On the morning of December 14, 2023, Dan Krug returned to a home in Broomfield, Colorado, that had seemed ordinary the night before. His wife, Kristil, 40, a mother of three and an engineer who enjoyed art and restoring classic cars with her father, was found dead in the family garage. The discovery set off an investigation that would hinge less on physical clues at the scene than on a trail of digital evidence.
In the months leading up to her death, Kristil told family she was being stalked. She described a barrage of messages from an account using the name Anthony, ranging from solicitations to obscene threats and a creepy image of Dan arriving at work. Kristil identified Anthony as Anthony Holland, a former boyfriend who had sporadically contacted her over the years. Concerned, she met with Broomfield Detective Andrew Martinez in early November and hired a private investigator. The investigator located Holland in Utah, about 500 miles away; Martinez said he planned to gather enough evidence for an arrest rather than confronting Holland immediately.
Kristil took precautions at home. She installed security cameras, carried a gun gifted by her father, and told relatives she felt hunted. Family members urged more aggressive police intervention, while investigators worried a premature move might escalate the threat.
The fatal sequence began that Thursday morning when Dan left for work after a routine start to the day. While driving he received a text from Kristil asking if he could pick up a child. When he sent a follow-up because he did not get a timely reply, he asked police to conduct a welfare check. Officer John O’Hayre looked through a garage window and saw Kristil apparently lifeless with a head injury.
An autopsy found Kristil had been struck repeatedly from behind, suffering multiple skull fractures, and then stabbed above the heart. Investigators treated the case immediately as a homicide and canvassed the neighborhood and nearby security footage. Several cameras at the home had been manually turned off, though a Nest camera near the garage remained active.
Detectives initially focused on the stalking complaint and Anthony Holland. Within hours they traveled to his Utah home. Holland provided an alibi: a Kohl’s receipt showing a purchase well after the estimated time of the attack and employment records placing him in Utah. Investigators concluded he could not have driven to Colorado to commit the killing.
The probe then shifted to digital forensics. A Broomfield digital examiner, Randy Pihlak, expedited service-provider records and traced two accounts that had harassed Kristil to the same IP address: the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, where Dan Krug worked. That discovery moved suspicion to someone with access to that network.
As interviews continued, more anomalies emerged. Messages that appeared to have been sent from Kristil after Dan left had in fact been scheduled using a timer feature; investigators say the timed texts were programmed before he departed, apparently to create the impression she was alive after he was gone. Searches on Dan’s phone the day before the murder included queries about what happens when a person is knocked unconscious and whether people lose consciousness after head injuries. Forensic analysis of the image that had spurred Kristil to go to police — a photograph of Dan exiting his car at work — indicated the picture was taken using the selfie timer, consistent with him taking the photo and sending it to Kristil.
Investigators say Dan’s demeanor changed when detectives told him Holland had been eliminated as a suspect. Within days law enforcement arrested Dan in a supermarket parking lot. The subsequent interview and mounting digital evidence led prosecutors to present a case of premeditated harassment, impersonation, and murder.
At trial in April 2025, prosecutors laid out a timeline in which Dan, they alleged, impersonated Holland online to terrorize Kristil and portray himself as protector. When those tactics failed to control her, the prosecution said, he ambushed her in the garage. The state emphasized the digital breadcrumbs: the impersonating emails and texts, the scheduled messages on Kristil’s phone, the selfie-timer photograph, and internet searches that suggested motive and opportunity.
The defense criticized investigative gaps. Attorney Phillip Geigle noted that the blunt instrument and knife used to kill Kristil were never recovered and faulted police for not testing Kristil’s phone for fingerprints or DNA. He highlighted that no Dan DNA or blood was found on chest swabs and clothing, and that searches of his car produced no incriminating physical evidence.
After a three-week trial, jurors convicted Dan on counts including first-degree murder, stalking causing extreme emotional distress, stalking with a credible threat, and criminal impersonation. Judge Priscilla Loew sentenced him to life without parole on the murder verdict and an additional nine-and-a-half years for the other convictions.
Following conviction, Dan continued to proclaim his innocence in recorded jail calls, expressing concern for his children. His family struggled with the weight of the evidence and public scrutiny. Kristil’s parents, Lars and Linda Grimsrud, while relieved by the verdict, remained consumed by grief and questions about whether different or faster police actions might have changed the outcome. Kristil’s relatives have focused on supporting her children, starting a fundraising campaign and keeping her memory alive through the hobbies that connected her to family, including classic car restoration.
Detective Martinez has said the case has haunted him and acknowledged he might have made different choices in hindsight, including how quickly investigators pursued Holland’s location after Kristil first reported the stalking. Holland, the man repeatedly impersonated in the harassment, has said he believed police should have been in contact with him sooner.
The Krug case highlights the dangers that arise where domestic violence and digital harassment intersect with law enforcement decisions. Prosecutors built their case primarily on online activities and device records rather than physical forensic links to the scene. For residents, advocates, and police, the case raises uncomfortable questions about how to evaluate stalking reports, when to act decisively, and what measures are necessary to protect people who say they are being terrorized. Kristil’s family hopes her story will serve as a warning about how rapidly stalking can escalate and the importance of urgent, coordinated responses when a victim expresses fear for her life.