The Pick-Up
A fisherman traipsed down a remote trail near Terminus Island outside Sacramento, Calif., in July 1986. In a flooded irrigation ditch where he often got bait, he spotted a semi-nude female body, floating facedown. It was clear to him that she was dead, so he returned home and called the police.
Detectives arrived from the San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Department to inspect the body before pulling it from the water. It was clear from dirt on her back and twigs caught in her bra that she had been dragged before being dumped. There was also a purplish mark on the back of her neck, indicating she had died from ligature strangulation. They looked for evidence in the immediate vicinity and found flattened grass in one area that helped identify the place to which she had been dragged. Leather sandals were also found near the water, but there was no purse or wallet from which they could get an ID. The pathologist said that rigor mortis had set in, but he needed more data to estimate time of death. It had probably been within the past day. No one knew whether she had been killed by a sudden attack or if she had been with her killer for a period of time.
The first task was to identify the victim, which would not be easy unless there was a missing persons report that matched her particulars. In this case, the investigators did find it easy. On the afternoon of July 15, the family of Stephanie Brown had filed a report. Sergeant Harry Machen picked up on it and brought it to the attention of Lt. Ray Biondi, head of Sacramento County Homicide unit. Biondi had been on the force for two decades, perhaps most famous for his capture of the so-called “Vampire of Sacramento,” Richard Trenton Chase.
Chase, 27, had murdered a woman in her home in 1978, eviscerating her and drinking her blood. Three days later, he struck again, slaughtering three people in their home and grabbing a baby, which he’d clearly harmed or killed. After a massive manhunt the police found him in his grubby apartment, where they discovered body parts, empty pet collars, and bloodstained glasses and bloody food blender. Chase lived alone, was unemployed, and had a history of psychiatric incarceration, having been released only months earlier. His arrest prevented a string of murders that, from marks on his calendar, was to include some forty-four more victims. In fact, his first ritualistic murder had actually been his second killing, as he had shot a man in his neighborhood more-or-less at random to try out his new rifle. After Chase was convicted, Biondi wrote a book about the case.
Stephanie Brown had been missing for twelve hours, reported to her mother by her roommate, Patty, who insisted something must have happened to her. Stephanie had been on her way home the night before, but had not made it. It seemed that after midnight, Stephanie had taken Patty and her boyfriend, Jim, to Jim’s house to pick up Patty’s car. Jim lived in a part of Sacramento unfamiliar to Stephanie, and she had been apprehensive about finding her way back home. Jim had directed her to take I-5 North, but she possibly had gone south instead, onto a desolate stretch of the highway. Somewhere there, she had disappeared.
The police asked questions to make certain Stephanie had not decided just to leave abruptly. They then asked for dental x-rays (since DNA analysis was at the time only just being tested in England and had not yet been acknowledged as reliable for identification purposes). A yellow Dodge Colt fitting the description of the car Stephanie was driving was found on I-5, going south from where she should have turned north, and a crumpled map was found beside it, as if she’d been looking at it.
Officers from San Joaquin County who were calling around about their discovery of the car happened to talk with Sgt. Machen about his missing person, and everything matched: white female, around eighteen, five-foot-eight, short blond hair, brown eyes. A match was soon made via fingerprints to Stephanie, 19, and now it was clear that she had been murdered and dumped about twenty miles from her car. Then certain discoveries made it clear that there was something rather odd about this fatal assault.
Bruises indicated that Stephanie had been punched in the jaw and bound around her wrists. She had also been dragged after death to the dump site. The cause of death was asphyxia from ligature strangulation, and death had occurred some time the night before. There was no physical evidence of forcible rape, but swabs would later show the presence of semen.
Stephanie’s car appeared to have had no mechanical problems, and, while the lights had drained the battery, she had not used the emergency flashers. She had filled up with gas about half an hour before. Also, her window was rolled all the way down, which her parents insisted she would not have done at night, and the armrest had been broken, as if it had been damaged in a struggle. When an investigator saw pictures of Stephanie, he observed they all showed long hair. He asked if she had recently cut it, and her mother said no. Now it seemed clear that her killer had cut it. A close examination revealed a fairly clean cut, such as scissors would have left, rather than a knife, so it seemed likely the killer had brought scissors with him and taken the hair as a fetish souvenir. Indeed, a pair of muddy shears was later found in the ditch, under three feet of water.
