IA IA - Rose Burkert, 22, & Roger Atkison, 32, Williamsburg, 12 Sept 1980

  • #241
Just because a chair was pulled up beside the bed doesn’t mean a conversation occurred.

The killer could have grabbed the chair after the killings and calmly sat and watched tv for awhile while they laid dead with no remorse.
 
  • #242
its true that both possibilities are valid..but mentioned they might have entertaining the killer(s) because its something that comes up by the detectives....also the no forced entry gives a similar vibe...but sure its possible he was watching them while he was going thru the wallet and the soap weird stuff
 
  • #243
I found the latest podcast episode hard to listen to..as it discusses the serial killer monster who was related to the wife.. his horrendous abuse and murder of little boys and how he was absolutely supported by the corrupted justice system who set him free a zillion times and who was deceived by his antics and who used to treat sick peados as mental patients ... its disgusting and hard to hear
this was a monster waiting to abuse babies to kill them in the most savage way ever .. and he was saved every time he wanted to end his cursed being
 
  • #244
so who is sending the threats ...to stop digging ...to roses friend ....if there is no valid suspect in sight or if its a random possibly dead serial killer .. who is doing the threatening ..this is too wierd
 
  • #245
so who is sending the threats ...to stop digging ...to roses friend ....if there is no valid suspect in sight or if its a random possibly dead serial killer .. who is doing the threatening ..this is too wierd
WAS THAT DETAILS SHARED IN THE PODCAST YOU HAVE BEEN REFERENCING ?
 
  • #246
WAS THAT DETAILS SHARED IN THE PODCAST YOU HAVE BEEN REFERENCING ?
all of my posts comes from the podcast
the threats were mentioned about the friend.. but this is something I already knew about .. she talked about it in the media that she was threatened ...but by whom
 
  • #247
I have completed the podcast and I would like to thank the person here ...it was very well done and informative...the only podcast that was a series that I finished.. normally I cant tolerate them..
but this was top notch ..I just wish we were going somewhere..
its a dead end game here..as the detectives talked in the last episode.. the dna comes from a spot on the towel and is only partial .. meaning useless for ancestry ...............and holes says its already been exhausted by tests .. he also thinks it might not even be from the killer ...but if its from the killer.. they already eliminated a lot of ppl using it including mike h and the wife's father...and the serial killer that they suspected !
but holes says he gives it 20% as being from the killer.. the detective working on the case is more hopeful .........
 
  • #248
my thoughts on the link to the Galesburg murder
the similarities are undeniable...but the most important difference is one male vs a couple .....
the motive for the Galesburg murder is also not convincing ...
the homosexual factor sounds manufactured to suit the detectives
the male found in his undershorts in both cases...is not a clue
the toothpaste thing ? who knows what this means...a killer signature ?
but why these hotels and why these two rooms ? why not more than one murder per hotel seems he knew how to get away undetected ?
also what about the two attackers theory in roger and rose case ?
how did one person control two people ..
what baffles me more and more...is how you commit such a bloody crime in a hotel and you don't draw attention ?
and more importantly...the no forced entry angle in both cases ?? did he knock and pretend to be someone ...........................
so many questions
1980-06-26.jpg


I don't think it's that concerning that it went from male targets to a couple. I think he was still the main focus and she was just unlucky. Her being repositioned, covered, and her items untouched just make me think there was a level of regret with her that wasn't there for the males. Perhaps when she left the room to move the car, he got in.

I am very curious about the murder of Jack McDonald from Meridian Mississippi in 1970 that may be connected to this. I cannot find any decent information at all. I really want to read about that crime scene and any similar male murders in hotels near military bases in the 70s.
 
  • #249
I don't think it's that concerning that it went from male targets to a couple. I think he was still the main focus and she was just unlucky. Her being repositioned, covered, and her items untouched just make me think there was a level of regret with her that wasn't there for the males. Perhaps when she left the room to move the car, he got in.

