Bernd Goericke and Andrea Scherpf Pt. One

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
Welcome back to the Pathway Chili.

Speaker 2 (00:32):
I'm Robin, I'm Jules, and I'm Ashley.

Speaker 3 (00:36):
Let's dive right into this week's case.

Speaker 2 (00:39):
October sixth, nineteen eighty three, British Columbia, Canada, twenty seven
year old Burned Erica and his twenty two year old fiance,
Andrea Sharp are found shot to death next to a
remote road. The couple hailed from West Germany and had
been hitchhiking through Canada, but an unidentified man driving a
pickup truck is he when using Andrea's travelers checks in

(01:02):
the days following her death. Six years later, a suspect
named Andy Rose is charged with the crime based on
testimony from a former friend who claimed she heard him
confess to the murders. After two trials and two overturned convictions,
the charges against Andy are dropped when DNA testing excludes
him as the perpetrator, but no one else is ever

(01:23):
charged with killing Burned and Andrea.

Speaker 1 (01:26):
After that, the path went Chiley. So today we are
going to be covering an unsolved cold case which led
to a wrongful conviction. The nineteen eighty three murders of
Burnt Gerica and Andrea Shirp. You know we love to
cover wrongful conviction cases on a show because this is
a topic that Ashley is very knowledgeable and passionate about.
But this is the first time we have covered one

(01:47):
of these stories from Jewels and I's home country of Canada.
Our two victims were a West German couple named Burnt
Gerica and Andrea Shirp, who have been making a lengthy
two month trip through western Canada. They relied on hitch
hiking as their primary mode of transportation, but unfortunately, while
they were in British Columbia, it seemed like they hitch
a ride with the wrong person, who fatally shot the

(02:08):
couple and robbed them of all their personal possessions before
dumping their bodies. It would not be until six years
later when police finally charged a suspect named Danny Rose,
a Newfoundland resident who had been living and working in
British Columbia at the time of the murders. The problem
was that the only evidence against Annie was the testimony
of a woman who claimed that he showed up at
her trailer one night while covered in blood and made

(02:30):
a drunken confession to the murders. Even though there were
a number of logistical issues which made it almost seem
impossible that Andy could have committed this crime. He was
found guilty by two separate juries at two separate trials.
Andy was in the midst of going on trial for
the third time in two thousand and one when the
prosecution decided to drop the murder charges against him as

(02:51):
DNA evidence from a pair of bloody genes found near
the murder scene did not match him. Thus far, no
one else has ever been charged with this crime. While
the investigation did turn up a compelling alternate suspect who
also allegedly confessed to the murders, the evidence does not
really point towards him either. On this series of episodes,
we're also going to be discussing a controversial police procedure

(03:14):
known as the Mister Big technique, which was invented by
the Royal Canadian Mountain Police and is actually banned in
the United States, though it has played a role in
some controversial convictions in Canada.

Speaker 3 (03:26):
Okay, I have two things I want to ask you about.
First of all, I've heard of the Mister Big technique.
Isn't it almost like the read techniques that's designed to
elicit a confession from someone.

Speaker 1 (03:37):
It's very similar, but it involves undercover police officers, usually
posing as criminals, and they try to use that as
a means to get a confession out of a suspect
by saying like, oh, we'll let you join our criminal
gang if you tell us about all the murders you did.
But there's a lot of controversy about it because you
almost have to question the validity when they supposedly confess,

(03:58):
because you're wondering, are they just tell the undercover officer
what they want to hear by just bragging about a
prime they did not commit, as.

Speaker 2 (04:06):
You Americans call it entropment.

Speaker 3 (04:09):
Yes, sense, so basically where the read techniques are controversial,
But it's a uniformed officer who's sitting in an interrogation room.
This is a group of officers undercover who are making
promises and offering something attractive to that person who doesn't
know their law enforcement to solicit a confession.

Speaker 1 (04:30):
Exactly. Yes, Okay, well.

Speaker 3 (04:32):
Highly controversial, Okay, I can buy that. I'm also highly
concerned about a couple of things that you've already told me.
When we're talking about this woman who says he shows
up bloody and confesses to a murder. You described her
as a former friend. Do we later find out that
that confession never took place, or that he actually did

(04:52):
make a drunken confession.

Speaker 1 (04:54):
He always denied making that confession, And of course it
was very suspicious because she didn't actually come f forward
herself to share this story. We're going to find out
that it was shared kind of third hand by another
friend of hers, who said that, by the way, she
told me one time, someone came to her trailer, well
bloody and confess to this double murder. So obviously there
were a lot of credibility issues. And what was particularly

(05:15):
problematic about this case is that this was literally the
only evidence proving that Andy Rose was responsible, Yet somehow
the juries found it convincing enough to convict him on
two separate occasions.

Speaker 3 (05:27):
I'm really frustrated because I can put into my mind
a million scenarios where this woman would have a reason
to make Andy look bad. Let's say she had formerly
been interested in him and he wasn't interested. Let's say
they had had a fling and she wasn't happy with
the way it turned out. Let's say that they were
friends and he did something that made her mad. There's
a lot of reasons why people would even let's say,

(05:47):
well she was drinking and hanging out with friends, would
throw someone else under the bus. And so that's really
problematic that one he doesn't say like, yeah, I did it,
or he doesn't confess to law enforcement, which in and
of itself doesn't necessarily prove anything. Either, he has this person, who,
like you said, third party, is saying that he's guilty
and he did this and confessed to her. And then

(06:10):
we also have some unidentified individual who was using Andrea's
travelers checks in some pickup truck. Remember they were hitch hiking,
so it makes a lot of sense that you would
think maybe someone they ran into while hitchhiking, hurt them,
took their belongings and started using their travelers checks. That's
the person I want to know about. And somehow Andy

(06:31):
gets tied into this just because some woman who could
have been upset with him says he confessed to her
through a third party.

Speaker 1 (06:40):
And when you look at the timeline, it seems impossible
that Andy could have been at these locations to use
the travelers checks. It seems obvious it was somebody else.
So yeah, this is definitely one of the weakest cases
I've ever seen where someone went to trial and it
still managed to secure a guilty verdict.

