Skip to main content

Father of Apalachee High School shooter sentenced to 15 years in prison

▶ Watch Video: Collin Gray to be sentenced in Apalachee High School shooting case

A judge sentenced Colin Gray to 15 years in prison Thursday, following emotional testimony from victims’ families during his sentencing hearing in the Apalachee High School shooting case.

The sentence came after victims’ families urged Judge Nicholas Primm to impose the maximum punishment, while defense attorneys argued Gray had sought mental health treatment for his son and asked for a lesser sentence. 

Judge Primm imposed a 15-year prison sentence after ordering most of Gray’s sentences on the various convictions to be served concurrently, meaning they will overlap instead of being added together. Prosecutors sought an 80-year prison term.

“It is clear you failed as a parent,” Primm said. “You didn’t get him mental health counseling when it was obvious he needed some. None of those failures helped your case, but those aren’t why you were convicted. You were convicted because the warning lights were flashing brighter and brighter and you didn’t get him help.”

Georgia High School Shooting
Colin Gray, father of the Apalachee High School shooter Colt Gray, enters the courtroom during his sentencing hearing at Barrow County Superior Court on Thursday, July 30, 2026, in Winder, Ga. 

Hyosub Shin

Gray entered the Barrow County courtroom shortly after 9 a.m. wearing an orange-and-white striped Barrow County Detention Center uniform. 

His hearing was held a couple of days after his son, 16-year-old Colt Gray, was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole after pleading guilty to 55 charges, including murder, in the school shooting that killed two students and two teachers.

In March, a jury convicted Colin Gray on 27 charges, including second-degree murder, involuntary manslaughter and cruelty to children. Prosecutors argued he provided the rifle used in the shooting despite repeated warning signs about his son’s declining mental health.

Victims’ families describe lasting pain from Apalachee High School shooting

The hearing opened with emotional testimony from victims’ families.

Shayna Aspinwall, the wife of teacher and football coach Richard “Ricky” Aspinwall, described the lasting impact of her husband’s death.

“To the world, Ricky was a math teacher and a football coach. To the players he coached, he was a mentor. To me, he was my best friend, my partner and the person I expected to grow old with,” she told the court.

Aspinwall said she now lives with post-traumatic stress disorder and can no longer teach because of her fear of another school shooting.

“He was a single parent by choice. I am now because of his decisions,” she said, referring to Colin Gray. “Colin couldn’t take his kid to therapy. Now I have to take mine.”

Georgia High School Shooting
Colt Gray, left, the 16-year-old Apalachee High School shooting suspect, stands next to his attorney Charlton Allen and pleads guilty at Barrow County Superior Court in Winder, Ga., on Friday, July 24, 2026.

Arvin Temkar

Richard Aspinwall’s stepfather, Rick Aspinwall, told Gray he was responsible for the devastation caused by the shooting.

“Through your ineptitude and lack of situational awareness, you are responsible for all that’s happened,” he said. “I hope to God that you sit and remember everything that you’re responsible for.”

Breanna Schermerhorn, the mother of 14-year-old Mason Schermerhorn, rejected describing the shooting as a tragedy.

“People keep calling us a tragedy. But tragedies are unavoidable. This was preventable,” she said.

She added that parenting “requires responsibility, sacrifice and showing up even when it’s hard.”

Mason’s older sister, Alana Schermerhorn, said her family never had the opportunity to stop what happened.

“Parents are supposed to protect their children,” she said. “Mr. Gray had opportunities to make different choices. My family didn’t have an opportunity.” 

Schermerhorn asked Judge Nicholas Primm to impose the maximum sentence.

“I ask for the maximum sentence not out of revenge, but because the consequences of these failures were irreversible,” she said.

Georgia High School Shooting
Judge Nicholas Primm speaks during the sentencing hearing of Colin Gray, father of Apalachee High School shooter Colt Gray, at Barrow County Superior Court on Thursday, July 30, 2026, in Winder, Ga. 

Hyosub Shin

Defense seeks 20-year sentence; prosecutors ask for 80 years

After victim impact statements concluded, defense attorneys argued Colin Gray should receive a 20-year sentence with 10 years to serve in prison, with the sentence running concurrently.

Defense attorneys said Gray has been in custody for 22 months and argued the evidence showed he had been trying to seek mental health treatment for Colt Gray. They also pointed to evidence they said reflected Colt Gray’s hostility toward his father and argued the court never heard testimony from Colt Gray himself.

During closing arguments, prosecutors said the defense was conflating the timeline and evidence presented during Colt Gray’s criminal case with the evidence introduced during Colin Gray’s trial.

Prosecutor Brad Smith told the court Colin Gray was convicted “for what he did know,” arguing the jury found he ignored a substantial and unjustifiable risk.

Smith displayed posters investigators found in Colt Gray’s bedroom, telling the judge, “This is the risk that stared him in the face.”

He also argued that after Colin Gray’s daughter texted him on the day of the shooting that three people had been killed at Apalachee High School, he never attempted to call his son. The state asked Judge Primm to sentence Colin Gray to a total of 80 years in prison.