Investigators returned to the site to look for more items and fished a blue tank top, identified as Stephanie’s, out of the water. They found the shoulder straps cleanly cut. Lt. Biondi said in the documentary, “Knot for Everyone,” that he had never seen anything like this in hundreds of other murder investigations. The cutting pattern appeared to offer no useful function.
Although a rape kit showed evidence of semen, the samples recovered were too degraded for testing. Stephanie’s friends and family were shocked that she had been killed, especially those who had last seen her. They felt responsible. But no one could connect her with a man who might wish her harm, and the probability that her death was a random crime, with her in the wrong place at the wrong time, loomed large. This made it unlikely, without a lucky break, that the murder could be solved.
A month later, Charmaine Sabrah, 26, and her mother, Carmen Anselmi, were driving home to Sacramento from dinner when Charmaine’s Pontiac Grand Prix broke down on Peltier Road and I-5. It was around 3:30 a.m., and the area was too desolate for even a gas station. Charmaine turned on the emergency flashers and hoped for assistance. A man approached who seemed friendly enough and offered to help. They wanted to go find a phone, but he said he had only a two-seater so he could only take one.
Carmen decided to go, but when she failed to reach anyone, the man brought her back to the disabled car. Since both women were quite distraught, the man offered to take them home, one at a time. Charmaine went first, because she had a baby at home to feed.
She did not return. When Carmen finally got help from the California Highway Patrol and reached home, her daughter appeared to have vanished. She was horrified that she had allowed Charmaine to get into a stranger’s car — a man who might have done something terrible, and she reported the incident. However, when officers questioned her, she was unable to provide more than a generic description because she had been drinking and had not paid much attention to the driver. All she could offer was that he had been white, in his 40s, with a large nose and pale skin.
It would be nearly three months before a hunter came across Charmaine’s remains in the foothills of the Sierra Mountains, fifty miles away in Amador County. The remains were skeletal, with bones removed by animals, and a purple skirt and alligator shoes found with them were similar to the clothing Charmaine had been wearing when she had been abducted. Dental x-rays confirmed that the remains were hers, and an examination indicated that, like Stephanie Brown, she had been strangled with a ligature, still around her neck. Charmaine’s panties had missing sections cut out and a liner was cut from inside her blouse to use as a ligature. Both shoulder straps of her bra had been cut, and clumps of her hair had been pulled out and wrapped in part of the waistband from the panties.
That two women had been abducted from the same highway and had been bound, strangled and dumped in a remote area indicated they shared a common killer. That clothing from both had been oddly cut in a unique and inexplicable manner indicated a possible signature.
Profiles that link two or more crime scenes work best when the offender displays obvious psychopathology, such as sadistic torture or postmortem mutilation. Some killers leave a “signature”—a behavioral manifestation of an individualizing personality quirk, such as positioning the corpse for humiliating exposure, postmortem biting, or tying ligatures with a complicated knot. This helps to link the incidents and may point toward other types of behaviors which aid in capturing the offender.
Things helpful to investigators which a profile can offer include such things as the offender’s probable general age range, racial identity, ideas about the modus operandi, estimates about a person’s living situation and education level, his travel patterns, the possibility of a criminal or psychiatric record, and probable psychological traits. A profile may also outline a fantasy scenario that drives the person or even pinpoint an area where he or she probably resides. This is all based on deductions from what is already known about offenders and deviancy. At this point in the I-5 investigation, investigators thought they had a fetish-killer who probably got aroused from cutting his victims’ clothing, and they were certain he was not going to stop. They knew he would keep killing. And he did.
On September 6, southeast of Sacramento again off I-5, the badly decomposed remains of a white female were found not far from where Stephanie Brown’s body had been dumped, although this newly discovered victim had clearly been in place a long time. Dental records helped to identify the remains as Lora Heedick, 21, and it quickly became clear that her tank top had not only been cut for use as a ligature, but also had been damaged with the odd nonfunctional cutting pattern. Her pantyhose had been used to bind her wrists.