Speaker 2 (06:56):
And they did they go and do their due diligence
with regards to testing the veracity of her statement. I mean,
we know polygraphs are controversial, but did they give her
a polygraph? Did they talk to other people in her
life to see if she was indeed a credible witness?

Speaker 1 (07:10):
Do you know, Robin, Well, we're going to talk about that.
They actually had to wear a wire and have a
conversation a phone conversation with Andy years after the fact,
but he never actually made any incriminating statements to back
up her story that he confessed to this murder.

Speaker 2 (07:25):
So our story begins in my home province of British
Columbia in nineteen eighty three. Our central figures our twenty
seven year old Burned, Gerica and his twenty two year
old fiance, Andrea Shirp, who originally hail from Bulga, West Germany.
Following his graduation from university, Burned received an extended trip
to Canada as a gift, so he and Andrea decided

(07:47):
that they would spend nearly two months traveling through the
western portion of the country. A good chunk of this
trip would involve camping and backpacking, and they planned to
use hitchhiking as their primary mode of transportation. The couple
first touched down in Winnipeg, Manitoba, on August eighteenth, before
going to visit relatives in the municipality of Roblin for

(08:08):
the next several weeks. They proceeded to hitchhike their way
through Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia, and when they arrived
in the municipality of Port Hardy, they boarded a ferry
which took them to the port city of Prince Rupert.
From there, they proceeded to travel north and cross the
border into Haines, Alaska, before crossing the border back into
Canada and continuing up north to Whitehorse, the capital city

(08:31):
in the Yukon Territory. At some point, Burned and Andrea
started heading back south into British Columbia, as they were
scheduled to return back home by boarding a flight from
Vancouver to Frankfurt, Germany, on October seventh. The last confirmed
sighting of the couple took place on October third, as
they were seen hitchhiking in Dawson Creek, nearly twelve hundred

(08:53):
kilometers northeast of Vancouver, but unfortunately they would not make
their flight. On October sixth a low resident discovered Burned
in Andrea's bodies in a field next to an isolated
road about a half kilometer away from Highway ninety seven.
Burned had been shot once in the back of the
head and once in the face, while Andrea received a

(09:13):
fatal gunshot wound to the temple. The location was about
thirty two kilometers west of the district municipality of chetwind
and it was estimated that the couple had been dead
about three days before their bodies were discovered. The investigation
would be headed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police aka
the RCMP, and they initially could not even identify the

(09:36):
two victims because their identification, including their passports and driver's licenses,
were missing. In fact, all of the items which Burned
and Andrea had been carrying, including their backpacks, clothing, camping equipment,
and a guitar Burned owned, were presumably stolen by the
person who killed them, and they were never recovered, which
makes me.

Speaker 3 (09:56):
Incredibly suspicious of the person who was using the cashier
checks or the checks, because they obviously are unidentified. They're
driving this truck. I could easily see them pulling over
and talking to this couple and saying, hey, I can
give you a ride, no problem. These are young kids.
They're just floating from place to place. They were known
to be hitch hiking, and so to me, it makes

(10:17):
the most sense that that truck pulls over says that
they can take these kids somewhere and then when they
execute them is basically what happened. They steal all of
their belongings and I'm sure scattered them along the way somewhere,
but those checks were used. Those had to be on
Andrea's persons before she was killed, because I can't imagine

(10:38):
someone robbing them and them not reporting that or not
saying anything and saying, oh, someone took my checks, but
that's okay, We're just going to keep on going. That
would be a major problem. If you were hitch hiking
someone robbed you and took your money and access to
your bank accounts, you would have said something. So that
had to be tied into the person who killed them,

(10:58):
because everything else was this scene as well. So it
makes sense that whoever had those checks also killed this couple.

Speaker 1 (11:06):
Yeah, I definitely think that's what happened. That they were
picked up hitchhiking by the wrong person who proceeded to
kill them, and that person continued traveling south and using
Andrea's checks. And cases like this are just a time
capsule of a much different era where no one thought
too much about the dangers of hitchhiking, and you hear
stories about people traveling to foreign countries and hitch hiking

(11:26):
the entire way, and unfortunately, cases like this are pretty
much the ultimate cautionary tales and show why people know
these days that hitch hiking should not be done and correctly.

Speaker 2 (11:37):
If I'm wrong, Robin, bit, aren't some of these areas
in which they were traveling and where they were found
close to the Highway of Tears. Isn't it Highway ninety seven?

Speaker 1 (11:46):
Uh? Let me just double check that I should know this. Yeah, yeah,
because you live in the area.

Speaker 3 (11:51):
I almost think you're right.

Speaker 1 (11:52):
I almost think you're right, Jewels, Oh, it's Highway sixteen.

Speaker 2 (11:55):
Actually, is it Highway sixteen? Okay?

Speaker 1 (11:58):
But yeah, this was the era of the of the
Highway of Tears, where a lot of people were murdered
hitchhiking in British Columbia.

Speaker 3 (12:04):
Okay, I have a very important question too. Is the
Dawson's Creek? You mentioned the Dawson's Creek that I fell
in love with in my teen TV show. No, okay,
I just had to make sure. I just had to
make sure.

Speaker 1 (12:16):
Go on this to be clear. This is Dawson Creek
without an S on the end, so it's totally different.

Speaker 3 (12:23):
Yeah, he doesn't own it. Okay, that's fair.

