NVR Logo
Murderer confesses to six additional killings
Two women killed near Lake Berryessa
Friday, October 09, 2009
Save and Share Share
The man dubbed the “I-5 Strangler” has pleaded guilty to six murder charges, including two cases that occurred in Napa County, following court proceedings in San Joaquin County.

Roger Kibbe, 70, accepted a plea agreement Sept. 29 that included two life sentences without the possibility of parole, according to San Joaquin County District Attorney James Willett.
In 1991, Kibbe was convicted of the 1987 strangling of a West Sacramento woman, Darcie Frackenpohl. He was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison.  He also became a key suspect in other murders in San Joaquin, Sacramento and Napa counties between 1977 and 1986, the Napa County district attorney’s office said.

He confessed in 2003, when investigators questioned him about those cases.
Last year, Kibbe was indicted in the murders of six women, including Walnut Creek resident Lou Ellen Burleigh, 21, and Sacramento area resident Katherine Quinones, 25. Kibbe brought both Burleigh and Quinones to the Lake Berryessa area before he killed them, according to prosecutors.

In September 1977, prosecutors said Kibbe lured Burleigh to a business park one Sunday morning under the pretense that he was looking to hire a secretary. Burleigh disappeared and was reported missing later that day.
Kibbe told investigators during his confession that he kidnapped her and drove to Napa County, where he killed her. Burleigh’s body was never found.

No one in Napa County knew of the murder until Kibbe confessed in 2003, said Mike Frey, now supervising investigator at the Napa County district attorney’s office.

Frey was a detective at the Napa County Sheriff’s Office in 2003 and was assigned to assist San Joaquin County with its investigation. Kibbe’s confession led Frey to check the missing person’s cases in Walnut Creek, where he found Burleigh’s name.

In 1986, Kibbe picked up Quinones and drove her to Lake Berryessa.

Quinones’ body was found near the Pope Creek Bridge a few months later by people playing Frisbee in the area.

Napa County District Attorney Gary Lieberstein agreed to have San Joaquin County prosecute the case under a law that allows one county to prosecute homicide cases that cross multiple jurisdictions, he said.

Fibers and other microscopic evidence processed by the California Department of Justice linking Kibbe to the crimes were present in most of the cases. Officials agreed they could present the strongest case if all were combined, Lieberstein said.

He said cases like Kibbe’s are also very time-consuming and require  more staff and money.

 “If possible, you want to avoid multiple trials in multiple jurisdictions,” he said.

Frey said Kibbe had been a suspect in several unsolved murders in the ‘80s, and investigators persisted until they got a confession during the interview from prison in 2003.

Frey was one who talked to Kibbe, who described the area where he killed Burleigh. Frey visited the area based on Kibbe’s account, but to no avail.

Frey described Kibbe as “unassuming.”

“He doesn’t look like the horrible monster that he is,” he said.

Ultimately, the San Joaquin County district attorney’s office didn’t seek the death penalty because of Kibbe’s age, the length of time it would likely take before he was executed, and the wishes of the victim’s families, Lieberstein said.

Lieberstein said he supported that decision, calling it “pragmatic.”

As part of the agreement, Kibbe consented to help investigators look for Burleigh’s remains once more, said Napa County Sheriff’s Capt. Tracey Stuart.

Kibbe accompanied sheriff’s detectives to the area last weekend, but was unable to pinpoint a location, she said.

That will likely be the last time detectives makes an effort to look for Burleigh, Frey said.

Frey’s feelings about the outcome of the case are mixed.

