Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - '#1 Dad' Murdered Fianceé and Her Sons: Police

Episode Date: February 3, 2026

Charles Broomfield faces three counts of premeditated, first-degree murder in Michigan. Grand Rapids Police say Broomfield shot and killed his fianceé, Jacqueline Neill, on January 30 and also shot and killed Jacqueline's two sons, Cameron Kilpatrick, 15, and Michael Kilpatrick, 13. Police said Broomfield's five-year-old son was in the home but was not harmed. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy goes through the horrific story in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/CrimeFix Host:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guest: Neil Rockind https://x.com/neilrockindlawCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Daniel CamachoGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Do you understand that charge in the maximum possible penalty? A so-called number one dad from Michigan appears in court accused of a heinous, heinous crime, murdering his fiancé and her two sons. But there's a twist of sorts in what detectives said he claimed. I go through the shocking case. I'm Ann Janette Levy, and this is Crime Fix. There's a reason that Morgan and Morgan is America's largest personal injury law firm. It's because the firm fights for its clients and,

wins a lot in court, and I mean a lot. The firm has more than a thousand lawyers that have recovered $25 billion for more than 500,000 clients. In the last few months, a client in Florida got $12 million when the insurance company offered just $350,000. In Pennsylvania, another client won $26 million. That was 40 times the insurers offer. Morgan and Morgan makes it really easy to fight for what you deserve. You can even start a claim from your phone, so if you're ever hurt, you can start a claim at for the people.com slash crime fix, click the link below or scan that QR code that you see right there on your screen. Charles Broomfield is in jail in Michigan accused of horrific crimes against his fiance and her two teenage sons. This case is shocking. Brumfield is accused of

the premeditated murder of a woman he was supposed to love and her boys. The case takes us to Grand Rapids, Michigan in the western part of the state. It was January 27th at 740 a.m. When Detective Say Broomfield called 911 from the home of Jacqueline Neal and reported a home invasion. The police report states the 911 operator noted in the CAD history that the 911 caller was crying so much that they were unable to get necessary information. The caller reported possibly two individuals were in his house and someone was shot. G-R-PD patrol units arrived within a few minutes of the 911 call and went to the listed address and found Charles Broomfield in the living-room area and his deceased female victim on the ground near Charles. It was later determined that Charles

Broomfield was the 911 caller. The initial responding officer noted that Charles was calm and not upset, not crying on his contact with him in the house near the female victim. Officers asked if there were any other people in the house, and he stated his son was upstairs. Officers called up to his son, and the son answered. Officers went upstairs and secured the son and escorted him and Charles out of the house. So Charles Broomfield, according to the police report, was inconsolable on the 911 call with the dispatcher, but he wasn't crying when police arrived, and his five-year-old son was the only person still alive in the house.

Broomfield's fiancé, Jacqueline Neal, and her two sons, Cameron and Michael, had been shot to death. Cameron was just 15 and Michael 13. Police had to determine whether this was, in fact, a home invasion, so they brought in canines, dogs to track a possible scent. The report states, officers began a canine track after securing the house, and verifying there were no more victims inside. The canine track led to the backyard of the listed address

and to a gun box with a padlock on the box. No tracks in the freshly fallen snow led away from the box. The only tracks officers observed went from the house to the gun box and tracks back to the house. Officers found no other tracks in the snow that would show multiple individuals entered the house as described in the 911 call. Now this was a major clue. One set of footprints, not prints that showed several people going in and out of the house.

Police took Broomfield to the police department, read him his rights, and they say he agreed to talk to them. The police report states, Broomfield's initial statement was that two individuals broke into his house. He heard someone downstairs talking to the female victim and he went down to see who it was. And he, Charles, stated he went down to see who it was because his fiancé, the female victim was downstairs and saw an individual pointing a gun at the female victim. So he went back upstairs, but a second suspect followed him upstairs. While upstairs, Charles said he heard shots come from the area downstairs he had just left, and by this time the second suspect was confronting him upstairs in his bedroom.

Charles stated his gun was in an unlocked gun box on a table next to the door to his bedroom, and the second suspect opened the unlocked box and took out the gun and pointed it at him and his son and told him to give him everything he had. Charles pleaded with the second suspect who was now holding Charles' gun to not hurt him or his son and the suspect went through things on the table but left the room without harming him or his son. Now this is a terrifying story. The report claims that Charles then heard gunshots coming from the area where Cameron and Michael had been shot to death. Charles stated shortly after the suspect left his bedroom, he heard multiple gunshots come from the area of where his step-sons, the two male teenage victim's rooms, were located.

