I recently watched an UM segment about Phillip Fraser. He was a young man who was murdered by a hitchhiker in Canada. They showed a sketch of the killer.

Did they catch him?

Yes, I remember this case. I don't know if they caught the guy either. But I remember this one scared the crap out of me!

I don't think he was ever caught :( such a senseless crime :(. I've tried to find some info about this case on the net to no avail.

That segment really freaked me out. I don't know if the RCMP will be able to ever identify and catch the guy. Random crime is so difficult to solve. The victim and the perpetrator (both non-residents of the area) were just passing through a scarcely populated part of British Columbia. Even with the testimonies of the café owners and the couple that lodged the suspect overnight, it seems like there has been no other leads in the case. A search of the RCMP database (including cold cases) turned up nothing on Philip Fraser. I've sent an email to the RCMP to see if they can give any updates on this case. Keeping my fingers crossed that they will be able to answer me.

Philip's parents were particularly touching. They spoke so very eloquently about their son's death in the segment, it was very moving. My heart really goes out to them. :(

Is this about the older canadian couple in the RV?
She was shot by robbers and the husband lived?

Oh that was soooo sad :(
HE broke my heart talking about his wife.

Is this about the older canadian couple in the RV?
She was shot by robbers and the husband lived?

Oh that was soooo sad :(
HE broke my heart talking about his wife.

No that one was the Blind River Rest Stop Murder. Unfortunately no one has even been charged in the murders to my knowledge. I agree it was heartbreaking hearing Gord McAllister talk about his wife. :(

Is this about the older canadian couple in the RV?
She was shot by robbers and the husband lived?

Oh that was soooo sad :(
HE broke my heart talking about his wife.
No, that one is the Blind River Reststop case. That is one of the saddest interviews and scariest re-enactment. "I'm gonna rob you, then I'm going to kill you."
Jeez

And yeah, I guess they haven't caught Phillip Frazier's killer. How bold that guy was to show his face to so many witnesses. It is surprising to me that he hasn't been caught yet. Maybe he killed someone in the US and is in prison for it or dead, hopefully.

I'm surprised he didnt do something to that couple he stayed with.

True. That couple was extremely lucky.

True. That couple was extremely lucky.

Especially since he slept right under the gun case.

A first step, but an important one as my request to the RCMP has not fallen into inbox oblivion. I've received a first email from headquaters in Ottawa. My email has been redirected to the B.C. branch of the RCMP.

I'll keep you posted, eh!

I'll keep you posted, eh!
Ya, you betcha.

Ya, you betcha.

LOL! Is that Fargo-nese? You sound like Marge Gunderson. :p

Ya darn tootin'.

Our friends at the RCMP have sent me a (non) update. It was nice of them to reply to my request. It looks that I'm not the only one that contacted them about the case.

I can confirm with you that this investigation has not been solved and is still open. There has been no significant developments since the last media release to Unsolved Mysteries. I am not sure if this investigation was posted on this years Unsolved Mysteries due to timing and communication with the shows producers. Regards.

Glenn K., S/Sgt.

Bummer. It would have been exciting to have learned of an update. Thanks for trying, SuperSally!

I'm just confused on why anyone would want to attend Evergreen for pre0med? I'm familiar with Evergreen, a college that is famous for creating your own major, My father attended in 1973 it's first year and left and one year. My friend is currently attending Evergreen and hates it.

sad crime.

I'm just confused on why anyone would want to attend Evergreen for pre0med? I'm familiar with Evergreen, a college that is famous for creating your own major, My father attended in 1973 it's first year and left and one year. My friend is currently attending Evergreen and hates it.

sad crime.

Could be that there were courses he wanted but couldn't get closer to home. He would probably do the course(s) there and transfer upon completion.

This case pisses me off to no end. I know killing anyone is never right (unless it is self defense) but especially in this case, why did he have to die? I mean, what pushed it to that point? You could tell that Phillip would not have been the type to resist had the suspect just wanted to steal his car and wallet. Totally senseless killing that will sadly never be solved. Ridiculous.

Could be that there were courses he wanted but couldn't get closer to home. He would probably do the course(s) there and transfer upon completion.

Perhaps I just find it strange someone would take pre-med classes there, or even attend college there!

Perhaps I just find it strange someone would take pre-med classes there, or even attend college there!

Why is it so bad? Just curious.

Senseless crime.

One of those heartbreaking cases.

I've beem to alaska and people seem to confuse it with the arctic but most people live in the panhandle and when i was there it is the most beutifal place i've ever been I'm from Western NY so thats not saying much though. First if the parents are doctor they most likely live in a populated area with schools at least there would be one close. This case almost makes me want to stop hitch hiking...it seem as if it deadly . Any news or thoughts on the case and good hitchhiking?

I watched this segment on the forbidden site today. First time I saw this case in over 10 years because I hardly remember seeing it on Lifetime. But it was still as erie as I remember it. What a senseless crime. Pure speculation on what led to the murder of Phillip but I'm guessing the hitchhiker might have wanted a longer ride to wherever the hell he was going and Phillip just wanted to get rid of him. I'm guessing he wasn't killed in the car because the hitchhiker tried to sell it to the couple who picked him up within hours. The killer wouldn't have left evidence like blood in the car before trying to sell it.

I'll bet Phillip was killed in the exact location his body was found. It was remote just off the side of the road. Not much chance for any witnesses to see anything given the location. The hitchhiker probably forced Phillip to pull over and killed him or Phillip might have stopped willingly to stretch his legs and the hitchhiker snuck up behind him and killed him. Maybe Lifetime cut some parts out but the segment never mentioned how Phillip was killed, only that his body was found. Was he shot? Was he beaten to death? It doesn't say.

And what was the point of burning the car? To get rid of any evidence like fingerprints? Why didn't the hitchhiker consider that when he tried to sell the car to the couple?

Sadly, this is one of those cases where it would take a miracle for it to ever be solved. :(

I can't find anything online in regards to this case either.

His body WAS found. Or at least, that's what the RCMP guy said.

His body WAS found. Or at least, that's what the RCMP guy said.

His body was found about a two-hour drive from the cafe. His killer must have murdered him within hours of Mr. Glazer picking him up.

Perhaps the killer used the "I've got to take a leak" ruse and then dispatched Mr. Glazer.Or maybe they argued and then things got out of hand. Either way the killer had no problems killing another human being and then acting as if nothing happened.

One thing is almost certain;Mr. Glazer wasn't killed inside of his vehcle. The lack of blood in the interior area states that. I'm certain that the Olsons (the couple that stopped to help the killer) would have noticed it if it had.

I was really hoping the hitchhiker would have gotten caught. How sad.
BTW, is this the correct spelling of Phillip's last name?

a VERY strange case, i seen it recently and i wondered some things. What did the hitchiker/highly likely murderer say to get in the car??? when i seen it, it seemed the Phillip was going to leave or was trying to not pick him up, but then either changed his mind or may have been somehow forced to change his mind. i feel bad for Phillip and of course his friends and family, it was a senseless crime that did not have to happen and the couple who let the hitchiker stay in their house was very lucky, one more thing, the two people in the diner seemed to know this guy was bad news. i wonder how the others in the segment didnt see that.

One wonders if the hitchhiker wasn't running away from some other crime when Frazier picked him up.

One wonders if the hitchhiker wasn't running away from some other crime when Frazier picked him up.

Yeah, that's basically what I thought about whomever killed Dexter Stefonek. I thought he might be a transient criminal who felt he really, really needed use of Dexter's vehicle at that particular time (the reason being, I suppose, he needed to refuel his truck and get out of there). In the same way, it seems Fraser's killer conspired to do likewise: take the car and move. (As well as utilize whatever else Fraser had in his possession at the time.)

Yeah, that's basically what I thought about whomever killed Dexter Stefonek. I thought he might be a transient criminal who felt he really, really needed use of Dexter's vehicle at that particular time (the reason being, I suppose, he needed to refuel his truck and get out of there). In the same way, it seems Fraser's killer conspired to do likewise: take the car and move. (As well as utilize whatever else Fraser had in his possession at the time.)

I think Frazier might've accidentally seen something or the hitchhiker let slip something he felt was incriminating to himself (He might've been VERY paranoid, especially if he's on the run for one crime) leading him to kill Frazier.

After all, if he killed Frazier, why not kill the couple he stayed with overnight who not only knew the car he was driving, but got a good look at him and even some information from him?

I think Frazier might've accidentally seen something or the hitchhiker let slip something he felt was incriminating to himself (He might've been VERY paranoid, especially if he's on the run for one crime) leading him to kill Frazier.

After all, if he killed Frazier, why not kill the couple he stayed with overnight who not only knew the car he was driving, but got a good look at him and even some information from him?

He also never harmed, nor attempted to harm the first driver that dropped him off at the restaurant.

After all, if he killed Frazier, why not kill the couple he stayed with overnight who not only knew the car he was driving, but got a good look at him and even some information from him?

I reckon he either thought he would draw too much attention to himself, held some semblance of gratitude for the Olsons' efforts, or a little bit of both. They towed his car and gave him a place to stay for the night, after all. There was nothing he apparently wanted to take from the Olsons; it seems he just wanted to work on the car and get out of there without drawing any undue attention to himself. And he was actually pretty good at it, in all honesty. I'm sure it didn't register with the Olsons that something was very wrong until they heard news of Fraser's body turning up--and that his story of traveling to Washington state to study medicine matched their visitor's, verbatim. And after he was long, long gone.

He also doesn't appear to be particularly worried with anyone recognizing him. The Frocklages got a good look at the killer as well, and even witnessed him leaving in Fraser's car. It leads me to speculate that he might be one of those criminals that rapidly gains and loses weight in an effort to obscure his identity.

One wonders if the hitchhiker wasn't running away from some other crime when Frazier picked him up.
hmm...he might, but the big question we would need answered and the police would have to know is about a crime committed near where the hitchiker was, i tend to think he just killed Fraizer for his money and ID, but no matter what the motive was, it was a crime that didnt have to happen, if the killer let something slip, he didnt have to talk to Phillip in the ride. all he had to do is get his ride and leave, now i still tend to think he did this for money though.

I wonder if they can trace this guy AS Philip! He stole Philips' wallet, check book, credit cards, and possesions; and I'm as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow that he's been using Philip's identity, and probably here in the US, since it would be easier to do so since it would send up "red flags" in the canadian systems and would be linked much easier to a deceased person there, and probably not in any computer systems here. I'm sure the guy pawned Philip's stuff, got rid of his car and has assumed his identity; maybe even working. You would think a paper trail would show up somewhere wouldn't you? Especially if he has been using Philip's credit cards and bank accounts. This guy is total scum; I hope some day that he's caught and sent up the river!

I wonder if they can trace this guy AS Philip! He stole Philips' wallet, check book, credit cards, and possesions; and I'm as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow that he's been using Philip's identity, and probably here in the US, since it would be easier to do so since it would send up "red flags" in the canadian systems and would be linked much easier to a deceased person there, and probably not in any computer systems here. I'm sure the guy pawned Philip's stuff, got rid of his car and has assumed his identity; maybe even working. You would think a paper trail would show up somewhere wouldn't you? Especially if he has been using Philip's credit cards and bank accounts. This guy is total scum; I hope some day that he's caught and sent up the river!
i think (if he used Philip's ID or stuff now) that he would be caught, i think he did use it for a bit, but now has somehow got a new Identity.

I new Phillip since the time when we were in Kindergarten together in Anchorage Alaska. He wouldn't hurt a fly, and probably couldn't hurt a fly either as he was very skinny and non athletic type of person. I would also describe him as some what gullible and a person who might be easy to take advantage of.

To answer some of the previous questions I noticed while reading through this post. This tragic event happened way back in 1983, his body was found and it had bullet holes. As far as I know the case has not been solved and after 27 years it might not ever be.

I often think of Phillip. I remember his birthday and I usually do a private message and tribute to him on that day each year.

As far as the scumbag who did this I couldn't think of a punishment despicable enough and I have a pretty good imagination, long and painful would be necessary elements though.

Obviously the burning of the car was to get rid of any evidence that may incriminate him.


However, Dont you guys think that since the hitchiker stayed a night at the folks' home, he would have left some DNA evidence behind, such as his hair, fingerprints, etc.

The investigators could have processed their home and may got a few leads outta this as to who this creepy dude was.

Of course, even if anybody realised this, it would have been too late to do anything about it by now.

Obviously the burning of the car was to get rid of any evidence that may incriminate him.


However, Dont you guys think that since the hitchiker stayed a night at the folks' home, he would have left some DNA evidence behind, such as his hair, fingerprints, etc.

The investigators could have processed their home and may got a few leads outta this as to who this creepy dude was.

Of course, even if anybody realised this, it would have been too late to do anything about it by now.

DNA evidence was by far not as advanced back with this crime occurred as it is today. I doubt investigators took any samples from the couples home. Sadly, I think the only way this case will be solved is by a confession of some sort.

Obviously the burning of the car was to get rid of any evidence that may incriminate him. However, Dont you guys think that since the hitchiker stayed a night at the folks' home, he would have left some DNA evidence behind, such as his hair, fingerprints, etc. The investigators could have processed their home and may got a few leads outta this as to who this creepy dude was.
sadly, back in that day, dna wasnt as big as it is now and the old folks likely didnt know much about that guy till it was too late too. the hitchiker likely is now either alive and well (or having some type of illness) under a new name or his own name, in jail or dead. i doubt he is using Frazier's identity now.

I watched this segment on the forbidden site today. First time I saw this case in over 10 years because I hardly remember seeing it on Lifetime. But it was still as erie as I remember it. What a senseless crime. Pure speculation on what led to the murder of Phillip but I'm guessing the hitchhiker might have wanted a longer ride to wherever the hell he was going and Phillip just wanted to get rid of him. I'm guessing he wasn't killed in the car because the hitchhiker tried to sell it to the couple who picked him up within hours. The killer wouldn't have left evidence like blood in the car before trying to sell it.

I'll bet Phillip was killed in the exact location his body was found. It was remote just off the side of the road. Not much chance for any witnesses to see anything given the location. The hitchhiker probably forced Phillip to pull over and killed him or Phillip might have stopped willingly to stretch his legs and the hitchhiker snuck up behind him and killed him. Maybe Lifetime cut some parts out but the segment never mentioned how Phillip was killed, only that his body was found. Was he shot? Was he beaten to death? It doesn't say.

And what was the point of burning the car? To get rid of any evidence like fingerprints? Why didn't the hitchhiker consider that when he tried to sell the car to the couple?

Sadly, this is one of those cases where it would take a miracle for it to ever be solved. :(

I can't find anything online in regards to this case either.

You have to figure he wanted to get rid of the car as soon as possible because he didn't know how long it would be before Phillip's body was found and his car would obviously be missing, so the local police and state troopers would be on the lookout for it. According to RCMP officer Craig Gates (in charge of the investigation), Phillip was already reported as a missing person and potentially a homicide victim by the time his car was found (about 36 hours after he was last seen, at the cafe). If the hitchhiker was caught red-handed driving a murder victim's car, BINGO! He is instantly caught and the case quickly solved. For all he knew, Phillip's body was found hours after he drove away from the body dump site (in reality, it was 6 weeks before his body was found even though his car was discovered just 12 hours after the hitchhiker left the Olsens' home). So he has two objectives at this point:

1) Get as far away from the crime scene as possible and as fast as possible, then
2) Get rid of the car as fast as possible

His first idea was to sell it, so he could potentially profit from it and erase his connections to it. Because if he had been able to sell it to the Olsens in the time frame he wanted to, it could have been MONTHS before they realized or were discovered to be in possession of a murder victim's car, because they would have made it their own and within that time, have cleaned the car and wiped away any evidence they didn't know was there. However, that didn't work out, so he needed an alternative way to get rid of the car.

He drives to Prince George, just a 4-5 hour drive away from Kitwanga (where the Olsens lived), since it is the nearest decent-sized town but not necessarily a large or small town (the population in Prince George is about as large as it is in Palm Springs, California), and is a large transportation hub for buses and trains. So he ditches the car at a car wash, then burns the car not necessarily to destroy any evidence, but more likely to distract the authorities in order to buy more time to make his get away. That means he had about 6-7 hours before the car would be found; plenty of time to be halfway to Vancouver, Edmonton, or Calgary by bus or train.

With his strange behavior as speculated by the Frocklages and Olsens, I am suprised the police didn't put out any flyers, APBs, or notices around Prince George to get more information in case anyone within that town remembered coming into contact with a strange, overweight male fitting the hitchhiker's description. They should have especially gone to train stations and bus depots in case any transportation employees came into contact with him.

You have to figure he wanted to get rid of the car as soon as possible because he didn't know how long it would be before Phillip's body was found and his car would obviously be missing, so the local police and state troopers would be on the lookout for it.
if i am right, and i know i am not always right, the killer/hitchhiker tried to sell the car to the people who took him in, but was unsuccessful. he tried to get rid of the car and make money off it, but didnt. in the segment, they said he could be using Frazier's name, but when i heard it, i doubted it, if he used it now, he would be caught, he likely used it until he heard of Frazier's death and then changed his name again.
His first idea was to sell it, so he could potentially profit from it and erase his connections to it. Because if he had been able to sell it to the Olsens in the time frame he wanted to, it could have been MONTHS before they realized or were discovered to be in possession of a murder victim's car, because they would have made it their own and within that time, have cleaned the car and wiped away any evidence they didn't know was there. However, that didn't work out, so he needed an alternative way to get rid of the car.
I thought SO!!!! yeah, he tried to sell it, but was unsuccessful so he had to get rid of the car, this guy acted like he was part of the criminal world. he knew what to do with the car, either sell it or get rid of it any way you can.
He drives to Prince George, just a 4-5 hour drive away from Kitwanga (where the Olsens lived).
in the segment, the car broke down.
So he ditches the car at a car wash, then burns the car not necessarily to destroy any evidence, but more likely to distract the authorities in order to buy more time to make his get away. That means he had about 6-7 hours before the car would be found; plenty of time to be halfway to Vancouver, Edmonton, or Calgary by bus or train.
true true, you are good here. i agree. back in that time, DNA wasnt as big, i think he burned it to basically get rid of it and to distract the police to buy time to get away and it worked because has he been caught yet and charged with Fraizer's death?? the answer is no.
With his strange behavior as speculated by the Frocklages and Olsens, I am suprised the police didn't put out any flyers, APBs, or notices around Prince George to get more information in case anyone within that town remembered coming into contact with a strange, overweight male fitting the hitchhiker's description. They should have especially gone to train stations and bus depots in case any transportation employees came into contact with him.
how long was it before they discovered the connection with the Frocklages and the Olsen's???? it's likely this guy got out of Prince George quickly and likely wasnt noticed much by the people in town.

