Police records describe a recorded admission-like statement, later denials and physical evidence collected after Robert Larsen was found dead.
RICHLAND TOWNSHIP, Mich. — Brittany Leigh Groat told investigators she did not know how blood got onto her clothes and denied harming her boyfriend, police said. But officers were also working with a recorded phone call in which she allegedly repeated that she thought she had killed him, creating a central tension in an open murder case built from statements and physical evidence.
Groat, 36, is charged in the July 24 death of Robert Walter Larsen, 50, who was found dead on a staircase inside a Kalamazoo County residence. Michigan State Police described the two as being in a dating relationship and said Groat had stayed at Larsen’s home for several weeks. A probable cause affidavit summarized by multiple news organizations gives an early account of what detectives believed the evidence showed. It does not amount to a finding of guilt, and Groat has not been convicted. The available record also does not include a full defense filing explaining how she contests the government’s account, making careful attribution essential when describing statements that police say she made.
One of the most consequential pieces of evidence described in the affidavit came from before officers reached the home. At about 9 p.m., police said, Groat contacted another person and made statements about Larsen’s death. Part of the conversation was recorded. After reciting the address, she allegedly said, “I think I killed him, I think I killed him.” The person or people who later contacted 911 were not identified in the reports reviewed. Troopers were dispatched at approximately 9:16 p.m. That sequence gives investigators a recorded statement they can compare with what Groat said later, but the published materials do not provide the entire call or its surrounding context.
Her reported comments changed after police took her into custody. The affidavit says Groat waived her Miranda rights and denied that she had done anything to Larsen. Detectives asked how blood had gotten on the clothes she was wearing, and she said she did not know, according to police. She acknowledged the dating relationship and her recent stay at the house. When questioned about what happened before she left the residence, investigators said Groat told them that she could not remember. Because only excerpts and summaries of the interview are publicly available in the sources reviewed, it is not possible to assess from those reports alone the full sequence of questions, the length of the interview or any qualifications she gave with her answers.
Police said another statement introduced a different element. Groat allegedly told investigators that Larsen cut her with a folding knife while she was attempting to leave and that he returned inside after she went outside. She also said that only she and Larsen had been in the home, according to the affidavit. That claim could be important because investigators reported finding a folding knife near Larsen’s body. Still, the reports reviewed do not state that Groat has formally presented a self-defense claim in court, and they do not establish whether officers documented an injury to her, whether the knife was tested for DNA or fingerprints, or what any such testing showed.
The clothing described by officers adds a physical component to the statements attributed to Groat. Police used surveillance video and witness interviews while reconstructing the evening and said Larsen’s vehicle left the residence at about 7:11 p.m. Authorities later found the vehicle on Kings Highway with Groat alone behind the wheel. Officers described a white shirt, jean shorts and black-and-white Converse shoes and said her clothing was extensively bloodstained. That observation was included in the probable cause account. The public reporting, however, does not include laboratory results identifying the source of every stain or explaining whether blood from more than one person was detected.
Inside Larsen’s home, investigators described a scene that extended beyond the staircase where his body was found. Police said there was significant blood evidence throughout areas of the residence, including bloody footprints leading through the house and toward the garage. A search warrant allowed detectives to conduct a more detailed examination. They reported finding both a folding knife and a baseball bat on the stairs and landing near Larsen. The existence of those items is documented in the investigative narrative, but their precise role remains less clear publicly. The sources reviewed do not say whether the bat was used during the confrontation, whether either object carried identifiable biological material, or whether investigators reconstructed the order in which Larsen’s injuries occurred.
The autopsy supplied information that officers could not determine from the initial scene examination alone. After Larsen’s body was moved, investigators observed at least six stab wounds, according to the affidavit. Two days later, an autopsy documented 10 stab wounds and additional lacerations. The medical examiner concluded that Larsen died from blood loss caused by the stab wounds and ruled the death a homicide. The medical ruling establishes that the death resulted from another person’s actions rather than natural causes, accident or suicide as classified by the examiner. It does not, by itself, decide who is criminally responsible or whether a killing legally amounts to first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter or a justified act.
That separation between evidence and legal conclusion is particularly relevant because prosecutors charged Groat with open murder. Under Michigan practice, an open murder charge permits a prosecution to begin without specifying first- or second-degree murder in the charging language. Michigan Supreme Court precedent has described the process as moving from a general murder accusation toward a more specific determination as the case develops. First-degree and second-degree murder carry different legal requirements and potential penalties. Michigan law makes first-degree murder punishable by mandatory life imprisonment, while second-degree murder can result in life imprisonment or a term of years. None of those potential consequences establishes which offense, if any, Groat ultimately may be found to have committed.
Groat was arraigned in Kalamazoo County’s 8th District Court, where a judge denied bond. That hearing marked the beginning of the court process rather than its conclusion. In Michigan felony cases, district courts oversee early proceedings such as arraignment and preliminary examination. The preliminary examination is designed to test whether probable cause exists to believe a felony occurred and that the accused committed it; it is not a trial on guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If the case is bound over, later proceedings ordinarily move to circuit court. A preliminary examination can also be waived or postponed in accordance with state procedure.
Initial reports said Groat was scheduled for a preliminary hearing Aug. 5. The verified sources reviewed for this article did not establish what occurred on that date or provide a later disposition, so the status of that particular hearing cannot be stated with confidence. There is likewise no verified trial date, plea or final judgment in the material reviewed. The absence of that information matters because early police affidavits often present the evidence through the prosecution’s investigative lens. Defense attorneys later may challenge the admissibility, meaning or reliability of statements, physical evidence or forensic conclusions, and prosecutors may introduce information not described in the original affidavit.
The central factual issue visible in the early record is therefore not simply that police found several categories of evidence. It is how those categories relate to one another. Investigators have a recorded statement in which Groat allegedly expressed belief that she had killed Larsen, a later denial of responsibility, a claim that Larsen cut her, bloodstained clothing, a vehicle timeline, two objects recovered near the body and an autopsy establishing the cause of death. What remains publicly unresolved is the context surrounding the confrontation and whether further testing or witness testimony strengthens, weakens or changes the initial reconstruction.
Those unanswered questions will matter if the case continues through Michigan’s felony courts. Prosecutors would have to prove any criminal charge they ultimately pursue under the required standard, while Groat would have the opportunity to challenge the state’s evidence and present any legally available defense. As of Aug. 29, the reliable reporting reviewed supports describing her as charged with open murder and held without bond, not as guilty of Larsen’s killing.
Author note: Last updated August 29, 2026.