I am very curious about the murder of Jack McDonald from Meridian Mississippi in 1970 that may be connected to this. I cannot find any decent information at all. I really want to read about that crime scene and any similar male murders in hotels near military bases in the 70s.

I don't think I recall she was covered ..or repositioned ? they were both found in the same head down position ? ...
about the meridian ...they mentioned in the podcast how hard it is to get info on old cases when detectives did not store info anywhere ....but they do discuss whatever is known about this case similarities in ep 6 from SOTC............if you haven't listened...
the case looks more similar to the Galesburg in term of what position the male victim was found
 
  • #250
I don't think I recall she was covered ..or repositioned ? they were both found in the same head down position ? ...
about the meridian ...they mentioned in the podcast how hard it is to get info on old cases when detectives did not store info anywhere ....but they do discuss whatever is known about this case similarities in ep 6 from SOTC............if you haven't listened...
the case looks more similar to the Galesburg in term of what position the male victim was found


They mention it here.

Revisiting The Site Of Roger Atkinson and Rose Burkert's Murder

Her stuff was untouched. She was repositioned and covered more carefully. She wasn't the target, just a regretful casualty in the mess, imo.
 
  • #251
however what you say didn't make any detective come to a conclusion who was the target .they've been debating for 40 years with no answers ..... holes might be too biased concerning the serial killer theory ... the similarities is def something interesting.. however hotel bloody crimes wasnt that rare back then ....and the strange toothpaste similarity might be a coincidence ... it might have been a signature of a killer .. or it might have been used to clean up .. .......holes himself goes back and forth about this....
if the killer indeed is expressing regret in killing rose ..why not cause he is related to her in some way..........................
if they could tie the first 2 murders together then we will have a stronger case for serial killer

edit
interesting that in this image.. rose seems to be less covered..we dont know whats accurate in older cases like this
rose-atkinson-homicide-scene-illustration.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • #252
I am still intrigued by the alleged phone call the receptionist received that asked for a ( burkert ) ..........did it really happen ...was the name accurate.. did she redirect the call to their room ...questions
 
  • #253
Did Rose went to the bar first before moving the car? Why? Any particular reason? The call from the reception was placed at 9:30 approx. Rose dresses up or she's still dressed, gets out and removes her car from the parking lot area for the handicapped. Is this the time she goes to the bar instead to room 260? But why? What followed next before she entered the room?
Who did she call from the bar?
 
  • #254
MysteryMike, it seems Rose's mother was the one babysitting the child or children (how many children had rose anyway?) while Rose went with Roger near Williamsburg, Iowa.

We must always think and put all the things in perspective. I tend to ignore the fact the disposition of the chairs. That must have been mere coincidence. I think there was no talk of killers sitting in those chairs unless if it was CRH and FH. You must include the soap carving and the bathroom mirror... to me the must baffling thing within the crime scene. And we must remember the room was very small. Anyone thought that the carving could be made by Roger while Rose was getting the car outside? And, well, difficult to say this and very weird, but the soap bits could have been used as lubricant? Not recomended today, but in those days could have suited just fine if no other stuff was ready available. If the soap had no fingerprints than I will be incined it was the killer but I'll bet if police ran tests and found only Roger's... the soap bits are explained (even if not used to what I wrote).

If you take in consideration of Rose's half-sister being the killer you must put all the piece puzzles we know about the case and trying to get them to fit properly. The soap bits, how he killed them with a axe or a trawler? If Rose and Roger were shot with a muffled pilllow outside the bed, the things could be more easy for any killer. But then you have Rose dressed in bed, roger in shorts, both lying down with their heads cut deep till death...blood everywhere in the wall and headboard which definitely points to them being killed while laid on the bed. What is the motive then concerning the half-brother? Something more deeper than we know? It was really an accidental, unintentional murder?