Does anyone know if the RCMP ever talked to whomever dropped the hitchhiker off at the diner? They didn't go inside, just drove away right? Maybe he did something to disturb them. Maybe they knew him, though I doubt that. I wonder if there was any luck at all tracing the path of the hitchhiker backwards to find any clues.
I also wonder what made them think the hitchhiker was familiar with Toronto and Seattle or if they kept a copy of the composite sketches at any of the border crossings since they did think he was familiar with Seattle. Did he look enough like Fraser to use his I.D.?

Does anyone know if the RCMP ever talked to whomever dropped the hitchhiker off at the diner? They didn't go inside, just drove away right? Maybe he did something to disturb them. Maybe they knew him, though I doubt that. I wonder if there was any luck at all tracing the path of the hitchhiker backwards to find any clues.
I also wonder what made them think the hitchhiker was familiar with Toronto and Seattle or if they kept a copy of the composite sketches at any of the border crossings since they did think he was familiar with Seattle. Did he look enough like Fraser to use his I.D.?
he likely used Fraser's credit cards or debit cards (if he had any) and took his money and anything he could sell for money. As for his id, if he used it earlier he would be ok, but it's likely now that the hitchhiker is not using the ID.

As for the police talking with whoever dropped the hitchhiker off, i wonder if the police even knew who the guy who dropped him off was. if they did though, wouldnt they have some info from him that they would put on the segment??? my guess is they dont know who the guy that dropped the hitchhiker off.

he likely used Fraser's credit cards or debit cards (if he had any) and took his money and anything he could sell for money. As for his id, if he used it earlier he would be ok, but it's likely now that the hitchhiker is not using the ID.

I'm sure you're right about the money. They could have traced when and where the cards were used if they were, though if they did it obviously didn't help. I was just curious if the I.D. picture looked enough like the hitchhiker for him to have used it for something like crossing the border. I've never crossed the border so I don't know how closely they would have looked, or what all they would have looked at, during that time period.

As for the police talking with whoever dropped the hitchhiker off, i wonder if the police even knew who the guy who dropped him off was. if they did though, wouldnt they have some info from him that they would put on the segment??? my guess is they dont know who the guy that dropped the hitchhiker off.

I'm sure you're right about this too. I just thought when they got the story out maybe the driver of the first car contacted them. They do leave some things out on purpose, but they probably wouldn't have left out something like that. Mostly I was curious about how much effort they put into tracing the hitchhikers path backwards.

I'm sure you're right about this too. I just thought when they got the story out maybe the driver of the first car contacted them. They do leave some things out on purpose, but they probably wouldn't have left out something like that. Mostly I was curious about how much effort they put into tracing the hitchhikers path backwards.
yeah and i personally agree. i would like to know how that other guy felt about the hitchhiker.

in the segment, the car broke down.

how long was it before they discovered the connection with the Frocklages and the Olsen's???? it's likely this guy got out of Prince George quickly and likely wasnt noticed much by the people in town.

The car's trouble was discovered to be just a broken fan belt; according to the segment, he was back on the road headed south within an hour after departing the Olsen's home. 12 hours after leaving the Olsen's home, the car was found in Prince George at a car wash

It was probably shortly after Phillip's body was found (6 weeks after he was seen at the cafe with the hitchhiker) that the police put out notices for more information. It probably only took a few days or weeks before the Frocklages and Olsens reported in their tips.

I am suprised that no employees or customers at the car wash came forward with information; it seems pretty hard to not notice a car in flames at a commonly used car service place.

If he got out of Prince George quickly, he probably hitched another ride because if he went to an airport, bus depot or train station, he probably would have had to show ID to get a ticket and would be easily recognized; especially since every witness who reported seeing him reported him as having a noticeably strange demeanor.

The car's trouble was discovered to be just a broken fan belt.
yeah i thought the car broke down somehow because the Olsen's gave him a lift. i wonder though, why kill Frasier, but not the Olsen's??? i think they were very lucky.
It was probably shortly after Phillip's body was found (6weeks after he was seen at the cafe with the hitchhiker) that the police put out notices for more information. It probably only took a few days or weeks before the Frocklages and Olsens reported in their tips.
yeah, that's my guess. my guess is when they heard that Fraiser was missing that the Frocklages reported about the hitchhikier and it's likely that (if the car was reported as missing too) that the Olsen's reported what they saw after that.
I am suprised that no employees or customers at the car wash came forward with information; it seems pretty hard to not notice a car in flames at a commonly used car service place.
yeah true, my question is how did this guy not get noticed while setting the car on fire???
If he got out of Prince George quickly, he probably hitched another ride because if he went to an airport, bus depot or train station, he probably would have had to show ID to get a ticket and would be easily recognized; especially since every witness who reported seeing him reported him as having a noticeably strange demeanor.
that's my guess too, i think he likely burned the car, walked a bit, then hitched another ride out of town or home. i just wonder who the next person that picked him up was.

yeah i thought the car broke down somehow because the Olsen's gave him a lift. i wonder though, why kill Frasier, but not the Olsen's??? i think they were very lucky.

yeah, that's my guess. my guess is when they heard that Fraiser was missing that the Frocklages reported about the hitchhikier and it's likely that (if the car was reported as missing too) that the Olsen's reported what they saw after that.

yeah true, my question is how did this guy not get noticed while setting the car on fire???

that's my guess too, i think he likely burned the car, walked a bit, then hitched another ride out of town or home. i just wonder who the next person that picked him up was.

I don't think the Olsens were lucky. He didn't really have any reason to kill them even if he did know about the gun case he had access to in that house. He likely killed Phillip just for his ID documents and money (he did pull out two wallets), and to possibly get to his destination when he wanted to. He didn't have a need to kill them because he didn't give any clue that he wasn't who he said he was until he began behaving secretly and by that time, he would quickly be back on the road.

The segment didn't say anything distinct about the location of where the car was found, just that it was a car wash. If the car wash was an abandoned or closed one then he might have been able to set it on fire without anyone noticing but we don't know those details.

I don't think the Olsens were lucky. He didn't really have any reason to kill them even if he did know about the gun case he had access to in that house. He likely killed Phillip just for his ID documents and money (he did pull out two wallets), and to possibly get to his destination when he wanted to.

Yeah, there was no motive there. The Olsons had done nothing but help him, and of course their willingness to do so is rooted in a level of trust. He had more far more to gain by leaving them unharmed, and he maybe even felt some gratitude towards them. Who knows.

Another thing. The investigators and/or Phillip's parents should have done a special search for his possessions. Remember, his body was found just 70 miles north of the Olsons' home. Chances are, the killer dumped his possessions after killing Phillip so 70 miles of road is a fairly small area to search. His parents seemed to know what he took with him on the trip so they would know what to look for (clothing of his, books, maybe a photo album, etc). They could have searched any gas stations, motels, donation shops, cafes, etc along that stretch of highway.

I don't think the Olsens were lucky. He didn't really have any reason to kill them even if he did know about the gun case he had access to in that house. He likely killed Phillip just for his ID documents and money (he did pull out two wallets), and to possibly get to his destination when he wanted to. He didn't have a need to kill them because he didn't give any clue that he wasn't who he said he was until he began behaving secretly and by that time, he would quickly be back on the road.
he didnt have much of a reason to kill Frasier either unless he said something incriminating to him like a crime he committed. if he killed for money, why not kill for the Olsen's money??? i also wonder about the other person who dropped him off, i wonder why he didnt kill that guy. it was like Frasier was the guy he wanted to kill, the perfect guy to steal money and ID from.

he didnt have much of a reason to kill Frasier either unless he said something incriminating to him like a crime he committed. if he killed for money, why not kill for the Olsen's money??? i also wonder about the other person who dropped him off, i wonder why he didnt kill that guy. it was like Frasier was the guy he wanted to kill, the perfect guy to steal money and ID from.

I'd say he definitely premeditated murdering someone. He's probably either killed before, or seriously hurt someone before as indicated by his seemingly calm attitude despite also being secretive. He also didn't appear to be on drugs, alcohol or nicotine which is common among murderers if they feel any stress afterwards. I'd say stealing ID seems like the best possible motive. Since he was trying to establish himself as Phillip while at with the Olsens, he was probably doing it to possibly throw off the authorities by making it harder to track Phillip's movements down the countryside. He was probably headed for Seattle just like Phillip and if he was already on the run from the authorities, using someone else's ID would be an ideal way to cross both providence lines and the American border.

Maybe the trucker who dropped him off at the cafe had an accomplice with him, which made killing more than one person a risk for the hitchhiker. So he came from the north, trekking across the Cassiar highway in search of an ideal victim. Someone alone, traveling by car, and maybe around the same age.

I would like to re watch this segment again, and I can't find it on the forbidden site. Does anyone know if the title is something other than phillip fraser on the forbidden site?

I would like to re watch this segment again, and I can't find it on the forbidden site. Does anyone know if the title is something other than phillip fraser on the forbidden site?

Google - Philip Frazier Part 1 UM

Google - Philip Frazier Part 1 UM
Found it, thanks! I guess its Frazier not Fraser on the site. But it's really Fraser...

I'd say he definitely premeditated murdering someone. He's probably either killed before, or seriously hurt someone before as indicated by his seemingly calm attitude despite also being secretive. I'd say stealing ID seems like the best possible motive. Since he was trying to establish himself as Phillip while at with the Olsens, he was probably doing it to possibly throw off the authorities by making it harder to track Phillip's movements down the countryside. He was probably headed for Seattle just like Phillip and if he was already on the run from the authorities, using someone else's ID would be an ideal way to cross both providence lines and the American border.

Maybe the trucker who dropped him off at the cafe had an accomplice with him, which made killing more than one person a risk for the hitchhiker. So he came from the north, trekking across the Cassiar highway in search of an ideal victim. Someone alone, traveling by car, and maybe around the same age.
ok, i read all your points and they DO make sense, especially the last lines, BUT in my book stealing the ID is risky, ESPECIALLY if he's still using it today because someone will watch this segment and be like, yeah nice try. As for killing someone or hurting someone before, yeah it sounds as if he did do this before. he seemed too calm.

ok, i read all your points and they DO make sense, especially the last lines, BUT in my book stealing the ID is risky, ESPECIALLY if he's still using it today because someone will watch this segment and be like, yeah nice try. As for killing someone or hurting someone before, yeah it sounds as if he did do this before. he seemed too calm.

I figure he only wanted to use the ID once, and for the purpose of getting to wherever his ultimate destination was. He would probably know that it would be too risky to use it in the long term.

I figure he only wanted to use the ID once, and for the purpose of getting to wherever his ultimate destination was. He would probably know that it would be too risky to use it in the long term.
yeah, if he used it long term, he would be in jail right now. people would know that Phil Fraser is dead and that they have a stolen ID here. my guess is that he likely used it to get money, then when he heard he was missing on the news, quit on using the ID. he is likely in another city or state or country (Canada) using another name and being a more model citizen and that is likely why they havent found him.

just watched this one... WEIRD

I think there is a probability that the drifter is Michael Wayne Mcgray

I think there is a probability that the drifter is Michael Wayne Mcgray

I think that theory makes the most sense. From his pictures, he appears to fit the drifter's age and description. Based on what the Frocklages and Olsons described about him, I would say the man who killed Phillip either killed before or inflicted serious harm on others before, as evidenced by his seemingly calm demeanor when he was picked up by the Olsons.

The similarities between this case and Michael Wayne McGray is almost frighteningly believable.

I think that theory makes the most sense. From his pictures, he appears to fit the drifter's age and description. Based on what the Frocklages and Olsons described about him, I would say the man who killed Phillip either killed before or inflicted serious harm on others before, as evidenced by his seemingly calm demeanor when he was picked up by the Olsons.
i agree with you here and he does look like the composit and i agree i think he has killed before, he seemed WAY too calm.

CD who is your avatar? I know who but I can't place the name

If u look up this guy yall are blaming, it says hes confessed to 16 murders but only convicted of 4 or 5. Hmmm....

One of the things I learned from this episode and that applies in a few others is how important it is to trust first impressions/intuitive information about a person. There are so many episodes where the parents say something like, "I had a feeling" or "I didn't trust him"....or "She knew he was going to kill her one day..."

The mother and daughter that ran the restaurant where the killer came in with his backpack, knew something was wrong with him immediately, enough so that the older woman refused to leave the younger woman alone, fearing they had trouble on their hands. If it was that clear to both of them this guy was trouble, it was probably clear to Philip also.

If we can believe the reenactment, he even put the guy off, saying he couldn't help him. Then he made a fatal mistake, which the woman behind the counter caught and commented on, he didn't listen to his intuition but probably started thinking, "This guy is probably fine, he is stranded and I am going the way he is, it's a shame to leave him out here..." ignoring the part of him that didn't want to give the guy a ride in the first place. Again, if we can believe the reenactment is based on fact, he didn't even let the guy in the front seat to ride together, but had him get in the back. Probably not the best thing to do for someone who can pull out a knife or gun from behind. When Phillip realized he had a problem on his hands it was too late. I definitely wouldn't have wanted to look in the rear-view mirror and see that face making eye contact. I think the fact that he was studying to be a doctor made it worse in some ways because he is in a profession to help people, and he probably gave the man the benefit of the doubt. I wish he had walked into that restaurant and that maybe one of the women could have warned him with her eyes or shook her head in the killer's direction. He might be alive today.

One of the things I learned from this episode and that applies in a few others is how important it is to trust first impressions/intuitive information about a person. There are so many episodes where the parents say something like, "I had a feeling" or "I didn't trust him"....or "She knew he was going to kill her one day..."

The mother and daughter that ran the restaurant where the killer came in with his backpack, knew something was wrong with him immediately, enough so that the older woman refused to leave the younger woman alone, fearing they had trouble on their hands. If it was that clear to both of them this guy was trouble, it was probably clear to Philip also.

If we can believe the reenactment, he even put the guy off, saying he couldn't help him. Then he made a fatal mistake, which the woman behind the counter caught and commented on, he didn't listen to his intuition but probably started thinking, "This guy is probably fine, he is stranded and I am going the way he is, it's a shame to leave him out here..." ignoring the part of him that didn't want to give the guy a ride in the first place. Again, if we can believe the reenactment is based on fact, he didn't even let the guy in the front seat to ride together, but had him get in the back. Probably not the best thing to do for someone who can pull out a knife or gun from behind. When Phillip realized he had a problem on his hands it was too late. I definitely wouldn't have wanted to look in the rear-view mirror and see that face making eye contact. I think the fact that he was studying to be a doctor made it worse in some ways because he is in a profession to help people, and he probably gave the man the benefit of the doubt. I wish he had walked into that restaurant and that maybe one of the women could have warned him with her eyes or shook her head in the killer's direction. He might be alive today.

I always thought there could have been a number of ways he could have avoided the hitchhiker. I remember how he lost a couple days of travel to car trouble before he even reached the border checkpoint on the Alaska-Yukon border but came through with two handguns. I've heard that with a permit, Americans can transport firearms through Canada if they are traveling between Alaska and the Continental States; maybe Phillip was given the option to turn around and send the guns home but he declined since he was already behind schedule so he decided to hand them over and get back on track.

Personally, whenever I travel on long road trips by myself, I always make sure I stop in areas with multiple businesses/gas stations in the immediate vicinity for the purpose of avoiding such situations. I've also got into the habit of giving hitchhikers/hoodlums the cold shoulder treatment; one reason is because I see a lot of them with booze or cigarettes and I'm like; you can afford lung-blackening leaves, but not sandwiches? Hello, what do you think I am? You always have to be careful whenever you come across strangers in those kind of situations.

Phillip was probably searching for a map, music CD or other travel supply in his car and/or stopped to stretch his legs/use a restroom when he came across the killer. I think he was killed a few hours later when he stopped again for whatever reason and the killer strangled or slashed him dead. He might have gotten a bad feeling about his passenger some point along that lonely stretch of highway and maybe tried to get rid of him but was too late to save himself.

I always thought there could have been a number of ways he could have avoided the hitchhiker. I remember how he lost a couple days of travel to car trouble before he even reached the border checkpoint on the Alaska-Yukon border but came through with two handguns. I've heard that with a permit, Americans can transport firearms through Canada if they are traveling between Alaska and the Continental States; maybe Phillip was given the option to turn around and send the guns home but he declined since he was already behind schedule so he decided to hand them over and get back on track.

Personally, whenever I travel on long road trips by myself, I always make sure I stop in areas with multiple businesses/gas stations in the immediate vicinity for the purpose of avoiding such situations. I've also got into the habit of giving hitchhikers/hoodlums the cold shoulder treatment; one reason is because I see a lot of them with booze or cigarettes and I'm like; you can afford lung-blackening leaves, but not sandwiches? Hello, what do you think I am? You always have to be careful whenever you come across strangers in those kind of situations.

Phillip was probably searching for a map, music CD or other travel supply in his car and/or stopped to stretch his legs/use a restroom when he came across the killer. I think he was killed a few hours later when he stopped again for whatever reason and the killer strangled or slashed him dead. He might have gotten a bad feeling about his passenger some point along that lonely stretch of highway and maybe tried to get rid of him but was too late to save himself.

Zack, you make a lot of good points here. I am in a relationship with a European and we talk all the time about how much he hitchhiked as a teen, he traveled through Germany one summer hitchhiking the whole way. His brother, in this fifties, sometimes still hitches through England with his teen-age son. As an America, I'm horrified by these stories. I'm not necessarily proud of it, but I've never hitchhiked once in my entire life - I accepted a ride home from a stranger in a bar in my early twenties and I realized that was a mistake, nothing happened, but it was still more of a chance than I wanted to take - as the hitcher or the driver. I guess in America hitchhiking has a whole different reputation. And being a guy is one thing, but I've never understood women hitching alone, or even together. If I were a woman, I don't think I could get in a car with a man unless I was armed or had a knife.

I think that Philip probably figured he could handle himself. You are probably right, they had stopped and that's when the guy killed him. If I was threatened in a car, I think I would jump out and take my chances, leaving the car moving with them in the back seat, than to risk because taken to another location. Of course, it's easy to say what you would do in a situation like this. I just feel it was scary that the woman in the restaurant said, "He's going to regret that decision for the rest of his life."

The mother and daughter that ran the restaurant where the killer came in with his backpack, knew something was wrong with him immediately, enough so that the older woman refused to leave the younger woman alone, fearing they had trouble on their hands. If it was that clear to both of them this guy was trouble, it was probably clear to Philip also.

If we can believe the reenactment, he even put the guy off, saying he couldn't help him. Then he made a fatal mistake, which the woman behind the counter caught and commented on, he didn't listen to his intuition but probably started thinking, "This guy is probably fine, he is stranded and I am going the way he is, it's a shame to leave him out here..." ignoring the part of him that didn't want to give the guy a ride in the first place.
yeah and it bites as he died trying to help the guy out. the killer was clearly after stealing his money and identity. i dont think he's using Phil's id anymore (that would be dangerous), but i do think he's somewhere under another name.

The fat bastard.

yeah and it bites as he died trying to help the guy out. the killer was clearly after stealing his money and identity. i dont think he's using Phil's id anymore (that would be dangerous), but i do think he's somewhere under another name.

Hopefully whoever did this is in jail (or dead) for an unrelated crime.

The fat bastard.


You are not funny

I was always confused by the way they staged the reenactment of this. Ms. Frocklage, the diner owner, tells us that Philip pulled out as though he had second thoughts, and let the hitcher in. She then relates her daughter Tina's comment about Frazier regretting this, which implies that he did indeed "let" the hitcher in willingly. But the first time I viewed this segment, I got the strong indication from the reenactment that the hitcher basically forced his way into the moving car. Upon viewing this again the other day, I still feel that that is how it comes across on the screen. I thought maybe UM left it open ended because the details are not known for certain? However, reading through this thread, no one else has brought this up, so I guess I have to accept that my eyes are misleading me!

I was always confused by the way they staged the reenactment of this. Ms. Frocklage, the diner owner, tells us that Philip pulled out as though he had second thoughts, and let the hitcher in. She then relates her daughter Tina's comment about Frazier regretting this, which implies that he did indeed "let" the hitcher in willingly. But the first time I viewed this segment, I got the strong indication from the reenactment that the hitcher basically forced his way into the moving car. Upon viewing this again the other day, I still feel that that is how it comes across on the screen. I thought maybe UM left it open ended because the details are not known for certain? However, reading through this thread, no one else has brought this up, so I guess I have to accept that my eyes are misleading me!

Maybe the sequence of how the hitchhiker ended up getting into the passenger seat of Phillip's car as shown in the segment is a very rough reenactment. Perhaps Ms. Frocklage was unable to recall exactly how it happened because it happened so quickly and she couldn't quite make it out; but she could tell the man got into the car and knew for sure that Phillip was gonna regret it.

@someofshane: actually, I brought up this very subject on one of the other threads on this case. it's post #19 here:

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=165219&page=2&highlight=fraser

Thanks! Regardless of what actually happened, I'm glad that someone else interpreted the reenactment in the same way I did.

The fat bastard.

He was a vile human being.

Rewatching this case and reading this thread again.

Has anyone ever contacted the authorities about Michael Wayne McGray and how he probably was the killer? Seriously.

Does anyone know if McGray was in Alaska/Yukon/British Columbia in June 1988?

Has the possibility ever been mentioned that Phillip might have been a victim of the so-called "Highway of Tears"? The murder did occur somewhere around Prince George, BC as I understand. Highway 16 in BC has been the subject of many disappearances since the 1970s.

The majority of the victims have been young women. However, it is not un-reasonable to suspect that perhaps Phillip's disappearance and murder could be linked to others. An earlier poster mentioned Michael Wayne McGray. I would also like to posit Bobby Jack Fowler.

After recently viewing the 48 Hours Documentary about the "Highway of Tears", I was struck by just how many people have vanished in such a relatively small geographic region. Authorities have always suggested that there were multiple perpetrators; focusing on the fact that there are a number of drifters and transients hitchhiking along that stretch of road. Sounds like this case a little?

This is one of those cases that I feel like is solvable with the right media attention. Perhaps it if was framed within the context of being a "Highway of Tears" murder, it might bring new attention to it?

I was actually just thinking about the Highway of Tears possibility; I also watched the 48 Hours episode about it. I believe it's possible Phillip could have been another victim of the HoT; but not necessarily connected to any of the other murders/disappearances that have occurred in previous years along that highway. Speaking of which, I also believe the HoT victims were done by numerous perps instead of a single one.

I would say bringing Phillip Fraser into that context would bring new attention to the case. One reason is because the HoT victims only seem to be shown as female; I can't find any male victims being put into the same context. Serial killers usually pick victims of a single gender, maybe that could also be a reason, which produces the theory of the work of a single killer. I can't think of any who deviate from this theory except possibly the Cleveland Torso murder. Any other notable serial killers with this pattern of victim selection?

I wish there was more information about this case. I'm pretty sure I saw the original airing of this episode and was upset with it back then.

We know literally nothing of this killer except he used Canadian cash and he was overweight.

What about the truck that dropped this guy off at the rest stop/restaurant??

This guy is a complete ghost.

Damnit, I want answers.

Hopefully whoever did this is in jail (or dead) for an unrelated crime.
hopefully, but I think (if he were in jail) that it would've been found out that he was the guy who killed Fraser or they would at least investigate it. if he's passed on then there's no way of knowing. like I said earlier, my guess is either 1) he's dead.....2) he's living under another name or 3) he may have went back to where he's from and they may not know a thing about what he did.

I think there is a probability that the drifter is Michael Wayne Mcgray

One of my friends who used to post on here frequently believes the same thing. He did a substantial amount of research on it... I think both he and you are on to something.

I don't think Fraser's killer is Michael Wayne McGray. McGray's killings are said to have begun in 1985. Fraser's killing happened in 1983. McGray would have been 18 at the time, and eyewitnesses placed him in his early 20s.

EDIT: His friend says the killing happened in '83. Others who've posted say the killing happened in '88.

The segment said June 14th, 1988.

The segment said June 14th, 1988.

I know that, but his friend said this happened in '83. So either he's right, or UM is right. I would place my bets on UM. If this murder happened in '88, then he's a probable suspect. If this murder happened in '83, then he's not a probable suspect.

I had posted this in the prior thread and it remains valid. The killer's movements are interesting, to say the least:

I did a little research online and the timeline and maps of the area really make me wonder about the killer's comings and goings. Philip left Anchorage on Highway One, crossed the border, and stayed on Highway One through the Yukon until the turn-off for the Cassiar Highway. He obviously had to stop a couple times, at least, for gas, and for some rest.

He arrived at the 40 Mile Flats Cafe, just north of Iskut, BC (MP 188.5) on June 18th. The killer had been dropped off at the same location shortly beforehand. There's essentially only one way into/out of 40 Mile Flats; given that the killer wanted to go south, he almost certainly came from the north; I suspect he had been staying at one of the campgrounds along the highway and hitched a ride to the cafe - I wonder if RCMP canvassed along the Highway? I do find it surprising that no-one else came forward who had given the killer a ride beforehand; he would have had to hitch along the Cassiar and/or Highway One a couple of days, at least; if we presume the Canadian money in his pocket means he was Canadian, you'd suspect he started his journey somewhere in Yukon - not exactly the kind of place a person can disappear (insofar as there just aren't many people there).

Philip and the killer leave 40 mile flats together; the killer is next seen about 8 hours later, 200 miles south on the Cassiar Highway in the vicinity of Derrick Lake; we don't know how long the killer was waiting there, but since it only takes about four hours or so to drive between these two locations, that leaves a significant amount of time unaccounted for. We are told Philip's body was found about 70 miles from the Olson's house - presuming the body was north of the house, the killer dumped it in roughly the same area as Olson found him - the car trouble he had may had to do with him going onto rough roads to dump the body, perhaps.

The killer left the Olsons house in Kitwanga, BC on the morning of the 19th; the car was found burned out in Prince George, BC 12 hours later. Again, we can track the route fairly easily - the killer took the Cassiar Highway to the end of the line, then went east on the Yellowhead Highway to Prince George. Total driving time would be about six hours, so once again, the killer had plenty of time unaccounted for before the discovery.

The trail ends in Prince George. Given that all of Philip's property was taken, it seems inconceivable the killer didn't have further onward transportation - we don't know how much stuff Philip had, of course, but it would seem more then what could be carried - which suggests to me that the killer could have rented a car/had a car waiting for him/stole a car in Prince George.

Prince George is the largest city in Northern BC and a busy transportation hub, well-connected to the rest of Canada and the US.

I don't know the full scope of the RCMP investigation, of course, but it seems that the certain route, the limited population, and the forensic clues (at the Olson's house, if no-where else) should have led to a better idea of where the killer had been and who he might be.

Read more: http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=165219&page=3&highlight=fraser#ixzz2VZrlp4TQ

Yeah, there was no motive there. The Olsons had done nothing but help him, and of course their willingness to do so is rooted in a level of trust. He had more far more to gain by leaving them unharmed, and he maybe even felt some gratitude towards them. Who knows.

Thats a very interesting point Meg ! A thought that crossed my mind is that when Phillip initially tried to drive away from the guy maybe he took it badly and that set him off in the same way some killers are set off by rejection and then he decided Phillip had to pay for that , I also think that during the drive maybe Phillip gave the guy too many details about himself like money hence the killer targeted him , considering that they were in a fairly remote area he the killer had the motive , means and opportunity , add to that anger from Phillip nearly leaving him ......... just a thought

he didnt have much of a reason to kill Frasier either unless he said something incriminating to him like a crime he committed. if he killed for money, why not kill for the Olsen's money??? i also wonder about the other person who dropped him off, i wonder why he didnt kill that guy. it was like Frasier was the guy he wanted to kill, the perfect guy to steal money and ID from.


I think if Phillip had told the killer he was from Alaska then he would be a better victim to kill because it would have taken some time for him to be reported as missing by his parents by which time the killer would have long moved on whereas if he killed a local person a faster response from local cops would have led to him being possibly apprehended ...

For some reason I was reminded of this interesting case this weekend and re-researched it. I think many of the theories on this thread read a lot into the meagre evidence we have and interpret some of it in ways that
To get by car, hitching or even on foot from Alaska to the US or even to the more settled parts of Canada there were and still are only two ways to go- the Alaska Highway in the east and the Cassiar Highway in the west. The Cassier provides a shorter route to Vancouver and Seattle. This means both routes probably have a certain amount of routine traffic, probably with a much higher level in the summer. Still, by city standards, the traffic is probably relatively sparse. Fraser was driving in a car which was not in the best of shape. Given the lack of repair facilities on the way maybe this was his version of "into the wild." Unless he was a freshman at the college, he had probably made the trip before, making him less apprehensive. Since roadside stops could be hundreds of miles apart, they must have appeared as oases to travelers and when approaching each, the driver had to decide whether to stop or not.
The killer was dropped off by a truck that kept going. Truckers have large fuel tanks and work on schedules. The killer may have wanted to stop to get food but the driver wanted to keep going. Maybe he wasn't going where the killer wanted to anyway. The trucker didn't comply with the killer's wishes but may have seen too formidible to force him to. We don't know except the killer was dropped off. After he stopped, he may have realized how hard it was going to be to get a ride or he picked Fraser because he was alone, skinny and
As for the ladies at the restaurant, their comments about the creepy guy need to put in context. By most people's standards, they must have seen a lot of creepy guys. This one only sticks out in retrospect. I doubt at the time they were concerned.
All we know about the killer at this point is that he took the opportunity to kill someone. Did he kill before or later? We don't know. all we know was that he was sociopathic enough to kill this time. The circumstances are unknown.
The Cassiar is spooky because of its remoreness. Someone travelling along it in June 2000 at the (google Meziadan Junction) felt he was chased at night in the very strech of road where Fraser was murdered. And the same traveler saw a current missing poster at a roadstop located between 40 Mile Flats and the Olsons.
The killer ended up in Fort George, the big city for northern BC. Was he just passing through or was he from there? We do not know. Was he a Nova Scotian serial killer who seemed to prey only in large cities of the east? Probably not. The later Highway of Tears case shows that at least one killer lived locally. That case, to me, is, perhaps, the serious connections could be looked at but it, too, is unsolved.
Burning the car at the car wash-- why did no one see anything? It was probably done when the car wash was closed or unattended. Why did he do it? We do not know. Maybe he just wanted to get rid or it. Maybe he was a pyro too. Maybe there was blood in it (probably not given his desire to sell it). Maybe it broke down and got him mad.
Anyway, interesting case that will probably not get solved.

I think if Phillip had told the killer he was from Alaska then he would be a better victim to kill because it would have taken some time for him to be reported as missing by his parents by which time the killer would have long moved on whereas if he killed a local person a faster response from local cops would have led to him being possibly apprehended ...


This is a good point. I think one of the reasons the killer murdered Fraser was because he was just passing through and would not be missed right away.

I doubt the trucker was even aware of the crime as he drove away and the situation didn't become apparent until weeks later and would probably not be prominent whenever he returned to the area, if he did. Ice Road Truckers has taught us that such trucks are real busy in the summer months.

Here are some news accounts:

Daily Sitka Sentinel, Sitka, Alaska, Tuesday, June 20,1989, Page 5

Canadians Trace Movements Of Murdered Anchorage Man

WHITEHORSE, Yukon Territory (AP) -- The Royal Canadian Mounted Police has traced the movements of an Alaska man who was murdered last summer near Dease Lake, British Columbia, said Cpl. Craig Gates. But the investigation has not turned up any clues as to who killed Phillip Fraser, 23, of Anchorage last June, Gates said. Police said Fraser travelled the Alaska Highway to Upper Liard in the Yukon, continuing down Highway 37, the Stewart-Cassiar Highway. He left Anchorage on June 14 on his way to Olympia, Wash. Fraser was last seen at Forty Mile Flats, south of Dease Lake in northwestern British Columbia, on June 17 or 18 with a male hitchhiker. "We talked to an awful lot of people, but we did not have any success in identifying the hitchhiker," Gates said. Fraser's body was found by tourists in a gravel pit July 27 about 30 miles east of Stewart, British Columbia. Anyone with information should contact the Whitehorse RCMP detachment, Gates said.

Page 14, Sitka Daily Sentinel, Sitka, Alaska, Friday, December 16,1988

Police Hunt for Clues in Killing PRINCE GEORGE, British Columbia (AP) --

Police are still searching for clues to the murder of an American whose car was found burning in a car wash last June in this central British Columbia city. Tourists found the body of Phillip Fraser, 23, of Anchorage, in a gravel pit July 27 about 30 miles east of Stewart near the Alaska border. Police said he had been shot with a pistol. Since Fraser's car was found burning June 19, police have followed up more than 500 tips, RCMP Cpl. Dwight Damann said Wednesday. RCMP said Fraser had travelled the Alaska Highway to the Upper Liard in the Yukon, continuing down Highway 37, the Stewart-Cassiar Highway. He left Anchorage on June 14 on his way to Olympia, Wash., where he planned to enroll in college.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-DVcvIS_mqZM/VHSn8enNpkI/AAAAAAAAAOQ/Muk6CTdyQGk/w506-h608/Philip%2BFraser%2Bcase.jpg

Thanks for the informative posts JJMCGR. I am glad someone still cares about this case. His family deserves answers.

Had to bump this. I just watched this case last night on my DVR. That sketch was creeeeeepy :eek: . I hadn't seen it in so long I had forgotten just how creepy. I think the fact he originally had Canadian money says he is Canadian.

The man who murdered Philip Fraser is just a hitchhiker who has no known family (possibly) someone knows him, but they are not looking for him, whoever the hitchhiker was is just a drifter who may go from state to state, I highly doubt that he's even living in Canada or Seattle anymore, it's possible he may be someplace else, but without a positive image of him, it would be hard to identify him--wherever he is, he could most likely be dead or who knows he could be married. I feel sad for Philip, sucks that life has to end that way for the unfortunate. The hitchhiker murdered Philip in cold blood to obtain his car and to get across the border, but how on earth did the border patrol not see that he was not the man on the ID? did the hitchhiker look a bit like Philip? whatever the reasons for what happen with the overall thing, it didn't end very nicely. Another theory is that Philip and the hitchhiker could have gotten into a bad argument or else the hitchhiker threatened Philip and told him to pull off into the wooded area to kill Philip. it could have went down any kind of way. as a criminal justice student, I would have to have more details about this case, an hear more about the hitchhiker, but there aren't many leads regarding this case--and from the looks of it, the case looks like it has automatically closed; they will never find Philip's killer unless the killer comes forth himself. very bad, bad indeed. smh.

Thats a very interesting point Meg ! A thought that crossed my mind is that when Phillip initially tried to drive away from the guy maybe he took it badly and that set him off in the same way some killers are set off by rejection and then he decided Phillip had to pay for that , I also think that during the drive maybe Phillip gave the guy too many details about himself like money hence the killer targeted him , considering that they were in a fairly remote area he the killer had the motive , means and opportunity , add to that anger from Phillip nearly leaving him ......... just a thought

I think this is exactly what happened.

Plus, let's not forget that the killer told those people who helped him, that he had parents that were physicians, which Phillip had.

Did anyone ever wonder how in the heck law enforcement was able to piece this all together? The mother/daughter that ran the 40 Mile Flat Café were over four hours away from the couple who picked up the hitchhiker. I mean, obviously, it was good police work but with all the fake "eyewitness accounts" that law enforcement gets on all kinds of stories, I thought it was pretty cool that they were able to weed through the fake ones in this story and connect the dots correctly.

You confused me. I don't think the killer used Phillips car to go over the border and enter a new area or country. He didn't use the car to enter America by Seattle because by that time the car was on fire and done with. I guess you thought maybe the killer took his American car and entered Alaska?

I doubt that because he was Canadian and it would look suspicious driving an American's USA car into another country.

I doubt the killer entered Alaska at all because Alaska definitely would have missing posters of the murdered kid as well as the killer's mug shot. Plus, u can tell the killer was heading south because he stayed overnight at that couple's house which was like 3 hours south of the crime or flat café.

I too wonder why the police have not been able to track down the trucker who dropped off the killer. Maybe they did and he didn't have any good info or perhaps like the other poster on here said - the driver is so busy and was not from that area or never heard of the crime. We fans have always been curious on how UM knew that the killer was familiar with Toronto and Seattle area! Maybe police got this information from the man who dropped the killer off at the café. Or maybe they got the information from the couple he stayed with, but they didn't say anything on TV perhaps to avoid giving away clues to public. The killer talked to the couple since he was stuck with them and they helped him so I am thinking he told them he is from Toronto and used to live in Seattle for a while? I doubt the killer talked at all to the mom and daughter waitress combo since they got bad vibes from him. only thing he said was what he wanted to eat and thank you as we saw him saying on the UM segment on his way out.

One thing with these serial killers or one time killers is timing. It is just a spur of the moment and pooof someone is gone. Phillip lost a day or two due to car problems before arriving at the café. Now if he didn't have car problems then he never'd die.

Unfortunately none of us can predict what will happen. I have heard true stories of murder on FF and UM and AMW where a young lady decides just at that moment to get something to drink down the street from her house and she gets kidnapped and killed. Phil probably didn't expect car problems, unfortunately those messed up his timing and he later ran into a killer.

remember the killer killed phillip with a gun. It was not phillip's gun because he got his taken away when entering Canada from Alaska. So it didn't really matter if there were guns in the basement where he slept since he had a gun of his own.

But its odd they had guns down there. did they say they were loaded or were there bullets in basement? if I were the man I would lie to the killer upon entering the house and say to stay upstairs with his wife and watch tv while he goes downstairs in the basement to "clean up", but really he is just taking all the guns down and unloading all the bullets and hiding everything snug in another part of the basement under a bunch of stuff. Sure they didn't know he was a killer, but he was a stranger!

I doubt that. Alaska probably has 1 good sized university that offers lots of pre-med classes. I think Phillip wanted to get away from Alaska to study college and then medical school in the '48 states' since its a brand new area to him. Kind of like us down here - it would be amazing to live in Alaska for a few years for college and get away from our area.

Philip picked a great state in WA state its so nice and beautiful. Sorry he couldn't get there. I can see him picking that state since its closer to Alaska compared to Florida or New York. The good states would be WA, Oregon, California, Arizona, Utah, Florida, Maine, and west half of Montana.

bad states: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Texas, Nevada, N and S Dakota, and Nebraska.

I doubt that. Alaska probably has 1 good sized university that offers lots of pre-med classes. I think Phillip wanted to get away from Alaska to study college and then medical school in the '48 states' since its a brand new area to him. Kind of like us down here - it would be amazing to live in Alaska for a few years for college and get away from our area.

Philip picked a great state in WA state its so nice and beautiful. Sorry he couldn't get there. I can see him picking that state since its closer to Alaska compared to Florida or New York. The good states would be WA, Oregon, California, Arizona, Utah, Florida, Maine, and west half of Montana.

bad states: Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Texas, Nevada, N and S Dakota, and Nebraska.

Not trying to tell you what to do, but you need to start quoting people when you're responding to certain statements made on the board. I have no clue who you are talking to with your last three posts because you didn't quote anyone. You do appear to be directly responding to someone's statements though.

Not trying to tell you what to do, but you need to start quoting people when you're responding to certain statements made on the board. I have no clue who you are talking to with your last three posts because you didn't quote anyone. You do appear to be directly responding to someone's statements though.

Thanks! I forgot about that. I used to include quotes and thought it looked weird a while later when none appeared. Too bad this site just automatically included them in there all the time instead of picking between 2 reply icons. I thought the quote icon was for something else, like inserting another quote from another site.

I new Phillip since the time when we were in Kindergarten together in Anchorage Alaska. He wouldn't hurt a fly, and probably couldn't hurt a fly either as he was very skinny and non athletic type of person. I would also describe him as some what gullible and a person who might be easy to take advantage of.

To answer some of the previous questions I noticed while reading through this post. This tragic event happened way back in 1983, his body was found and it had bullet holes. As far as I know the case has not been solved and after 27 years it might not ever be.

I often think of Phillip. I remember his birthday and I usually do a private message and tribute to him on that day each year.

As far as the scumbag who did this I couldn't think of a punishment despicable enough and I have a pretty good imagination, long and painful would be necessary elements though.

Im pretty sure a skinny person can kill a tiny fly lol. Also if someone is skinny it usually is genetics and just how they were born. I noticed a lot of skinny kids who later got kind of fat once they reached upper 20s or early 30s. But the key here is attitude and confidence. If someone is raised in a soft way (gullible) (like my younger brother was) then they pay for it in the future when they meet a nice person who is really not nice and is a scam artist or killer. Plus naïve people, especially younger ones, are less likely to speak their mind and defend their thoughts or views.

I'd say no to the hitchhiker even if I felt guilty about it. Now my younger brother (who is skinny and gullible) he would be afraid to drive with a stranger, especially a bigger built man. Yet I see my brother giving the guy a ride since he cant say no to anyone.

I have been doing some 'research' online and i couldn't find a 40 miles flat cafe. There is a place called 40 miles flat but when i looked on Google map it was just like a rest stop with trucks and some old looking stuff around? It does seem very isolated though...

I have been doing some 'research' online and i couldn't find a 40 miles flat cafe. There is a place called 40 miles flat but when i looked on Google map it was just like a rest stop with trucks and some old looking stuff around? It does seem very isolated though...

I also searched for it a while back and could not find it, but you have to keep in mind that we are talking about an incident that took place around 30 years ago. There's a good chance that the 40 Miles Flat Café went out of business somewhere along the line.

Im pretty sure a skinny person can kill a tiny fly lol. Also if someone is skinny it usually is genetics and just how they were born. I noticed a lot of skinny kids who later got kind of fat once they reached upper 20s or early 30s. But the key here is attitude and confidence. If someone is raised in a soft way (gullible) (like my younger brother was) then they pay for it in the future when they meet a nice person who is really not nice and is a scam artist or killer. Plus naïve people, especially younger ones, are less likely to speak their mind and defend their thoughts or views.


To quote "The Big Lebowski", what in God's holy name are you blathering about?

Yes you're right. I found Gaye Frocklage and her daughter on Facebook. I really want to MSG them and ask them about it.....

To quote "The Big Lebowski", what in God's holy name are you blathering about?

that's as 'bout as coherent as most of the other things from that poster. ;)

Every damn time I see this segment I hope Phillip just drive away :(

Every damn time I see this segment I hope Phillip just drive away :(

Yep. One of the most eerie segments UM ever did. The part when Phillips drives off and the camera pans up to show the landscape while that scary music plays, gets me every time.

Yep. One of the most eerie segments UM ever did. The part when Phillips drives off and the camera pans up to show the landscape while that scary music plays, gets me every time.

It's literally straight out of a horror movie, where you're watching the TV and you just know something awful is about to happen.

one things i am not sure most americans know is that the RCMP (National Canadian police force) usually have detachments in rural out posts. Yes they are in some cities, but their mandate is to cover the entire country including low population areas or provinces with no provincial police forces like British columbia where he was killed.

Makes me think that the man who killed him might have been Canadian and knew the woods. BC is a vast land and I am not sure a person who is a foreigner who knows nothing about the layout would want to randomly kill someone there.

Plus the RCMP do not issue warnings, its a ticket regardless what they stop you for even if you are a cop. Why steal someones car when you are not insured to drive it, can not provide ownership etc. Seems like a local unstable guy killed him and dumped the car.

I have been doing some 'research' online and i couldn't find a 40 miles flat cafe. There is a place called 40 miles flat but when i looked on Google map it was just like a rest stop with trucks and some old looking stuff around? It does seem very isolated though...

I believe this is from an earlier thread, but here it is:


http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc426/InvestigativeByNature/UMPhotos/40MileFlatsCafe2.jpg

Yep. One of the most eerie segments UM ever did. The part when Phillips drives off and the camera pans up to show the landscape while that scary music plays, gets me every time.


How about when the guy picks the murderer up after he has car trouble and then let's him sleep in his basement where all of his firearms were.

Gives me the chills every time.

How about when the guy picks the murderer up after he has car trouble and then let's him sleep in his basement where all of his firearms were.

Gives me the chills every time.

Its very odd that this guy killed Phillip but then doesn't do a thing to the couple who took him in, even after he was surrounded by a ton of guns. He and Phillip must have gotten into an argument and he really became enraged.

Its very odd that this guy killed Phillip but then doesn't do a thing to the couple who took him in, even after he was surrounded by a ton of guns. He and Phillip must have gotten into an argument and he really became enraged.


I'm guessing the murderer wanted Phillip to take him somewhere Phillip wasn't going and then killed him. Although the 2 women that worked at the restaurant seemed scared at his odd behavior.

I think you may be right.

Just read this comment at Unsolved.com:

"I just saw this episode on tv and the three drawings of that hitchhiker LOOKS like my brother who is on America's most wanted and still being hunted for.... I believe it is him. his name is howard james nodine the 3rd 3rd belive hitchhicker"

He does look like the composite sketch
https://web.archive.org/web/20150503052111/http://www.usmarshals.gov/wanted/major-cases/nodine.jpg

Nodine was in prison from 82-93. Fraser was killed in 88, so that puts him out of the time window. The resemblance is uncanny though. He's a dead ringer for the sketch.

A lot of good points have been made as to the motive for Philip's murder. What I want to know is if this hitchhiker is a serial killer. Another thing that comes to mind, is if this killer had a personality disorder that made him want to take the identity of someone else (in this case, Philip Fraser), due to dissatisfaction with himself. He may have low self-esteem due to being overweight, unattractive and unsuccessful in life, and felt that stealing the identity of Philip, a younger, attractive, successful guy, would make the killer feel better about himself. It's bothersome to think that this guy may have killed before or since Philip's murder. Hopefully the police can improvise on the original sketches so that someone could possibly identify him.

Has anyone mentioned the possibility of Phillip's killer being Michael Wayne McGray? For those not familiar with him, McGray is a convicted serial killer currently incarcerated in Canada for numerous killings of hitchhikers throughout the 80's and early 90's. His MO certainly fits Phillip's case. He has been convicted of a handful of killings but claims to have killed a dozen more.

Has anyone mentioned the possibility of Phillip's killer being Michael Wayne McGray? For those not familiar with him, McGray is a convicted serial killer currently incarcerated in Canada for numerous killings of hitchhikers throughout the 80's and early 90's. His MO certainly fits Phillip's case. He has been convicted of a handful of killings but claims to have killed a dozen more.

Old pictures of him also fit the description of the Phillip's hitchhiker.

A lot of good points have been made as to the motive for Philip's murder. What I want to know is if this hitchhiker is a serial killer. Another thing that comes to mind, is if this killer had a personality disorder that made him want to take the identity of someone else (in this case, Philip Fraser), due to dissatisfaction with himself. He may have low self-esteem due to being overweight, unattractive and unsuccessful in life, and felt that stealing the identity of Philip, a younger, attractive, successful guy, would make the killer feel better about himself. It's bothersome to think that this guy may have killed before or since Philip's murder. Hopefully the police can improvise on the original sketches so that someone could possibly identify him.

I doubt if he was a serial killer since there was no body trail, and he didn't harm the couple who let him sleep next to their gun rack.

And the theory about him having a personality disorder, and wanting to be Phillip due to being unsatisfied with himself is a terrible one. I don't think a hitchhiker who was probably having a rough time cared about looking sexy, and younger. If anything he killed Phillip for his car, and belongings, that's it. You're looking too hard into this, when the motive is clear cut and simple.

If anything Phillip told him that it was time for him to get out, and the hitchhiker not wanting to have to hitch again killed him, and took his identification incase he needed to prove the stuff was his (ex. showing the old man Phillip's I.D. to trade the car for a plane ticket). Phillip was just an easy target. Younger, underweight, and couldn't fight back. He was in the middle of a nowhere with a dude 2x his size.

It's clear the hitchhiker killed out of necessity (transportation, money), and not a mindless killing. It was mindless, but you get my point. If he was a serial killer, and was hungry for blood then that older couple would've been dead, and had their stuff stolen, which proves he probably killed Phillip out of desperation, and not malice. He showed kindness, and even gave the couple compensation for staying with them. I'm not saying he was a saint, but I don't think he was a serial killer either.

Think about the Dorothy Donovan case. When Charles Holden told the passenger to get out, he was apparently attacked in a fit of rage when Charles told him he couldn't drive him any further. Seems to be the same thing here.

Think about the Dorothy Donovan case. When Charles Holden told the passenger to get out, he was apparently attacked in a fit of rage when Charles told him he couldn't drive him any further. Seems to be the same thing here.


I agree. Plus, if the re-enactment is correct, Phillip initially did not want to give him a ride, so the killer may have already been a little ticked off at him.

I agree. Plus, if the re-enactment is correct, Phillip initially did not want to give him a ride, so the killer may have already been a little ticked off at him.

Exactly. Also, they were in the middle of nowhere, so if Phillip did tell him that he had to get out, then I'm sure the hitchhiker was even more upset because if you're in a desolate area, then another car coming by anytime soon could be slim.

Like you said, Phillip was basically driving with him hanging onto the car, so I'm sure that pissed him off, then if he was told to get out in the middle of nowhere then that was the straw that broke the camels back.

He was desperate for a ride. I'm sure in his mind he had a "I'm not going back out there" train of thought, and killed Phillip in a desperate rage.

I agree. Plus, if the re-enactment is correct, Phillip initially did not want to give him a ride, so the killer may have already been a little ticked off at him.

I think the killer would've still attempted to steal identification or items from Phillip had he simply allowed him to get in from the outset, but I'm not sure he would've killed him under those circumstances.

That, or he simply wanted the car and he felt killing the driver was the best way to get it.

I think the killer would've still attempted to steal identification or items from Phillip had he simply allowed him to get in from the outset, but I'm not sure he would've killed him under those circumstances.

That, or he simply wanted the car and he felt killing the driver was the best way to get it.

I'm sure he would've still have killed him if he let him in without incident. He wanted his car, and that was the only way he was going to get it. Seeing as how Phillip wouldn't let him in, I'm sure he wasn't going to just give up his car without a fight.

You really have to think about this case from the eyes of the hitchhiker. Why bother stealing just his wallet when I'm possibly about to be stranded in the middle of nowhere, when I can take his vehicle and get to a populated place? I'm sure the wallet was an after thought after the car.

From what we know he didn't attempt to steal or kill from any of the other drivers, so why Phillip? Because he was a 100-something pound kid who's car he knew he could've taken. Perhaps the other drivers were more his size and could stand up to him. Phillip couldn't, maybe that's why he was so adamant about getting in. Probably saw Phillip and planned this before he got in.

I doubt if he was a serial killer since there was no body trail, and he didn't harm the couple who let him sleep next to their gun rack.

And the theory about him having a personality disorder, and wanting to be Phillip due to being unsatisfied with himself is a terrible one. I don't think a hitchhiker who was probably having a rough time cared about looking sexy, and younger. If anything he killed Phillip for his car, and belongings, that's it. You're looking too hard into this, when the motive is clear cut and simple.

If anything Phillip told him that it was time for him to get out, and the hitchhiker not wanting to have to hitch again killed him, and took his identification incase he needed to prove the stuff was his (ex. showing the old man Phillip's I.D. to trade the car for a plane ticket). Phillip was just an easy target. Younger, underweight, and couldn't fight back. He was in the middle of a nowhere with a dude 2x his size.

It's clear the hitchhiker killed out of necessity (transportation, money), and not a mindless killing. It was mindless, but you get my point. If he was a serial killer, and was hungry for blood then that older couple would've been dead, and had their stuff stolen, which proves he probably killed Phillip out of desperation, and not malice. He showed kindness, and even gave the couple compensation for staying with them. I'm not saying he was a saint, but I don't think he was a serial killer either.

Think about the Dorothy Donovan case. When Charles Holden told the passenger to get out, he was apparently attacked in a fit of rage when Charles told him he couldn't drive him any further. Seems to be the same thing here.

Even though he didn't leave more than one body on this particular trip of his, it doesn't necessarily mean the hitchhiker wasn't a serial killer. Generally speaking, most of them don't usually pick off their victims in groups or sprees, unlike mass murderers. He didn't really have a reason or desire to harm the Olsons plus he probably figured they could have easily stood up to him. I think the Olsons only mentioned their gun rack AFTER realizing they were housing a possible killer; there's also a chance he might not have even noticed there was a stash of guns nearby.

Here's another speculation that comes to mind about the Michael Wayne McGray theory. According to some media sources, he had been in and out of institutions between 1985 and 1995. Gaye and Tina Frocklage speculated that he seemed like the type that had escaped from a mental hospital or institution.

The hitchiker was probably in search of an ideal victim opportunity: somebody alone, easily overpowered and could offer him 'help' in some sort of way. We also don't know exactly why he was hitchhiking or where is desired destination was.

Even though he didn't leave more than one body on this particular trip of his, it doesn't necessarily mean the hitchhiker wasn't a serial killer. Generally speaking, most of them don't usually pick off their victims in groups or sprees, unlike mass murderers. He didn't really have a reason or desire to harm the Olsons plus he probably figured they could have easily stood up to him. I think the Olsons only mentioned their gun rack AFTER realizing they were housing a possible killer; there's also a chance he might not have even noticed there was a stash of guns nearby.

What I mean't was that he didn't attack any of the other drivers, the Olsons, or the women in the diner, meaning he killed Phillip out of "necessity". You're pretty much just repeating what I said about motive. He had a motive to kill Phillip because he needed his car to get out of the area, where the other people it wouldn't have been as easy to do. I'm sure he noticed the gun rack if he slept near it. I'm pretty sure he cased that entire basement, but he needed to be on the downlow after just committing a murder, so he played nice. This further proves my point of necessity. It wasn't necessary to kill the older couple because they gave him food, and shelter, and they had nothing he needed, proving he killed Phillip because he had something he needed at the moment. Of course that's why they mentioned the gun rack, the point was they had no idea the guy was a murderer because of how nice, and courteous he was, and he even slept next to a gun rack and didn't steal or shoot them, further proving that he was a "nice guy" to them.


Here's another speculation that comes to mind about the Michael Wayne McGray theory. According to some media sources, he had been in and out of institutions between 1985 and 1995. Gaye and Tina Frocklage speculated that he seemed like the type that had escaped from a mental hospital or institution.

That makes me wonder. Gaye, and Tina said he appeared so crazy, and creepy that they were scared out of their minds. However, The Olsons painted a different picture entirely. Now, I am NOT defending this guy what so ever, but I wonder if he came off crazy to them, despite not doing anything, because he had been hitchhiking? That can take a toll, and if you haven't showered or cleaned up in a while, then you can come off as "unhinged" to some, I guess. I mean a big, dirty, unkempt, looking dude in a diner in the middle of nowhere would scare me to, but you have to keep in mind that he probably was slumming it for a while. I don't think he was insane, either. He knew how to switch it up, and come off as a "decent" person to others. Look how he fooled the Olsons.


The hitchiker was probably in search of an ideal victim opportunity: somebody alone, easily overpowered and could offer him 'help' in some sort of way. We also don't know exactly why he was hitchhiking or where is desired destination was.

Again, you're just repeating what I said again. I said this exact same thing about why he killed Phillip and took his car. Good point about why we don't know why he was hitchhiking, I really wonder where he was coming from, and why no one else can come forward despite giving him a ride?

Again, you're just repeating what I said again. I said this exact same thing about why he killed Phillip and took his car. Good point about why we don't know why he was hitchhiking, I really wonder where he was coming from, and why no one else can come forward despite giving him a ride?

He could have killed Phillip both for the necessity of taking his car and whatever thrill/thirst for murder common amongst such sadists. I think it's possible none of the other drivers came forward because either they couldn't be located and/or they didn't necessarily get a 'bad vide' from him unlike the Frocklages and Olsons.

and whatever thrill/thirst for murder common amongst such sadists.

Such sadist? As far as we knew he only killed one person. He didn't kill the women in the diner, the older couple who let him sleepover, and the other driver. If he was such a sadist he would've killed the others. He killed him out of necessity. I don't know where you're going with this odd bloodlust, sadist angle, but it doesn't link up with what we know.

Such sadist? As far as we knew he only killed one person. He didn't kill the women in the diner, the older couple who let him sleepover, and the other driver. If he was such a sadist he would've killed the others. He killed him out of necessity. I don't know where you're going with this odd bloodlust, sadist angle, but it doesn't link up with what we know.

I have to agree with this. There's just no evidence that this hitchhiker was out on a killing spree. It looks a lot more like a simple crime of opportunity.

I have to agree with this. There's just no evidence that this hitchhiker was out on a killing spree. It looks a lot more like a simple crime of opportunity.

The thing is, we cannot say for certain whether or not this murder was pre-meditated. Even if this was all a factor of opportunity for a one-timer, there still had to be some sort of trigger that set him off on a sense of rage and lunacy that caused him to commit this violent act.

The thing is, we cannot say for certain whether or not this murder was pre-meditated. Even if this was all a factor of opportunity for a one-timer, there still had to be some sort of trigger that set him off on a sense of rage and lunacy that caused him to commit this violent act.

What else would the trigger be for him to have killed Phillip? He wanted his car. You can either guess that Phillip had told him to get out and a fight ensued, or he blindsided Phillip when we was least expecting it. I mean I'm not sure if it was rage induced, or he thought if he told Phillip to get out of the car, and drove away with him alive, then Phillip would have went to the police.

What else would the trigger be for him to have killed Phillip? He wanted his car. You can either guess that Phillip had told him to get out and a fight ensued, or he blindsided Phillip when we was least expecting it. I mean I'm not sure if it was rage induced, or he thought if he told Phillip to get out of the car, and drove away with him alive, then Phillip would have went to the police.

It takes a certain level of guts to be willing to commit such an act. If he was increasingly desperate to get to Seattle or wherever else he desired, there had to be something in his background that gave rise to that amount of desparation to go far enough to commit cold-blooded murder.

I've noticed how Phillip's case bears similarities to Dexter Stefonek. The general speculation there seems to be that 'hotjock' was increasingly desperate to get out of the cold area of Bad Route Rest Stop; desparation might have been the case with Phllip's killer as well. He might have actually been more desperate because he was in the middle of the countryside with no other guaranteed way of getting out since there's not much motorist traffic running through that area.

I just watched this episode for the first time. It's sad that they have not been able to catch this guy even after all these years. I feel bad for Fraser's parents. The randomness of the case reminds me of the Blind River rest stop one a bit. Canadian highways are apparently dangerous places.

I just watched this episode for the first time. It's sad that they have not been able to catch this guy even after all these years. I feel bad for Fraser's parents. The randomness of the case reminds me of the Blind River rest stop one a bit. Canadian highways are apparently dangerous places.
But why kill him if the kid picked him up or was he reluctant too cause he pulled a gun on him.

But why kill him if the kid picked him up or was he reluctant too cause he pulled a gun on him.

If you can answer that question, you're in a far better place than I. I have never been able to justify why people kill each other. This case is another great example. I'm willing to bet the farm that Philip would have done whatever was asked of him... yet he was still murdered.

If you can answer that question, you're in a far better place than I. I have never been able to justify why people kill each other. This case is another great example.

I really think this was more of a case of opportunity than anything else. The hitchhiker had Philip's car, wallet, and even tried to fake his identity. I think he wanted what Philip had, and Philip was an easy target. Philip was half his size and weight, and they we're driving in the middle of nowhere, perfect opportunity.

Though, we really don't know what happened. It could've been an argument about Philip telling the hitchhiker to get out, or maybe Philip tried to attack the hitchhiker while he was sleep (remember he didn't want to let him in, I'm sure he was uncomfortable the whole time).

I'm willing to bet the farm that Philip would have done whatever was asked of him... yet he was still murdered.

Keep in mind that if Philip was robbed of his car, and wallet and kept alive, then he would've told police about the suspect. That's the only reason why I think he was killed. If Philip was kept alive, then who knows how long it would've been before he told authorities. With Philip dead, the suspect got away with ample time. Granted, his body wasn't really hidden, I wonder if he left it out in the open so he could be found faster? I mean he had the time to properly hide Philip given the fact they were in the middle of nowhere, and he would've been hard to find if buried in those woods somewhere.

I really think this was more of a case of opportunity than anything else. The hitchhiker had Philip's car, wallet, and even tried to fake his identity. I think he wanted what Philip had, and Philip was an easy target. Philip was half his size and weight, and they we're driving in the middle of nowhere, perfect opportunity.

I agree that it was probably nothing more than a case of opportunity. The killer wanted Phillip's car to get from point A to point B. Or at least relatively close to point B. If he needed to kill in order get the car, so be it. Evil people with no regard for human life exist, unfortunately, and this man is proof of it.

Keep in mind that if Philip was robbed of his car, and wallet and kept alive, then he would've told police about the suspect. That's the only reason why I think he was killed. If Philip was kept alive, then who knows how long it would've been before he told authorities. With Philip dead, the suspect got away with ample time. Granted, his body wasn't really hidden, I wonder if he left it out in the open so he could be found faster? I mean he had the time to properly hide Philip given the fact they were in the middle of nowhere, and he would've been hard to find if buried in those woods somewhere.

I see your point, but I'm also pretty familiar with the place Phillip was murdered. The Alaskan Highway is a pretty desolate stretch of road. If the hitchhiker had just robbed Phillip and thrown him out of the car, there was a pretty solid chance that Phllip would not encounter another car for hours, if not at least a day.

He didn't have to kill him-- he just wanted to. That's the part that is the most scary to me.

I see your point, but I'm also pretty familiar with the place Phillip was murdered. The Alaskan Highway is a pretty desolate stretch of road. If the hitchhiker had just robbed Phillip and thrown him out of the car, there was a pretty solid chance that Phllip would not encounter another car for hours, if not at least a day.

He didn't have to kill him-- he just wanted to. That's the part that is the most scary to me.

I get what you're saying, but you're thinking rationally, and reasonably, not as someone who needs to get out of a desolate area and who just committed a crime. He definitely didn't have to kill him, I agree, but as someone who is about to rob someone of their possessions you're not thinking how long it's going to be until he finds another car, you're just thinking if he's going to find a car period. It could've been a matter of minutes before another car came. He's thinking in a more panic state of mind then you are. I find it strange he didn't bother to hide the body.

The thing about this case is that we don't know what happened inside of that car. There could've been an argument, Phillip could've told him to get out, there could've been a struggle that turned deadly, anything. I'm not defending the guy, he's definitely a POS, but like I said we don't know what happened.

But why kill him if the kid picked him up or was he reluctant too cause he pulled a gun on him.

I don't entirely understand what's being said here, but it did place in my mind something I'd never once considered in all these years of watching this segment and knowing about this case: that the hitchhiker pulled a weapon on Fraser, and that's why he allowed him into the vehicle after apparently attempting to drive off.

A handgun wouldn't have been difficult for Gaye Frocklage to miss if the hitchhiker was on the far side of Philip's car and she were some distance away from it, nor would it have been difficult to conceal in a pants pocket or waistband--especially if it were compact.

IIRC, I don't think it was ever revealed how Fraser was killed. I've always had a rather unfounded suspicion that he was shot, however. The focus on the confiscation of Fraser's own firearms at the Canadian border and Eddie Olson's commentary on the hitchhiker sleeping next to a weapons case full of guns in their home yet leaving said guns be is one reason why. The other is that males primarily use weapons when murdering other males, rather than strangling or beating them to death.

I don't entirely understand what's being said here, but it did place in my mind something I'd never once considered in all these years of watching this segment and knowing about this case: that the hitchhiker pulled a weapon on Fraser, and that's why he allowed him into the vehicle after apparently attempting to drive off.

A handgun wouldn't have been difficult for Gaye Frocklage to miss if the hitchhiker was on the far side of Philip's car and she were some distance away from it, nor would it have been difficult to conceal in a pants pocket or waistband--especially if it were compact.

IIRC, I don't think it was ever revealed how Fraser was killed. I've always had a rather unfounded suspicion that he was shot, however. The focus on the confiscation of Fraser's own firearms at the Canadian border and Eddie Olson's commentary on the hitchhiker sleeping next to a weapons case full of guns in their home yet leaving said guns be is one reason why. The other is that males primarily use weapons when murdering other males, rather than strangling or beating them to death.

Wow. Excellent theory. Never considered that.

IIRC, I don't think it was ever revealed how Fraser was killed.

It's the only time I remember a segment not mentioning HOW a victim was killed. At first, I thought it might have been cut out in the Lifetime version. But seeing the original on Prime, they don't mention it there either.

It's the only time I remember a segment not mentioning HOW a victim was killed. At first, I thought it might have been cut out in the Lifetime version. But seeing the original on Prime, they don't mention it there either.

I wonder if it's because they couldn't determine a cause of death? I mean, if there was a bullet wound wouldn't they mention that? I feel like alerting the public that he was possibly armed and dangerous would've been necessary?

I don't entirely understand what's being said here, but it did place in my mind something I'd never once considered in all these years of watching this segment and knowing about this case: that the hitchhiker pulled a weapon on Fraser, and that's why he allowed him into the vehicle after apparently attempting to drive off.

A handgun wouldn't have been difficult for Gaye Frocklage to miss if the hitchhiker was on the far side of Philip's car and she were some distance away from it, nor would it have been difficult to conceal in a pants pocket or waistband--especially if it were compact.

IIRC, I don't think it was ever revealed how Fraser was killed. I've always had a rather unfounded suspicion that he was shot, however. The focus on the confiscation of Fraser's own firearms at the Canadian border and Eddie Olson's commentary on the hitchhiker sleeping next to a weapons case full of guns in their home yet leaving said guns be is one reason why. The other is that males primarily use weapons when murdering other males, rather than strangling or beating them to death.
It really not that hard to hide a 22 pistol and the killer was wearing a hooded jacket. That is why I think he stopped the car.

I don't entirely understand what's being said here, but it did place in my mind something I'd never once considered in all these years of watching this segment and knowing about this case: that the hitchhiker pulled a weapon on Fraser, and that's why he allowed him into the vehicle after apparently attempting to drive off.

A handgun wouldn't have been difficult for Gaye Frocklage to miss if the hitchhiker was on the far side of Philip's car and she were some distance away from it, nor would it have been difficult to conceal in a pants pocket or waistband--especially if it were compact.

IIRC, I don't think it was ever revealed how Fraser was killed. I've always had a rather unfounded suspicion that he was shot, however. The focus on the confiscation of Fraser's own firearms at the Canadian border and Eddie Olson's commentary on the hitchhiker sleeping next to a weapons case full of guns in their home yet leaving said guns be is one reason why. The other is that males primarily use weapons when murdering other males, rather than strangling or beating them to death.

On another thread (or maybe even his one further up the chain) a one post wonder type who had some connection to the Fraiser family claimed that Phillip was shot. I remember thinking this was crucial because the cause of death wasn't mentioned in the segment.

I wonder if it's because they couldn't determine a cause of death? I mean, if there was a bullet wound wouldn't they mention that? I feel like alerting the public that he was possibly armed and dangerous would've been necessary?

I highly doubt it. They would have been able to tell how he died...unless the autopsy was done by the same guy who did Kurt Sova's. :crazy:

I guess they just decided to leave it out and leave it to the point that the hitchhiker killed him.

I highly doubt it. They would have been able to tell how he died...unless the autopsy was done by the same guy who did Kurt Sova's. :crazy:

I guess they just decided to leave it out and leave it to the point that the hitchhiker killed him.

True, they would have to know how he was killed. Weird they left it out

True, they would have to know how he was killed. Weird they left it out

I wonder if the police actually had the murder weapon in their possession (or it was found in the car) and have some identifying features that they are withholding information in order to check the validity of tips.
If the hitchhiker was going into the US they wouldn't have been able to bring the weapon across the border, so why not ditch it?
It definitely makes sense of all the gun mentions in the segment that seem to go nowhere.

I wonder if the police actually had the murder weapon in their possession (or it was found in the car) and have some identifying features that they are withholding information in order to check the validity of tips.
If the hitchhiker was going into the US they wouldn't have been able to bring the weapon across the border, so why not ditch it?
It definitely makes sense of all the gun mentions in the segment that seem to go nowhere.


Great point. I just figured after all of these years some information would've came forward, guess not.

Eh I don't think he pulled a gun. I think Phillip was a bit meek and the guy bullied his way into the car as shown.

It really not that hard to hide a 22 pistol and the killer was wearing a hooded jacket. That is why I think he stopped the car.

Eh I don't think he pulled a gun. I think Phillip was a bit meek and the guy bullied his way into the car as shown.

This is what I've always thought, too.

Eh I don't think he pulled a gun. I think Phillip was a bit meek and the guy bullied his way into the car as shown.

Maybe the hitchhiker flashed some nipple.

Nah, I agree with you. If he had a gun I wonder why he didn't use it steal the previous car driver's stuff? Why didn't he harm the old couple?

The couple mentioned that he seemed nervous when they found him on the side of the road. I wonder if Philip died from a fight? He doesn't seem like a serial killer to me. He had the opportunity to kill multiple people in isolation but didn't.

I really wonder what happened inside of that car.

Maybe the hitchhiker hates teens or young adults that is why he killed him why would've torch the car.

wpupdnhe

C'mon man, seriously, who is this? Lmao

What would happen if Freakbook was driving and it was Macbeth wearing the hoodie and forced him to pull over and give him a ride? That would be a good episode for the twilight zone...

Why would he have torched the car though.

Why would he have torched the car though.

Because he was done with it and didn't want to leave any evidence behind that could link to him.

Because he was done with it and didn't want to leave any evidence behind that could link to him.
That is why he killed him with a gun

The actual cause of death in this case has never been released to the general public. No matter how matter-of-fact someone seems when discussing Fraser's cause of death please keep in mind that it is pure speculation on their part. I'm fairly certain that I know who the killer was but I definitely wouldn't state it as fact. With all of the information abailable I'm about 95% sure and one of the only reasons I can't be 100% sure is because I don't know what the cause of death was. My suspect is a particular type of killer so finding out the cause of death would either put me at 100% certainty or back to square one. The RCMP have never revealed it (trust me, I've tried to find out several times) and are keeping that information close to the vest as part of the investigation. It's been 30 years though so I don't see the harm in releasing it especially since nobody is actively investigating it anymore.

The actual cause of death in this case has never been released to the general public. No matter how matter-of-fact someone seems when discussing Fraser's cause of death please keep in mind that it is pure speculation on their part. I'm fairly certain that I know who the killer was but I definitely wouldn't state it as fact. With all of the information abailable I'm about 95% sure and one of the only reasons I can't be 100% sure is because I don't know what the cause of death was. My suspect is a particular type of killer so finding out the cause of death would either put me at 100% certainty or back to square one. The RCMP have never revealed it (trust me, I've tried to find out several times) and are keeping that information close to the vest as part of the investigation. It's been 30 years though so I don't see the harm in releasing it especially since nobody is actively investigating it anymore.
But why would they not say who it was the father died without knowing his son killer.

This guy resembles the sketch. I wonder if anyone has investigated the travel habits of Dominique during the late 80's .

^ Jesus Christ. Is that Mt. Rushmore?

100% was not Dominique. He didn't start killing until the late 90s and all of his killings were of a sexual nature with other gay men that he picked up in bars. While the resemblance in the composites are interesting, Fraser's murder does not fit his MO and happened well over a decade before his first kill and over 3,000 miles away from where all of Dominique's murders occurred. Also, Dominique has a very distinct Cajun accent that would have absolutely stood out like a sore thumb to all of the witnesses. Fraser's killer was a Canadian.

Fraser's killer was a Canadian.

Eh?

Seriously, though. Thanks for all that information. I didn't know any of that. I WOULD imagine that someone with a Cajun accent would stick out in those parts!

Eh?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wayne_McGray

I have a lot I can share to implicate him, but it doesn't matter much at this point. Michael Wayne McGray will never see the light of day since he is in prison and will never be granted parole and Philip Fraser has no surviving relatives that I can find. "Solving" this case at this point would sadly be nothing more than a formality and unfortunately the RCMP don't seem to care.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wayne_McGray

I have a lot I can share to implicate him, but it doesn't matter much at this point. Michael Wayne McGray will never see the light of day since he is in prison and will never be granted parole and Philip Fraser has no surviving relatives that I can find. "Solving" this case at this point would sadly be nothing more than a formality and unfortunately the RCMP don't seem to care.

Looking at McGray's pictures, he does not resemble the composite like Dominique does. Wasn't McGray had facial hair at the time of the crime?

Looking at McGray's pictures, he does not resemble the composite like Dominique does. Wasn't McGray had facial hair at the time of the crime?

Incorrect.

There was a one post wonder type on either this, or another thread on the case, who claimed he knew the family and they said they had heard that Phillip had been shot. Take that for what it is worth.

It stuck out to me due to the fact that I remembered this was one of those oddball cases in which the cause of death wasn't released.

There was a one post wonder type on either this, or another thread on the case, who claimed he knew the family and they said they had heard that Phillip had been shot. Take that for what it is worth.

It stuck out to me due to the fact that I remembered this was one of those oddball cases in which the cause of death wasn't released.

I do remember coming across that post whilst researching this case. The poster in question had the incorrect year listed for Philip's death though so that kind of weakened their credibility IMO.

Jesus, that pic looks like someone drew a face on their thumb

There was a one post wonder type on either this, or another thread on the case, who claimed he knew the family and they said they had heard that Phillip had been shot. Take that for what it is worth.

Correct. He was shot with a handgun.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1345&dat=19881216&id=VxhXAAAAIBAJ&sjid=6fkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6697,19156&hl=en

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wayne_McGray

I have a lot I can share to implicate him, but it doesn't matter much at this point. Michael Wayne McGray will never see the light of day since he is in prison and will never be granted parole and Philip Fraser has no surviving relatives that I can find. "Solving" this case at this point would sadly be nothing more than a formality and unfortunately the RCMP don't seem to care.

Have his parents passed away?

There was a one post wonder type on either this, or another thread on the case, who claimed he knew the family and they said they had heard that Phillip had been shot. Take that for what it is worth.

It stuck out to me due to the fact that I remembered this was one of those oddball cases in which the cause of death wasn't released.
I honestly think that he was shot with a handgun.

I honestly think that he was shot with a handgun.

Police confirmed he was shot with a handgun.

Not sure if I posted this, but someone sent me Philip's death certificate many months back and Philip died from multiple gunshot wounds (three I think, but it didn't say where on the body). Due to the condition his body was in (a month and a half had passed since Philip was killed when his body was found), he was cremated and the ashes scattered over Otter Lake in Anchorage, Alaska. Philip's father Robert died in 2014 of complications from diabetes, but his mother Shirley is still alive and still a neurologist in Anchorage.

Not sure if I posted this, but someone sent me Philip's death certificate many months back and Philip died from multiple gunshot wounds (three I think, but it didn't say where on the body). Due to the condition his body was in (a month and a half had passed since Philip was killed when his body was found), he was cremated and the ashes scattered over Otter Lake in Anchorage, Alaska. Philip's father Robert died in 2014 of complications from diabetes, but his mother Shirley is still alive and still a neurologist in Anchorage.

Someone mentioned previously that he had a brother or two and one was a doctor as well? Could be thinking of someone else.

A lot of good points have been made as to the motive for Philip's murder. What I want to know is if this hitchhiker is a serial killer. Another thing that comes to mind, is if this killer had a personality disorder that made him want to take the identity of someone else (in this case, Philip Fraser), due to dissatisfaction with himself. He may have low self-esteem due to being overweight, unattractive and unsuccessful in life, and felt that stealing the identity of Philip, a younger, attractive, successful guy, would make the killer feel better about himself. It's bothersome to think that this guy may have killed before or since Philip's murder. Hopefully the police can improvise on the original sketches so that someone could possibly identify him.

Good points. The Frocklages mentioned that they thought the hitchhiker was mentally ill. Based on pictures, the hitchhiker and phillip couldn't be more different. The hitchhiker was obviously strange/unstable, not well kempt, overweight, and short on cash. Phillip came from a successful family of doctors, was on his way to study pre-med, and had a car and some money. Phillip was nicer looking, if not super handsome. But he radiated wholesomeness whereas the killer did not. Perhaps the killer was jealous of Phillip, because he resented all the things Phillip had and what he represented.

I wondered why he didn't kill the Olsons, but perhaps he didn't feel that same way about the Olsons because they were nice to him, not close to him in age, and he didn't envy them in the same way. If the killer is a volatile person who came to resent Phillip, he may have had the same pattern in the past. Hating men close to his age whom he felt were more successful/on their way to becoming successful. If the killer has killed before, he may have a specific person that triggers him to rage. Someone like Phillip. Perhaps the car started to break down, the killer saw it as an opportunity, or simply got angry because the car was breaking down and blamed their bad luck on Phillip.

just some thoughts. I am new to the board and enjoying your thoughts on UM. So many of those cases I wish could be solved. Hopefully, one day they will be.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wayne_McGray

I have a lot I can share to implicate him, but it doesn't matter much at this point. Michael Wayne McGray will never see the light of day since he is in prison and will never be granted parole and Philip Fraser has no surviving relatives that I can find. "Solving" this case at this point would sadly be nothing more than a formality and unfortunately the RCMP don't seem to care.

This picture of him gives me the heebee jeebees. Looks like the picture from the composite sketch
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/365094/images/r-CLIFFORD-OLSON-large570.jpg

Good points. The Frocklages mentioned that they thought the hitchhiker was mentally ill. Based on pictures, the hitchhiker and phillip couldn't be more different. The hitchhiker was obviously strange/unstable, not well kempt, overweight, and short on cash. Phillip came from a successful family of doctors, was on his way to study pre-med, and had a car and some money. Phillip was nicer looking, if not super handsome. But he radiated wholesomeness whereas the killer did not. Perhaps the killer was jealous of Phillip, because he resented all the things Phillip had and what he represented.

I wondered why he didn't kill the Olsons, but perhaps he didn't feel that same way about the Olsons because they were nice to him, not close to him in age, and he didn't envy them in the same way. If the killer is a volatile person who came to resent Phillip, he may have had the same pattern in the past. Hating men close to his age whom he felt were more successful/on their way to becoming successful. If the killer has killed before, he may have a specific person that triggers him to rage. Someone like Phillip. Perhaps the car started to break down, the killer saw it as an opportunity, or simply got angry because the car was breaking down and blamed their bad luck on Phillip.

just some thoughts. I am new to the board and enjoying your thoughts on UM. So many of those cases I wish could be solved. Hopefully, one day they will be.

The motive was simple. You're thinking way too hard about it. Phillip had what the hitchhiker wanted, the end. Phillip was half of his size/weight, as well as had a money and vehicle. I don't think the hitchhiker was thinking about how much nicer Phillip looked, but that he wanted his vehicle and money.

I don't think a hitchhiker slumming it is really concerned with jealousy. He killed Phillip because he was an easy target. The hitchhiker didn't kill the women in the cafe, or the Olsons, so I don't think he was a serial killer. Just a crime of opportunity.

Given how reluctant Phillip was to give him a ride, a part of me thinks that Phillip probably told him to get out, and the hitchhiker killed him instead.

The motive was simple. You're thinking way too hard about it. Phillip had what the hitchhiker wanted, the end. Phillip was half of his size/weight, as well as had a money and vehicle. I don't think the hitchhiker was thinking about how much nicer Phillip looked, but that he wanted his vehicle and money.

I don't think a hitchhiker slumming it is really concerned with jealousy. He killed Phillip because he was an easy target. The hitchhiker didn't kill the women in the cafe, or the Olsons, so I don't think he was a serial killer. Just a crime of opportunity.

Given how reluctant Phillip was to give him a ride, a part of me thinks that Phillip probably told him to get out, and the hitchhiker killed him instead.

Perhaps you are right and it was simple opportunity. I am just surprised that he got rid of the car so quickly. He had hidden the body well and could have continued using that car for a while. Was he panicking at that point? Why not get further away before burning it? Did it break down again? And why burn it instead of just driving it into the woods and covering it up? Or drive it to a major city, dump it, and take the bus from there? It's a very remote area. He attracted a lot of attention to himself in doing that. This was before the age of DNA. Phillip's blood might have been in it, but unless this guy's fingerprints were in the system, why would he care? He'd be long gone at that point. Maybe it is that Mcgray guy, or someone who had a previous arrest record, or military record. Someone with fingerprints on file. The pic really does look like the composite sketch.

Perhaps you are right and it was simple opportunity. I am just surprised that he got rid of the car so quickly. He had hidden the body well and could have continued using that car for a while. Was he panicking at that point? Why not get further away before burning it? Did it break down again? And why burn it instead of just driving it into the woods and covering it up? Or drive it to a major city, dump it, and take the bus from there? It's a very remote area. He attracted a lot of attention to himself in doing that. This was before the age of DNA. Phillip's blood might have been in it, but unless this guy's fingerprints were in the system, why would he care? He'd be long gone at that point. Maybe it is that Mcgray guy, or someone who had a previous arrest record, or military record. Someone with fingerprints on file. The pic really does look like the composite sketch.

He probably burned it because of DNA left behind in the car. Blood, hair, etc. Not only that, but the guy who let him sleep in the house had seen the vehicle, and helped him work on it, so blowing it up probably seemed more logical to him so that it would buy him more time to get away (in his mind). But I think destroying evidence was probably his number one priority. If Phillip was killed in the car, then that's DNA city.

You bring up a lot of great points such as why not just dump it in the city and leave, but who knows? I also like your point about him having a record, so maybe that's why he didn't want his fingerprints found. However, it's hard to be in a logical state of mind when you just commited murder and you're fleeing, so who knows what was going through his mind.

WELCOME TO THE BOARD BTW :wave:

EDIT: Actually it just hit me. He probably blew up the car because he probably knew that the police were searching for Phillip. If he was seen still driving his car while the police were searching for Phillip then he'd get arrested. I guess blowing it up made more sense after all.

The motive was simple. You're thinking way too hard about it. Phillip had what the hitchhiker wanted, the end. Phillip was half of his size/weight, as well as had a money and vehicle. I don't think the hitchhiker was thinking about how much nicer Phillip looked, but that he wanted his vehicle and money.

Agreed. This appeared to be more of a robbery related homicide than an act of a serial killer. If not a robbery, then he might have got angry with Philip at some point, might have been amplified due to mental illness or instability. Perhaps felt Phillip had made a pass at him or was going to ditch him.

The Olsons described him as nervous when they picked him up then he attempted to sell the car to get to Seattle. Soon as he got to Prince George, he burned up the car. This would virtually make the crime untraceable barring a death bed confession or this individual coming forward due to guilt.

Nothing really suggests this was the act of a serial killer. Even if it was, there were so many murders in Canada during this time frame, that it would be impossible to pin it on someone.

I often wondered if the Frocklages exaggerated slightly when describing the encounter. They came forward weeks later, yet seemed to remember this individual so well.

Also the Olsens didn't describe this guy in terms even close to the way the Frocklages did. The Frocklages described him as almost from another dimension.

Also the Olsens didn't describe this guy in terms even close to the way the Frocklages did. The Frocklages described him as almost from another dimension.

Exactly. The physical descriptions are pretty on point. But the Frocklages describe him as "mentally off" and threatening. So much so, Tina allegedly said "he'd live to regret" giving the hitchhiker a ride. Yet, the Olsons described him as nervous and later suspicious but were totally comfortable allowing him to stay the night in their home.

The killer knew that he couldn't get out of the area without help and had to pass himself off as a plausible human being. Which would suggest to me he was probably a weirdo, but mentally sound. The irony is what did he really get out of this crime other than a ride? He took Phillip's id, checkbook, etc but it doesn't sound like he ever used them. He probably hitched another ride to get out of the area after he burned the car. Did he kill that person too? Doesn't sounds like it.

Exactly. The physical descriptions are pretty on point. But the Frocklages describe him as "mentally off" and threatening. So much so, Tina allegedly said "he'd live to regret" giving the hitchhiker a ride. Yet, the Olsons described him as nervous and later suspicious but were totally comfortable allowing him to stay the night in their home.

I think the Frocklages, and the Olsons descriptions were both correct. A big, dirty, hitchhiking dude wanders into a diner with just two women working there, then I'm sure they were more alert and on guard. Even if he acted normal, his appearance alone would've caused suspicion with the two women just by how he looked. I do think that they embellished, and exaggerated though. The whole "living to regret" line seemed exaggerated

The Olsons account makes sense also. He had just committed murder, and was stranded with a stolen vehicle, I'm sure he was nervous. Which makes me think if he was a serial killer, or a murderer for opportunity. I don't think a complete psychopath would be nervous. They're great at hiding emotions, and "roleplaying" but they said he seemed super nervous, and was acting weird with the wallets. Keep in mind that he didn't kill the other rider who dropped him off at the diner.

I wonder what happened between them two? Did Phillip try to put him out and it turned into a fight? As ruhroh said, did the car breaking out cause them to argue? I'm not quite sure he was a serial killer, but I don't know. He didn't have to kill Phillip, but he did, so I wonder what happened.

"Tina...Tina uh we've got a winner here, there's something wrong with this guy"

QUOTE=jOHnNyD]Also the Olsens didn't describe this guy in terms even close to the way the Frocklages did. The Frocklages described him as almost from another dimension.[/QUOTE]

Technically you can get disheveled in an hour...

Still you can be a psychopath and act totally normal

He probably burned it because of DNA left behind in the car. Blood, hair, etc. Not only that, but the guy who let him sleep in the house had seen the vehicle, and helped him work on it, so blowing it up probably seemed more logical to him so that it would buy him more time to get away (in his mind). But I think destroying evidence was probably his number one priority. If Phillip was killed in the car, then that's DNA city.

You bring up a lot of great points such as why not just dump it in the city and leave, but who knows? I also like your point about him having a record, so maybe that's why he didn't want his fingerprints found. However, it's hard to be in a logical state of mind when you just commited murder and you're fleeing, so who knows what was going through his mind.

WELCOME TO THE BOARD BTW :wave:

EDIT: Actually it just hit me. He probably blew up the car because he probably knew that the police were searching for Phillip. If he was seen still driving his car while the police were searching for Phillip then he'd get arrested. I guess blowing it up made more sense after all.


Sorry it took so long for me to respond. Hey, thanks. :waves back:
I had forgotten that DNA was already being used back in the late 80s, so that's why I didn't get why the criminal would have been thinking about getting rid of DNA evidence. I think you are right that he wanted to get rid of evidence. Someone else mentioned another possibility-- the killer was from that area and had no desire to run further away because he didn't think he would get caught. Maybe he just caught the nearest bus back to whatever hole he crawled out of. Ha ha. Hard to imagine he felt that confident about it, but since nobody has caught him, I guess he was right to think he'd get away with it.

Early in the segment, Stack says that Philip packed up everything he owned into his car, including 2 guns. When he crossed into Canada, his guns were seized and he continued on his journey. At the end of the segment, Stack says that none of Philip's possessions were ever found or recovered. The police officer interviewed says that the car was completely gutted before the killer torched it. Since the killer did not have a vehicle and was hitchhiking throughout Canada, where exactly did he store Philip's possessions? After reading up on Michael McGray (https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/i-got-very-good-at-it-killer-says/article4162061/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&), I don't think he's a viable suspect. He targeted gay men, prostitutes, and homeless people, and almost always used a knife in each homicide. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Prince+George,+BC,+Canada/Kitwanga,+BC,+Canada/@51.6830867,-123.0396216,5z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x538898f7ef590fe9:0x50135152a7b3050!2m2!1d-122.7496693!2d53.9170641!1m5!1m1!1s0x54752ea5f449575d:0xd3b97b986202bfdc!2m2!1d-128.0267756!2d55.111672) the approximation of where the killer left the Olson's house to where the car was found. I think the killer knew someone, or lived nearby the area where the car was found torched. How else would he have made it out of the area, especially with Philip's possessions? I think he had to have had help in moving and possibly disposing of the evidence in Philip's car.

Early in the segment, Stack says that Philip packed up everything he owned into his car, including 2 guns. When he crossed into Canada, his guns were seized and he continued on his journey. At the end of the segment, Stack says that none of Philip's possessions were ever found or recovered. The police officer interviewed says that the car was completely gutted before the killer torched it. Since the killer did not have a vehicle and was hitchhiking throughout Canada, where exactly did he store Philip's possessions? After reading up on Michael McGray (https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/i-got-very-good-at-it-killer-says/article4162061/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&), I don't think he's a viable suspect. He targeted gay men, prostitutes, and homeless people, and almost always used a knife in each homicide. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Prince+George,+BC,+Canada/Kitwanga,+BC,+Canada/@51.6830867,-123.0396216,5z/data=!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x538898f7ef590fe9:0x50135152a7b3050!2m2!1d-122.7496693!2d53.9170641!1m5!1m1!1s0x54752ea5f449575d:0xd3b97b986202bfdc!2m2!1d-128.0267756!2d55.111672) the approximation of where the killer left the Olson's house to where the car was found. I think the killer knew someone, or lived nearby the area where the car was found torched. How else would he have made it out of the area, especially with Philip's possessions? I think he had to have had help in moving and possibly disposing of the evidence in Philip's car.

