Monica McKay sought court protection weeks before prosecutors said escalating stalking ended in her November 2024 killing.
TOPEKA, Kan. — Weeks before Monica McKay was killed at her Shawnee County home, she had already gone to court seeking protection from her estranged husband, a step that later became a central piece of the stalking and murder case that put Brian P. McKay in prison for life.
The protection-from-stalking order marked an important point in a rapidly worsening domestic dispute. Court records show Monica McKay obtained the order in October 2024 and Brian McKay was served Oct. 17. She filed for divorce shortly afterward. About six weeks later, the 50-year-old health care administrator was found dead at the couple’s property near Topeka. A jury ultimately concluded that McKay murdered her and also violated the very order that had been intended to restrict his conduct.
The sequence mattered because prosecutors did not describe Monica McKay’s death as an isolated eruption of violence. At McKay’s July 20, 2026, sentencing, Shawnee County District Attorney Mike Kagay said the evidence showed weeks of stalking, planning and escalating conduct before the killing. McKay received life in prison and must serve at least 50 years before he becomes eligible for parole consideration. Sentences for aggravated burglary, stalking and violation of the protection order were ordered to run concurrently.
Long before jurors heard the homicide evidence, the couple’s separation had created a record in civil court. They had been married since 2009, according to court records reported by the Topeka Capital-Journal. By 2024 they were separated, and Monica McKay moved to legally end the marriage. Prosecutors told the murder jury that Brian McKay was increasingly preoccupied with the divorce and its financial impact. Those claims formed part of the state’s explanation for why the conflict continued after the couple separated.
The protection order was accompanied by concerns that Monica McKay was being watched. One of her adult sons had found devices inside the home that family members believed were being used to monitor her, according to an investigative affidavit. The equipment was described to authorities as covert cameras and microphones and possibly an Amazon Echo device. Investigators also said a GPS tracking device had been placed on a vehicle Monica McKay operated, allowing someone to monitor routine travel between her residence, workplace and other locations.
Those discoveries changed the character of the evidence. The prosecution was not relying only on testimony that the marriage had become hostile. Authorities had physical and digital indications of repeated monitoring, and the stalking allegations covered a period beginning around the time the protection order was served. The criminal complaint later alleged McKay stalked Monica McKay from Oct. 17 until shortly before her death, closely tying the alleged course of conduct to the court order already in effect.
Investigators said they also found signs that McKay had been researching ways to bypass security. A detective’s affidavit cited searches associated with his Google account involving an Android password and a lock-picking tool. Those searches were among the digital records reviewed after Monica McKay’s death. Prosecutors were required to establish how the evidence fit together rather than simply showing that troubling searches existed, and jurors eventually accepted the state’s broader reconstruction of planning, surveillance and unlawful entry.
Monica McKay was found at the property on Thanksgiving Day in 2024. The charging documents placed her death on Nov. 27 or Nov. 28. An autopsy determined that drowning was the cause of death, with strangulation and multiple blunt-force injuries contributing. Trial evidence indicated that she had suffered a physical assault before being drowned in a bathtub. Prosecutors also presented evidence of activity inside the home that they said was consistent with attempts to clean the scene after the killing.
McKay’s conduct during the initial investigation also became part of the evidentiary record. When police asked when he had last seen Monica McKay, an affidavit said he referred dismissively to the restraining order and claimed he had not seen her since it was obtained. Investigators observed marks on his cheek and neck. McKay provided explanations for those marks, saying one was related to previous skin-cancer treatment and another came from a twig while he was clearing brush. The jury later heard a much broader body of evidence before deciding the case.
His cellphone location posed one of the prosecution’s challenges. Investigators found data indicating the phone was at McKay’s home during the relevant period, but they developed a theory that the phone had been intentionally left there. Authorities believed he traveled to Monica McKay’s home without it. At trial, the defense challenged the prosecution’s timing and argued that the window available for the killing and subsequent activity was too short. Prosecutors countered that evidence from Monica McKay’s phone and Ring doorbell application supported a different timeline.
The case did not result in an immediate arrest after Monica McKay was found. Investigators continued collecting digital, forensic and other evidence for more than two months. The Shawnee County Sheriff’s Office arrested McKay on Feb. 11, 2025, after authorities determined Monica McKay’s death was a homicide. District Attorney Kagay announced formal charges on Feb. 21 after his office reviewed the investigation. McKay was charged with two first-degree murder counts based on different legal theories, along with aggravated burglary, stalking and violation of the protection order.
That distinction between the civil order and the later criminal case became especially clear at trial. A protection-from-stalking order did not itself determine that McKay had committed murder, and prosecutors still had to prove every criminal charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The order instead supplied part of the chronology: Monica McKay had sought judicial intervention, McKay had received notice of the restriction, and the state alleged his stalking nevertheless continued. The jury ultimately found that continuation criminal beyond the homicide itself.
Jurors returned their verdict May 14, 2026, after several hours of deliberations. They found McKay guilty of premeditated first-degree murder, felony murder, aggravated burglary, stalking and violating the protection order. More than 60 people were present in the courtroom when the verdicts were announced. Monica McKay’s relatives and friends expressed relief, while prosecutors emphasized that the decision could provide legal accountability but could not reverse her death.
Monica McKay had been a health care leader in the Topeka area. At the time of her death, she was director of physician clinics at the University of Kansas Health System’s St. Francis campus. She previously served as director of primary care there. That professional history was part of the public record surrounding a case that otherwise focused heavily on the final weeks of her marriage and the escalating conduct identified by investigators.
Two months after the verdict, the court imposed the sentence that gives the case its present status. McKay received life imprisonment with a mandatory minimum of 50 years before parole consideration. The remaining sentences run concurrently. The murder conviction therefore produced the controlling punishment, while the stalking and protection-order convictions separately established that the conduct preceding Monica McKay’s death was itself criminal.
The case now stands as a completed prosecution at the trial-court level, with the protection order occupying an unusually direct place in the verified chronology. It was obtained before the killing, served on McKay before the divorce filing and later formed the basis of one of the counts on which the same jury convicted him.
Author note: Last updated August 24, 2026.