Expendable For A Cause.

7^th July 1985: Sophie Dickman was raped, assaulted and robbed in Monterey Park. During the attack, the man threatened to kill her with a small pistol which he held against her head. She was left handcuffed to her bed.

Sophie Dickman’s neighbour across the street was Linda Arthur, an L.A. County Sheriff’s Deputy and crime scene analyst (she was featured in the Netflix documentary). Linda Arthur was a friend of Detective Gil Carrillo and one of the few investigators that believed in his serial killer hypothesis. She decided that this rape was somehow to do with the “Valley Intruder” and called him in, even though Monterey Park was out of his jurisdiction (they have their own team of homicide detectives).

Arthur’s reasoning, given in City in Fear: Night Stalker (a documentary for MSNBC), was that the rapist “drove away.” This is not very insightful for a police officer but she was in good company. It is also nonsensical, because up to this point, there had only been one similar attack – Carol Kyle and the rapist with the good teeth. But Kyle’s rape was not yet linked to the murders and did not become a “Night Stalker attack” until late August. Moreover, the Kyle incident happened in Burbank, not the San Gabriel Valley and was dealt with by Burbank Police Department. Linda Arthur and Gil Carrillo were LASD (the County Sheriff’s Department) and shouldn’t have known about the Kyle case. Other attacks that week were Mary Cannon, Whitney Bennett and Joyce Nelson who had all been beaten over the head and strangled, or stabbed.

The Curly-Haired Man

The Night Stalker underwent one of his many metamorphoses in the Dickman case. She stated that her attacker had brown curly hair that curled in a “soft” and “natural” way (this was the era of the perm) This is the composite drawing dated 7^th July:

The newspapers, probably using information given by the police, claimed this composite was the Nelson killer. Nelson did not survive to be able to describe the killer, but the police had been telling the press that the suspect was tall with curly hair because of a strange man they had encountered weeks earlier. We now know that nobody had described this man in crimes before July 1985.

This composite sketch was made from plastic overlays causing it to resemble composite sketches from other crimes across America. See this post for more information. This image was shared on a flyer at a neighbourhood watch event in Monterey Park.

The Suspect’s Changing Height

Below is the description from Sophie Dickman’s first responder police interview. She told Officer Costleigh that the suspect was a white man who looked about 27, and was either 5’8″ or 5’9″ – short to medium height.

At trial, under cross examination by Ramirez’s attorneys, Sophie Dickman denied telling Costleigh that the suspect was 5’8″-5’9″. The problem is, she gave the same description to Detective Corrigan when making the composite sketch. Dickman was asked if her 5’8″ description was on the flyers distributed around Monterey Park. She claimed she could not remember. Unfortunately for Sophie Dickman, it was revealed that she had previously admitted at the preliminary hearing that her original 5’8″ description was on the flyer. According to Philip Carlo’s book, she became snappy and said, “Well, I don’t remember telling you that, but if I did, I did.” (pg. 311).

“She later testified that she had described his height to the police as 6′ or 6’1”.

_{– Petition, pg. 396.}

It is possible that she changed his height in a later police interview after being manipulated into doing so. Other victims also changed their descriptions.

Hiker

In another police interview, the officer wrote down that the rapist was dressed in hiking or mountain climbing gear and was “leathery smelling”. She again denied it and suggested the police made this up. It must be noted that this report is not included in the Petition documents, nor is it on her initial statement. The information is from Carlo’s book, pg. 310.

She also claimed that all the officers had decided her attacker was white when she had not said so. Yet, officers claimed she had not specified that he was Latino. Why would multiple officers say he was white if he was not and why would she not correct them? In his descriptions, Gil Carrillo describes her as a forthright and no-nonsense character, but she seems quite confused, hostile and without the sense to correct police when they apparently write something down wrong. If she changed her story, it suggests she was easily manipulated. Carlo alleges he and Salerno were anxious for her to leave the witness stand because she was such a poor witness.

More evidence of her suggestibility is when she chose a suspect from a photo spread who looked nothing like the curly-haired, short, thin white man in her description. She picked a 6’0″, broad Mestizo, Arturo Robles. This was the same suspect in the Dayle Okazaki case.

“Police showed Sophie D. the same photographic lineup not including defendant’s photograph that had been shown to Maria Hernandez, and Sophie D. picked out the same person who, as noted above, was apprehended, questioned and released.”

_{– Ramirez’s 2006 Appeal}

Funny how Carrillo should show both women photos of Arturo Robles and both chose him even though he looked nothing like their attackers. Sophie Dickman’s short curly haired man is nothing like the taller, moustachioed man who shot Maria Hernandez.

