“I’d Make Him My Man”

Sometimes victims of horrific crimes are beguiled, induced or traumatised into deliberately making wrongful identifications. This may be attributed to PTSD, manipulation, confabulation or rage. Here is one story where this nearly happened, if it hadn’t have been for a cooler head.

The Man on the Mountain

Los Angeles Times Magazine, page 11, 1st May 1988 – True Grit, One Woman’s Triumph Over the Horror of Random Violence.

On Valentine’s Day in 1984, during a hike to the Echo Mountain Inspiration Point, a woman was attacked by a man she encountered on the trail.  She wished him “good morning”, he responded, and they continued on their separate ways; he jogging downhill, she hiking up toward the top to claim the reward of a bench and a stunning view of the ocean.

As she progressed up the trail, she heard someone running fast behind her, unsuspecting, she went to sidestep to let them pass, but they didn’t overtake.  Instead, a man hit her, a crushing blow to the right of her skull, and as she gazed at him, she saw his hands raised above his head, holding what seemed to be a sledgehammer. She pivoted away from him, he stuck again, and she realised she couldn’t escape, he was going to kill her. Fighting back, she managed to kick him in the stomach, he stopped, almost surprised, and they made eye contact. No word was spoken between them, the attack resumed. She fell backwards.

Instinct, the desire to survive, overtook rage; she played dead, all thoughts of retaliation gone. It was at this point she was raped, and then he gone.

Her name was Carol. She was bludgeoned, raped, and left for dead at 9am on a pleasant Tuesday morning. Carol described a young man, in his early twenties, of “Native American” appearance. He was clean, upright, “graceful”, of middle weight and muscular.

The Night Stalker “spree” had not yet begun, and the man who violently assaulted her remained unapprehend.


Eighteen Months Later

It was in the Spring of 1985 that detectives first started to theorise that a string of crimes were the work of one man, a shadowy entity, dubbed The Valley Intruder, The Walk-In Killer and later, infamously, The Night Stalker. A creature from the dark, raping and killing indiscriminately, and Carol became obsessed, collecting all the newspaper clippings, keeping them alongside the composite picture of her own rapist, “feeding her rage”, as she described it.

“Every morning I’d cut, staple and stack, and focus feeling and feed my rage. I cherished the obsession and found it repellent”.

Los Angeles Times Magazine, 1st May, 1988

Carol’s brother asked her if she thought that The Night Stalker could be the man who had brutalised her that morning in 1984.

“Do you think the Night Stalker could be your man?”, my brother asked.

Lots of people were asking. They called to ask about it. “That composite picture looks a hell of a lot like him, like your composite picture”, my brother said. I kept my composite on my desk in my bedroom, next to the Polaroid of my daughter as a baby.

“Yeah”, I said.Except it doesn’t”.

Los Angeles Times Magazine, 1st May, 1988

Blaming Ramirez?

On the day that Richard Ramirez’s mugshot was released to the public, Carol was shocked. She didn’t know that police did that, released a suspect’s face to the world before they were caught. Suddenly, before her, was the focus of her rage. Her real attacker was still out there, roaming free, but here was was another, perhaps he would do instead.  Someone to take the blame.

“My God, the cops must be scared stiff. I didn’t think they released this kind of stuff.

Richard Ramirez stared at me. Richard Ramirez.

I’d make him my man”.

Los Angeles Times Magazine, 1st May, 1988

Three days later she called the detective assigned to her case and told him that she thought, perhaps, Ramirez was the man on the mountain who’d attacked her. She wanted to be included in the identification parade that was to take place on 5th September. She knew that Ramirez wasn’t the man who’d assaulted her, and yet she wanted to go to the line-up and falsely identify him.  Because someone has to pay. The media said he was guilty, so did the mayor, so did the police, and clearly, so would she.  

“I’d like to be part of a line-up”, I said.  “What do you think?”.

“I never forget you, Carol”, he said. “Whenever anything comes in, I think of your case. But this isn’t it, it just doesn’t fit – not his height, his weight. Nothing about it. I’m sorry, Carol, I won’t forget you.”