Speaker 1 (12:25):
Fair. A forensic pathologist who conducted postmortem examinations on Burnt
and Andrea was unable to determine the exact make and
model of the bullets and guns used during the murders,
but she fell it was consistent with either a thirty
eight caliber or three fifty seven magnum handgun. The pathologists
also suspected that the victims might be European, which prompted

(12:46):
the RCMP to contact Interpol, and they eventually learned about
a missing West German couple who had not returned home
as scheduled from a trip to Canada. A friend of theirs,
who lived in Edmonton, Alberta, had to be brought to
British Columbia. To view the body, and they were positively
identified as Burnt and Andrea on October the sixteenth, ten
days after they were found. The most promising piece of

(13:08):
evidence was a pair of PSI thirty four genes, which
were discovered inside a waste disposal bin located alongside Highway
ninety seven, about one kilometer south of the murder scene.
The genes were heavily stained with blood spatter, particularly below
the knees, and a forensic rologist determined that the blood
was consistent with the two victims. There was also a

(13:29):
bloodlike substance underneath Andrea's fingernails, which may have belonged to
her killer. Investigators would also learn that on October the
fourth and fifth American Express Travelers checks belonging to Andrea
were used to purchase gasoline at no less than five
service stations in Prince George Quinnell Mickley's Lake Lach Lajash
and one hundred Mile House, which were all located hundreds

(13:51):
of kilometers south of the murder scene. According to the
various clerks at these stations, the individual who used these
checks was a white male who appeared to be fed
foot nine and approximately forty years old. And spoke with
a slight American accent. He was also described as having straight,
collar length, brown hair and slumped shoulders, and he was
dressed in work clothes. The witnesses said that the man

(14:13):
had a pleasant demeanor and did not do anything to
arouse suspicion, which is why he agreed to accept travelers
checks from him, and even though these checks had a
woman's signature on them, the man was able to provide
seemingly plausible stories to account for this. For instance, the
clerk at the gas station in Mcleis's Lake said that
the man told him he had bumped into a lady
who ran out of gas up the road, so she

(14:35):
gave him a signed ten dollars travelers check in order
to fill up a gas can to bring back to her.
The man was reportedly driving a green late nineteen sixties
model pickup truck, which may have been a Chevrolet, but
unfortunately none of the witnesses took down the license number.
Even though a number of pickup truck owners from British
Columbia were questioned by the RCMP, they were unable to

(14:56):
find a match, and while two separate composite sketches were
created and circulated for the mail driver. He could not
be identified.

Speaker 3 (15:04):
I love how what threw them off was a quote
lady's signature, because you know, I mean, most guys don't
have a real pretty signature, but us women, I don't
know that we have a distinct gendered signature. But Andrea
is right at the top of the check as well.
And so when he goes in and he's saying, hey,
I have this traveler's check one A traveler's check is

(15:25):
kind of an odd form of payment, maybe not so
much back in the eighties, but you would think they'd
scrutinize the check. It says Andrea at the top, and
then he has to come up with these stories of hey,
this woman gave me this check. She wants me to
bring her car back. I'm just gassing it up for
and like you said, because he seems pretty pleasant, which
means he doesn't appear to be this kind of criminal

(15:48):
mastermind or some gang leader or anything like that. It
seems as though people just believe him and doesn't really
register until it's called into question that these two kids
died and Andrea happens to be one of them. So
really interesting because it almost seems like this person so
calm and cool and collected. Could they have done something
like this before? Is it something that he just had

(16:10):
enough time driving hundreds of miles to kind of be
calm and regroup and think of stories he could tell
to use her money? And do you think that was
the main motivator behind the crime itself, just to get
their stuff?

Speaker 1 (16:21):
Possibly? I mean, they never specified just how much money
was the travelers checks were worked, because obviously we know
he used one ten dollars one, which isn't a lot
of money. As possible that he wasn't even planning to
kill anyone, but maybe he made sexual advances on Andre
or something and things escalated into violence. Or maybe he
was just a serial killer who just loved to pick

(16:43):
up random people and rob them while traveling through the area.
Because they described him as having an American accent, So
if he was from say, Washington State, and he went
up to Canada to kill people, he might have just
had the mentality, well, if I crossed the border and
go back home, they'll never figure out that I was
responsible for these crimes.

Speaker 2 (17:00):
I don't know, like I've got nothing to go on here,
but I almost get a gut feeling that you're right, Ashley,
that this is somebody who's done this before, and that
they are like a chameleon, and that they can fit
in in any scenario and come off seeming decent, so
that people don't take down his license plate and they
allow him to pay with these travelers checks that say

(17:21):
Andrea sharp on them when he is clearly not an Andrea.
And it almost feels like there's a possibility that the
robbery element could just be a secondary motivation, like if
your motivation is to murder, and then well, why wouldn't
you then take advantage of the situation and take whatever
belongings you could.

Speaker 3 (17:41):
That's very true. I mean you have this idea that
one he could have been making sexual advances. One it
could be a power control thing. He sees a couple,
just like we know several killers have targeted couples, and
what he does is he, let's say he kills the
young man first and then kills the then kills Andrea.
It makes sense and like you said, maybe just taking
all our things as a way to erase their identity

(18:03):
temporarily so he can get away further. Because if he's
done it before, he knows you don't leave that kind
of information. It makes the police very easily able to
identify who the victims are and maybe gets them a
jump start on the investigation. Oh question, do I have
an American accent?

Speaker 2 (18:20):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (18:22):
I mean America is such a big country that I
liked more specifics about which kind of region that your
accent is from, because listening to your voice, I can
tell you're American, but I wouldn't be able to guess
where you're from.

Speaker 2 (18:34):
I love it, Jules, you said, yes, I hear American accent,
but I also like, this will sound weird. When I
hear Robin talk, I hear a Canadian accent that we
don't necessarily have out here.

Speaker 3 (18:45):
So people think I'm from New York, which makes no
sense because I'm from Florida and I've never been up
in New York. But I don't have the typical Southern
draw unless I've I don't know, unless I'm really tired
or something. But I'm a Southern girl and people are
always like, are you from New York? So we are
very vastly different. Depending on what region you're from, people
think they can identify where you're from.

Speaker 2 (19:05):
I get refined Southern from you. Yay.

Speaker 3 (19:08):
Thank you, God, bless you.

