Talk:Richard Ramirez

I noticed a few things in the article that are stated as facts that really shouldn't be. All the refrences to Ramirez raping children, for example, aren't facts. They are speculations. They were never proven and he wasn't convicted for them. They should be changed in a way so that they are not presented as facts. (However, in all actuality they probably are true.)

Can we get some more current information on this guy, such as, say, psychiatric evaluations? --Orborde 06:22, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

---

---

Night Stalker

I just want to say that this guy scared the #### out of millions of Californians for half a year. Since I was living in California at the time this article probably does have some minor NPOV problems. Please update the article as needed. --mav

Absolutely, lots of folks were having nightmares about coming home to meet "The Nightstalker"

--- Removed from article:

Ramirez's first known murder was of a 50-year old clown name Frank Toots. He was raped and stuffed in a trunk.

This needs a citation - I could find no mention of a "Frank Toots" associated with anybody named "Ramirez" on the Internet.[1] -mav 05:26, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The March 17 article says "1985 - Serial killer Richard Ramirez commits his first two murders", while the main article says "Ramirez committed his third known murder on March 17". Which one is it? -- Card 18:25, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Why is he listed under "Gay, #######, or Bisexual People" and yet, nothing is mentioned of this fact in the article? - good question, i've removed it until somebody can provide some examples of his bisexuality

Raping old women and sodomizing little boys isn't bisexuality?

- No, it's sexual abuse. Raping old women is certainly not bisexual. Furthermore, there is no evidence that this man had a strong attraction to both genders and/or persued relationships with men. It's very likely that he was sexually abused as a child and is trying to "even the score" through his own violent means. 67.174.31.228 03:16, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Copyright Infrigement

I believe portions of this page have been lifted from CourtTVs Crime Library website. Specifically, the Trial and conviction section contains sentences that are nearly identical to sentences from the Crime Library site. For example:

On August 3, 1988, the Los Angeles Times reported that jail employees had overheard a plan by Ramirez to shoot and kill the prosecutor with a gun that someone was going to smuggle to him in the courtroom. A metal detector was installed outside the courtroom and even the lawyers were searched.

is very similiar to the fourth paragraph on this page:

On August 3, the LA Times reported that jail employees had overheard a plan by Ramirez to shoot and kill the prosecutor with a gun that someone was going to slip him in the courtroom. A metal detector was installed outside the courtroom and even the lawyers were searched. Ramirez seemed surprised, and no gun was ever found.

Another example:

On August 14, the trial was interrupted because juror Ms. Phyllis Singletary did not arrive. That day she was found dead in her apartment. The jury was terrified; they could not help but wonder if Ramirez had somehow directed this event from inside his prison cell and if he might have something similar done to another of them. She had been shot and killed by her boyfriend, who later killed himself with the same weapon in a hotel. The alternate juror who replaced Singletary was so afraid she could not even walk to her place.

is similiar to the twenty-fourth paragraph on the same page:

Judge Tynan called them into court the next day and told them that Ms. Singletary had been shot by an abusive boyfriend. He assured them the incident was unrelated to the case. An alternate was chosen to replace her, although the woman was so overcome with fear she could not walk to her place. Yet more news was forthcoming. Ms. Singletary's boyfriend used the same weapon with which he'd killed her to commit suicide in a hotel. He left behind his written confession. They had been arguing over the Ramirez case and he had become enraged by her disapproval of Ramirez's lawyers.