Primera acusada ante el tribunal de deportación para “terroristas extranjeros” impugna su constitucionalidad

La mujer que enfrenta el primer caso en la historia del Tribunal de Deportación de Extranjeros por Terrorismo impugnó la constitucionalidad del tribunal, lo que supone una prueba crucial para la decisión del gobierno de Trump de activarlo, un tribunal que nunca se había utilizado en sus 30 años de historia.Los abogados de Nazira Haji Zada —una residente permanente legal oriunda de Afganistán y acusada de simpatizar con ISIS y de ayudar a su hijo en un complot terrorista frustrado contra las elecciones de 2024— afirmaron durante una audiencia inicial este jueves que el procedimiento del tribunal contraviene varias enmiendas de la Constitución.“Todo este plan viola el debido proceso y es inconstitucional”, declaró Matthew Farley, defensor público federal designado para representar a Haji Zada.Sus argumentos podrían dar pie a meses, si no años, de litigio sobre la constitucionalidad del tribunal, una cuestión que podría llegar hasta la Corte Suprema.La jueza Joan Ericksen, presidenta del tribunal y encargada del caso, denegó la solicitud de liberación inmediata de Haji Zada. Sin embargo, indicó que estas cuestiones constitucionales se debatirán junto con otras disputas legales ya surgidas en este caso sin precedentes.El Congreso creó el tribunal en 1996 para que el gobierno protegiera los secretos de Estado en casos de deportación donde la divulgación de pruebas contra un presunto terrorista extranjero pusiera en riesgo la seguridad nacional. (Terrorista extranjero es un término definido en la ley de inmigración).Hasta la decisión del Departamento de Justicia de presentar la demanda contra la mujer a principios de este mes, las administraciones anteriores evitaron recurrir al tribunal, optando en cambio por los procedimientos habituales de deportación para el manejo de información clasificada.Los documentos que se han hecho públicos en el caso contra Haji Zada ​​ofrecen una visión muy limitada de por qué el gobierno la considera terrorista y por qué cree que revelar esas pruebas pondría en peligro la seguridad nacional. Los procedimientos judiciales permiten al gobierno ocultar esas pruebas no solo al público, sino también a la propia acusada de terrorismo extranjero.Farley calificó esos procedimientos de “lamentablemente inadecuados” y señaló que el resumen no clasificado del caso que se le entregó a Haji Zada ​​constaba de solo dos párrafos, y que uno de ellos simplemente describía las condenas previas de su hijo y su yerno por el complot terrorista.El verano pasado, los hombres —Abdullah Haji Zada ​​y Nasir Ahmad Tawhed— se declararon culpables de los cargos que los acusaban de comprar rifles y municiones para un atentado terrorista planeado para el día de las elecciones de 2024. Los fiscales alegaron el jueves ante el tribunal que la acusada, Nazira Haji Zada, había contribuido a “radicalizar a la familia”.Ericksen indicó que planeaba examinar minuciosamente la justificación del gobierno para mantener ocultas las pruebas a Haji Zada ​​y al público. La jueza afirmó que una explicación general no sería suficiente y que, para cada dato que el Departamento de Justicia no pudiera revelar, exigiría “una razón y un fundamento que justifiquen por qué su divulgación sería perjudicial para la seguridad nacional”.La audiencia de 45 minutos —la primera audiencia pública ante un tribunal, tras una sesión a puertas cerradas con solo el Departamento de Justicia y la jueza a principios de este mes— tuvo como objetivo explicar a la presunta terrorista extranjera las acusaciones generales en su contra y algunos de los procedimientos judiciales. Haji Zada ​​fue arrestada el martes en Texas, donde reside. Se comunicó con dos intérpretes, principalmente asintiendo con la cabeza para confirmar que entendía lo que se decía.Más allá de las alegaciones constitucionales que sus abogados afirmaron plantear, ya está surgiendo una controversia en torno al intercambio de información clasificada en el caso. La ley otorga a Haji Zada, como residente permanente legal, el derecho a un abogado especial que puede examinar pruebas clasificadas e interrogarlas en su nombre, pero no compartir esa información con ella. Sin embargo, el Fiscal General Adjunto Interino, Hayden O’Byrne, quien representó al Departamento de Justicia en la audiencia, afirmó que otra disposición de la ley permite al gobierno retener cierta información clasificada también a dicho abogado especial.Ericksen indicó que el asunto se presentará por escrito y que necesitará argumentos muy sólidos del Departamento de Justicia para respaldar su postura.La jueza reconoció que, dado que este era el primer caso en un tribunal que había estado inactivo y sin ser puesto a prueba durante tres décadas, aún se encontraba en las primeras etapas de la implementación de su infraestructura. Tanto ella como los abogados consultaron copias impresas del estatuto pertinente durante la audiencia, y parte del procedimiento se centró en la logística de la presentación de documentos judiciales, ante la ausencia de un sistema digital de presentación de expedientes, que se encuentra en proceso de implementación.La jueza reconoció que podría haber momentos que parecieran “menos elegantes”, al tiempo que expresó su compromiso de llevar adelante el caso con “fidelidad a la Constitución”.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story