True Crime All The Time - David Brom

Episode Date: September 8, 2025

In February 1988, 16-year-old David Brom murdered his parents and younger siblings. His defense argued that David was mentally ill, suffering from abuse, and snapped after an argument with his father. Prosecutors had evidence that David spent months planning the murders and killed his family in a cold and calculating manner. Join Mike and Gibby as they discuss David Brom. There was no doubt that David murdered his family. What investigators and prosecutors had to focus on was David's mental health and whether there was premeditation involved. You can help support the show at patreon.com/truecrimeallthetimeVisit the show's website at truecrimeallthetime.com for contact, merchandise, and donation informationAn Emash Digital productionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello everyone and welcome to episode 450 of the True Crime All The Time podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson. And with me as always is my partner in True Crime, Mike Gibson. How are you? Hey, I'm doing good about you. Doing very well. I didn't realize that it was episode 450. It's kind of a milestone. And normally on milestones, we do really big cases. But we have one coming up next week. I missed it by a week. Shocker, that you would have that wrong.

Yeah, something to look forward to. A really big case. Okay. That I think people are, have been waiting for for many, many years. Like how you threw everybody off. I think you did it on a purpose. They're counting on it.

No, I just messed it up. Delay in a week. I just messed it up. I'm going to be completely honest. Let's go ahead and give our Patreon shoutouts. We had Patty Musari. Musari. Melanie Madamba.

Ooh, madama. Peter Ozuna. These are fun names. Yeah. Ozuna. Nikki. and Xavier McNata. Yeah, there's the Magnata.

Good old Sarah jumped out at our highest level. Thanks, Sarah. Tracy Dale. There's Dale. And last but not least, Don Reed. I can read. Like, you should read something every day. You should.

You know. And then if we go back into the vault. This week, we selected Marie Helen Rancourt. Thanks, Rancourt. Yeah, so we appreciate the new support, the continued support, all of that. We have a brand new episode out right now on true crime all the time. where we're talking about Ashley Willett and Tony Torres. And this is such a fascinating, layered, complex case.

Ashley was murdered in 1999 up in Maine after leaving a sleepover at a friend's house. And then about a month later, this young man named Tony Torres kind of said what happened to Ashley. And then he went missing just a few months later and has never been found. So there's there's a number of mysteries here. It's very intriguing to me. It is a good episode. All right, buddy, are you ready to get into this episode of true crime all the time? Yeah, I'm ready for this. We're talking about David Brom in February 1988. 16 year old David Brom murdered his parents and younger siblings. And you know, this is a case where, you know, the defense and, you know, the defense is going to argue one thing.

The prosecutors are going to present evidence that supports their argument, which is something, you know, in the opposite direction. The Brom family lived in a quiet, well-to-do area of Cascade Township, Minnesota. The family consisted of 41-year-old Bernard, 40-year-old Paulette, 16-year-old David, 14-year-old Diane, and 9-year-old Ricky. Big family. It is. It is. And they actually had the another child, the oldest child, 19 year old Joe Brom, who was living in Rochester at the time of the murders. By 1988, David was a sophomore in high school. He and Joe both worked as cooks at a restaurant in Rochester. To outsiders, the Broms seem like a happy, close family. And we say that a lot. We do. You know, but it's, it comes up. that when you read through articles and you, you know, pay attention to what neighbors have to say about families.

They're like, you know, this was the all-American family. They seemed very happy, very close. Now, anytime I see a really happy family, you start to wonder. Yeah, I'm like, yeah, you aren't that happy. What's going on behind closed doors? Bernard had worked as an advisory engineer at IBM for 20 years. Bernard and Paulette were respected leaders at Pax Christi Catholic Church. They often hosted other members at their home for singing and social gatherings.

Bernard and Paulette served as Eucharistic ministers, ushers, and leaders in the marriage counseling program. Paulette was the church's preschool director for many years, but resigned in 1986 to spend more time with family. So no doubt, they were very active in the church. church. Neighbors later said there didn't appear to be any friction among the family. They said David was friendly, helpful, and often babysat younger children in the neighborhood. During a snowstorm in early 1988, David plowed his neighbor's driveway and wouldn't accept

any money from him. David's manager said he was a quiet, dependable worker. His school friend said he was a sensitive person who wasn't violent. David even objected to the killing of animals in slaughterhouses. A counselor at David's school said he was sensitive, a good writer, and an artist. Is it uncommon to hear all this wonderful stuff about this individual? Well, I think, I don't know that it's uncommon. I think it's less common than what you hear about, you know, a family. because when you're talking about someone who goes on to kill, sometimes there are signs, right?

People come back and they say, well, you know, we were worried about him or he was doing this or doing that or she. But in some cases, there are no signs or the signs are missed. And maybe he was just a genuinely good, sensitive, kid. Yeah, yeah. I mean, up to a point.

Before something changed him. Yeah, because obviously we know something has to change for him to go from this person that everybody is describing to a murderer. Although the Brom seemed like a normal family, there were rumors about a rift between the parents and the two oldest sons. Overall, those who knew David said he was a nice boy, who was often frustrated with his parents, particularly his father. He felt his parents were too strict. And I don't know that that's uncommon at all. I mean, what kid at some point or another doesn't think, oh, why are my parents doing

this to me? They're too strict. They have too many rules. I think we've all been through that. I know I went through that. Yeah. I can't believe you guys are doing this to me. And my neighbors had the strictest parents ever. The strictest? Oh, they were pretty strict. They were pretty strict. Yeah. My parents weren't super strict. I mean, there was rules, but, you know, it was pretty relaxed.