Speaker 2 (19:13):
Over the next several years, the RCMP collected around nine
hundred tips, but none of them led the case any
closer to a resolution. However, a major development took place
in July of nineteen eighty nine, when the RCMP detachment
in Gander, Newfoundland was contacted by Tom Martin, a drug
dealer who acted as an informant for them. Martin claimed

(19:35):
that months earlier, he'd been living in the town of
Grand Falls, Windsor and sharing a house with a woman
named Madonna Kelly. According to Martin, Madonna told him that
she knew the identity of the person responsible for the
murders of two German tourists in British Columbia. The RCMP
eventually brought in Madonna for questioning, and she recounted this story,

(19:56):
confirming that she'd been living in a rented trailer in Chetwyn,
British Columbia, back in nineteen eighty three. At the time,
Madonna was working at a sod farm and befriended another
employee named Andy Rose. Like Madonna, Andy also hailed from
Grand Falls, Windsor, Newfoundland, and was one of thirteen siblings
in his family. Over the years. Andy had worked and

(20:17):
lived in a number of different places, including Toronto, Edmonton,
and Thompson, Manitoba, and had one failed marriage under his belt.
Even though Andy was described as being a nice guy
when he was sober, he did have issues with alcohol
and had become something of a drifter who had a
hard time holding down steady employment. After arriving in Chetwynd

(20:38):
in nineteen eighty three, Andy lived with one of his
brothers for a month and moved into a motel once
he got the job at the Sad Farm. According to Madonna,
during the early morning hours of October fourth or fifth
that year, Andy suddenly showed up on the doorstep of
her trailer while he was intoxicated. Madonna described him as
wearing blood stained jeans and having blood stained hands, and

(21:01):
she also said he appeared to have scratches under his eyes.
Andy then told Madonna that he had murdered two German
people by blowing their heads off and leaving their bodies
by the side of the road. The female victim had
apparently fought back and caused scratches on Andy's face, which
is why he wanted to borrow some makeup from Madonna
in order to help him cover them up since there

(21:23):
was a full moon that night. Madonna also described Andy
as quote howling like a werewolf when he shared a story.
She claimed that Andy threatened to kill her and her
infant son if she ever told anyone about what he did,
which is why she remained silent for nearly six years.
Madonna then left Shetwynd and moved back to Newfoundland only

(21:43):
weeks after this incident took place.

Speaker 3 (21:46):
Okay, let's look at his behavior. He seems like, like
she talks about, he had an alcohol problem, he had
become a drifter. It's kind of like he had this
huge family, he started working on this farm and his
life just started to kind of unravel.

Speaker 1 (22:00):
His mental health.

Speaker 3 (22:00):
Seems to be a little bit an end question here.
And then you contrast that with the individual we know
was caching these checks of Andrea's. That's someone who's calm,
who's well put together, who arouses no suspicion, who can
very calmly tell you stories about what he is doing
and how he got these checks in his possession. Does

(22:22):
not seem like the same person to me whatsoever.

Speaker 1 (22:26):
Yeah, That's what I'm thinking as well, And as we're
going to talk about There is nothing to indicate that
Andy ever traveled south during that time period, hundreds of
kilometers to even use these travelers checks at these different locations.
In fact, he was so poor that I'm not even
sure he had access to a vehicle during that time period. So,
I mean, I can understand investigating him after hearing this

(22:46):
story about his so called confession, But when you look
at like his movements and the timeline of when these
murders took place, it just seems impossible that he could
have just traveled one hundred kilometers south and then just
suddenly returned act to chatwind and then moved on with
his life.

Speaker 3 (23:04):
And think about too, if he's this person who's struggling,
let's say, financially, who has an alcohol problem, who's a drifter,
and these two kids are hitch hiking, don't you think
there's some awareness when you're hitch hiking, Like if a
really like I don't know, dishoveled individual pulls overs like
get in the car, like you have the right to go, eh,
we're okay, we're okay, we're gonna wait a little bit.

(23:26):
You know, you don't have to get in the car
with that person. So I also think there's a lot
to say about who people choose to get in the
car with. Even in the eighties, when you have someone
who's charming, well put together, who is you know, kind
and clean, and their car is clean, those kinds of
things go a really long way to allow you to
make assumptions of safety, Whereas if someone was just shoveled,

(23:46):
let's say, had a really beat up car, those kinds
of things, maybe you say I'm okay, no, thank you,
especially when you're not just as you know, one individual,
there's two of you, so two brains thinking. I would
think that the person who pulls over and picks them up,
both of these kids are looking at ho they were going, yep,
let's get in the car with them.

Speaker 1 (24:05):
That totally makes sense because when you hear the description
of the guy using the travelers checks, who seemed like
a pleasant, charming guy, he sounds like an individual that
the couple would have been comfortable climbing into a vehicle with. Well.
Upon further investigation, it turned out that Andy had left
Shedwyn around the same time Madonna did, and traveled to
the town of Courtney to look for work before he

(24:26):
relocated to Edmonton and got a job moving furniture for
U Haul. By nineteen eighty nine, Andy was forty years
old and finally achieved a bit of stability in his life,
as he had spent the past three years living and
working in Sun Dance, Manitoba. In fact, on October the
twenty eighth, while the RCMP were building a case against him,
Andy's common law wife gave birth to their first son.

(24:49):
Even though Andy had once been arrested for public intoxication
and spent the night in a drunk tank, he had
no serious criminal record or history of violence, but the
RCMP still felt he was worth pursuing as suspect. On
September seventh, just ten days after Andy's child was born,
the RCNP requested that Madonna phone him and Sun Dance
while they secretly recorded the conversation. Their call lasted for

(25:12):
about an hour, but when Madonna brought up Andy's alleged
murder Confashion from nineteen eighty three, he completely denied that
the incident occurred or that he had ever killed anybody.
During the call, Andy did provide a potential alternate explanation
for Madonna's story, as he acknowledged getting into a bar
fight in Chetwind during that time period in which he
was punched in the nose and wound up bleeding onto

(25:34):
his own clothing. Andy recalled there being a full moon
on that particular night, so if he had shown up
to Madonna's trailer after the fight, perhaps this was the
incident she recalled. And he also maintained that he did
not own a gun or a car while he was
living in Chetwind and would not have had the means
to acquire them. He told Madonna, quote, I couldn't even

(25:55):
buy my own breakfast. I drank every cent I had
I end quote. Regardless, even though Andy did not make
a confession or reveal anything incriminating during the recorded phone call,
the RCNP still believe that Madonna's story was strong enough
evidence to charge it with Burned and Andrea's murders. Andy
was quickly arrested in sun Dance and eventually extradited into

(26:15):
British Columbia to stand trial for the crime.