Lora had last been seen in an area frequented by prostitutes and drug addicts. Apparently at the urging of her boyfriend, James Driggers, she had agreed to prostitute herself in exchange for drug money. Driggers told investigators that on April 20 she had gotten into a white two-door car with a fiftyish man, inviting Driggers to go with them. They then had dropped Driggers off outside a motel and taken off to get the drugs, but Lora never came back or called. Driggers told police he had last seen them heading toward Highway 99. But he then took a polygraph test, and failed, so police wondered if he had a connection to the other victims. Yet since he had no car and thus no apparent means of transporting victims, Driggers was ultimately dropped from the suspect list.
It was impossible to determine if the victim had been raped, but shafts of brown head hair and pubic hair were lifted off her. Lora was believed at this time to have been the killer’s first victim.
Since he appeared to be trolling for easy prey, police decoys dressed as prostitutes or distressed motorists were situated about the area to try to lure him into a trap, but this tactic failed. Warnings were broadcast to female drivers to beware, especially near I-5. The killer, believed to be operating alone, was now dubbed the I-5 Strangler. Sacramento County Sheriff Glen Craig said to newspapers that the killer was likely familiar with the area, especially the back roads. “He has owned or had access to several different makes of vehicles during recent years,” he said, “and he’s probably familiar with or frequents prostitution strolls in the Central Valley cities.”
Soon patrol officers pulled over a furniture salesman, Roger Kibbe, for a traffic violation and noticed that he resembled the composite drawing. It was not the first time that Kibbe, 47, had been questioning in association with a missing woman, so his wife Harriet was alarmed when detectives came looking for him. In fact, Kibbe’s brother was a homicide detective and Kibbe had apparently asked him for advice on how to handle an investigation of this nature.
Under questioning, Kibbe admitted to soliciting prostitutes and mentioned being in several areas that could have put him in contact with the victims. He traveled I-5 whenever he visited his brother in Tahoe and was also familiar with the areas where the bodies had been dumped. The cars he had owned matched descriptions of cars associated with the young women. He was looking more and more like a prime suspect.
It was later learned that he had often asked his brother “innocent” questions about law enforcement, thereby gaining inside knowledge that had assisted him in preparing for murder and cleaning up evidence. In fact, the brothers often took long walks together to talk about crime solving, including the ongoing I-5 serial murder investigation. Since the brother was unpersuaded of Kibbe’s involvement, the investigation became dicey for the cops: in his loyalty, the brother might hold back important details as well as spill crucial information to a possible killer. Without hard evidence, the investigation dragged on and the murders continued.
Twenty-five-year-old Karen Finch was in a new relationship and had started a new job. On June 14, 1987, she dropped off her two-year-old daughter with her ex-husband and vanished. Her car was found abandoned near I-5, but nothing appeared to be wrong with it. Her sandals were inside, so it seemed unlikely she had just wandered away. The ex-husband assisted in the search, and there was no reason to suspect him.
Not long afterward, a family driving east of Sacramento got out for a walk near Echo Summit. They discovered Karen’s nude body inside a ditch and called the police. Finch was identified quickly via communication between the neighboring jurisdictions, and investigators were soon certain she had become the latest I-5 victim since her clothing had been cut and was scattered around the scene. This time, however, there was plenty of blood, as if she had been stabbed, a new development. Since her sandals were in her car and she wore no other shoes, it appeared that she might have been forced to walk barefoot across rough terrain — perhaps another form of torture. Blood on the ground indicated where she had been fatally attacked.
As the pathologist examined her body, he found a piece of duct tape stuck in her blond hair. Detectives working on the linkage analysis pondered this and surmised that the killer had gagged the women with duct tape and then cut it off and taken it with him to avoid leaving evidence behind. Stephanie Brown’s hair had probably made that difficult, so he had just cut off her ponytail. But this idea raised a possibility: The killer was savvy about law enforcement procedures and evidence collection. He knew that fingerprints could be lifted from duct tape. Again, they thought of Kibbe, whose brother might be innocently discussing these things with him. While no evidence came from the tape fragment, there was more nonfunctional cutting on Karen’s clothing than there had been on the others, suggesting the killer might have been lost in prolonged private erotic fantasy.
Karen had many bruises, but the cause of death was blood loss from two slashes to her throat. She had also suffered several stab wounds to the right chest and shoulder. Dental records and fingerprints definitively identified her, but no one could make sense of why she had stopped on the interstate and left her car. Skid marks indicated she had stopped quickly, so investigators wondered if she had fallen into a trap set for someone like her. Tire marks in front of her car suggested that someone else had been there.