“On one hand, I’m happy for the families (of the victims), but I’ll always regret not being able to find Lou Ellen Burleigh’s remains,” he said. “I’m hoping someday someone will stumble across something ... I think her family deserves that.”
12 comment(s)

did i just read that wrote on Oct 8, 2009 11:45 AM:

" Is this man the first murderer ever convicted of committing a murder under the age of 10? 70 years old and the case is 6 decades old? I might not be doing NVR math here?! "

napagrrl wrote on Oct 8, 2009 11:55 AM:

" No, no, no. Six counts of murders each of which is two to three decades old. The hyphen between "decades" and "old" shows that. Otherwise it would be "Six decades old" to mean sixty years. English is great!! "

krazyladee wrote on Oct 8, 2009 12:02 PM:

" I think it means 6 deaths, which are decades old. It's not worded well. "

Skip M. wrote on Oct 8, 2009 12:06 PM:

" I think the headline is a little confusing. He was convicted of 6 murders that are decades old. The headline makes it sound as though the murders are 6 decades old.

Either that, or he really was a bad little boy. "

reader wrote on Oct 8, 2009 12:07 PM:

" did I just read that: No math involved here it is your grammer that is flawed. The title states "6 decades-old . . . The hyphen clarifies the grammer and therefore the meaning of what is written. In other words, 6-deaths that are decades old. "

onlymary wrote on Oct 8, 2009 12:10 PM:

" 6 murders, not 6 decades "

shrapnal wrote on Oct 8, 2009 1:03 PM:

" yes it's confusing but it got me to come and read the article :) "

NVR-Dan Ross wrote on Oct 8, 2009 4:32 PM:

" The original headline, "Murder conviction in 6 decades-old deaths," was grammatically correct, but it confused readers, so there is a new headline as of 4:30 p.m. "

TruthSeeker wrote on Oct 8, 2009 8:40 PM:

" This is confusing considering that there was an "I-5 Killer," Randy Woodfield. It would be interesting to know who "dubbed" Kibbe the "I-5 Strangler." His supposed confessions to Napa murders may be only false confessions to garner himself some credibility in the twisted world of serial killers. It would be interesting to know the specifics of his confession. Once again, a Register article leaves its readers with more questions than facts. "

Dblue34 wrote on Oct 9, 2009 4:42 AM:

" Is this article a help wanted ad for wannabe proofreaders, or a story about a confessed murderer.

Dan Ross was mistaken when he stated that the first headline was grammatically correct. You should always spell out whole numbers less than 10, therefore the headline should have read: "Murder conviction in six decades-old deaths". This may have helped some of you whom only read the headlines to better understand the jist of the story.

It doesn't however explain your anal-retentiveness when it comes to commenting on NVR articles.

None of you are qualified to edit the stories posted by the writers that contribute to this outlet, so just shut up and be happy you don't have to wait until the newspaper is printed and delivered to read the stories that are posted online.

If you are so skeptical of the NVR, why do you rely solely on them for your news?

I'll set the over/under on senseless replies to this post at 4.5...Any takers? "

Rocketman wrote on Oct 9, 2009 8:00 AM:

" If you want more information, google Roger Kibbe........you'll get all you want. "

reason-ator wrote on Oct 9, 2009 1:07 PM:

" Dblue34 wrote on Oct 9, 2009 4:42 AM:

" ......None of you are qualified to edit the stories posted by the writers that contribute to this outlet, so just shut up ....... "

Well, now we know what the username of Alisha Wyman's mom is.;-)

Dblue34, the NVR makes plenty of mistakes, and I believe that often a middle school student could pick out the errors. Trust me, there are plenty of people who are qualified to point out the NVR mistakes. People who learned grammar without counting on spell-check and grammar-check software to teach them how to write are more equipped to proofread than those who rely solely on insufficient software.

I think much of the reader's fustration is because the NVR really wants us to believe that they NEVER make mistakes, when in fact they are human and far from perfect.

They would be much more credible if they admitted that they occasionally make mistakes instead of trying to create a myth of NVR perfection. When someone is wrong and refuses to ever acknowledge it, what they say automatically becomes more suspect than it would if they were NOT trying to pretend that they are perfect.

But then, I'm probably not qualified to notice the NVR's mistakes. Sorry, mom. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy