Expendable For A Cause.

Another two nuggets of stupidity from the ‘His M.O. was No M.O.’ files.

Carrillo had learned through his detective studies that some killers are sexually aroused by seeing fear in their victims’ eyes. He frequently cites his source, a criminology professor, Robert Morneau. Morneau wrote a book called Sex, Motivation and the Criminal Offender (1980) and Carrillo evidently applied Morneau’s teachings to the Night Stalker case. On podcasts, he cogitates for far too long at the idea of Richard Ramirez reaching orgasm: ‘He was orgasming!’ ‘Climaxing!’ ‘Foreplay!’. Alongside the bullets and the ridiculous links set out in this post, he also speculated that the murders of Okazaki and Yu were committed by the same man because ‘Richard Ramirez’ wanted to see fear in their eyes. “That was sex to him,” he declares.

Carrillo does not actually know what happened. He claims the killer banged on a car to attract Maria Hernandez’s attention (though she said it was an undefinable noise) specifically to see her scared expression. He claims Richard went up into Okazaki’s kitchen and waited for her to peep over the breakfast bar before shooting her (again, speculation). He then claimed that when the killer walked past Hernandez outside, he decided not to shoot her a second time because she no longer had fear in her eyes.

Wait – what? Why would Hernandez not have fear in her eyes? She had just been shot in the hand and was bleeding. She had heard her friend being shot and had no idea whether she would find her dead or alive. And here was the shooter, pointing the gun at her face for the second time… and she did not show fear?

Carrillo claims that Richard turned Tsai-Lian Yu around to see the fear in her eyes before he shot her. There was no proof this man – described as short and Asian – was Richard, yet Carrillo somehow knows what the Night Stalker was feeling when he shot this woman.

The next murder was a couple: Maxine and Vincent Zazzara. Maxine’s eyes were removed, so presumably, the killer did not enjoy seeing the fear in her eyes that much.

Then there were the four rape victims:

Carol Kyle testified that the rapist threatened to cut her eyes out if she looked at him. He covered her head with a pillow. (She did manage to see his nice straight teeth though).

Sophie Dickman said he put a towel and a pillow over her head, (but was able to see he was short to average height).

Somkid Khovananth said he put a coat over her head (luckily, she was able to identify a man with dark curly hair and a ‘brown face’).

Sakina Abowath was blindfolded (but not before she glimpsed a blondish man) and he hit her for looking at him.

Hold on a minute… did the modus operandi just change? How did the man who became excited from seeing Okazaki, Hernandez and Yu’s terror suddenly change into the man who gouges women’s eyes out, threatens others with the same, or covers victims’ faces and demands that they do not look at him?

He conveniently argues that those rapes were different because the Night Stalker only kills those who fight back, extinguising his fear-fetish. They complied so were spared. This doesn’t make sense either. Violent rape and burglary at gunpoint are terrifying – surely, he would be in his element? But no, he did not want to see their faces, not even to help him get an erection after he was unable to at the Dickman Incident. Hardly a sexual fetish then. And, if he really cared about being seen, he would have shot them; he had a gun; after all, he had killed the husbands of two of the rape victims.

The Night Stalker ‘celebrity’ detectives like to state that Richard’s M.O. was no M.O., but that is clearly an excuse for their lazy policing; they cannot have it both ways. You either have a man who gets off on seeing women terrified or a man who hates being looked at. He cannot be both. It’s merely a device to excuse the lack of consistency: make the Night Stalker someone completely unusual. Furthermore, he cannot have nine different looks, five different heights, three different body types, four different hair colours, and three different sets of teeth.

Bob Morneau: Turd Theory

In Philip Carlo’s book, there is a passage where Morneau is mentioned regarding … for want of a better phrase, a kink for shit. According to Morneau, if a criminal is dropping a log on your property, that’s his/her sexual deviance. Well, Carrillo has picked up the turd theory with both hands, clapped, and then smeared it all over the Ramirez case: he claims Richard Ramirez “confessed” (at around the 42 mins mark) to curling one out at one of the crime scenes. I wonder what other theories from Morneau found their way into the Night Stalker cases.

-VenningB-

5th Jan 2023