Four more detectives were placed on the case, and by now it had been a year since they had found Stephanie Brown in the ditch. Biondi and his crew were no closer to solving it, nor to definitely connecting the others to her. The investigators were instructed not to worry over jurisdiction, as the killer apparently respected no boundaries. He might, in fact, be deliberately making things difficult for any single investigative team by operating in different counties.
Debra Guffie, 29, was soliciting for drug money when a man asked if she was “working” and invited her into his car — a white compact. She got in. He declined her offer of a room and drove for a while without talking. When he finally parked he became violent, slamming her head hard against his lap. She heard the click of handcuffs, which made her struggle wildly against his effort to bind her, and she was able to get out of the car. She screamed with everything she had. Fortunately for her, Sergeant Charles Coffelt was nearby on patrol, and he gave chase to the driver, who sped away. Back-up arrived and they arrested the man, already known to law enforcement in that area: Roger Kibbe. He was charged with assault.
As the assault case against Kibbe was being processed, the body of a fifth victim was discovered. A jogger had come across the nude body of a young female in the woods in El Dorado County. A ligature was still around her neck, and her body had been in the woods for several weeks. Typical of the Strangler, her clothing had been tossed around the general area.
It took a while to identify her, but this victim would turn out to be seventeen-year-old Darcie Frackenpohl, a runaway from Seattle last seen at a Sacramento prostitute stroll. She had been choked to death with a garrote fashioned of cord with dowels at both ends — a new device for the Strangler, if she was his victim. Her panty hose were stuffed into her mouth, and the same unusual cuts were made to her clothing. Several fibers were lifted from her body, and there was evidence of a blow to her head. Since the ligature had been left behind, investigators were able to examine the rope used, which was made of white nylon.
Back in Sacramento, detectives examined items removed from the car of Roger Kibbe: handcuffs, a battery-operated vibrator, a 6-inch pair of scissors that had cut something adhesive, rubber hair bands, and two 6-inch pieces of wood dowel, one of which had a white nylon cord looped around the end of it. Detective Kay Maulsby realized the items were the same type of cord and dowel as used in the device found with the recent victim. Since Kibbe was one of their primary suspects, they went to work on these items, and also learned more about Kibbe. He was a skydiver, and the cord was like that used on parachutes. He had owned two different cars, and this cord was found in both, as well as in his home. It was hollow white nylon cord with six fibers running through it, and while all the pieces were the same, no one could say they were all from the same source. Fibers stuck on the scissor blades proved to be too generic to match to victim clothing. Thus, investigators had only a circumstantial case, and not one likely to interest the district attorney.
Kibbe made bail and was therefore free to go, so they kept surveillance on him and continued to do research. Eventually he would go to trial on the assault charge. It turned out, he had a peculiar criminal record.
Kibbe’s background opened a few eyes. He’d had a very bad relationship with his mother, who beat him and treated him as if she had disliked him, and he had always been getting into trouble. Kids at school had teased him about his stutter and he’d become a loner. He lied easily and stole things.
In 1954, when he was 15, according to Bruce Henderson in Trace Evidence, Kibbe had been arrested. A young girl had informed police that she saw him riding his bike into a Chula Vista park, carrying a shovel and cardboard box. He had dug a hole and buried the box. When police dug it up, they found a dress and two bathing suits just reported stolen from a clothes line. The victim had also reported several nylon stockings missing, but these were not found in the box. The officers suspected a sexual fetish and eventually worked their way through witnesses until they found the culprit, Roger Reese Kibbe. He was charged with petty theft and prowling and referred to a juvenile officer. He was also a suspect in similar thefts in that neighborhood over the past year, although he initially denied that he had taken anything. However, he quickly cracked and admitted to the thefts. He took something off a clothesline once or twice a week, he said, and usually buried it or tossed it. He had saved a few things, and these he turned over to the officer. On top of the items was a pair of scissors used for medical purposes, and they saw that the articles, all of which were intimate female apparel, had been cut up in unusual ways.