I had some friends, though, who, and they couldn't do nothing. Yeah. Like couldn't get away with anything. Like on lockdown all that. Yeah. Yeah. And I was like, I'm glad I don't live in that family. Not that they weren't good people.

It's just, you're not going to have any fun. and I'm sure that's what it was designed to curb. Also, that one friend that had, like, way too much for you? Yes. Yes, I had one too. But he's the kid that always had to blow out kegers and stuff because his mom just didn't care. Didn't care. Or she was working her third job.

Right. Right. He had the free reign of the house. On the evening of February 18th, 1988, the bodies of Bernard, Paulette, Diane, and Ricky Brown were found in their home in Cascade Township. Authorities went to the home after they received a call from staff at Lord's High School, who said other students reported that David Brom may have threatened to harm his family. David came to school on February 18th, but didn't attend any of his classes. His friends noticed that he had drastically changed his appearance. He dyed his hair black, shaved the sides of his head, and spiked the hair on the back of his head. He was all

also spotted that day purchasing a wig and makeup. Okay. So we just got done talking about David in, you know, pretty glowing terms, right? All these people had these great things to say about him. Yeah. And now all of a sudden, not that changing your appearance means that you're going to do something bad, but it had to stand out to people, especially at the school who knew this kid. Yeah. If you see him changing his appearance. You're hearing about him buying some makeup and a wig. On top of that, there's rumors that he talked about doing harm to his family. It's going to raise some flags. Yeah. Well, you know, what is going on with him? The police spoke to David's friends who said David was having trouble with his parents, specifically his father. He and Bernard got into an argument because David purchased

the punk music tape, which his parents disapproved up. And, you know, we do. We do. We do. We do kind of have to frame everything in the time frame that we're talking about, right? That late 80s was really kind of a seminal moment for music and, you know, the lyrics and people being up in arms, wanting to slap labels on music. Yeah. I kind of remember all of that. You're right. On February 17th, 1988, David talked about killing his parents.

And on the 18th, he told a friend he had killed them. This rumor reached school staff who notified the police. When the police arrived at the Brom household, the doors were closed but not locked. Bernard, Paulette, Diane and Ricky were found dead on the upper floor. All four had been struck at least once in the head with an axe. And when you describe a murder, or in this case four murders, it's never good, but some of them are way more gruesome than others. And I think being hit in the head with an axe, that's a very gruesome way to go.

When I hear axe, I just get even more nauseated. I don't know. It's just something about the word axe. Yeah, it denotes savagery, carnage. Now, obviously, being shot to death is not good either. No. but there is something about an axe to the head that seems particularly nasty. Because it's so hands-on.

I think that's part of it, right? You're up close and personal, but also, you know, the axe to the head is a serious blow. Ricky was in his bed. Bernard was found next to a bed in another room. Paulette and Diane were found in the hallway. It appeared that Bernard attempted to defend himself against the killer. They were in their pajamas, leading authorities to believe they were attacked in the early morning hours of February 18th. I think that's a pretty easy, safe theory to come to, right?

They're still in their pajamas. So either they were killed as they slept, right, before they went to bed or before they got up. Yeah. A bloody axe was found in the basement. Two cars were found in the driveway, but the family's van was missing. Authorities put out a national alert for David and spent the night searching for him. There were multiple citizen reports from people who thought they saw him in Rochester. I mean, obviously Gibbs, he's going to be the main suspect.

There's no way around that. Yeah, I mean, he has to be, right? I mean, there's reports of him acting to, looking differently, and he's the only person from that family unaccounted for. That was living at the home at the time. Yeah. And he had actually threatened the family and told a friend that he'd killed them. Right.

So, I mean, once police get all that information, it's kind of a no-brainer. Pretty high on the list. The van David was seen driving was found late that night near the Rochester Methodist hospital. On the morning of February 19, 1988, David was arrested at the post office in Rochester in charge with four counts of first-degree murder, a citizen called the Olmstead County Sheriff's Office, to report seeing someone fitting David's description in a phone booth near the post office. And I thought this was pretty strange. You know, here's a guy who is suspected of murdering everyone in his house, his family members, but he takes the van but doesn't leave the area?

Not the smartest guy when you think about it that way. You know, I mean, you're, you want to, you are a suspect and a quadruple murder. You're going to hang out? No, you should be getting, you should have got out of town, but he didn't. So what does that mean? Does that mean that he, you know, there was no planning here or he didn't have a plan for. for what was to come afterwards. I think that's something we're going to have to look at as we go through the story. David didn't enter a plea at his arraignment. He was ordered to undergo psychiatric examination and was being held under 24-hour watch

at the county jail. Prosecutors announced their intentions to try David as an adult. And that doesn't surprise me at all. I get it. He's 16 years old. But if, you know, they think you killed. four family members with an axe. That's an adult-like crime.

It is. So it doesn't surprise me at all that they wanted to charge him as an adult. No motive was established. But the sheriff confirmed reports that David had a disagreement with his father over the purchase of a punk music tape. In late February, David was transferred to a juvenile detention center for a week of psychiatric testing. Prior to his hearing, the testing would assess whether David, should stand trial as a juvenile or an adult. Local authorities completed their investigation in March and announced they wouldn't be

making any more arrests. Because they felt like they had their suspect. And he acted alone, right? That's what they must have concluded. Yeah. David's highly publicized hearing to determine whether he should be tried as a juvenile or an adult started on April 5th, 1988, the first witness was Deputy Michael Braley, who testified he was in a state of shot. After finding the victims, he said, I had never seen so much carnage in such a small area.