This is a great point, one I've never thought of. With that said, in the absence of any other serial killers not mentioned, I'd wager that it could've been a small town criminal, perhaps a drug dealer, biker or someone of that sort.

In a small town/village/encampment, with either similarly shady co-horts or perhaps relatives, this person could've either disposed of or pawned off Philip's belongings and then faded back in to obscurity.

As I re-watched this one I remembered watching it vividly when I was a kid. It just creeps you the eff out. Also, the scene in which the fatty forced his way into the car cracked me up this time because I pictured people who know me and my attitudes toward the homeless watching it. They would burst into laughter because they know that there is less than zero chance that I would have been like, "well, this is chill. I'll keep driving." I would have stopped the car and said something to the effect of, "if you don't get your ass out of my car now I will beat it out."

Correct. He was shot with a handgun.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1345&dat=19881216&id=VxhXAAAAIBAJ&sjid=6fkDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6697,19156&hl=en



This is random but I shared a house with the bf of your avatar.

That Mc Gray serial killer looks very similar to the suspect's sketch

That Mc Gray serial killer looks very similar to the suspect's sketch

That’s because he did it.

"Tina...Tina uh we've got a winner here, there's something wrong with this guy"

QUOTE=jOHnNyD]Also the Olsens didn't describe this guy in terms even close to the way the Frocklages did. The Frocklages described him as almost from another dimension.

Technically you can get disheveled in an hour...

Still you can be a psychopath and act totally normal

That really annoyed me-your typical small town, small minded people. He could have been mentally disabled for all they knew & there they were judging him on appearance. Reminds me of the case where the black guy walked into the bar with the drunk & everybody went quiet & started staring.

I read somewhere the couple said that both guys stayed at the house, but the show portrayed it as just the killer. Never quite sure with UM how much is artistic licence.

I agree, it's Mc Gray, even in the description of the big belly falling out

My money's on McGray too (he at least shares a build with the guy UM got to portray the suspect - at least from the pics I've been able to find)

1. I am not understanding the dispute about how Philip died. The media reported that it was from a gun show wound and that police had revealed that info.

2. I do not belive the killer had any intention of flying to Seattle and that is a red herring. (I am guess he likes around Prince George and dropped off the contents of the car at his place before torching it.) How would he have flown to Seattle after selling the car? There was no airport anywhere nearby so the guy could not have bought him a plane ticket but would have given him cash ans he would have to hitchike a distance to an airport. I don't think he was going there. I think he wanted people to think that Philip sold his car which "broke down" and flew to Seattle so that the missing persons search would take place in Seattle and have nothing to do with him. He would take the money for the plane ticket and keep going.

3. This wasn't on the Alaska Highway, as an earlier poster said, but the Stewart-Cassair Highway. I have driven both and, while both are isolated, the S-C is much more so.

4. The city is called Prince George not Fort George.

5. I had to laugh at the person early in the thread who talked about safety with travelling and how they would only have stopped at a place with multiple businesses. On this highway, those places don't exist. Businesses are literally hundreds of miles apart and you stop every time there this is anywhere to stop.

6. I keep getting a feeling that the killer was a guy who had worked mining at Jade City, which is further North up the highway, who eithrt got fired or quit and eas making his way home. I don't why. I'm sure that the RCMP would have checked there to see if anyone recognized the guy.

He was killed by the hitchhiker he picked up

He was killed by the hitchhiker he picked up

https://www.soundandvision.com/images/styles/600_wide/public/090914_Signals_promo.png

Just my opinion,so take it for what it is worth.

The fact that there were eyewitnesses in remote areas of Northern BC, but none in Prince George, which has 70,000 people is perplexing. According to the RCMP, it was major news in the area, and they knew right away the burned out car was related to the Phillip Fraser disappearance. One would think someone would have spotted him in the community if he was passing through (hotel staff, Greyhound employees, truck stops, etc).

This leads me to believe the suspect was either a resident of Prince George, or was very familiar with the area with family in the city. It would be too hard to go undetected in the city without someone coming into contact with him. I also believe, due to the random encounter and murder, that the suspect has a criminal history, and has spent time in either prison or a mental hospital. It's extremely rare for a person to kill a random stranger and not have had one or more legal beefs throughout his life.

Very frustrating that this was never solved, although Northern BC is not the area in terms of solving crimes, as it is so remote, and has always had a significant transient population.

1

2. I do not belive the killer had any intention of flying to Seattle and that is a red herring. (I am guess he likes around Prince George and dropped off the contents of the car at his place before torching it.) How would he have flown to Seattle after selling the car? There was no airport anywhere nearby so the guy could not have bought him a plane ticket but would have given him cash ans he would have to hitchike a distance to an airport. I don't think he was going there. I think he wanted people to think that Philip sold his car which "broke down" and flew to Seattle so that the missing persons search would take place in Seattle and have nothing to do with him. He would take the money for the plane ticket and keep going.

The suspect never intended to fly to Seattle. He extracted as much information from Phillip as possible, and then killed him then pretended that he was Phillip (from Alaska, med school in Washington State, etc). The RCMP already are aware of this. The car was also torched in PG, so it's likely the suspect was just trying to rid himself of any connection to the murder.

McGray was convicted in 1987 of a robbery and sentenced to a 5 year prison term. He would've been in jail during Philip's murder. Plus, the robbery happened across the continent, nowhere close to British Columbia. So it couldn't be him. I still think the guy was local (or knew someone local) in Prince George because he would've needed help in getting rid of evidence as well as possibly selling Philip's possessions.

McGray was convicted in 1987 of a robbery and sentenced to a 5 year prison term. He would've been in jail during Philip's murder. Plus, the robbery happened across the continent, nowhere close to British Columbia. So it couldn't be him. I still think the guy was local (or knew someone local) in Prince George because he would've needed help in getting rid of evidence as well as possibly selling Philip's possessions.

Emphasis mine. Even if you ignore the quite concrete fact that McGray was incarcerated at the time of the murder, the crime doesn't fit his MO at all. What I suspect is behind the reason anyone is even still talking McGray as a suspect in this case at all is because he does indeed bear a certain resemblance to one or more of the composite sketches and witness descriptions of the hitchhiker. It's an instance of the very human tendency to make pieces fit despite factual information to the contrary. We have been throwing out McGray for years on this board at various times and there is simply no way he could have committed the crime.

I am somewhat perplexed by the behavior of the perpetrator: firstly, the fact that he left Fraser's body in a gravel turn-off by a desolate highway instead of somewhere in the abundance of wilderness surrounding said highway--unless, for whatever reason, he wanted the body to be eventually found by someone. Secondly, that he burned the car and left it in a public place in a pretty well-populated location. I don't understand the rationale behind these acts, but admittedly I'm approaching it with the presumption that the hitchhiker intended to take every measure to ensure his crimes were adequately concealed. Perhaps I'm incorrect there, but what would be his reasons for not doing so?

I am somewhat perplexed by the behavior of the perpetrator: firstly, the fact that he left Fraser's body in a gravel turn-off by a desolate highway instead of somewhere the abundance of wilderness surrounding said highway--unless, for whatever reason, he wanted the body to be eventually found by someone. Secondly, that he burned the car and left it in a public place in a pretty well-populated location. I don't understand the rationale behind these acts, but admittedly I'm approaching it with the presumption that the hitchhiker intended to take every measure to ensure his crimes were adequately concealed. Perhaps I'm incorrect there, but what would be his reasons for not doing so?

I too can't come up with a rationale for his movements. You can see the relevant locations here (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/40+Mile+Flats,+British+Columbia,+Canada/Kitwanga,+BC,+Canada/Prince+George,+BC,+Canada/@53.7498475,-128.1209311,5.26z/data=!4m20!4m19!1m5!1m1!1s0x53f82a2ebed16069:0xb9f90cbc666b161b!2m2!1d-130.033333!2d57.9375!1m5!1m1!1s0x54752ea5f449575d:0xd3b97b986202bfdc!2m2!1d-128.0267756!2d55.111672!1m5!1m1!1s0x538898f7ef590fe9:0x50135152a7b3050!2m2!1d-122.7496693!2d53.9170641!3e0). Philip picked him up at the 40 Mile Flats, and during the drive south at some point the hitchhiker murdered him and dumped his body 70 miles north of Kitwana (where he stayed with the Olson's). Then he drove east for 12 hours and torched the car. I'd love to know why he was so far up north from Prince George (if that indeed was his intended destination), and if Prince George wasn't his intended destination, how did he get out of the area unnoticed? And did this dude pass himself off as Philip after this? Seems unlikely due to the publicity generated from UM...but I can't imagine that this guy just fell off the face of the earth.

Philip picked him up at the 40 Mile Flats, and during the drive south at some point the hitchhiker murdered him and dumped his body 70 miles north of Kitwana (where he stayed with the Olson's). Then he drove east for 12 hours and torched the car. I'd love to know why he was so far up north from Prince George (if that indeed was his intended destination), and if Prince George wasn't his intended destination, how did he get out of the area unnoticed? And did this dude pass himself off as Philip after this? Seems unlikely due to the publicity generated from UM...but I can't imagine that this guy just fell off the face of the earth.


The hitchhiker had to have been from or at least familiar with the area. You can bet he knew some people the helped him after the fact too (Occam's Razor).

I am somewhat perplexed by the behavior of the perpetrator: firstly, the fact that he left Fraser's body in a gravel turn-off by a desolate highway instead of somewhere in the abundance of wilderness surrounding said highway--unless, for whatever reason, he wanted the body to be eventually found by someone. Secondly, that he burned the car and left it in a public place in a pretty well-populated location. I don't understand the rationale behind these acts, but admittedly I'm approaching it with the presumption that the hitchhiker intended to take every measure to ensure his crimes were adequately concealed. Perhaps I'm incorrect there, but what would be his reasons for not doing so?

Did he feel guilt and wanted Phillip's body and vehicle to be found, or was he cooly flaunting his crime?

In all seriousness, given the description of his actions he seemed mentally unhinged and sloppy. The man who he stayed with said he seemed impatient and was rushing to get a plane ticket, so he probably wasn't thinking and was just doing everything urgently. I feel like for him to have burned the car that brazenly in the open he had someone helping him with another vehicle, or he was going directly to the airport.

The hitchhiker had to have been from or at least familiar with the area. You can bet he knew some people the helped him after the fact too (Occam's Razor).

I doubt it. No evidence suggests that the killer had any kind of help.

Did he feel guilt and wanted Phillip's body and vehicle to be found, or was he cooly flaunting his crime?

In all seriousness, given the description of his actions he seemed mentally unhinged and sloppy. The man who he stayed with said he seemed impatient and was rushing to get a plane ticket, so he probably wasn't thinking and was just doing everything urgently. I feel like for him to have burned the car that brazenly in the open he had someone helping him with another vehicle, or he was going directly to the airport.

I agree that the killer was in a rush to dispose of Phillips body, and continue driving in his car. If he really wanted the body to e found, he would have left it on the highway. Not sure if you have ever been in Northern British Columbia, but it is very remote. You can drive hours, without seeing any kind of business or rest stop. He likely shot Phillip, and dragged him as far as he could off the highway.

I'm very positive he did not grab a plane ticket, and fly to Washington. Prince George RCMP would have checked outgoing flights to Vancouver and Washington State, and passed along that information to the airline industry and Greyhound. There would have been staff who were on the lookout for a man of his description.

This is why I think he may have been native to the Prince George area. Many of the inhabitants travel to and from the logging city of 70.000 on a regular basis. There is a strong possibility that the suspect had a second vehicle in the Prince George area, and disposed to Phillips car, before driving off in a different vehicle.

1. I am not understanding the dispute about how Philip died. The media reported that it was from a gun show wound and that police had revealed that info.

2. I do not belive the killer had any intention of flying to Seattle and that is a red herring. (I am guess he likes around Prince George and dropped off the contents of the car at his place before torching it.) How would he have flown to Seattle after selling the car? There was no airport anywhere nearby so the guy could not have bought him a plane ticket but would have given him cash ans he would have to hitchike a distance to an airport. I don't think he was going there. I think he wanted people to think that Philip sold his car which "broke down" and flew to Seattle so that the missing persons search would take place in Seattle and have nothing to do with him. He would take the money for the plane ticket and keep going.

3. This wasn't on the Alaska Highway, as an earlier poster said, but the Stewart-Cassair Highway. I have driven both and, while both are isolated, the S-C is much more so.

4. The city is called Prince George not Fort George.

5. I had to laugh at the person early in the thread who talked about safety with travelling and how they would only have stopped at a place with multiple businesses. On this highway, those places don't exist. Businesses are literally hundreds of miles apart and you stop every time there this is anywhere to stop.

6. I keep getting a feeling that the killer was a guy who had worked mining at Jade City, which is further North up the highway, who eithrt got fired or quit and eas making his way home. I don't why. I'm sure that the RCMP would have checked there to see if anyone recognized the guy.


I agree with you. I worked for six weeks in Fort St.John area, (two hours north on the Alaska Highway). Not quite as remote, but years before I used to do Canoeing in Northern Manitoba, and you could go hours without seeing any kind of business.

The theory of him working in a remote area, and leaving makes perfect sense. I've worked in Northern Alberta, and people come and go all the time.

Has anyone ever tried to catch what the Hitchhiker was yelling when he tried to get in the car at 6:27:00?

6:22 — "Still heading in this direction?"
6:24 — "I thought you were getting a bite to eat?"
6:25 — "Mind if I go with you?"

At 6 minutes and 28 seconds, Gaye Frocklage covers-up what the hitchhiker is yelling. Gay Frocklage says, "The Hitchhiker just ran beside him and pulled open the door..."

While Gaye is saying that, there's at least four seconds of the hitchhiker yelling something at Phillip. This is between 6:28 and 6:33. Has anyone been able to make out what the hitchhiker was yelling at Phillip during this time? It's pertinent to understanding the mystery of why Phillip hit the break.

I'm using the video on the forbidden site, by the way.

It probably doesn't matter - the actors improvised all of their dialog in the reenactments.

Has anyone ever tried to catch what the Hitchhiker was yelling when he tried to get in the car at 6:27:00?

6:22 — "Still heading in this direction?"
6:24 — "I thought you were getting a bite to eat?"
6:25 — "Mind if I go with you?"

At 6 minutes and 28 seconds, Gaye Frocklage covers-up what the hitchhiker is yelling. Gay Frocklage says, "The Hitchhiker just ran beside him and pulled open the door..."

While Gaye is saying that, there's at least four seconds of the hitchhiker yelling something at Phillip. This is between 6:28 and 6:33. Has anyone been able to make out what the hitchhiker was yelling at Phillip during this time? It's pertinent to understanding the mystery of why Phillip hit the break.

I'm using the video on the forbidden site, by the way.
It's a recreation so they probably made it more dramatic.

Someone in this forum gave an interesting suspect: https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=293253&page=2

https://unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com/wiki/Martin_Ganz
Roger Hoan Brady, this guy is very resemble. I wonder if anyone questioned witnesses? I heard that Gaye has FB, but I only found Gaye Pauline Frocklage?

Why did philip not shoot the guy and run away

Why did philip not shoot the guy and run away

Hopefully they will answer this on the fall season of UM on Netflix!

Why did philip not shoot the guy and run away

Philip did not have his guns. Didn't he have to turn them in when entering Canada from Alaska?

Philip did not have his guns. Didn't he have to turn them in when entering Canada from Alaska?

That's true. In the segment, the RCMP officer said the guns were seized. I'm willing to bet (though the officer did not mention) that when Phillip arrived at the checkpoint and declared the firearms, he was given the opportunity to turn around (either to return the firearms to his home or obtain the paperwork necessary to properly transport the weapons through Canada). However, he was already a couple days behind schedule due to car trouble and decided to surrender them instead.

Someone in this forum gave an interesting suspect: https://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?t=293253&page=2

https://unsolvedmysteries.fandom.com/wiki/Martin_Ganz
Roger Hoan Brady, this guy is very resemble. I wonder if anyone questioned witnesses? I heard that Gaye has FB, but I only found Gaye Pauline Frocklage?

That was me! It was the reason I made an account actually! I just watched this segment the other day and man does that guy give me the creeps still. I was intrigued by him burning the car. It was the first populated area they talked about so that was probably his first chance to ditch the car, especially since he didn't hide the body he probably thought people were looking for him. There were witnesses that could identify him getting in the car with Philip. He probably kept the possessions that he wanted or had value, trashed the rest and set the car on fire to burn any evidence. I think that's what happened up until then, but what happened next? Did he thumb it out of there, hop a bus, or maybe even caught a ride with a bush pilot.
I highly doubt he had any plan out all, it was just a crime of opportunity. It probably wasn't his first or even his last.

[QUOTE=zack007attack;5794531]That's true. In the segment, the RCMP officer said the guns were seized. I'm willing to bet (though the officer did not mention) that when Phillip arrived at the checkpoint and declared the firearms, he was given the opportunity to turn around (either to return the firearms to his home or obtain the paperwork necessary to properly transport the weapons through Canada). However, he was already a couple days behind schedule due to car trouble and decided to surrender them instead.[/QUOTE/]

Even without his firearms, I don't understand why Fraser didn't just drive off (especially when the guy (presumably) forcefully opened the door. Maybe he didn't get the same vibe from the guy that Gaye did.

My guess is exactly that, he didn’t get the “weird vibe.” Usually women get that since they have that feeling with certain guys, Fraser (being a younger male) likely didn’t get creeped out by other guys and thought he could handle him. Sadly he was wrong

My guess is exactly that, he didn’t get the “weird vibe.” Usually women get that since they have that feeling with certain guys, Fraser (being a younger male) likely didn’t get creeped out by other guys and thought he could handle him. Sadly he was wrong
Perhaps this is true. The segment is very strange. Yet multiple witnesses who spent quite a bit of time around the murderer, described him very well, which substantiates that he was a strange drifter. My guess is Phillip did exactly what we saw in the segment. Phillip was cautious and didn’t want to give the guy a ride, but felt bad for the guy. only to realize that he wanted nothing to do with him. Maybe the guy wanted to go somewhere off of Phillip’s itinerary like we saw in the Dorothy Donovan case. If the re-enactment is true, It is strange that Phillip just didn’t keep on driving but he may have not realized his life was in danger in that flight or fight moment.