There were warnings signs of what lay ahead: no apparent remorse, no emotional reaction to having been caught, a sexual fantasy life involving trespass against women, and plenty of furtive behavior acting it out. He also liked tying himself up in female undergarments. What the authorities did not then know, because no one was yet subjecting antisocial children to rigorous study, was that these behaviors also signaled a developing psychopath who would not be deterred by the threat of incarceration or punishment, and would not learn from it. He would also not benefit from the early sessions in which he participated with a psychiatrist. For Kibbe, this was all just an annoying hindrance; he would find ways to go deeper underground and continue his behavior.
For police, there was another red flag: Kibbe’s wife Harriett was reportedly domineering and mean. She kept him in line, seemingly just another version of his mother. This would likely feed his anger against women.
Soon a trace-evidence specialist, Faye Springer, got involved, and with her painstaking examination she found blue trilobal carpet fibers from a car, the same color and type as the fiber in one of Kibbe’s cars. They had even been dyed with the same chemicals. This type of evidence is known as “class” evidence, or just one of many specimens of that class, and thus does not definitely identify someone, it contributes to the totality of circumstances needed to persuade a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The more precise the analysis, the more convincing, which involves both finely-honed technical expertise and high-powered microscopic analysis. This case received both.
Trace evidence analysis relies on Locard’s Exchange Principle: “Objects or surfaces which come into contact always exchange trace evidence. Every contact leaves a trace.” In other words, when someone commits a crime, that person leaves something behind at the crime scene and also takes something away. Cross transfers of fiber often occur in cases in which there is person-to-person contact, and investigators always hope that fiber traceable back to the offender will be found at the crime scene, and that fiber or trace evidence from the scene will be found on the offender as well. Success in solving the crime often hinges on the ability to identify the source of trace fibers on either the victim or suspect.
Unlike fingerprints or DNA, however, fibers cannot pinpoint an offender in any definitive manner. There must be other factors involved, such as something unique to the fibers, that sets them apart. Fibers are gathered at a crime scene with tweezers, adhesive lift tape, or an evidence vacuum. They generally come from clothing, drapery, wigs, carpeting, furniture, and blankets. For analysis, they are first determined to be natural, manufactured, or a mix of both.
Natural fibers come from plants (cotton) or animals (wool). Manufactured fibers are synthetics like rayon, acetate, and polyester, which are made from long chains of molecules called polymers. Generally, the analyst gets only a limited number of fibers to work with—sometimes only one. Whatever has been gathered from the crime scene is then compared against fibers from a suspect source, such as a car or home, and the samples are laid side by side for microscopic inspection.
A compound microscope uses light reflected from the surface of a fiber and magnified through a series of lenses, while the comparison microscope (two compound microscopes joined by an optical bridge) is used for more precise identification. A phase-contrast microscope can reveal the structure of a fiber, while various electron microscopes either pass electron beams through samples to provide a highly magnified image or reflect electrons off the sample’s surface. A scanning electron microscope converts the emitted electrons into a photographic image for courtroom display. It also provides the elemental composition.
Another useful instrument is the spectrometer, which separates light into component wavelengths. In 1859, two German scientists discovered that the spectrum of every organic specimen is unique determined by its constituent parts. By passing light through a sample to produce a spectrum, the analyst can read the resulting lines, called “absorption lines.” That is, the specific wavelengths that are selectively absorbed into the substance are characteristic of its component molecules. Then a spectrophotometer measures the light intensities, which yields a way to identify different types of substances.
A combination of these instruments for the most effective forensic analysis is the microspectrophotometer. The microscope locates minute traces or shows how light interacts with the material under analysis. Linking this instrument to a computerized spectrophotometer increases the accuracy. The scientist can get both a magnified visual and an infrared pattern, which increases the number of identifying characteristics of any given material.
The first step in fiber analysis is to compare color and diameter. If there is agreement, then the analysis can go to another stage. Dyes can also be further analyzed with chromatography, which uses solvents to separate chemical constituents. Under a microscope, the analyst looks for lengthwise striations or pits on a fiber’s surface, or unusual shapes—-as with the one short and two long arms of the trilobal fibers in the Kibbe investigation.
Yet closer inspection of the parachute cord also revealed something interesting.