Speaker 3 (26:19):
Let's say he actually had confessed to exactly what Madonna said.
He was such an inebriated individual at the time, and
he's even saying, Man, I'm drunk all the time, every
dime I have goes to drinking. He wasn't going to
be sober enough to go hundreds of miles to pick
them up, to go cash these checks, those kinds of things.
He says he didn't have a car, but if he did,

(26:41):
I highly doubt that someone who's struggling that hard with
an addiction that they would prefer to buy beer or
booze over let's say, shelter car, those kinds of things,
holding down their job, having stability with their family, that
alcohol was that important to him. I just don't see
him being able to be one the person who presents

(27:02):
as a safe driver and someone who is able to
concoct these stories and go hundreds of miles casting these checks.
It doesn't make sense. I would more likely, as a
police believe that someone who's struggling with addiction like this
would tell a fabricated story how at the moon and
be in some drunken stupor where he's reiterating some news

(27:22):
story he saw in the newspaper or on the news.
So it's perplexing to me that her telling this story
and not even being able to corroborate it on these
recordings that he has with Madonna, they went forward and
charged him anyway. It doesn't make sense. There's no evidence
to match it, and it actually goes against what we
think we know about this individual who was so calm

(27:45):
and collected, so well put together. It is not someone
who's struggling with alcohol addiction.

Speaker 2 (27:51):
There's an incongruity there, for sure. If it was a
crime that she was talking about and it was like
a smash and grab or a home invasion or something
that would involve just him quickly getting money to feed
that addiction, then that would make sense. But this seems
to be like well thought out and like you said,
he didn't have access to a vehicle, or he didn't
own a vehicle. It just doesn't seem to be in

(28:12):
line with the person that's described. Andy's trial would take
place at British Columbia Supreme Court in Prince George in
March of nineteen ninety one, and his defense team would
attempt to poke holes in the Crown's case against him. Obviously,
one of the biggest issues was that, in the days
following the murders, Andrea's travelers checks were used at various

(28:33):
gas stations located hundreds of kilometers south of chetwind The
composite sketches of the man seen using the travelers checks
did not have much of a resemblance to Andy, and
employment record showed that he'd worked an eight hour shift
at the sod farm in chetwind every single day between
October third and October sixteenth, nineteen eighty three. And like

(28:55):
we just mentioned, Andy did not even own a vehicle
during that time period, so how would he have even
driven to all of those gas stations. There was also
no physical evidence linking Andy to the murders, and even
though he did wear size thirty four Janes back in
nineteen eighty three, there was nothing to conclusively prove that
the blood stain thirty four genes found in the trash

(29:16):
bin near the murder scene actually belonged to him. While
Madonna had described Andy as wearing blood stained jeans while
confessing to the murders outside her trailer, the trash bin
was located only about one kilometer south of the crime scene,
so there was some question about why Andy would have
traveled over thirty kilometers to Chetwynd while wearing the bloody
jeans and then make another thirty kilometer trip back to

(29:39):
that particular trash bin in order to get rid of them.
Another potential hole in Madonna's story was her description of
Andy howling like a werewolf at the full moon. His
records showed that there was actually a crescent moon in
the night sky during early October of nineteen eighty three,
and the full moon did not appear until two weeks
after the murders. Regardless, even though Andy took the witness

(30:02):
stand to testify in his own defense, the jury still
found Madonna's testimony to be more credible. On March eighth,
they wound up finding Andy guilty on two counts of
second degree murder, and he received a sentence of life
imprisonment with no possibility of parole for fifteen years.

Speaker 3 (30:21):
Well, let's go to the pants real quick. When you
look at Min's jeans, thirty two thirty fours, though that
waste size is the most common waist size rebel wears
of thirty four. So I mean, when you look at
these thirty fours were found on evidence that could have
been a million people's pair of jeans. So unless you

(30:42):
had said, hey, it had you know, some card that
linked it back to him. There was a wallet found
in it, there was initials, you know, sewn into the
waistband or something that didn't happen. It's just a size
thirty four pair of jeans, and he says he didn't
even he did wear that size, but he didn't even
have a car to be in that location in the
first place. So when you think about him being put

(31:04):
up on the stand and in Madonna, clearly Madonna seems
to be stable when she's presenting, You've got to remember
this is a man who's had mental health issues with
addiction and those sorts. He's been a drifter. He clearly
has had a really difficult life. I wonder how intelligent
he comes off to the jury versus how Madonna comes off, because, genuinely,

(31:26):
whether the facts are congruent or not, when you have
two different personalities up on the stand, someone who seems
articulate and stable and grounded, even if they're not saying
facts that make sense, they're going to be believed over
someone who's sputtering off these truths but don't seem to
be a very reliable human being just in general. So

(31:46):
I think he was set up to fail by testifying
in the first place.

Speaker 1 (31:49):
I mean, I know Andy had some previous mental health
and alcohol issues back in the early eighties, but he
seemed to be in a good place by the time
he was arrested, so I'm not entirely sure he came
across that badly on the witness stand. But I haven't
seen footage of the original trial, but I would be
curious to see Madonna's testimony because all I can think
was it must have been pretty damn convincing, because there

(32:09):
are just so many holes in the prosecution's case, But
on Madonna's testimony alone, the jury just seemed to think
that proved Andy's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and that's
why they decided to find him guilty. But I guess
we just got to put ourselves in the shoes of
a potential juror back in nineteen ninety one, when issues
with wrongful convictions were just not general knowledge with the public,

(32:31):
So they probably just had the mindset, well, why would
this witness get on the stand and lie about this story.
She must be telling the truth. Therefore, Andy is guilty.

Speaker 3 (32:41):
Question for you guys, when you look at America's justice system,
it's you know, you're innocent until proven guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt. You need to be ninety nine point nine
nine nine percent sure that this is the true account.

Speaker 1 (32:53):
All of that's the same in Canada pretty much. Yeah,
Like they still have the same mindset that you should
not find someone guilty unless you feel that they have
proven their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I mean, there
are some differences between the Canadian and American justice systems,
but the basic essentials of a trial are pretty much
the same.

Speaker 3 (33:11):
Okay, so he would have had many rights himself as well.