And I never know Gibbs how big some of these police departments are, right, that we're talking about. I'm going to assume this was one that was probably on the smaller side. But even still, you know, how many. police officers have seen a house with four family members, you know, murdered by an axe. I don't know how many. Something they would never really want to ever see. No, and I don't know how you prepare for that. You know, the police academy is not going to prepare you for that.

I don't think there's really anything that can. According to Deputy Braley, two kitchen nuts were found in the hallway leading to David's room. Downstairs police found hair dye, splattered in a bathroom sink, an empty hair dye container, and rubber gloves. Letters and cards were strewn across the kitchen floor. It appeared as if there was a struggle in the kitchen because numerous utensils were also scattered. Deputy Coroner Dr. Catherine Burke testified that Bernard had multiple deep wounds to the back of his head, several tears in his pajamas and several wounds on his shoulders. I'm sure he had to hit his dad hard and pretty aggressive.

I mean, that was probably his biggest threat when he decided to attack his family, right? You've got to take out the dad first. Yeah, I think he would have been the biggest threat. Paulette suffered multiple wounds to the left side of her head and a deep wound to her left forearm. Ricky had wounds to the right side of his face. In total, Bernard had 22 wounds, Paulette had 19, Richard had nine, and Diane had eight. And, I mean, you can analyze the number of wounds. It was thought that he had a real issue with his dad.

Is it surprising that his dad suffered more wounds than anybody else? No. Followed by his mom. And then his siblings had less wounds, but they were. were obviously fatal still. But it's so brutal. I mean, think about it.

I mean, this is your parents. It's your siblings. And just the thought of somebody, you know, holding that axe, raising it up and just raining down with it. It's a very scary thought.

And if you're a parent, the last thing you expect is your 16 year old to attack you with an axe. Yeah, I'm sure you're taken off guard, right? And then do you fight back the way that you probably should? Or are you just so shocked and timid, I guess, that you don't fight back as strong as maybe one would have? Because it's your kid. You're like, I don't know if I want to hurt my own kid, even though he's hurting me. Yeah, I think this is one of those things that nobody knows what they would do unless

they were in that situation. Dr. Berg also testified that she found the notebook in David's bedroom during her investigation of the crime scene. One note said, killings I'll do tonight. The only other entry in the notebook was four horsemen of the apocalypse now. Okay, that's pretty cryptic. First one's pretty cut and dry. Yeah. This four horsemen of the apocalypse now is a little more cryptic.

Two of David's friends testified that he hated his parents and told, them he killed his family. Both witnesses were only 16 and were not identified by the press. A 16-year-old student at David's school said David told her, he took an axe into his parents' bedroom and hit his father several times, then killed his mother, brother, and sister. The witness rode with David in his family's van. The morning after the murders, they stopped to talk at a park. David told her his father hit him during an argument. At 4 a.m. David went into his parents' bedroom and hit his dad in the head with an axe. He repeatedly hit his father as he tried to get up from the bed.

His mother was screaming and ran out of the bedroom. He left the bedroom and, quote, got his mom. Then went into Ricky's room. Ricky screamed and David screamed back. Before hitting his brother with the axe, he returned to the hallway, where he found Diane cradling his mother. She screamed. He screamed back.

and then he hit Diane with the axe. David felt as if he had to leave, so he left the axe behind and fled to house. The witness and David left the park and drove to a store where she planned to call the school and tell them she was sick. At that time, David was changing clothes in the van. According to the witness, David seemed nervous.

And he told me he was sick. They went to the witness's home because David wanted to cut his hair. She couldn't get it as short as he wanted, so they went to Kmart and bought a razor, then returned her home where she helped David shave his head. The girl's mother came home while they were there. She explained that she left school because she didn't feel well, but she was feeling better now, so her mother took her to school.

If you're that girl, what's it like hearing this? And why is he telling her? Yeah, that was my first thought is why is he going around telling someone? so many different people that he killed his mom, his dad, and his siblings. But yeah, your question is equally as compelling. You're digesting this information. And what do you do? You got to be a little scared, right?

That if you do the wrong thing, say the wrong thing, maybe even act the wrong way, you could be next. And do you really think it's best to bring them back to your house? Again, don't know what she was thinking. She could have just been in self-preservation mode, trying to just keep his trust. I don't know. A girl David had been dating testified that he told her he hated his parents and told her he killed them. It's another person that he tells.

He's just going around telling a lot of different people after leaving the first witness's house, David went to the girl's school and met with her and some of her friends. They went to a pizza restaurant for lunch. The girl testified, per the Rochester post-bolton, David said his parents had kicked him out of the house and that he slept in the van the night before. David said he killed his parents, but they all thought it was a joke. However, she believed him when he called her after school from his home. David said he went back home to get some tapes. She asked why he was kicked out of the house. David said his dad was upset about some of his albums and thought the covers were too explicit. Later in their conversation, he said he killed his family in the early

morning hours and they were all upstairs. He wanted to get out of the house as fast as possible. David said he was going to dye his hair, moved to the Twin Cities and live on the streets. So he did have at least somewhat of a plan, but I think we'd know. We'd know. We'd know. We'd know. He'd No, he never really kind of put it into motion. He never got that far. He claimed he had enough money to live for a couple of years. He had been to an ATM and had about $250. Well, that's not going to get you very far.