Springer noticed contaminants on the surface of the cord and identified a fungal spore. This same spore was picked up from the floor mat of Kibbe’s car. This made the fibers more distinct, for the purposes of comparison. But there was more. In fact, once Springer got going, the trace evidence got better and better.
Hair from a victim’s dress proved to be microscopically consistent with hair taken from Kibbe’s inner thigh. Thus, he could not be eliminated. Also, Springer found cat hair from two different animals, consistent with the hair on the Kibbes’ two cats. She also discovered that no one had noticed that the pantyhose removed from Darcie’s mouth were inside out. Springer turned them right-side out and found fibers that no one had seen before. They proved to be microscopically similar to fibers from the seats of Kibbe’s car.
In addition, Springer saw red paint on the parachute cord used on Darcie, along with some tiny black particles that had a rubber-like consistency. Cord from Kibbe’s car bore the same red paint and black particles. This helped to associate Kibbe with Darcie’s murder. Since the size of these traces was tiny, they used a highly precise scanning electron microscope, which provided the elemental composition. The two cords had ten elements in common, including two substances nonessential to paint, and both cords also showed the same contaminants from the air when paint was sprayed near them. In fact, under a high-powered microscope, they appeared to be the very same piece of cord. This evidence apparently convinced Kibbe’s brother, who called and urged Kibbe to confess.
Kibbe persuaded his wife to get rid of evidence for him, promising detectives he would talk if they would allow him time alone with his wife. They did so, and then he reneged on his deal. Harriet followed the directions he gave during this interview, tossing away some shoes and a diamond ring belonging to one of the victims.
With all this evidence, Kibbe was charged with murder of Darcie Frackenpohl. He was suspected in the others—and he’d apparently revealed to his wife that there were more that the police did not even know about. The Assistant District Attorney for El Dorado County, Robert Drossel, believed their suspect was now boxed in, and he was ready to take the case to trial. It began on Valentine’s Day in 1991.
Drossel was allowed to present the circumstances of four murders and the assault, thanks to behavioral similarities. However, the jury could consider a conviction in only the case of Darcie Frackenpohl. Karen Finch’s case was left out, because she had been stabbed. But she was not forgotten. All this effort was for her as well. Unfortunately, Drossel was not allowed to tell the jury about Kibbe’s juvenile incidents. That would have been a strong tie-in to what he’d done as an adult, but the case had to be made without it.
Phil Kohn defended Kibbe and offered no opening statement. That was his prerogative. He kept his strategy to himself as he listened to Drossel’s line-up of witnesses.
Drossel took each of the key investigators through the cases and then showed the jury how Kibbe had assembled his murder kit with scissors, rope, handcuffs, a vibrator, duct tape, and other items. He operated “like a mechanic, getting ready to go to work.” Kibbe’s approached was cold, calculated, and predatory, affirming that he had planned it all beforehand and had felt nothing for his victims.
Friends of Darcie’s described Kibbe and his car on the night Darcie had disappeared; Kohn tried to destroy their credibility by raising their personal issues. He did the same to Debra Guffie, who had identified Kibbe as the man who’d assaulted her and tried to handcuff her. She was a prostitute and drug addict, and had taken heroin that night. But the defense team was poorly prepared to take on the criminalists.
Faye Springer ably explained the nature of fiber analysis and the importance of her findings in the case. A microscopist with a solid scientific reputation backed her up. This was followed by a signature analysis of the nonfunctional cutting of the clothing. Then Ray Biondi provided his analysis of how all the cases seemed linked.
Kibbe’s defense, which was brief, consisted of an expert on eyewitness testimony describing the problems with such evidence and a criminalist who questioned some of the technical testimony, albeit ineffectively. In addition, an expert on parachute cords described how red paint could have gotten onto the cords in question at the factory, although he admitted the procedure he described was usually done with felt pen rather than paint. Drossel managed to turn some of these witnesses into effective witnesses for his own points. Most trial watchers believed he had the upper hand as the case came to a close.
On the same day the jury went to deliberate, March 18, they found Kibbe guilty of first-degree murder in the case of Darcie Frackenpohl. On May 10, 1991, Kibbe was sentenced to 25 years to life. He had to serve a minimum of sixteen years and eight months before being eligible for parole, and was taken temporarily to Pleasant Valley State Prison. On his way to his cell, he admitted to an officer that he had killed a few women, adding, “What’s the big deal?”