Charles stated he was attempting to comfort his five-year-old son, who was in his bedroom with him during this incident. Charles stated he saw footprints in the snow, so assumed the suspects had left the house. Charles stated this is when he called 911. Eventually, police say Broomfield's story. If fell apart and testing on the shell casings that the scene revealed they all came from one firearm. Detectives say Charles Broomfield confessed to shooting Jacqueline and her two sons. When police said they searched the home, they found keys and a lanyard with Broomfield's five-year-old son's photo on it, and it was marked number one dad. Charles Broomfield appeared in court to answer to the three premeditated first-degree murder

charges and other felonies, and he asked. a little strangely. It is then alleged that on the same date and in the same location, you did deliberately with the intent to kill and with premeditation, kill and murder won Michael Kilpatrick. That offense is a felony punishable by up to life in prison without parole. Do you understand that charge in the maximum possible penalty? Broomfield's family told local news outlets,

they don't recognize the man who did this. Cameron and Michael's father, Conrad Kilpatrick, told 13 on your news. Tell the story of my sons. He called Cameron and Michael the most beautiful souls. He said Cameron was the smartest since the time he was a baby. Michael, he said, was a collector and the loudest and most loving little guy in the world. M.Live.com reported that Jacqueline's family told them that she was the victim of domestic violence. The court has had the opportunity to review the affidavit of probable cause. The most serious charges alleged are capital life offenses. I do believe that that poses not only a risk to public safety,

but also a risk of flight. At this time, the court is going to deny bond in this matter. So there is no need to set any special conditions. So I want to bring in Neil Rockind. He is a defense attorney in Michigan, not related to this case at all. But, you know, we wanted to bring him in to comment on this and give some analysis. Neil, this case, you know, is absolutely horrific. Your first thoughts just on what we're reading here in this complaint about Charles Broomfield being accused of the premeditated murder of his fiance and her two sons. My first take was probably very similar to yours. I did a double take. Read the allegations. I listened to what the allegations were. I looked over the complaint and I just shook my head

and put my head down and thought like, I just can't believe it. What's so odd to me about this, you know, they say that on the 911 call, you know, that he's inconsolable. They can't even understand what he's saying because he's crying so much. He can't give details. They can't understand what he's saying. They respond to the scene. And then they get in there and they say Charles is standing near Jacqueline and, you know, he's not upset at all. And so people's emotions, you know, they can vacillate. People can be in But obviously that was a big red flag to them there that he's inconsolable on the 911 call. And then they get there.

And it's just kind of like, oh, you know, here I am. So obviously he's presumed innocent until and unless he's proven guilty. And I'm sure he's, he has lawyers who are going to assist him in attempting to put up a defense. But when the police start to look at and they're able to chronicle and we have to assume, I'm hoping or assuming that the responding officers are. wearing body-worn cameras. So they'll be able to literally compare the way he sounded on 911 calls, which is where he sounded inconsolable and distraught and understandably upset over what appeared to be the

murder of his, of his fiancee. And then by the time the police arrive, according to them, he looks like he's calm and no longer in the throes of that level of hysteria. I mean, that's going to be quite a contrast. And I can imagine a prosecutor, a savvy one who's familiar with audiovisual and the way that and presenting that to a jury, taking the audio video to sound of his 911 call and then putting the body worn camera up and comparing it and saying, look, I mean, what about this moment a few minutes later would cause him to be calm. Not much.

He just wasn't able their argument's going to be to continue that level of phony hysteria. But I certainly hope it doesn't come down to just the officer's description of that. Because as you pointed out, In Jeannette, look, the fact of the matter is, is that people react to stressful trauma different. I mean, some people laugh, some chuckle. Some cry. Some are stoic. Some are all of those things all at one time. So I just, I hope there's actual documentation of that as opposed to just the police describing that. And I'm wondering about that too. I mean, obviously we'll have a copy of the 911 call. You would assume in this day and age that the Grand Rapids Police Department would have bodyworn cameras on their officers. I would be

shocked. That's not just some, you know, very small town and even small town police in some instances have bodyworn cameras these days. It's 20s, 26. I want to go to what they call, you know, the inconsistencies in the story. And, and they're talking about how, you know, he's talking about, it's almost like, let's say he, they said later he confessed, but they're saying in the very beginning, he's telling the story. I mean, this sounds like, horror story. The whole thing is horrific. But just the recounting of this, there's got to be some beads of truth to this that the five-year-old son, his five-year-old son, who is also Jacqueline's son, is crying. He's trying to console the five-year-old son. There are gunshots

from the area where Cameron and Michael are killed. He's talking about a suspect and another suspect, and then one of them getting into this gunbox that's in the home, the cops later find the gunbox out in the yard. But there's got to be some bit of truth to some of this. I am sure that five-year-old boy was absolutely just freaking out. Right, right. So the way that the complaint reads, it's so unusual because it reads like the story you were just telling, Angenet, which is very different from,

from how, I don't want to say typical, but how a murder case would usually unfold where victim or relative discovers a death and calls the police. And the police are looking, they're just sort of building the case and finding evidence and the case is sort of building. Here, it's almost like we almost start at the end, which is this claim of a break in and murder. and then the police are almost like, if you can picture, reverse Jenga, kind of pulling the pieces of his story out. And they're saying, well, that doesn't fit. And that doesn't fit. And that's inconsistent. So it's very unusual to watch this man's account of things to the police, according to the complaint and the state, to just be disassembled.