Speaker 1 (33:16):
Andy was sent to the Matsque Institution in Abbotsford, but
his defense team immediately appealed his conviction. Just under two
years later, on November twelfth, nineteen ninety two, the British
Columbia Court of Appeal ruled that Andy was entitled to
a new trial as they believe that the original trial
judge had given inadequate instructions to the jury about the
burden of proof and reasonable doubt. During the ruling, the

(33:39):
three justices wrote, quote, experience tells us that while very
few innocent persons are convicted, it does happen end quote.
Andy would return to British Columbia Supreme Court in Prince
George for his second trial in April of nineteen ninety four,
and once again the only real evidence against him was
the testimony of Adonna Kelly, who continued to maintain that

(34:00):
Andy had confessed to her about his involvement in the murders.
But even though the defense attempted to poke hole as
a Madonna's story, the jury still seemed to think that
she was a believable eyewitness. So on April the twenty sixth,
Andy was found guilty on two counts of second degree
murder for the second time. When sensing took place, Andy
told the court quote, I didn't kill those people. I

(34:21):
don't know what else I can say. There is no
evidence I didn't kill them end quote. He received the
same sentence of life imprisonment with no possibility parole for
fifteen years, and was subsequently sent back to prison.

Speaker 3 (34:34):
I don't get it. In nineteen ninety one, and in
nineteen ninety four, we definitely didn't have the technology we
have with DNA. Remember Andrea had had blood evidence underneath
her fingernails. Supposedly he was scratched. If we had that technology,
we could go back and say, hey, look had this happened.
But at the time, Andy saying I don't know what

(34:55):
else to do. How do you truly prove your innocent?
Your job is to prove that I'm guilty, you didn't
do that, and it's almost impossible. I've told you I
didn't have a car, I didn't have any money at
the time. I sure wasn't driving hundreds of miles. I
didn't say that I wasn't at Madonna's house confessing to
that I was in a bar fight, which it would

(35:16):
explain scratches and blood on me. But I don't know
how else to prove I'm innocent. I've thought about that
a lot before. If I had to prove my innocence,
you know, you can prove I have receipts for this,
I was here, But there's a lot of ways that
people look the other way and say, like, I just
don't buy it. I believe you're guilty. So it's very difficult.

(35:37):
Andy found himself in an almost impossible situation of saying,
prove that I did it. You didn't prove it, and
yet the jury said, yes, they did.

Speaker 1 (35:46):
Andy was just unlucky because, as we're going to talk about,
DNA testing does become a part of this case within
the next few years. So I think that if Andy's
trial had taken place just a couple years afterwards, he
probably wouldn't have been convicted because they would have been
able to use DNA evidence to pretty much prove beyond
a shadow of a doubt to a jury that he
could not have committed this crime.

Speaker 2 (36:06):
I'm curious, Robin, do you know in Canada if we
have with the equivalent of in America's a bench trial.

Speaker 1 (36:14):
Let me just look that up. I seem to recall
some examples of this happening in Canada, but I just
want to double shu murder trial.

Speaker 2 (36:21):
Make sure you look in the Yeah, because it would
be advantageous. I would think for Andy's defense to say, like,
let's do a bench trial because the evidence was so weak.

Speaker 1 (36:31):
Yes, they do, because let me just look this up here. Yes,
you've heard of the Richard Olin murder from New Brunswick
that took place in twenty eleven. Yes, yes, where his
son went on trial for murder. And I do know
that his conviction was overturned and he got a retrial,
and I think they did ask for a bench trial,
and the judge pretty much ruled that I don't believe

(36:51):
the evidence is strong enough to prove his guilty on
a reasonable doubt and found him not guilty. So yeah,
those do exist and are definitely better if the prosecution
is presenting a weak case, because most of the time
the judges will act objective and say that I don't
I'm not going to decide if you're guilty or innocence,
but if I don't think the evidence is strong enough,

(37:12):
I will acquit you.

Speaker 2 (37:13):
Because I think the judge is more likely to actually
weigh the evidence in the case, whereas I think the
jury is more likely to be swayed by who's telling
the best story or what is the best narrative.

Speaker 1 (37:26):
Yeah, and I think that's probably what happened in these
two trials.

Speaker 2 (37:31):
So Andy's defense team appealed his conviction, alleging that the
trial judge had once again misdirected the jury and there
were too many inconsistencies in Madonna's testimony. On February fourteenth,
nineteen ninety six, the BC Court of Appeals announced that
they had originally been planning to dismiss the appeal, but
we're now going to reserve judgment until new forensic testing

(37:52):
could take place. Well, DNA profiling and criminal investigations was
still a relatively new thing. When Andy was for charged
with the murders in nineteen eighty nine, the defense was
hoping to perform DNA testing on the blood stained genes,
as well as Andrea's fingernail clippings, which had traces of
blood on them. The Court of Appeal ordered the Crown

(38:13):
to release these exhibits for testing, and Andy even agreed
to provide the RCMP with a blood sample so as
DNA could be compared with the evidence. The results would
later show no trace of Andy's DNA on the genes
or the fingernail clippings, though it was determined that the
blood under Andrea's nails was likely her own and may
not have been the result of her scratching her killer.

Speaker 3 (38:36):
This is really fascinating. So even though he agrees, Andy
agrees to go ahead and give this blood sample, we
find out that Andy's DNA's nowhere. It's not anywhere that
it probably should have been. Remember, Madonna says that he
had these scratches on his face. If Andrea had truly
scratched him with her nails, and you had looked at

(38:57):
that blood and the DNA evidence of skin cells that
were underneath her fingernails, they would have matched the perpetrator.
And I'm assuming they run that evidence through other databases
and they can't find a hit anywhere.

Speaker 1 (39:10):
I actually haven't heard that it has been clarified how
thoroughly they have run this DNA to try to test
it and see if it matches any other offenders. But
I do know for certain that they have never attempted
to use genetic genealogy on it, even though that is
probably the best chance they have of figuring out who
this DNA belongs to.

Speaker 3 (39:27):
Also that in phenotyping too, being able to run it
through and having it pop up basically an image with
about ninety eight percent certainty of skin color, eye color,
you know, freckles are not dissent, all of those things.
It'd be fascinating for them to have a true I
know they have composite sketches, but a true image of
what they think this person would have looked lying.