If you revise the crime scene and try to put the puzzles on, you clearly see this is very difficult for a involuntary murder. An accidental crime would lead to a messy crime scene and possible more alerts from other people in the vicinities. Why going with an axe or trawler or even a meat clever if you do not think you're going to kill people? Alot of things must be cleared out to fit this suspect or that suspect.
Wonder if rose was gone to move the car and there was a knock on the door. He opened the door thinking it was rose but it wasn’t. He could have been dead by the time she let herself in to the room again. Someone in the bathroom and they appear behind her when she arrives into the room. Maybe she then was told to lie down on the bed while they left the room but clearly she was then murdered.
 
  • #255
It

My best guess would be he didn't like her choices and was fed up. I think he might have also intended on only hurting them or maybe a conversation escalated into a crime of passion. My best guess is that there was two confrontations. I don't know exactly when the first took place, but the first would have been her brother confront her and/or Roger about the fact that they were together. He's married. He's ten years older. Her last boyfriend was violent. She had a daughter at home and he and his wife had wanted kids but couldn't have them. There may have been more, but I think that was the core of his problem with her. I think in the first confrontation, Roger may have gotten him heated. I think Rose may have also played a part and threatened to tell things she knew about her brother--things along the lines of sexual abuse. Maybe Roger thought he was being protective of her by keeping her away from the brother.

If the brother was truly the killer, something caused him to go out of his way to see her that night. Something had to be dealt with. That said, I still believe the killer carved the soap. I can't help but think it was just something being done while talking/listening, or waiting after it was done.

Here's a theory I had quite some time ago, while I still believed it was the brothers, but could apply here too. Maybe Roger was killed and Rose locked herself in the bathroom. Maybe she wrote the message on the mirror and maybe it led to the killer, which the killer then later wiped out after coaxing her out. If it was the brother, the message on the mirror makes little to no sense. The only thing that would make sense to me is if he was trying to be misleading and changed his mind. Maybe he was trying to point it in the direction of the ex or someone else.

In answer to your other questions. I have no idea if the brother was ever a suspect. My guess is no, because there was already a rich list of suspects. I know the focus was on CRH for a little while. I know they thought the ex boyfriend seemed obvious until his alibi checked out. The bartender thing was suspicious. I bet the brother didn't seem like a good suspect, mainly because he didn't have a record, a known motive, and they had their hands full with a better more obvious list of people.

One discouraging fact about all cold cases, take Zodiac for example, is that there is often a handful of suspects and a pretty good debate over why I think it's person A and you think it's person B, and they think it's person C, but in the back of my head, I always wonder if the killer isn't even on the list. In this case, it may be possible. All the theories and guesswork are useless because the actual killer wasn't even suspected or mentioned.

I don't know what the relationship between half-brother and professor was. The man I spoke to thought it was interesting that he only said something shortly after half-brother died, as if he was protective, or even scared of him.

The man I spoke with also believed it was Rose's mother babysitting that weekend. He said she had been with Rose in the days leading up as well and knew where Rose was going. Rose called the babysitter according to articles at the time, so that means she called her own mother and told her where she was. Did her mother support what she was doing? It seems possible at this point. Would the mother have seen any harm in her own son knowing? Probably not. But then the question is when law enforcement questioned her on whether or not she told anyone else where they'd be, what did she say? Did she tell them she told her son? It seems to me that would have made him worthwhile of a look.

I know the men on Roger's crew also knew where he was going and there's been some implied issues between some of the crew and Roger, because of his infidelities. Maybe he'd gotten with one of their girls at some point. Still...how would they know the hotel? How would they figure out the hotel number? Goes back to the brothers possibilities we'd discussed.

I think part of this might be about Rose's daughter. I think someone, or some people, didn't like how she was raised. Half-brother probably acted alone but I'd guess the family would have figured it out, accepted it, protected it.

But this is all just guessing at this point. If the half-brother thing is true, DNA is really all that's left, other than someone to come forward from the family. Even then, how and why probably died with him.