“God, I wish it was him!”, I said. “I know”, he said.

Los Angeles Times Magazine, 1st May, 1988

Identity Charade

One cannot conceive the level of anger, loathing and hate that it must take to falsely identify an accused suspect. Especially when the victim (obviously suffering from PTSD) knows for certain that the person potentially being paraded in front of them didn’t commit the crime.

Whether the victim had begun to convince herself that Ramirez was truly the one who committed such a terrible act against her, or (as seems to be the case here) it was rage, a searing rage against all perceived violent men, to deliberately lie, or to commit perjury, makes a joke of justice.

One can envision had the lead detectives on Night Stalker task force been aware of this, they’d have happily let her take part in the line-up. So, what if her description didn’t match? Neither did the original statements of the people who were there, and who did go on to identify Ramirez, but no one was bothered about that.

As long as someone dies for it, Lady Justice is satisfied.

In this case, the investigator saw sense and acted professionally; the desire for truth overriding the need to close a case. Surely, fraudulently, erroneously, sending someone to be tried for their life would not, in the long run, facilitate healing in a victim.  

The man on the mountain was never caught.

Note: The Carol in this post should not be confused with Carol Kyle.


The 1984 mugshot of Richard Ramirez, released to the public 30th August 1985,

Sources: The LA Times, 1st May 1988. The article cited was an adaptation of Carol Rossen’s book, “Counterpunch”.

Document 19, attachment 5 from the 2008 Federal Petition for Habeas Corpus – Richard Ramirez v Robert L Ayers.

8 responses to ““I’d Make Him My Man””

  1. Thank you for this. I agree THIS is exactly what happened in his case; he became the model of hate and altered to the so called evidence.

    Brilliant article, Jay, as always.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thank you for your kindness. It’s interesting, isn’t it, that the detective in this case wouldn’t allow her to go to the line-up knowing her description of the attacker differed, and he knew it couldn’t be Richard Ramirez. Compare that behaviour to the witnesses either attending the line-up, or making in-court identifications. Their original statements described people who weren’t like Ramirez, either. Whether it was blonde hair, good teeth, wrong ethnicity, wrong height, wrong blood-type, wrong pubic hair, wrong semen; it’s completely crazy.
      Thank you for reading and commenting.

      Like

  2. I think this is all really interesting. Recently, I read about about a famous British celebrity who was convicted of indecent assault on both minors and adults. Although the first conviction was overturned on appeal because the complainant was a proven lying fantasist, other women followed in accusing him of sexual assault. None of their claims could be substantiated and the author of the book mentioned “confabulation” – he speculated women had been genuinely assaulted, but by someone else. Because their own attacker was uncatchable, they had possibly latched onto the celebrity as a sort of representation of that person. Sometimes it’s deliberate but other times their trauma has caused a delusion and a false memory. In this case, there was an offer of compensation which incentivised their claim.
    It seems to happen a lot and is worth looking into further.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I feel genuine sympathy for the woman in the article, her attack was horrific. However I wonder, had she been allowed to attend that line-up and made a false identification, knowing Ramirez wasn’t “her man”, how would that have affected her mentally? Her’s doesn’t seem to have been confabulation because she was aware he hadn’t attacked her. Imagine sending someone to the gas chamber on your false evidence because you need someone to pay for what happened to you. At some point that’s going to get to you.
      After what you told me about the UK case, I agree, it’s a subject worth looking at.

      Like

      1. Yeah I wonder how guilty you’d feel after doing that.

        Like

      2. I imagine, in the end, and because they’ve got to testify in court, they’ve convinced themselves it was really him. You’ve got to convince yourself before you can convince a jury. Otherwise, how do you live with the guilt?
        It’s horrendous.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. I remember reading that article awhile back. But had forgotten what this Carol said. “I wish it was him.” WTF!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. If Sheriff’s Homicide had involved themselves in this, she’d have got a front row seat at that line-up.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment