfriend reportedly ended their relationship and asked her to move out of his home. The fallout was swift, reflecting how public outrage and legal accountability can intersect in the digital age.
Benton County Justice of the Peace Joseph Bollinger weighed in on the matter, highlighting the broader implications of the sisters’ actions. “Everyone has a right to be able to express their freedom of expression. But what the issue is, is when you trample on someone’s memorial, the human act of grieving,” he told 40/29 News. “You’re not just trampling on their freedom of expression, you’re trampling on the memory of a person. You’re trampling on our Benton County values.” His comments underscore the distinction between individual expression and actions that infringe on others’ rights and dignity.
The Rollo sisters set up a GoFundMe after losing their jobs.
Family members and acquaintances added perspective on the personal consequences. Lacy Christian, the mother of Kaylee’s ex-boyfriend, emphasized the severity of the sisters’ choices. “Kaylee has lived in my home now for over a year, and I have never once cut her down or not allowed her to have the beliefs that she has,” Christian told the Daily Mail. “However, I will not allow someone living in my home to be OK or celebrate a murder. I will never allow someone to live in my home who is OK with destroying a memorial for someone else.”
The GoFundMe, launched in the wake of their arrests, had raised nearly $15,000 by Wednesday afternoon, with the sisters stating the funds would be used for “LEGAL COUNSEL AND COURT FEES.” However, not all contributors appeared to be genuine supporters. Many donations were made at the platform’s minimum amount and accompanied by comments expressing outrage at the sisters’ behavior. One donor wrote, “I guess it pays to do something deplorable,” while another added, “You got what you deserved.” Critics were harsh, with comments such as, “Only low-life humans would do such a thing to another human, let alone a father.”
The context of the incident only heightened the public’s reaction. Charlie Kirk, a father of two young children, was assassinated on September 10 while speaking at Utah Valley University, when a single shot allegedly fired by 22-year-old Tyler Robinson struck him. The memorial the Rollo sisters vandalized was meant to honor his life, legacy, and the grief of his family. By attacking that memorial, the sisters not only violated property laws but also became embroiled in a moral and social debate about respect for the deceased and the public display of mourning.
The legal charges against the sisters carry serious implications. First-degree criminal mischief is a felony, reflecting the severity of the offense and the damage caused. Both Kerri and Kaylee were released on bond totaling $22,500, though their ongoing legal battles are expected to be both costly and high-profile given the viral nature of the incident. Observers note that the viral video and widespread media coverage will likely influence public perception, potentially affecting jury pools and the broader discourse surrounding freedom of expression and protest.
Social media amplified the consequences of the sisters’ actions. Video clips, screenshots, and commentary circulated rapidly on platforms such as TikTok, X, and Instagram. Viewers debated the ethics of their behavior, their claims to free speech, and the responsibilities individuals have when engaging in acts that directly affect grieving families. Many users criticized the sisters for conflating personal political beliefs with destructive behavior, while others discussed the potential implications for future public demonstrations and protests.
Signs set up on the courthouse steps near the Kirk memorial.GoFundMe
Legal experts weighed in, noting that the First Amendment does not protect acts of vandalism or actions that disrupt private mourning. “Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of American democracy,” one attorney explained, “but it does not grant individuals the right to destroy property or interfere with memorials. There is a clear legal distinction between speech and criminal action.” The distinction was crucial in shaping the case against the Rollo sisters.
The incident has also sparked a broader cultural conversation about accountability, privilege, and the intersection of political expression with civil responsibility. By posting videos online and attempting to frame their actions as a statement of First Amendment rights, the sisters inadvertently highlighted the ways social media can amplify acts of transgression. Their story demonstrates how digital platforms can serve as accelerants for public outrage, legal scrutiny, and social consequences.
Meanwhile, the public response has been wide-ranging. Some view the sisters’ actions as a deliberate provocation intended to gain notoriety, while others frame it as reckless immaturity compounded by political extremism. The combination of video evidence, social media amplification, and the highly charged political context has made this a case study in modern media dynamics, public reaction, and legal accountability.
The sisters were filmed trashing a memorial to Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated on Sept. 10.AP
Ultimately, the Rollo sisters’ story is a cautionary tale about the limits of expression, the responsibilities that come with public action, and the human consequences of disrupting acts of remembrance. By destroying a memorial meant to honor a recently assassinated figure, they crossed a line that blurred political opinion with personal harm, triggering legal, social, and personal repercussions that will likely follow them for years to come.
As of now, Kerri and Kaylee remain focused on their legal defense, with the GoFundMe campaign providing temporary support for attorney fees. The long-term consequences, however, extend far beyond finances: public condemnation, job loss, strained family relationships, and potential criminal penalties all serve as stark reminders that freedom of expression carries both rights and responsibilities. In the case of the Rollo sisters, the viral footage that initially gave them attention has instead become the evidence that will define the legal and cultural legacy of their actions.