And they seem to have, in essence, disassembled it quickly. Right? And the big piece that you were pointing out, which raises an eyebrow, is about his own five-year-old son who wasn't killed and who was obviously distraught. So the question, of course, she means, why was the five-year-old distraught? Was he distraught because he witnessed some, you know, break in and, you know, his siblings and his mother killed by, you know, the people who broke in? or was he distraught because he just witnessed his father, you know, kill his loved ones. And that's going to be something that is going to have to be sorted out in court. And I'm afraid for this young man who's five years old, he'll likely be sorting that out for the rest of his life. Yes. Oh, my God. It's horrific. I mean, he's saying Charles Brumfield, according to this complaint, is saying there was a home invasion and that there were two suspects that come in there and then happen to find his

gun box and take his gun. I mean, I'm like, this is just like beyond belief. And then the cops go out and they, you know, they're looking for evidence. They see one set of footprints. The gunbox is out in the yard. And none of it computes. And it's locked. So, I mean, it has all the hallmarks of a some type of annihilation. I'm kind of kind of wondering if. he was, if Jacqueline maybe was, was she ending this relationship? That's kind of what I'm wondering. You know, they always say, and this is the hardest time when women try to leave. You know, it's dangerous. So, so who knows? Like, I think that there's a lot we still don't know. The home invasion aspect of this, I mean, obviously, and then they say that the, they believe that

the bodies, they believe the victims had been deceased for some time. time. This wasn't like a recent event. Maybe we don't know the exact time period, but it wasn't like they had been shot and then a 911 call was placed immediately. Right. I think the way that he told the story, again, we're working off of media accounts, off a media accounts and off of what was in the complaint. But, you know, there's the old saying, a couple of things came to mind as you were talking. There's the old saying that, you know, if something is too good to be true, then it is. And then the other is that even the perfect murder leaves 10 or 15 or 20 pieces of string to be pulled to unravel them. And so here the things you just pointed out, so you've got one, we know that medicine and science allow the police and prosecutors to identify and to approximate a time of death when somebody is killed or died.

eyes, their heart stops beating, obviously. The blood stops flowing through their body, and then things start happening to their body, which you're familiar with, Angenet, like rigor mortis and libremortis, and so blood starts to settle. And science tells us basically how long it takes and can give us a range. So if you arrive to a scene and the bodies are cold, it's not something it's not a recent killing. So that appears to disagree with his telling, where he claimed that it was recent and he happened to come in

and he happened to find it and find the bodies. I think that he just happened to walk in on the home invasion or he happened to uncover it, and the individuals got away. The problem with that is, of course, that when he called the police, the timing doesn't match up with what we understand the forensic evidence to be.

then the gunbox outside. So I commend him in that family for having a gun save for a gunbox, which is separated from the children so that children can access it. But that also proves to contradict his story. Again, his story was that the gun that was used to kill his family was stored in this gunbox. And it had a key. Well, when the police got to it, I think the gunbox was locked. and the only key was around his neck.

So how did the key that these home invaders use to access the gun box, get the gun, kill, put the gun back in the gun box, and somehow return the lanyard with the key to Mr. Broomfield's neck? That's a huge contradiction. And then I know they're looking at the footprints in the snow. I'm always dubious of that because I don't know how the police can identify one one. set of footprints, but they claim in an affidavit that there was only one set of footprints outside. And arguably, there should be three. There should be the two home invaders and there should be his. Right.

And it says that the emergency personnel on scene believe that the victims were dead for an extended period, possibly 40 minutes before they arrived. So these are people who respond to crime scenes and, you know, emergency calls all the time. So they know when they arrive, they can tell. I mean, these are professionals that deal with sick people and sadly, probably on some occasions, people who've passed away. And so they can look and see, oh, they can tell when somebody possibly, they can ballpark it a little bit. If you break that down, imagine when we call 911 and the first responders and the paramedics arrive and they arrive with their gurney and they've got all their gear and they come in and they're expecting to attempt to revive victims or patients. So they're ready to hit the paddles and to chest compressions.

And when they get there and what I'm anticipating is that they're going to say that they felt the bodies were cold or lukewarm and not warm to the touch, which is evidence that they were deceased for some time. That's a very startling image. That's a very startling image and one that will be relatively easy for the state to be able to prove if the evidence backs that up. You know, in looking further down in the complaint, they say that eventually the police do that Charles Broomfield confessed. They don't go into the details of that. They say eventually he confessed.