No, but for a 16-year-old, you know, do they always have the best understanding of money? No, not always. Yeah, I got about enough to get me through two years. Oh, wait, well, I got to pay what? Well, you know, if you're living on the streets, okay, obviously there's not going to be a lot of expenses. Maybe he was planning on, you know, asking for money, panhandling. I don't know. The witness saw David one more time that day when he returned her book bag, which she left in the van.

He told her he was in deep trouble. He planned to sleep under a bridge and go to the Douglas Trail in Rochester in the morning. The girl testified that she met David at a church retreat in January 1988, and they started dating shortly after. She soon learned things were not well in David's home. One night they were talking in David's van after a date. The girl testified, he said he didn't like his parents. He said his dad abused him. He didn't like how they made him do everything around the house like always chop wood.

David also talked about his older brother Joe and how upset he was that Joe was kicked out of the house a couple of years earlier they talked often about a fantasy in which David would hit his father over the head take the family van and go with her to Florida part of his fantasy was scaring his siblings with a night so they wouldn't tell his parents where he went

so he had all these fantasies in his head on what he would think about doing someday But I do think this is all going to be important, right, when it comes to trial, because it kind of hints at how long this deep-seated hatred had been building up. Was it spur of the moment or, you know, did it kind of escalate over a period of years? And I would argue it sounds like more of the latter. Although David said he hated his parents, she didn't really believe him and was, sure what to think. David also talked about dying and said he was never happy. But before he wanted to die, he wanted to get back at his family. And we talk about this a lot, right? Someone says something to you.

You know, 15, 16, 17 years old. Think back about, you know, what your friends, your boyfriend, your girlfriend says. A lot of people joke around about things that they really shouldn't joke around about it. It's true. Or they're venting and they say, oh, I'm so mad I could kill them. But you don't think they really mean it. No. But in some cases, I guess they do. County services worker John Raymond wrote a report recommending David to be tried as an adult. Raymond testified that David claimed he was physically abused by his father and that his family had many conflicts. Raymond also testified that after the murders, David wanted to be able to around Rochester for 30 hours. He fell asleep in a culvert before he was arrested at the

post office. Under cross-examination, Raymond said the family had been in conflict for years and had sought family counseling over disagreements with Joe who moved out when he was 16. The conflict stemmed from how Joe was treated due to differences in religious beliefs. David also felt his parents imposed strict limits on him. David told Raymond that his father physically abused him, but he didn't tell another adult because he didn't trust anyone and thought he would be laughed at. He didn't think anyone would believe him because Bernard was well respected at church. That's kind of a struggle for somebody that's in a abusive relationship. Who can you tell that will actually believe what you say? Yeah, now we don't

know at this point if what David is saying is true. but I think people do struggle with that, right? Do I come forward and tell this secret, right, when they are being abused? Because am I going to be believed? We've heard that before. The defense asked if Raymond was aware that David and his father argued the night before the killings and that Bernard pushed David over a coffee table. Raymond said, David did mention the argument, but in his opinion, David was

physically disciplined, not physically abused. No other adults such as school counselors ever indicated. David had injuries suggesting abuse. Raymond said social services had not received any reports about the Brown family, but the defense counted that three years earlier. Social services considered foster care for Joe Brown. And the one thing that I will say gives is that the absence of visible injuries, the absence of reports, doesn't necessarily mean that something is not going on. Yeah, you're right. I mean, clearly there's going to be things people can do that can hurt you that wouldn't stand out to somebody. Raymond testified his recommendation for adult prosecution was partially based on the fact that there were multiple homicides. He agreed that David had no history of problems.

Dr. Carl Malmquist, who performed David's court-ordered evaluation, diagnosed David with severe depression and said he didn't know how to deal with his aggression. David suffered from progressive depression that built up over a period of years. He tried to end his life. In June and September, 1987, Dr. Malmquist characterized David as an extreme case. He didn't fit the mold of most juveniles who are certified as adults after continuous trouble with the law. Momquist testified per the post-bolton. David doesn't know what to do with his aggression.

He smiles. He's a nice kid. Everyone likes him. David played the role of a clown to try to make others happy. So we have differing opinions here. I think what's interesting to me about this doctor is that, you know, He's saying most juveniles, you would see a pattern, right, a progression. They didn't see that here with David.

And he was a good kid. Everyone liked him. And the next thing you know, he murdered his parents and siblings with an act. Yeah. David's feelings of unhappiness intensified in the ninth grade because it became difficult for him to make people happy. Two of his close friends moved away. And his brother, Joe, had moved out.

kind of lost his network well you know if you are a person who plays that role right of making others happy and maybe that's where your self-worth comes from if you lose that ability and you lose that the friends your your core friends okay maybe that does something to you yeah yeah your self-worth goes down because you're not able to perform that function or that role anymore. David was fearful of his father, but that fear was exaggerated. Balmquist explained he lived in terror of his father, that something terrible would happen, and David's terror was real. Part of their family conflict was that the parents didn't want David, Diane, and Ricky to turn out like Joe, so they were overly strict. And I could see that happening. You know,

we've talked about cases where parents lose, you know, one of their children. and then they try to protect the other one or the remaining children at all cause. And part of that is not giving them the freedom that they probably would have. Had something not happened to one of their children. Balmquist had reservations about keeping David in the juvenile system because he felt David needed long-term treatment, focused on his tendencies of self-destruction and the bursts of violence. He added, I have real reservations that I could assure myself in this court that I could step back and say he was well.

