Expendable For A Cause.

Multiple mental health professionals evaluated Richard Ramirez over several years, and they all came to the same conclusion: he was not mentally competent to stand trial in San Francisco. Based on this, the San Francisco District Attorney “stayed” the charges indefinitely – a fact quietly buried and never reported in the media.

The implications of this meant that Ramirez should never have stood trial in Los Angeles. The fault lies with Ramirez’s former attorneys, Arturo Hernandez and Daniel Hernandez and their failure to research his background before his Los Angeles trial. Had they done so, they would have found information detailing a history of seizures, abnormal EEGs, medical treatment, and a psychological evaluation.

It was clear to the original Los Angeles lawyers that something was wrong with Ramirez. Allen Adashek and Henry Hall both moved for competency hearings. As did attorney Joseph Gallegos. Manuel Barraza, who put Ramirez in contact with the Hernandezes also realised Ramirez had mental disorders.

Instead, Daniel Hernandez and Arturo Hernandez chose to turn a blind eye to his illnesses and covered them up – partly because of Ramirez’s paranoia and obstructiveness, but also for their own financial gain: they hoped to receive payment by way of book and movie deals for representing the case.

Mental Competency

Before we delve into Richard Ramirez’s mental health, I will briefly review the definition of mental competency within the confines of the judicial system. Mental Incompetency is not the same as a “not guilty by reason of insanity” plea.

Under the California Penal Code, for a defendant to be found incompetent to stand trial, the defendant must have a mental disorder that affects his ability to understand the duties of the officers of the court (judge and jury), understand the nature of the charges against him, the consequences of those charges and assist attorneys in the conduct of a defense in a rational manner. If a defendant does not meet the requirements mentioned above, per the law, they should be rendered incompetent to stand trial until they meet the standards set forth by the California Penal Code 1368.

Dr. Anne Evans’ Evaluation

Evans was a licensed psychologist who had conducted numerous forensic evaluations for criminal cases before she was sought by the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office to evaluate Richard Ramirez in 1991.

Between 1991-1995, she administered various psychological and personality tests to Ramirez. She reviewed declarations, police reports, newspaper articles, and medical, psychological, neuropsychological, educational, neurological, jail, prison, and trial records.

“The results of my psychological evaluation … indicate that Mr. Ramirez suffers from a serious mental disorder. The integration of all of my psychological test results in combination with prior assessment, history, records and consultation with current mental health evaluators reveals a strong consistency in the findings of longstanding mental impairment.”

_{– Dr. Anne Evans, Exhibit 73 of Richard Ramirez’s federal habeas corpus document 16.7.}

She determined he suffered from disorganized, fragmented thinking, paranoid delusions, suspiciousness, and mistrust of others which significantly affected his ability to interact with his attorneys. He also had difficulty attending and concentrating. He suffered mood swings, depression, low self-esteem, and suicidal thoughts.

“In my profressional opinion, Mr. Ramirez has clearly not been able to assist his attorneys in the conduct of his defense in a rational manner and, therefore, meets the criteria of incompetence to stand trial pursuant to California Penal Code 1368. It is also my professional opinion, to a reasonable degree of psychological certainty, that this inability is the result of a mental disorder.“

_{– Dr. Anne Evans, Exhibit 73 of Richard Ramirez’s federal habeas corpus document 16.7.}

Some criminal defendants may have depression, mood swings, and paranoia but are still competent to stand trial. Ramirez wasn’t just paranoid and delusional, he literally thought people were out to get him. He even thought his attorneys from the public defender’s office did not want him to “get off” and were colluding with the prosecution. This led to Ramirez being unable to rationally or reasonably assist with his defense or cooperate with attorneys.

He tried to prevent his attorneys from speaking to family, friends, and potential witnesses to gather medical and social history. Ramirez worked against his defense team and their efforts to save his life.

“To my knowledge, over the past ten years, every defense attorney who has attempted to work with this defendant to develop a defense strategy has encountered the same irrationality, paranoia and self-destructiveness. Investigators on the case in 1991 were frustrated by Mr. Ramirez’s refusal to discuss his childhood or reveal anything about his feelings and thoughts at the time of the offenses.”

_{– Dr. Anne Evans, Exhibit 73 of Richard Ramirez’s federal habeas corpus document 16.7.}

Evans further elaborated on his delusions and self-sabotaging behavior:

“He was unable to appreciate the seriousness of the reality of dealing with 12 death sentences. On the other extreme, according to Mr. Martin [Randall, his attorney], Mr. Ramirez very much wanted to live, yet he did nothing to help in his defense and actively attempted to totally block access to his family. His paranoia caused him to be psychotically protective of his family to such an extreme that any attempts to discuss possible ways to save his life were out of the question if his family would be involved in any way.”

_{– Dr. Anne Evans, Exhibit 73 of Richard Ramirez’s federal habeas corpus document 16.7.}

Although Ramirez attempted to block his San Francisco attorney’s efforts to mount a vigorous defense by not cooperating and helping them obtain information for a reasonable defense, they continued to work on his behalf despite the obstacles they encountered.

Randall Martin, one of the public defenders in San Francisco, went to El Paso, conducted interviews with family and friends, and obtained vital medical and social information. As a result of this, Martin was removed from Ramirez’s defense team because Richard was highly upset with him and no longer wanted him as his attorney.

However, the remaining attorneys, Daro Inouye and Dorothy Bischoff, continued working on Ramirez’s case and gathering the necessary information for his trial in San Francisco. Because of the diligent work of the San Francisco Public Defenders that represented Ramirez in the Pan case, the case never went to trial.

Anne Evans, like other professionals that evaluated Ramirez, believed he had a seizure disorder and that the it was the cause of the psychiatric illness symptoms he experienced. It’s reported in some books and online forums that there is no evidence Ramirez had seizures or treatment for such, and this is not the truth. Evans wrote as much here:

“Clearly, Mr. Ramirez’s mental problems have been of a longstanding and severe nature. Without intensive psychological treatment and appropriate medication – which I can safely say has not been provided for him either by the San Francisco County Jail or by San Quentin State Prison – the likelihood of any major changes occurring in Mr. Ramirez’s mental condition is essentially non-existent.”

_{– Dr. Anne Evans, Exhibit 73 of Richard Ramirez’s federal habeas corpus document 16.7.}

Ramirez’s mental disorders were a direct result of temporal lobe epilepsy.

“There is strong evidence that Mr. Ramirez’s mental impairment is related to temporal lobe dysfunction. The constellation of symptoms and behaviors he exhibits are consistent with an organically-based syndrome of this type.“

_{– Dr. Anne Evans, Exhibit 73 of Richard Ramirez’s federal habeas corpus document 16.7.}

While he was at the San Francisco County Jail and at San Quentin Prison, multiple physicians and psychologists determined that Ramirez suffered from a thought and mood disorder, specifically psychosis (delusions/disorganized thought patterns) and depression. These can be treated and cured with appropriate medication.

Ramirez was a sick young man urgently needing treatment for his mental health conditions. He was not “crazy” – he was suffering from serious but treatable mental health conditions. Instead, he was locked up and sentenced to death. Is justice served by sentencing a seriously mentally ill young man to death? If that’s what we believe, we may need to reassess our definition of justice.

Psychosis is a disorder characterized by delusions, hallucinations and/or disorganized thought patterns. Psychosis is not a personality disorder. It is not anti-social behavior such as psychopathy or sociopathy. Psychosis can and does occur in individuals with a history of temporal lobe epilepsy and is treatable

– Kaplan & Sadocks Concise Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry, 5th edition, 2023).

Kaycee