I would assume that they have this on video. You would certainly hope in 2026 that they do. And then they have ballistics. And I know how defense attorneys sometimes feel about that, but this is a different type of case. They said that the casings located upstairs near the two male victims. They compared those, and they found that all of the fired casings were fired from the same firearm. So the same firearm was used to kill all three victims.

So you have one gun killing all three victims. That's pretty tough to combat as well, coupled with a confession. So we, in a criminal case, which is what I, which is what I handle, I did as a prosecutor for four years back in the 90s and I do criminal defense cases now. You've got certain types of evidence. You've got direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. So direct evidence is where you have an eyewitness that actually observe something. You have circumstantial evidence is what we're dealing with here, which is a lot. lot of, and it's hard to argue in many cases with a lot of circumstantial evidence because it's

like, you know, the comparison I'd make is how many times in a case, some friend came back and said that he had just completed the first three holes in a golf round and got a hole in one, a double eagle, then a hole in one, you would look and be like, I don't know, man, come on, something isn't right about that. And because those things happen maybe once in a career, let alone three times in the first three holes. And here you've got ballistic evidence, which is going to match one gun, which doesn't match up with his story, which is very tough to argue against. And then you're going to have the time of death, which the medical examiner is going to put

at a different time than Mr. Brunfield claimed, and that's problematic. And then you've got an alleged confession. So you really have in many ways you have sort of that hole in one analogy where you, some cases don't even have any of that evidence. here you have all of it. The one thing that's so ridiculously horrific, it just adds to this. I mean, it's all horrific. You know, the officers located keys belonging to Charles in his bedroom on a key on a

land yard with a tab on it that reads, number one dad in a photo of his five-year-old son, Charles. I mean, just like number one dad accused of murdering two teenage boys who would likely be, you know, who would be his stepson. who he's living with, and I'm assuming treating it's a stepson's, and then their mother. I mean, it's just like, it never ceases to amaze me the things we learn through covering these stories. And I don't understand why people do the things that they do, Neil. You know, this, it writes itself. If you, and Jeanette, if you actually were to submit this as a subplot in a, in a,

a crime thriller, I think it would probably be rejected. I think that the producers or director would look at it and go back to the writer's room and say, this is not believable that a man that has a lanyard with a keychain that says number one dad with a picture of he and his son, the one son that he happened to, that he spared, again, assuming that he's guilty, but that he spared in this in this homicidal um you know uh rant uh and he would just say okay that's just not believable like that's not even a believable twist but this is the reality that we're dealing with so there's i am very interested in seeing the statement that he gave to the police I'm very interested in that too, and I'm interested to see what the prosecutors end up doing with this.

Whether this goes to trial, whether he ends up pleading out, we'll just have to wait and see. Well, he faces life in prison. Michigan does not a death penalty state. So it'll be, you know, his perspective, his lawyer's perspective, very well may be that he has very little to lose if there are no plea offers in the case. he doesn't face. There's no penalty he can face other than natural life. I'm always curious what the police happened to say to somebody like Mr. Broomfield and what he happened, how he responded to his Miranda warnings. He went to such elaborate lengths to come up with this ruse of a story. So if you went to those lengths and then your legacy is that you went to those lengths, which was awful enough. but then when you sat down with the police,

what happened in that interrogation room that you decided to confess? And we don't know what he actually said. We don't know if it's a legitimate confession or not. But again, taking the affidavit at face value, I just wonder where the seat change went about. Did he have a change of heart? Did he have some touch of morality,

you know, of, I don't know. But it's certainly going to be interesting to see how it plays out as the days weeks and the year kind of unfolds it ahead of us. Definitely will. Neil Rockine, thank you so much. Thanks, Janette. It was great to be here and great to see you again. Thanks. One of Jacqueline Neal's daughters is now taking care of her five-year-old younger brother, who it appears is the child that Charles shared with Jacqueline. The GoFundMe Post reads, with unimaginable heartbreak, I am sharing the tragic loss of my mom, Jacqueline Neal, and my

brothers, Cameron and Michael, who were taken from us in an act of violence. Our feet, has been shattered in a way no words can fully describe. In the midst of this devastating loss, I am now raising my five-year-old brother and trying to navigate grief while handling responsibilities we were never prepared for. We are facing funeral and memorial expenses as we try to find stability during this traumatic time. Any funds raised will go directly toward funeral and memorial arrangements supporting my brother as we begin this painful new chapter. If you are able to donate, share this fundraiser or keep us in your prayers. It truly means more than I can express. Your kindness, love and support are helping us survive the darkest moment of our lives. And that's it for this

episode of Crime Fix. I'm Ann Jeanette Levy. Thank you so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time.