Speaker 1 (39:49):
Well. A surprising new development would occur in September of
nineteen ninety seven when the RCNP was contacted by the
police in pall Up, Washington, who shared information about a
potential alternate suspect, Vance Hill. Hill originally hailed from California,
but moved to Canada in nineteen sixty seven and eventually
settled in Prince George. Vance and his wife, Willadeine Hill,

(40:10):
had three children together while he worked in construction, but
he also struggled with chronic alcoholism. In April of nineteen
eighty three, the Hill separated and Willadeine decided to move
back to California with their children, while Vance remained in
Prince George. On October the twenty first of that year,
three and a half weeks after the murders, Vance was
arrested by the RCMP on two charges of obtaining lodging

(40:33):
by false pretenses. After a brief stint in jail, Vance
decided to leave the country and return to California so
he could move into a new place that was closer
to his family. In January of nineteen eighty four, Vance
supposedly confessed to Willadeine that he was responsible for murdering
a male and female hitchhiker he had met at a
bar in Chetwynd. He claimed that the couple had asked

(40:55):
him for a ride in his pickup truck, but while
they were driving, Vance began to harass the woman when
her male companion began to protest, Vance stopped the truck
and both men climbed out. They proceeded to have a
heated confrontation until Vance reached into his truck, pulled out
a rifle, and fatally shot the man. The woman started screaming,
and when she refused to shut up, Vance shot her

(41:16):
as well, before dumping both victim's bodies by the side
of the road. At the time, Willodeine apparently did not
believe her husband's story and thought it was nothing more
than one of his quote unquote drunken fantasies. But shortly thereafter,
Willodeine found a suicide note that Vance had written inside
her garage, in which he expressed his intention to kill

(41:36):
himself because he didn't want to go to jail. Since
Vance did not actually go through with ending his life,
Willodeine never told him that she found his note. However,
on July the twenty eighth, nineteen eighty five, which happened
to be Vance's fifty seventh birthday, he finally did decide
to kill himself ya a self inflicted gunshot wound. Vance
left behind two more suicide notes, one for his wife

(41:59):
and the other for his landlord, but neither of them
made any mention of the murders. It was not until
nineteen ninety seven when Willadine told her nephew about her
late husband's alleged murder confession, and he decided to share
this information with the Pialla Police Department. Once they contacted
the RCMP about this, will Adeine was brought in to
be formally questioned and she confirmed the story, well.

Speaker 3 (42:23):
This one surely seems more probable than what Andy's convicted on. Again,
what a struggle is is that you have someone who
has an alcohol addiction and who clearly has some mental
health issues, as he's been suicidal multiple times, and then
eventually does take his own life. It's really sad when
you think about it. You know, his wife finds this
note that he's going to kill himself and here's why,

(42:45):
and then he doesn't follow through with it, which is
really distressing. So you know that there was this fight
of you know, almost begging him to save his own
life and not hurt himself, and then all of a sudden,
she does complete suicide and will Adein goes to find
these notes and she says, well, it's interesting because these
don't mention that, so is that not why he wanted

(43:05):
to complete suicide the first time, so very confusing grief
wise for her. I can imagine her sitting back and
trying to process, like, what caused this? Why did he
decide to take his own life? He has his kids, Yes,
we weren't working out, but he had his children. What
was it? And talking to her nephew about hey, you
know once he had mentioned in this suicide note that

(43:26):
he had killed this couple. So, you know, I feel
like she's almost just trying to process her grief and
the nephew shares with the police and they bring her in.
It does seem like a story that's again, way more
believable than what Andy's was.

Speaker 1 (43:40):
And I can give Willodeine some slack for not coming
forward and telling the police because he never shared any
specific details when he made this so called confession. He
just mentioned murdering a couple, but he didn't give any names.
He never said where the murders took place. And for
all we know, will Adeine, because she was living in
the United States at that time, probably had no idea
that Anne d Rose had gone through two trials for

(44:02):
a crime that her husband may have actually committed. So
she's just casually mentioning this to her nephew years after
the fact, that I think he was the one who
put two and two together and thought, wait a minute,
there's a big case in Canada involving a murdered couple
and an innocent man might be in prison. So that's
why I'm going to contact the police. But yeah, overall,
I mean, I'm not going to say it's one hundred
percent true, but will Adeine's story does seem more believable

(44:25):
than Madonna Kelly's.

Speaker 2 (44:27):
On the basis of this new information about vance Hill,
Andy's defense team filed an application to reduce fresh evidence,
and in June of nineteen ninety eight, the BC Court
of Appeal ruled that this was enough grounds to overturn
Andy's conviction for the second time, and he was awarded
a new trial. Andy was subsequently released from prison on

(44:47):
bail and would move in with one of his brothers
in Thompson, Manitoba to await his third trial. But since
the RCMP was concerned about whether the evidence against Andy
would be strong enough to secure another con they felt
they might need to strengthen their case before the trial began,
so in October of that year, they decided to launch
a Mister Big sting operation and if you're not familiar

(45:10):
with a Mister Big technique, we'll be sharing more details
about it in our next episode, and we covered it
a little bit in this one early on, but needless
to say, it's considered to be one of the most
controversial elements of the Canadian justice system. It usually involves
undercover police officers posing as criminals who attempt to befriend
and gain the trust of suspects in cold cases. These

(45:33):
officers give off the impression that they want the suspect
to join their so called criminal organization and get paid
good money to perform jobs for them, but only if
they disclose their full criminal history. Of course, this is
often used as a ruse for the suspect to make
a full confession to the crime that they are believed
to have committed, and if the undercover officers managed to

(45:54):
secretly record or videotape the confession, then this can be
the one final piece of evidence for required for them
to make an arrest. Following his release from prison, one
of the conditions of Andy's bail was that he was
required to sign in at the RCMP headquarters in Thompson,
and while there he was approached by a man calling
himself Fred. Fred claimed that he was an ex convict

(46:16):
and quickly befriended Andy and wound up developing a close
relationship with him. But in actuality, Fred was an undercover
RCMP officer and the whole endeavor was a Mister Big
sting operation.

Speaker 3 (46:29):
Let's hear it? How did this meeting with Fred go?