Maybe the mother didn’t approve and was constantly giving out to the brother about having to mind roses daughter so much. Possible jealousy over his sister having a child she didn’t want to mind when he couldn’t have one and maybe family honour?
It was different times back then. Family honour was a big thing
 
  • #256
Hi - so for those of you who have listened to the whole podcast, what do you think? Did Roger and/or Rose know their killer? Was it one person in that hotel room with them, or two? After spending 9 months writing those 11 episodes, I still can't commit to one theory, although I do have a strong suspect if the killer was someone known to them (someone(s) named in the Suspects episodes). I'd love to hear your thoughts!
 
  • #257
Hi - so for those of you who have listened to the whole podcast, what do you think? Did Roger and/or Rose know their killer? Was it one person in that hotel room with them, or two? After spending 9 months writing those 11 episodes, I still can't commit to one theory, although I do have a strong suspect if the killer was someone known to them (someone(s) named in the Suspects episodes). I'd love to hear your thoughts!
hello...I would like to thank you for your great effort ...it was very well done and I enjoyed it .....
its a very hard case the more we know the more we get confused about the very vast possibilities....especially as we are torn between the ( someone from inside vs random stranger ) ...while the similarities between the 3 murders are intriguing ...thinking that a random killer would stumble across secret lovers with so many enemies is a little hard to accept ...so I still lean towards the closer circle..but at the same time we are hearing from the detective that they are eliminating ppl according to the alleged dna which again might be misleading ..
so who is your fav suspect ?
 
  • #258
Firstly, before I write this I do not claim to be some armchair detective or anything. I was personally touched by the story and wanted to get further insight. Many and most of the good information was told on the Scene of the Crime podcast. However, I did a FOIA request and got hundreds of pages worth of information. I also spoke with Sheriff Rotter who told me his beliefs.

He said in an email and on the podcast that everyone who could be a suspect was tested with the DNA evidence and cleared. He also stated that he believed Esparza to be the killer just like Paul Holes said. He also seems to cling to the DNA as being the suspect. However, there are problems. LE did not exhume Esparza but took DNA of an alleged child who did not match. He stated, "It is not conclusive to confirm or disprove a suspect by using a child of a likely father, only when using the mother."

On one hand he seems confident in Esparza, and on the other hand he does question whether the DNA is that of the suspect or if the child that was tested is not his. He also stated that they hope to test more items. Lately, he believed the original investigators got bogged down by the affair as a motive to murder when the killing could've been random.

Here's what I did find. At 10:30pm guests of the adjacent hotel room heard the following outside their room, "I don't believe it, where's Randy". Roger worked with a couple of Randy's at GTE. One was his supervisor who knew of the affair and told Roger to go to the Amana's in Iowa since he didn't want the tryst to be near where they were currently working (Out of town but in MO). Randy the supervisor did not know of the exact hotel though. Perhaps that gives reason to the phone call "Do ya have a Burkert?"

Roger also had an affair with the wife of a coworker named John. John and his wife divorced not long after the murders.

When discussing this with friends and family of the victims; one thing we were speculating on was why Rose was dressed and Roger was not. Perhaps someone knocked on the door and Rose got dressed to answer it? Perhaps she met someone outside since the car wasn't in the correct spot.
Despite Rotter believing it was Esparza, I do not understand how Esparza would get in contact with them. I am unsure how William Kyle met with Esparza either. I heard it was possibly homosexual since Kyle's rectum was dilated but that's just what I heard. I haven't been able to get much backstory and information on William Kyle minus the fact that the nail clippers left in his room did not give any good DNA results.

I'm not sure what has been discussed already. As far as the writings go.... It seems the words 'this' was written in the upper right-hand corner. I'm guessing the killer wanted to write a full statement but gave up.
1745859723508.webp
 
  • #259
Here's a picture of the toothpaste in the tub.
1745860107155.webp


As for the "carved soap".... I don't know if the killer truly carved anything. One could easily write a message on the door without carving soap. It's crumbled and spread on the floor. I have another photo of the floor with the scattered cards and soap but there's a little bit of red from blood and I don't know if that would break the rules.
1745860241492.webp
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
2,518
Total visitors
2,632

Forum statistics

Threads
632,085
Messages
18,621,820
Members
243,017
Latest member
thaines
Back
Top