And I wouldn't have to worry about suicide or homicide if he was kept in the juvenile system and released at age 19. So although this doctor does differ in some ways from the previous doctor, he's got some real reservations about David. and what he would do if he was back out on the street, I think. I don't think he's wrong. No, I don't think he is either. He also said he believed the murders were premeditated and willful, saying it flitted in and out of his mind, just as suicide had. Mary Alice Richardson, an attorney and Joe Brom's former foster parent, testified

that Bernard and Paulette were strict disciplinarians, and couldn't accept their children's taste and music and dress. I just think sometimes people can be too strict. Parents can be too strict. Big camping. Yeah. I kind of think of the old, what was that movie? Footloose.

Mm-hmm. The original one. No dancing. No dancing. All that. Yeah. Yeah, obviously that was way too strict. But is it unusual for parents not to like the way that their kids dress

sometimes, the music that they listen to. I don't think it is. But, you know, do some people go way farther than others? Yes. Yeah, for sure. The court heard that Bernard and Paulette committed Joe to a locked psychiatric ward at the hospital because he wouldn't stop dressing in a punk stop. Let's face it, man.

Kids go through phases. They do. You know, especially in those four. 14, 15, 16, 17, age range. I mean, there's all kinds of different phases. But is that the best way to address how, because your son is going through a punk rock stage? No, it doesn't seem like it to you and I,

and probably not most people, but there are some people out there, right? As parents who really lay down the law. But committing him to a state psychiatric facility for the way he dresses. Yeah. That's rough. It really is rough.

And if you were his brother coming up... You're seeing it. You're thinking, well, I kind of want to dress that way, too. What does that mean for me? Witness Anita Fetch testified that the Brahms took Joe to the hospital under the guise of having a physical exam. Prior to his commitment, he had been staying with the Fetches for a few days. Joe was dating one of Anita's daughters.

Anita testified that Bernard and Paulette misled her about why they were taking Joe to the hospital. She tried to understand what their problem was with Joe, who she said was a nice boy. And, you know, she must have liked him to a point because she's letting him date her daughter. Both Mary Richardson and Anita Fetch described Joe as a normal adolescent who happened to dress in a punk style. Joe didn't drink or smoke. and he was an above average student. Just like to dress a certain way. Mary Richardson testified that before becoming Joe's foster parent,

she inquired with the doctor who treated him at the psychiatric hospital. The doctor described Joe as just a typical adolescent, rebelling against family rules, and there's nothing wrong with him psychologically or chemically. He just dresses punk. I mean, we're hearing it, not only from, you know, his foster parent, but his girlfriend's mom. Now we're hearing it from a doctor. The Richardson's got involved because their son Edward asked if his friend Joe could live with them due to two family problems.

Joe spent a month with them. During that time, the Brahms only came to the house twice to drop Joe off and pick him up. They never met the Richardson's in person and didn't show concern for Joe's wall. Fair, they called once and didn't even ask how Joe was doing. Right, that's a little cold. It's extremely cold, I think. Before taking Joe in, Mary talked to Paulette over the phone. Paulette said her son was argumentative, stubborn, and more than they could handle. She also warned Mary, once you see him, you won't want him.

Okay. Why? Because of the punk dress? Yeah. Mary was angry. When the night before Joe was supposed to go back to his parents, she still hadn't heard from them. Joe had nowhere to go the following day. When the Richardson's were leaving for a family trip, Mary called the Brahms and told them she couldn't believe.

Her family loved Joe more than his own parents. And that was when Bernard and Paulette finally took Joe back home. And it sounds to me like it was done begrudgingly. Like they really didn't want to. Now, I want to be careful. I don't want to bad mouth the Brahms, right? They are the victims in this story. True.

But I think it is important to analyze the treatment of Joe and how it relates to, you know, what David would have seen would have felt during this period of time. Several teens testified that David frequently talked about suicide. and made plans with several friends to take a summer trip financed with money he would obtain after killing his family. David once said he would kill his family by putting something in their foot. He told another person he was going to shoot them. And all of these people thought David was joking at the time.

Now, I don't know what he was planning to put in their feet that would kill them. I don't know if this was an injection between the toes. You've seen that in TV shows and movies. Yeah, I have. I'm not surprised people don't believe them at this point. No, because I think most people just think this is venting, spouting off, you know. It's not ever going to actually happen. Just trying to get, let some steam off. They still didn't believe David when he said he killed his family. On February 18th, two of the teens called the elementary school to see if David's younger siblings were there and one called the Brahm household. to see if anyone would answer. The prosecutor introduced a notebook that contained a list of things

David needed to do before and after killing his family. One entry was a list of supplies that ended with Kill Berry, FastBank, Hairdye. Okay. There were notes to call friends, have a friend get a gun, and have a friend get beer and cigarettes. And I don't really ever understand the lists. I know people journal a lot. A lot of people do keep journals or write down their thoughts.