Kibbe had also confessed this to his wife shortly after his arrest. She admitted he had told her he had killed four women. They had cried together, and she asked him why. He said he did not know. She claimed she had known nothing about it while she was married to him; his confession stunned her. And yet she did get rid of the incriminating evidence.
Kibbe revealed how he had managed to acquire his victims. He drove up and down the remote interstate until he saw something he liked, he said, then he drove ahead of the woman’s car and parked his own on the side of the road. Pretending to be disabled, he attempted to lure his victim to stop and help. Those who did ended up dead. Sometimes he also picked up a prostitute.
It’s clear to anyone who understands the psychological nature of a killer’s signature that whoever killed one of these victims most likely killed the others. The uniqueness of the cutting and the consistency of the trace evidence, as well as the nature of the murders, indicate a repeat offender. Kibbe still faced the possibility of murder charges for the other deaths, if evidence could be developed, although the district attorney was notably reluctant to pick up the other cases. Yet the other families wanted legal closure so they kept the pressure on.
It took 17 years, but in March 2008, as Kibbe neared his second parole hearing (he was denied parole in 2004), it became clear that authorities had been preparing. The news emerged that Kibbe, now 68, has been accused of six more murders and had been indicted by a grand jury that had listened to eighty witnesses over the course of a month. The homicides had occurred between 1977 and 1986, and new names had been added to the list.
Despite having been convicted in only one murder thus far, Kibbe still bears the moniker “the I-5 strangler.” On March 7, he appeared in a Stockton, Calif., court to face the indictment. The grand jury came back with an indictment that day.
Kibbe now stands accused of murdering Lou Ellen Burleigh on September 11, 1977, Lora Heedick on April 21, 1986, Barbara Ann Scott on July 3, 1986, Stephanie Brown on July 15, 1986, Charmaine Sabrah on August 17, 1986, and Katherine Quinones on November 5 that year—a crime to which he allegedly admitted to someone in prison. He was also charged with other crimes, such as kidnapping, rape, and forced oral copulation. If convicted of them all, he would face the death penalty.
On September 29, 2009, Kibbe pleaded guilty to all six murders as part of a deal to avoid the death penalty. Now 70, he is to be sentenced on Nov. 5 and faces six consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole. To successfully avoid the death penalty, Kibbe must cooperate fully with police by providing details about the slayings.
Brown, Pat. Killing for Sport: Inside the Minds of Serial Killers, New Millennium Press, 2003.
“California Man Sentenced in Girl’s Death,” Seattle Times, May 11, 1991.
Fersch, Ellsworth. Thinking about Psychopaths and Psychopathy, iUniverse, 2006.
Henderson, Bruce. Trace Evidence: The Hunt for an Elusive Serial Killer. Scribner, 1998.
Houde, John. Crime Lab. Calico Press, 1999.
Houck, Max. Trace Evidence Analysis. Elsevier, 2004.
“I-5 Strangler Blamed in Seven Deaths,” Los Angeles Times,” Jan. 9, 1988.
“I-5 Strangler Convicted,” Oregonian, March 19, 1991.
Kiely, Terrance. Forensic Evidence: Science and the Criminal Law. CRC Press, 2001.
“Knot for Everyone: The Locard Exchange Principle,” Medical Detectives, Films Media Group, 1998.
Lindelof, Bill. “Murderer Indicted as I-5 Strangler,” Sacramento Bee, March 8, 2008.
“Man Sentenced in Seattle Girl’s Death,” Seattle Times, March 11, 1991.
McClung, Jim. “Death, Violence Marked the 1980s,” Modesto Bee, January 2, 1990.
Mergendahl, Peter. “Trace Evidence No Mystery,” Rocky Mountain News, April 5, 1998.
Miller, Linda. “Prisoner Now Charged in 1986 Murder,” Modesto Bee, March 8, 2008.
Phillips, Kelli. “Convicted Killer Eyed in Deaths of Others,” Contra Costa Times, Sept. 12, 2005.
“Roger Reece Kibbe Indicted in San Joachin County,” KCRA Sacramento, March 7, 2008.
Smith, Scott. “Believed to be ‘I-5 Strangler,’ Kibbe Could Face Death Penalty.” The Record, March 8, 2008.