Speaker 1 (46:32):
Okay? Well, here are the details. The Mister Big operation
would last over eight months, as Fred made Andy believe
that he was part of a criminal organization which would
pay him substantial amounts of money to assist them with
their illegal activities. On July sixteenth, nineteen ninety nine, Fred
brought Andy to a hotel suite in Winnipeg to meet
a man named Al, who is the alleged head of

(46:52):
this organization aka mister Big. But of course Al was
also an undercover RCMP officer and na and over the
course of two days, all of his conversations with Andy
in the suite were secretly videotaped. Al told Andy that
he was aware of his upcoming murder trial, but warned
him that the police were pressuring Willadeine Hill to recanter story,

(47:13):
which meant there was a major risk Andy might get
convicted again. However, Al assured Andy that his organization had
the influence to alter the evidence against him and guarantee
that he would never even have to go on trial.
But Al said that he could only offer this assistance
if Andy officially became a member of their gang, which
meant he had to come clean and disclose the full

(47:33):
details about the murders he had committed. Even though Al
told Andy that he did not care if he actually
committed the crime and would fix the situation for him,
Andy continued to maintain his innocence. During their meetings, Andy
was told no less than twenty four times that he
did not confess to the murders, he would go back
to jail, but he still refused to admit any culpability.

(47:55):
Given Andy's past struggles with alcoholism, the undercover officers decided
to take a bane of the situation by bringing him
to the hotel bar to drink beer for around two hours.
When they returned to the suite, Andy finally stated quote, well,
we'll go with I did it okay. He then made
a full confession to the murders, unaware that the whole
thing was being videotaped. Needless to say, Andie's defense team

(48:19):
were a gas when they learned about what happened. But
he maintained that his confession was false and he had
been coerced, as he claimed that he only told the
officers what they wanted to hear. Indeed, even though Andy
admitted to the crime during the recordings, he did not
reveal any exclusive details which were not already public knowledge.
For instance, when asked about how he obtained the firearm

(48:40):
used to commit the murders, and he never went into
any specifics and simply said, quote, oh, I had it,
I had it.

Speaker 3 (48:47):
Oh that's dirty. I think when you get somebody under
the influence and you start to plan to something that
they've struggled with, Like you said, it's controversial to say
the least. But you know, he had maintained his innocence
multiple times, twenty four times. He's being told you're going
to go back to prison, you know that, right, and
he's saying, yeah, but I didn't do it. Yeah, but

(49:07):
I didn't do it. And this is to a group
who's promising him thinks he's never had financial security protection
in the legal system, which clearly he hasn't had and
so it's really troubling when you think of this idea
that they say, Okay, we're not getting the information we want,
so let's actually get him intoxicated. Let's play into an
addiction he has. And I wonder if he was actively

(49:29):
an addict at the time, which is really stressful to
think about too. But then he starts just unloading this
very generic explanation for what he did, Like he can't
even name how he got the gun. Remember he said
he didn't own that, he didn't own a gun, he
didn't own a truck, any of those things. And so
here he's just going like, oh, yeah, I had I
had it. Man, he's so drunk, who knows what he's saying.

(49:50):
He's simply basically telling them a very watered down story
so that he can check the boxes off and get
what they're what's being promised to him. Worse than the
read techniques in the United States, you think it can
elicit a false confession. That's basically the only thing that
I see coming out of this is that people are

(50:11):
using a criminal enterprise and people's weaknesses and addictions to
manipulate them mentally. That's pretty bad.

Speaker 1 (50:19):
I will acknowledge that there are some documented cases where
the Mister Big technique did work successfully and help put
guilty people away because some of them were stupid enough
to make a confession to a crime they did commit.
But there are also other cases, just like this one,
where it just seemed obvious that the subject was just
saying what people wanted to hear and that they were
being manipulated. And they always seem like the Reek of Desperation,

(50:42):
where the police are pretty much at their last resort
and are thinking, well, we can't find any other evidence
against this person, so we're going to do this elaborate
sting operation and just hope we get the making a
confession on tape. But of course the circumstances of how
they do it are pretty problematic, and I think that
Andy Rose's case is when of the very worst examples.

(51:02):
So I think that about brings an end to Part one,
and on our next episode will reveal how the Mister
Big technique affected Ay's case when he went on trial
for the third time. So join us next week as
we present part two of our series on the murders
of Burnt Gerrika and Andrea Shirt.

Speaker 2 (51:18):
Robin do you want to tell us a little bit
about the Trail Went Cold Patreon?

Speaker 1 (51:21):
Yes, The Trail Cold Patreon has been around for three
years now, and we offer these standard bonus features like
early ad free episodes, and I also send out stickers
and sign thank you cards to anyone who signs up
with us on Patreon if you join our five dollars
tier Tier two. We also offer monthly bonus episodes in
which I talk about cases which are not featured on

(51:44):
the Trail Went Cold's original feed, so they're exclusive to
Patreon and if you join our highest tier tier free
the ten dollars tier. One of the features we offer
is a audio commentary track over classic episodes of UNSAWD Mysteries,
where you can download an audio file and then boot
up the original Unsolved Mysteries episode on Amazon Prime or
YouTube and play it with my audio commentary playing in

(52:07):
the background, where I just provide trivia and factoids about
the cases featured in this episode. And incidentally, the very
first episode that I did a commentary track over was
the episode featuring this case. So if you want to
download a commentary track in which I make more smart
ass remarks about Jewel, Kaylor then be sure to join
Tier three.

Speaker 4 (52:26):
So I want to let you know a little bit
about the Jules and Nashty patreons. So there's early ad
free episodes of The Path Went Chili. We've got our
Pathwent Chili mini's, which are always over an hour, so
they're not very mini, but they're just too short to
turn into a series, and we're really enjoying doing those.

Speaker 2 (52:42):
So we hope you'll check out those patreons. We'll link
them in the show notes.

Speaker 1 (52:46):
So I want to thank you all for listening, and
any chance you have to share us on social media
with a friend or d rate and review is greatly
appreciate it. You can email us at The Pathwentchili at
gmail dot com. You can reach us on Twitter at
the Pathwent. So until next time, be sure to bundle
up because cold trails and Chili pass call for warm clothing.

Speaker 2 (53:05):
Music by Paul Rich from the podcast Cold Callers Comedy

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Bernd Goericke and Andrea Scherpf Pt. One