The Line-Up

Sophie Dickman admitted to seeing Richard Ramirez “lots of times” on television multiple times a day, as well as in the papers. Like other victims, Maria Hernandez and Carol Kyle, she learned that she was part of the Night Stalker attacks from the media or the police around the time Ramirez was captured. Like others, she failed to call the police when she saw her supposed attacker on the news. According to Philip Carlo, she arrogantly stated ““That is their job. They didn’t need any hints from me.” If you’re accusing a man of rape, then yes, you absolutely do need to cooperate with the police.

“She learned from the news that the Night Stalker was responsible for her attack about five days after the arrest, which was prior to the live line-up.”

_{– Petition, pg. 397.}

It should also be noted that Dickman was short-sighted and was not wearing her glasses during the attack. She was allowed to walk close to the stage during the line-up where she identified Richard Ramirez. In addition to being told they were going to see the Night Stalker in the line-up, victims were also coached who to choose on the day. The level of police manipulation and misconduct in this case is extraordinary.

The Jewellery Expert Tramp

Reporting on the trial, the Los Angeles Times wrote that Sophie Dickman testified that the rapist was knowledgeable about jewellery.

“The woman, who concluded her testimony Thursday, also said Ramirez was able to instantly distinguish real diamonds from cubic zirconia, the popular imitation diamond.”

_{– Los Angeles Times, 17th March 1989.}

This is in direct contradiction to what Sandra Hotchkiss testified. Hotchkiss was a convicted felon who committed many robberies with Richard Ramirez. She portrayed him in a way that is starkly at variance with the angry, demanding rapist in Dickman’s house.

“One the first occasion, Hotchkiss bought several rings and chains from Petitioner. Hotchkiss later bought jewelry from Petitioner at good prices because he was unaware of the weight of the gold or the value of stones.”

^{– Petition, pg. 142.}

Later, the Petition reveals that Hotchkiss was the one leading Ramirez.

“She picked the homes to be burglarized. According to Hotchkiss, Petitioner did not know how to identify valuable jewelry.”

^{– Petition pg. 143.}

The Los Angeles Times, observing Sandra Hotchkiss’ testimony reported that:

“Once inside, she said, Ramirez often behaved nervously, going in and out of the house while making a lot of noise. Ramirez was, she said, “too slow” and “just wasn’t smooth,” adding: “He didn’t know jewelry.”

_{– Los Angeles Times, 25th May 1989}

Ramirez’s ‘fence’ Felipe Solano also stated that Ramirez knew nothing about jewellery. Both he and Hotchkiss took advantage of his cluelessness.

The Confusion Surrounding the Rape

Avoid reading this section if you find rape descriptions distressing. However, the rape is questionable.

Describing her attack, in which it seems that she was sexually injured (there was blood on her bed), she said:

“He was just thrusting and pounding and that was it. He turned me over and tried sodomy … he was thrusting and pounding against the rectal area, except it was more like my tailbone … it felt like I was being torn in two.”

– Carlo, pp. 308-309

Carlo also wrote that prosecutor Halpin asked Dickman if she could tell if the suspect actually penetrated her genital area to which she replied, “I don’t think so. He didn’t have an erection.” The prosecution did not submit semen evidence from the Dickman case. Carlo wrote that Carrillo and Salerno were surprised because Dickman was swabbed with a rape kit and semen was found. How does a man ejaculate without an erection, much less make a woman feel like she was being torn in two? Ultimately, there was no forensic evidence to tie Richard Ramirez to this crime.

Joyce Nelson: Which Came First?

Sophie Dickman’s rape also occurred on the same night as a murder. A mile away, Joyce Nelson was bludgeoned and strangled. It has not been satisfactorily established which incident came first. If Joyce Nelson was attacked first, then Sophie Dickman should have noticed blood or marks on him: Nelson died fighting her assailant. But then it must be asked why the killer beat and strangled Nelson instead of shooting her. He had a gun, after all. Gil Carrillo claims that Dickman was attacked after Nelson because Nelson didn’t “acquiesce”, which he claims caused Ramirez to become enraged and kill her outright before seekingsatisfation at Dickman’s. This is of course complete conjecture and based on alleged unrecorded “confessions.”

Furthermore, there were Avia shoeprints at Joyce Nelson’s house. Sophie Dickman said the rapist wore hi-top sneakers in black with a white strip round the side. Avia Aerobics, the model the prosecutor claimed the killer wore, did not come as hi-tops with white strips. Did the Night Stalker change his shoes as well as his modus operandi?

So, while Sophie Dickman was raped by a thin man with dark, wavy/curly hair, he was too short, too Caucasian and too knowledgeable about jewellery to be Richard Ramirez. Because Sophie Dickman’s stolen property was found in the home of Ramirez’s fence, Solano, and the case was similar to the Kyle attack, this bolstered the prosecution’s argument. Ramirez was convicted and received the death penalty for this crime.

-VenningB-

Originally written on 27th December 2022
Updated on 9th June 2024.