Civil Trial Set for July in Raleigh Mass Shooting

Lawsuit alleges negligence in 2022 attack that killed 5 people

Published on Feb. 20, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A civil trial related to the 2022 Raleigh mass shooting is scheduled to begin on July 6 and is expected to last two weeks. The lawsuit names the shooter, his parents, the Hedingham HOA, and a security company, claiming negligence for failing to prevent the attack that left 5 people dead, including the shooter's brother and a police officer.

Why it matters

The civil trial will examine whether the various defendants could have done more to prevent the tragic mass shooting incident, which shook the Raleigh community. The outcome could have implications for liability and security measures in similar cases going forward.

The details

The civil lawsuit alleges that the defendants, including the shooter Austin Thompson, his parents, the Hedingham HOA, and a security company, failed to prevent the 2022 mass shooting in Raleigh that left 5 people dead. Last week, Thompson was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the killings.

  • The civil trial is scheduled to begin on July 6, 2026.
  • The trial is expected to last approximately two weeks.

The players

Austin Thompson

The shooter, who was 15 years old at the time of the 2022 Raleigh mass shooting that left 5 people dead.

Hedingham HOA

The homeowners association where the 2022 Raleigh mass shooting took place.

Security Company

A security company named as a defendant in the civil lawsuit related to the 2022 Raleigh mass shooting.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What’s next

The judge will preside over the civil trial beginning on July 6, 2026, which is expected to last approximately two weeks.

The takeaway

This civil trial will examine whether the various defendants, including the shooter, his parents, the homeowners association, and a security company, could have done more to prevent the tragic 2022 Raleigh mass shooting that claimed 5 lives. The outcome could have significant implications for liability and security measures in similar cases going forward.