But to write down kind of, what do you want to call it, Gibbs, a to-do list for murder. Yeah. Seems like such damning evidence that the police are going to find at some point. Yeah, but maybe at his age he doesn't really. that and he just wants to make sure he doesn't forget to do certain things so he's going to put it down so he's got a place to reference you know when this goes down yeah i mean the kid you know he was 16 years old at the time a crime lab analyst testified that there was strong evidence david wrote the

list however the handwriting of another note founded david's room that said the killings i'll do and will the four horsemen of the apocalypse ride was not not consistent with David's handwriting samples. The last witness at the hearing was psychologist Dr. James Gilbertson who believed David could be treated for his depression and would pose no risk to the general public. So this guy is saying, hey, we can treat him, he can be out in the general public, no concerns. He won't ever do this again. And I get that, that he could have that opinion.

And it could happen that way. but it could also go very badly, be taking a big risk. I think the other thing is, you know, that kind of line between getting the help you need and paying for what you did. And sometimes that line is very gray if a person has a real mental illness. And doesn't this plan only work if there's some guarantee that he'll follow through on the treatment. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I'm sure it would be mandated. He'd probably even be in a facility where he couldn't leave. But, you know, look at some of the things we talked about, Gibbs,

the planning, the telling friends that he's going to do this and this once he gets his money. You know, that to me seems to be at odds with, you know, not knowing what he was doing. Yeah. And that it was wrong. It doesn't seem like it was a spur of the moment thing. On April 26th, second, a judge ordered that David would be trialled as a juvenile because the state failed to prove he couldn't be treated or that he was a danger to the public. The judge did say is quoted by the post-bolton, I don't agree with the outcome, but I have to follow the law. I tell my jurors that all the time, that they are to follow the law even if they don't agree with it. And that's pretty interesting when a judge comes out and says, I don't agree with this, but the state didn't

prove it. And those are two different things. He doesn't think this guy is not going to be a risk. Probably should be tried as an adult, but the state didn't prove it to him. He makes a good case, right? You got to be able to prove it. And if we go this other route, we're setting ourselves up for appeals and things like that. Well, in this case, the prosecutor's appeal, the decision, and asked that the proceedings be postponed until the case was reviewed by the Minnesota Court of Appeals. In June 1988, David was transferred to a treatment facility in Texas for severely emotionally disturbed children in adolescents, per the Post Bolton. This was at the request of his defense, because they wanted David in a juvenile psychiatric facility.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on whether David should be able to be able to should be tried as a juvenile or an adult on August 11th. On October 18th, 1980, the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling and ordered David to be tried as an adult. The defense appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court, but laws. And I just wonder how the original judge felt about that. You know, coming out and saying, I don't agree with what I'm doing, but I feel like it's the right thing to do.

I don't think he was probably all that upset. that he was overturned. No, I mean, at least he said what he needed to say to make his conscious and professionalism heard. Right, he's saying the law doesn't allow for this, in his opinion. Well, obviously somebody else felt that it did, and they overruled them, and that's what it is. David returned to Rochester in January 1989 to begin the process of standing trials

as an adult. On January 26th, a grand jury returned. an eight-count indictment against David, he was indicted on four counts of first-degree murder and four counts of second-degree murder. David pleaded not guilty to the charges. David's attorneys filed a notice that they may rely on a mental illness defense.

Opening arguments in David's trial started on September 27th, 1989. David pleaded not guilty and not guilty by reason of mental illness to all the charges against him. Because of this, his trial was split into two phases, one to determine whether he was guilty of first or second degree murder and one where his defense had the burden of proving his legal mental illness. According to State v. Brom, during phase one, the defense requested permission to introduce expert psychiatric testimony about David's capacity to premeditate his actions. The court denied the request and the defense.

rested without offering testimony. That's got to hurt. Well, it sounds like they were hanging their hat on this one expert. Defense attorney Terry Walter said in opening arguments that there was no doubt David killed his parents, but he added, at least I can see that the physical body of David Brom committed the physical acts he is accused of. Walter said he expected the jury to return some guilty verdict. The question was whether it would be first or second-degree murder.

They argued that there was no premeditation to support a first-degree murder verdict. The prosecutor told the jury that David's former classmates would speak of a long-standing game. That preceded the murders. This game included talk by David about how he would kill his family and go on a trip, funded by his family's credit cards and cash. They also introduced David's notebook, which contained the list of things to do before and after the murders to support their premeditation argument. The defense questioned if there was a way to tell when the entries were made. I mean, this is not good.

For him and the defense, I would say no, because there does seem to be quite a bit of evidence of premeditation, right, on the part of David Brom. Two friends of David's testified that he had an imaginary friend called Just in Time, who was almost like a part of him. Okay. I mean, who didn't have an imaginary friend growing up? I didn't have one at 16 years old, though. I have to be honest about that. When I was little, little, sure.

You have an imaginary friend you talked to. I was an only child. I needed one. You probably didn't need one because you had two brothers, and you were all beating the you know what out of each other. That's true. Day in and day out. I have one now, though.

Because you need one. It's right over there. I see him. Just in Time. It's such a strange name. I know. I'm thinking, is it a play on words? Why are you thinking that?

Yes, obviously it's a play on words. You think that the imaginary friend's name just happens to be Justin, and his last name is time? Not just in time? It's kind of like that one Patreon member we got a couple weeks ago. Who was that? You can't remember, can you? I can't.

It's a good story. This makes for good pot. It does, doesn't it? Yeah. It was like Richard. Oh, Richard Handler? Yeah, Richard Handler. I got you.