I watched this one again and did some digging into the case. Outside of Michael Wayne McGray (who was incarcerated at the time of Philip's murder), the only other suspect who has been brought up was Roger Hoan Brady (Martin Ganz's killer). Even though Brady looks a lot like the composite sketches of Philip's killer, and his age is within the age range given for his killer, I don't think he is the guy. This (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-08-22-me-29986-story.html) article describes him attending college for 3 years in California before starting a bank robbing spree. It doesn't seem like he ever left the California area until after the murder of Martin Ganz of 1993. There is no connection between Brady and Canada.

Focusing back on the unknown hitchhiker, when he was first spotted in the Cafe, he paid for his meal with Canadian currency. He did give the Olson's American currency, but the Olson's observed him pulling out two wallets. The one with the American currency was obviously Philip Fraser's wallet. He did try selling Philip's car to the Olson's for a plane ticket to Seattle, which was an interesting little nugget I forgot about. What would a plane ticket to Seattle be worth for an unkempt Canadian man? IMO, this little tidbit would mean that the guy was an American who was hitchhiking through Canada (possibly from Alaska just like Philip) before encountering Philip. For years I had wondered why the hitchhiker would have torched Philip's car in a populated area like Prince George, but then I looked up the distance between where the car wash was located to the nearest airport and it is only 18 miles (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Hands+On+Car+Wash/Prince+George+Airport,+4141+Airport+Rd,+Prince+George,+BC+V2N+4M6,+Canada/@53.899885,-122.7290813,8861m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x538898fc6d07aecd:0xfb0e1230439b5d!2m2!1d-122.7583649!2d53.9209216!1m5!1m1!1s0x53889f38590a88c3:0x854a5ee989262231!2m2!1d-122.6742764!2d53.8836031!3e0). The segment says that several of Philip's possessions were never located, meaning that his killer had to have either taken them with him or sold them. If he sold them, he could have bought a plane ticket and either walked or hitched over to the airport. I am definitely leaning towards the killer being an American, who's intention was to use Philip Fraser's identity when returning to the States.

I also came across this (https://americancrimejournal.com/an-interrupted-journey/) article which goes into more detail and has 2 different composite sketches not shown on UM. Apparently there was an additional witness after the killer left the Olson's. The author theorizes that as they were headed south, Philip became weary of the hitchhiker and turned off from Highway 37 to 37A here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Meziadin+Junction+Gas+Bar+%26+Camp/@56.1472043,-129.4453981,11z/data=!4m13!1m7!3m6!1s0x51178198b4528b89:0x2e149cd561cc96ea!2sYukon,+Canada!3b1!8m2!3d64.2823274!4d-135!3m4!1s0x540a3f9cffd469f5:0x3ba1700c31a1e869!8m2!3d56.0998112!4d-129.3052197), intending to drive back into Alaska. This would lend some credence to the theory of the killer being an American from Alaska who was trying to hitchhike away from there. Philip's body was found 30 miles east from the nearest town of Stewart, meaning the hitchhiker could have figured out what was going on before commandeering the vehicle and murdering Philip. I definitely think the killer was fleeing the Alaska area and was trying to make his way back into the States.

I watched this one again and did some digging into the case. Outside of Michael Wayne McGray (who was incarcerated at the time of Philip's murder), the only other suspect who has been brought up was Roger Hoan Brady (Martin Ganz's killer). Even though Brady looks a lot like the composite sketches of Philip's killer, and his age is within the age range given for his killer, I don't think he is the guy. This (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-08-22-me-29986-story.html) article describes him attending college for 3 years in California before starting a bank robbing spree. It doesn't seem like he ever left the California area until after the murder of Martin Ganz of 1993. There is no connection between Brady and Canada.

Focusing back on the unknown hitchhiker, when he was first spotted in the Cafe, he paid for his meal with Canadian currency. He did give the Olson's American currency, but the Olson's observed him pulling out two wallets. The one with the American currency was obviously Philip Fraser's wallet. He did try selling Philip's car to the Olson's for a plane ticket to Seattle, which was an interesting little nugget I forgot about. What would a plane ticket to Seattle be worth for an unkempt Canadian man? IMO, this little tidbit would mean that the guy was an American who was hitchhiking through Canada (possibly from Alaska just like Philip) before encountering Philip. For years I had wondered why the hitchhiker would have torched Philip's car in a populated area like Prince George, but then I looked up the distance between where the car wash was located to the nearest airport and it is only 18 miles (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Hands+On+Car+Wash/Prince+George+Airport,+4141+Airport+Rd,+Prince+George,+BC+V2N+4M6,+Canada/@53.899885,-122.7290813,8861m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x538898fc6d07aecd:0xfb0e1230439b5d!2m2!1d-122.7583649!2d53.9209216!1m5!1m1!1s0x53889f38590a88c3:0x854a5ee989262231!2m2!1d-122.6742764!2d53.8836031!3e0). The segment says that several of Philip's possessions were never located, meaning that his killer had to have either taken them with him or sold them. If he sold them, he could have bought a plane ticket and either walked or hitched over to the airport. I am definitely leaning towards the killer being an American, who's intention was to use Philip Fraser's identity when returning to the States.

I also came across this (https://americancrimejournal.com/an-interrupted-journey/) article which goes into more detail and has 2 different composite sketches not shown on UM. Apparently there was an additional witness after the killer left the Olson's. The author theorizes that as they were headed south, Philip became weary of the hitchhiker and turned off from Highway 37 to 37A here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Meziadin+Junction+Gas+Bar+%26+Camp/@56.1472043,-129.4453981,11z/data=!4m13!1m7!3m6!1s0x51178198b4528b89:0x2e149cd561cc96ea!2sYukon,+Canada!3b1!8m2!3d64.2823274!4d-135!3m4!1s0x540a3f9cffd469f5:0x3ba1700c31a1e869!8m2!3d56.0998112!4d-129.3052197), intending to drive back into Alaska. This would lend some credence to the theory of the killer being an American from Alaska who was trying to hitchhike away from there. Philip's body was found 30 miles east from the nearest town of Stewart, meaning the hitchhiker could have figured out what was going on before commandeering the vehicle and murdering Philip. I definitely think the killer was fleeing the Alaska area and was trying to make his way back into the States.

Interesting theory - I wonder if the hitchhiker would've spared Philip then had he just driven back into Washington as he planned (or if killing him/stealing his identity was part of his plan all along once they crossed paths) ??

Focusing in on criminals from AK and keeping that theory in mind, I wonder if this hitchhiker was just a petty criminal or was more established/well known to authorities?

It probably doesn't matter - the actors improvised all of their dialog in the reenactments.

^This.

One should never take the Unsolved Mystery reenactments too literally. They were a TV show, and sometimes took the liberty of making the scenes look more dramatic for entertainment purposes.

[QUOTE=zack007attack;5794531]That's true. In the segment, the RCMP officer said the guns were seized. I'm willing to bet (though the officer did not mention) that when Phillip arrived at the checkpoint and declared the firearms, he was given the opportunity to turn around (either to return the firearms to his home or obtain the paperwork necessary to properly transport the weapons through Canada). However, he was already a couple days behind schedule due to car trouble and decided to surrender them instead.[/QUOTE/]

Even without his firearms, I don't understand why Fraser didn't just drive off (especially when the guy (presumably) forcefully opened the door. Maybe he didn't get the same vibe from the guy that Gaye did.

Considering Phillip is from Alaska, he should have known that you can't bring firearms into Canada, as a US citizen travelling through. It's very strange that he even attempted to do so.

As for the hitchhiker, was there any confirmation that he forced the passenger door open? Did either the cafe owner or her daughter see the suspect attempt to do this? It just seems very odd that Phillip would let a man trying to force himself into his car, eventually get in and proceed to drive him south along the highway.

Philip did not have his guns. Didn't he have to turn them in when entering Canada from Alaska?

Ignore that poster. Macbeth06 seems to be trolling this thread and others. I wish the moderators would do something about ppl that come on here, just to joke around.

As for the hitchhiker, was there any confirmation that he forced the passenger door open? Did either the cafe owner or her daughter see the suspect attempt to do this? It just seems very odd that Phillip would let a man trying to force himself into his car, eventually get in and proceed to drive him south along the highway.

According to Gaye Frocklage, she says:

I watched the hitchhiker go out and approach Fraser. The car sat for a few minutes and he pulled ahead like he had second thoughts. The hitchhiker just ran beside him and pulled the door open and the young man in the car proceeded to let him enter.

I think the re-enactment is pretty accurate. The hitchhiker asks Philip for a ride, he declines. Philip approaches the hitchhiker in his car, driving slowly, the hitchhiker pleads with him to let him in and then Philip stops and gives him a ride. I don't think he forced himself in per se, I think Philip had second thoughts about leaving him out there and decided to give him a lift.

I think the re-enactment is pretty accurate. The hitchhiker asks Philip for a ride, he declines. Philip approaches the hitchhiker in his car, driving slowly, the hitchhiker pleads with him to let him in and then Philip stops and gives him a ride. I don't think he forced himself in per se, I think Philip had second thoughts about leaving him out there and decided to give him a lift.

Yes, this is the strong impression I got as well re: the re-enactment. I think Philip changed his mind after initially telling the hitch-hiker that he couldn't give him a ride, but still had second thoughts about picking him up as he drove towards him. When the hitch-hiker runs after the car, Philip (who had already half-decided to take him) lets him into the car.

I don't think Philip initially had a "bad feeling" about the guy to begin with, or else I don't think he would have even considered giving him a ride. The two women (mother & daughter) who ran the cafe did get bad/creepy vibes from the guy, but they also had more exposure to him - given that he ate at the cafe.

This is an especially unfortunate case, given that all PF had to do was avoid giving the guy a ride - and he would probably still be alive today.

This is an especially unfortunate case, given that all PF had to do was avoid giving the guy a ride - and he would probably still be alive today.

But the hitchhiker didn't kill the driver that dropped him off at the cafe. Which makes me think that Philip was killed because the hitchhiker saw an opportunity to make it back to the States.

But the hitchhiker didn't kill the driver that dropped him off at the cafe. Which makes me think that Philip was killed because the hitchhiker saw an opportunity to make it back to the States.

Exactly. The hitch-hiker wasn't indiscriminately killing everyone he got a ride with/stayed with; he didn't kill/assault the guy who let him off at the cafe, and didn't kill/assault the couple who let him stay with them briefly later on. However, in PF's case it seems he had motive and opportunity.

My point was that if PF had gotten the same creepy/strange vibes that the women in the cafe noted, he probably wouldn't have picked the guy up. But, who knows?!

My point was that if PF had gotten the same creepy/strange vibes that the women in the cafe noted, he probably wouldn't have picked the guy up. But, who knows?!

That's true for a lot of cases - if only the victim didn't do this one thing.

I think Phillip didn't get the vibes because he was a young male. Brocklage had more life experience and was also looking out for her daughter - their location meant they needed to be extra aware of potential sketchy folk. And women naturally see more "this guy is suspicious" than men tend to simply because they're targeted more frequently and in more subtle ways. I cannot tell you how many times in my early 20s I was explaining to my male friends/companions how someone was sketch that they were oblivious to at first.

And even in the days when picking up a hitchhiker was more of a normal thing, people knew better than to tell their life story to the person they picked up - Phillip didn't.

I think this case would've been super solvable if it happened when agencies communicated better with each other - it took months to figure out Phillip's path and the hitchhiker's path AND to figure out which sightings were Phillip vs the hitchhiker.

I'm not sure the hitchhiker was definitely American - He was familiar with Toronto and had Canadian currency until he had Phillip's wallet. Toronto is very close to the US border much like Vancouver in BC. I think it's equally likely the hitchhiker's initial goal was to get to Vancouver but Phillip presented the opportunity for a new ID in an era where "let me see your photo ID" wasn't a thing. Hitchhiker could've been concerned that border patrol in the area he was currently trying to get away from could ID and arrest him but possibly thought the border patrol into WA wouldn't have the same information.

I think its clear the hitchhiker was desperately trying to get away from something to the point he was willing to kill someone to do it so there's got to be some other crime linked to this dude that either still hasn't been figured out or hasn't been released.

I can see the other two sketches not being shown on UM - they're clearly similar enough to the three that were, but different enough to be misleading imo - especially the one that looks almost like an asian caricature in the eyes. The other two also could have not been made available to UM at the time. When researching these cases years later, it's difficult to know what details might have been released later on as authorities were hoping for more details/renewed interest.

But the hitchhiker didn't kill the driver that dropped him off at the cafe. Which makes me think that Philip was killed because the hitchhiker saw an opportunity to make it back to the States.

Well the problem with killing him over an opportunity to make it to the USA, is that customs would have prevented him from entering, due to the vehicle being registered to PF, and if the driver gave a couple of cafe workers in an outpost the creeps, the US customs would have probably pulled him out of the car, and searched the vehicle.

Also, considering the vehicle was found torched in a car wash in Prince George, lends to the theory that he was Canadian, and may have been mentally ill, or just saw an opportunity to rob PF or his vehicle and belongings, but lost his nerve and decided to rid himself of the evidence. Prince George is a town with a large transient population, since it is at the crossroads to Northern BC, Alberta, and south to the Okanagan and Vancouver, BC.

Well the problem with killing him over an opportunity to make it to the USA, is that customs would have prevented him from entering, due to the vehicle being registered to PF, and if the driver gave a couple of cafe workers in an outpost the creeps, the US customs would have probably pulled him out of the car, and searched the vehicle.

I don't think the hitchhiker intended on murdering Philip initially. I think he planned on riding with him to the States. Philip, sensing something was off about this guy, began riding back towards Alaska to make it to customs agents with the hopes of getting rid of the guy that way. The hitchhiker realized this and murdered Philip unfortunately. Other than his conversation with the Olson's and trying to sell them Philip's car, I don't think he ever intended on assuming Philip's identity.

Here is my thing on this. It was said that the stranger asked Phillip Fraser for a ride and Phillip initially refused but the stranger ran along side his car and Phillip stopped and let him in. If I refuse someone a ride, which I absolutely would if I didn't know them, and they tried to chase after me, that's every reason not to stop and let them in. I would have floored it and if the person got injured or killed trying to hold on to my car, so be it.

What a depressing case. Yeah, I don’t get why he let a stranger who ran inside his car to ride with him. Case is even more depressing when you think about had the Canadian border police not taken away his firearms, he might have survived, scaring away the stranger possibly.

This is definitely a freaky case.

Based on how the stranger chased alongside fraser’s car, I can’t help but wonder if he had fraser at gunpoint demanding to give him a ride or he would kill the two women who worked at that restaurant?

I don't think the hitchhiker intended on murdering Philip initially. I think he planned on riding with him to the States. Philip, sensing something was off about this guy, began riding back towards Alaska to make it to customs agents with the hopes of getting rid of the guy that way. The hitchhiker realized this and murdered Philip unfortunately. Other than his conversation with the Olson's and trying to sell them Philip's car, I don't think he ever intended on assuming Philip's identity.

This makes the most sense to me. Phillip probably didn't get the vibes the women at the cafe did for the reason already stated... women are more used to honing in on those vibes.

Something set Phillip off and the hitchhiker sensed it. He needed the transportation so badly, possibly to get away from Canada or where he was running from, so he overpowered Phillip and killed him.

I don't think the hitchhiker intended on murdering Philip initially. I think he planned on riding with him to the States. Philip, sensing something was off about this guy, began riding back towards Alaska to make it to customs agents with the hopes of getting rid of the guy that way. The hitchhiker realized this and murdered Philip unfortunately. Other than his conversation with the Olson's and trying to sell them Philip's car, I don't think he ever intended on assuming Philip's identity.


Here is a fairly in depth article about Philip Fraser's disappearance and murder:

https://americancrimejournal.com/an-interrupted-journey/

"Often we can dismiss small town police or our friends in Canada as lacking the proper experience when it comes to murder investigations."

I found the above quote quite comical, as Canada has a far higher clearance rate for murder cases than the US does...

Here is a fairly in depth article about Philip Fraser's disappearance and murder:

https://americancrimejournal.com/an-interrupted-journey/

"Often we can dismiss small town police or our friends in Canada as lacking the proper experience when it comes to murder investigations."

I found the above quote quite comical, as Canada has a far higher clearance rate for murder cases than the US does...

I just looked back at that segment again. UM made a mistake leaving out the part of the description that states he was a chain smoker whose teeth were in poor condition and he happened to be a chain smoker.

I just looked back at that segment again. UM made a mistake leaving out the part of the description that states he was a chain smoker whose teeth were in poor condition and he happened to be a chain smoker.

UM also showed only two of the four composite drawings of the suspect, and on top of that, they didn't show the two drawings that generated the most tips, and chose to go with the two drawings that did not receive many tips at all..

Here is a fairly in depth article about Philip Fraser's disappearance and murder:

https://americancrimejournal.com/an-interrupted-journey/

"Often we can dismiss small town police or our friends in Canada as lacking the proper experience when it comes to murder investigations."

I found the above quote quite comical, as Canada has a far higher clearance rate for murder cases than the US does...

Yeah I have read that article before and may have posted it in this thread, but I largely agree with the conclusion that the author came to: Phillip sensed something was off about the hitchhiker and headed back to Alaska to get rid of him or to get help and the hitchhiker eventually realized this and killed him for it.

UM also showed only two of the four composite drawings of the suspect, and on top of that, they didn't show the two drawings that generated the most tips, and chose to go with the two drawings that did not receive many tips at all..

With certain segments, it's kind of obvious why UM chose to edit/portray them the way they did. Leaving out those other two composites and not revealing the cause of death though doesn't make any sense, no matter what angle they wanted to push.