Yeah. Justin Time was both a pen name and a fictional character. David used in many short stories and poems. David never said he was Just in Time, but the character was who he wanted to be. One girl testified as quoted by the post Bolton. In school, he was the clown. He made everybody laugh.

He made everybody smile. Outside, he was serious. He was darker. He was still sweet and gentle and kind, but he was serious. David told one of his friends, he thought about ending his life every single second of the day. It's rough, man. Yeah, if that's the truth,

that is a horrible way to live. live. David's former girlfriend, Catherine Rigmar, testified that they broke up because David was too depressing. He was preoccupied with death and suicide and wrote morbid poetry. The girl who David spent the morning of February 18th with testified that David described in detail how he killed his parents. David said he just kept on swinging for about half an hour. Well, with 20-some hits on his dad, 19-some hits on his mom, and the rest of the hits on his siblings, yeah, I guess it probably was nonstop swinging. But I don't know how many people have split wood. A half hour of splitting wood is one heck of a workout. Yeah, for sure. Swinging a fairly heavy axe that many times is not the easiest thing to do.

David said it was really gross and told her that someone has to be sick to be doing something like this. So is that him trying to label himself? Well, it's almost like he's talking about himself in the third person, right? Like this wasn't really me even though it was. In closing arguments, the defense said David didn't plan to kill his family. It was an act of impulsivity carried out amidst screaming and crime. The prosecution argued that it was a clear case of premeditation. David had a plan that he discussed with his friends.

He wrote down lists and followed through with many of the things on that list. The jury was instructed not to consider evidence of David's mental illness in phase one deliberations. And I thought, you know, to me, this is a very interesting part of this case, kind of the two phases. Now, we're used to the guilt or innocence phase and then the sentencing. Right. But this is different. On October 3rd in 1989, David Brom was found guilty of four counts of first degree murder. So then in phase two, it was David's defense who bore the burden of proving his legal mental illness.

The defense presented testimony from a psychiatrist who concluded that David didn't understand. that killing his parents and siblings was wrong, and therefore he was legally insane. The state called four psychiatrists. Two of the four concluded David was not legally insane at the time of the murders, and two didn't offer an opinion as to his mental illness. However, all of the experts agree

that David suffered some form of mental illness or impairment. I mean, to swing an axe at your parents and your siblings, I think there's something there. Well, I think it's hard for most people to believe that someone doesn't know that that is wrong. Now, there are some people who are mentally ill to the point where they don't know right from wrong, but is that David Brown? One person saying yes, two people are saying no, two other experts aren't sure, or they're not willing to say either way.

Is this him playing like the Edward Norton role, you know, in that one movie? Oh, the one with Richard Geard? Yeah. That was a good movie. It was a really good movie. According to the Post Bulletin, Dr. James Stevens testified for the defense that David was diagnosed with atypical psychosis, depression, and multiple personalities. David didn't know the nature of his acts or that they were wrong.

However, the Texas. psychiatrist who treated David daily for over six months testified that David was depressed and had borderline personality disorder but was not psychotic. Dr. Carl Malmquist testified that David did not see himself as a criminal. He felt relief after the killings. He quoted David as saying during his psychiatric evaluation, until this all happened, it was like I had such a great burden, which I could not escape from. It was like it took a great deal to make me laugh. The feeling I had inside me was like I was full, not of food, but rather that I couldn't handle anymore. It was like if a feather was put on me, I'd collapse. David first thought about taking his life, but that expanded to

killing his entire family. He didn't want Ricky and Diane to feel sad about the loss of their parents. He also felt he had to kill the family so no one could interfere with him carrying out the acts. That's his reasoning. But what acts are we talking about here? Him ending his life? Because I feel like if that's what he wanted to do, he could have done that without killing his family. Sure. The incident that triggered the murders was David's argument with his father on February 17th. Bernard pushed him into a table and said if his attitude didn't improve, he would lose his albums. David said he thought about running away, but it hadn't worked for Joe. He thought about killing himself, but also said,

I thought my parents were the only burdens I had left to relieve all the stress and tension. David stayed up all night thinking. At 3 a.m., he got an axe from the garage. Went to his parents' bedroom. he remembered standing in the doorway with the axe. According to David, he said, when I think about it, I get kind of sick. What I remember is gross. I walk into my parents' room and they're asleep.

I have the axe. There's a lot of screaming in there. I'm screaming. They're screaming. I was scared. I don't remember hitting anyone. I could hear the screaming, though, and it went on and on. Then I remember being in my room and packing things.

like blankets. All the lights were on and I had to go into each room. My brother was in his bedroom. And my mother and sister in the hall, there was blood everywhere. David said, I've always held in my aggression and I don't know how I could have done it. The anger inside me grew and grew. When I was in the room those hours, I felt angry, frustrated and confused when I dwelled on it. I think I snapped. I think he did too. I mean, he's sick. sitting there thinking about it, thinking about it. And just like that, come three o'clock, he makes the decision to go out to the garage, grab the axe, and he's going to do this thing. He's 16 years old. He decides to do this. But is that a snap? That's the thing that I have,

or the question I have. Is it a question of snapping, or, you know, as he put it, I snapped. when you've been talking and plotting and planning ahead of time. Maybe not snapped, but there has to be something that finally pushes you to do something so violent. You can talk about it all day. I'm going to kill them. I'm going to kill them. You know, I hate them. I'm going to kill them.

Are you really going to do anything? But what pushes you to actually finally go out, put your hands on an axe and have the the nerve to walk up to your dad and do what he did. Yeah, but see, I think with him it was more than just talk. It was planning, right? He had written it down. He had told friends what he was going to do with the money he would get from killing his parents.

On October 15th, 1989, the jury found David guilty of four counts of first-degree murder during phase two. On October 16th, David received four life sentences, three to run consecutively, and the fourth to run concurrently to the last consecutive term. Understate law at the time, David was required to serve 17 and a half years for each life sentence for a total of 52 and a half years in prison before he would be eligible for parole. According to the outlet, KTTC, the judge's decision to make the sentences for the murder of his younger siblings concurrent was controversial. Many questioned why Diane's life seemed to be worth less than her younger brothers.

Some argued that the judge was giving David leniency because he was a juvenile. In 2003, Minnesota lawmakers ended life without parole for juveniles. The new law changed the minimum term of imprisonment for individuals under 18 at the time of the offense, which made David eligible for parole after serving a total of 30 years. KTTC reported that during his 36 years in prison, David had just one violation. Dated August 24, 1992, he was cited for Rule 500, violation of special unit regulations. At the time, David's housing unit couldn't have more than four people in a cell at any given time. And he was observed with five people.

I mean, okay, for 36 years in prison, that's the only thing you're ever busted for? That's pretty good. Either you're really good at hiding stuff or you're just not going against the rules. David's review before the parole board took place in January 2025. He apologized and said he was struggling with depression at the time of the murders. KTTC quoted him as saying, I thought these things were going to last forever. And I knew I couldn't live with that forever.

And in that clouded depression, I started to believe other. people were at fault for the way I felt. On July 29th, 2005, David Brom, now 53 years old, was granted work release. He'll be residing in a halfway house in the Twin Cities area per the Minnesota DOC. His work release involves case management, supervision, and GPS monitoring. David's recent release refocused attention on this older case and brought up important conversations on laws regarding juvenile sentencing for violent crimes.

So it's a timely case in that he just got this or was granted this work release. Obviously, the murders go all the way back to the, you know, the late 80s. And I do think, you know, as we wrap this one up, Gives, it's these types of cases that can sometimes divide people. You know, anytime you're talking about mental health, right. you know, who's right and who's wrong about the state of this guy's mental health. You have people saying he didn't know what he was doing at the time was wrong. You have others saying, yeah, he was depressed.

He had some mental health issues, but he knew what he was doing. And he should be held accountable. Yes. Those are difficult sometimes. Yeah. I mean, you've got a juvenile with or without mental illness. I don't know how you look at it or some form of mental illness. It's going to be tough.

And like you said, it's going to be a split decision. Yeah, let's not discount the fact that he was 16. You know, obviously what he did was horrible. It's hard to fully know what he went through, you know,

inside the home. There was a lot of talk of abuse. And possibly there was quite a bit of it. We don't know for sure, though. I think what gets me, what I keep coming back to, is the level of premeditation, you know,

talking about what he was going to do with this money that he would get once his family was dead, the writing of the list. I don't know that this was a case of an argument that happened the night before that caused him to sit up all night and then just snap in a rage. It just seems like there was much more to it than that

that had been building up for a while. What I don't know is exactly what role mental illness played. And how can we know for sure? Yeah, I don't think we can. But he was so young when he killed his family that, you know, he's, he's now like our age. Yeah. And can still, if he gets out, live a life. Now, I don't know what that life will be.

Well, I'm sure it's going to be better than what he's been living in prison. Oh, absolutely. But if he had been 18 or 19. Yeah. I don't think he's ever getting out. No, no. For that type of heinous quadruple murder. He's in there for life.

Yeah. There's no doubt about it. That's it for our episode on David Brom. We've got a voicemail. You want to check that out? Let's check it out. Hey, Mike and Dewey. I've been listening for a while and never thought I would voicemail, but here it goes.

I am listening to your James Van Callis episode, and I got to the part where you're talking about the victim having studied German and being really into it. And it's just funny because that's actually my first language. And a lot of my really close friends I ended up finding because we had a common bond over them loving the German language

while being American. So my best friend is studied it in college to do international business and all of that. So there are a lot of people out there who study German and really enjoyed studying German. So I was just gonna give you a little clue on that. But love the podcast. I once listened to you guys on a trip

from California to Kansas and Oklahoma back. So that was a lot of hours of true crime all the time. And I'm getting back into it, as you can see, since I'm only on the James Beck House episode this season. But you guys are doing great and love listening to you. Thanks. Bye. Nine. Nine.

Is that all the German you know? That's it. Okay. I think it means no. I don't know. I think it does, too. It is like from Stahl League 8 or 19 or what? Captain, I was going to say Captain Curry.

Yeah. I don't know what you're saying. I don't think you know what you're saying. You don't remember Stahlig? Stalik. What else they call? I think that's the first problem is you're messing that word up. Yeah.

I know what you're trying to say, but I get it. German to me sounds like, and maybe it's just how it comes out, it sounds like such an angry language. Yeah. Like people are angry when they're not even saying things that that really they're mad about. They're like, I love you.

You know, but how are you saying it in German? The women are like, okay. But we appreciate the voicemail very much. Yeah, we do. All right, buddy, that is it for another episode of TrueCom all the time. So for Mike and Gibby, stay safe and keep your own time ticking.