There are other examples as well. Not all of them are as cut-and-dry as these, however, and I do not feel qualified to rewrite anything. 209.51.77.64 23:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, I've rewritten the offending material the best I can, I hope that it's good enough. Dragoonmac - ^{If there was a problem yo I'll solve it} 00:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The article still plagiarizes whole paragraphs from www.trutv.com : http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/notorious/ramirez/satan_2.html

It lifts word-for-word large sections of the article. I think it needs to be rewritten

Disambig link to Richard Ramirez (musician)

I've added a disambiguation link for the noise musician Richard Ramirez. I'm torn as to whether it should actually be there; on one hand, almost everyone searching for "Richard Ramirez" will be looking for the serial killer and not the musician, but on the other hand, for people who are searching for the musician, this is the best way to help them find the appropriate article without resorting to a rather cumbersome search. At any rate, there is the link; I leave it to concensus to determine if it should stay. MrBook 16:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

A&E documentary

Since 04 October 2006 Youtube visitors are able to watch a documentary by A&E titled 'Biography. THE NIGHT STALKER RICHARD RAMIREZ' (part 1: [2]; for the other parts see the middle column). In it are various statements made that (somewhat) differ from the information given by Wikipedia:

- It wasn't untill his teen years that Ramirez began spending his nights at the cemetery. To escape from his abusive father as a younger child he simply clinged to his (overly) religious mother.

- Ramirez' uncle Mike (Miguel) was in fact a Green Beret who was heavily decorated (in the article it says 'claimed', which makes for the logical connotation).

- The woman he shot but whose keys ricocheted the bullet is not named Angela Barrio but Maria Hernandez (spelling might be incorrect). Also, he shot her inside her garage, not outside her condo.

- The rape and killing of children is nowhere mentioned in the documentary, and I don't recall reading anywhere that he was convicted for such a thing. Naturally, the chances aren't slim he did this; but it shouldn't be portrayed as fact.

- In the Wikipedia article there is mentioning of one Harold and Jean Wu. I pressume these people are William 'Bill' Doi (shot in the head, 3rd deadly victim) and his wife Lillian 'Lillie' Doi (invalid and raped, restrained with thumbcuffs). No Wu family named in the documentary.

- The same goes for Malvial (Malvia I found on another website, possibly the source) Keller and Blanche Wolfe. The documentary claims these two women were called Mabel 'Ma Bell' Doyle and Florence Long.

- The rape of a 6-year-old again is not mentioned.

- There is no mentioning here of Maxson (Max?) and Lela Kneiding whom he killed on the same night (20 July 1985) as Chainarong and Somkid Khovananth, called Chitat and Sakima Assawahemin this article. No information given about their (alledged?) son.

- No mentioning in the documentary of the strange case of Christopher and Virginia Petersen.

- Again different names concerning Ammed Zia and Suu Kyi; in the documentary Allias and Sukina Abbawah (spelling might be wrong).

I hope someone can be of aid. There is alot of differing information.

Who wrote these criticisms of the article? Your criticism is valuable, but you need to sign your comments. As it is, there are a lot of problems with citation in the article. Someone removed the Eagle Rock murder, which I had read about in a contemporary copy of the LA Times found on FirstSearch historical newspapers at a college library. They removed it because they said it wasn't mentioned in court, but they did not cite the court transcripts. I don't even know where to get a hold of the information on what Ramirez was charged with exactly. There is a lot of sensational info floating around about him on the web and on TV, and rightly so, but there must be some way to get details we can cite. I am going to tag this article to note that it has problems with citation, but I am going to replace the Eagle Rock murder and cite it when I finally have access to that resource again. After all, when I added that detail and others I was using the newspaper article as a direct resource.Asedzie 14:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Source?

The last link on the article, the supposed source for the ogre comment, is not working. I'll be removing this line until the source article link has been fixed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TrrpnFlyr (talk • contribs) 22:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Picture of article

Look at the picture of the Times article; the names of victims differ from those on Wikipedia. Something tells me we should go with what the Times has to say about it.

Doesn't make sense

"Ramirez then left the Los Angeles area, and on August 17, he shot to death a 66-year-old man in San Francisco, also shooting and beating his wife. The couple survived their wounds and the wife was able to identify her attacker as "The Walk-in Killer" from police sketches. Since "The Walk-in Killer" no longer fit the modus operandi of the attacker, the news media re-dubbed him the "Night Stalker"."

So he shot the guy to death, but the couple survived?

199.33.140.2 23:09, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Rivers

Location of Murders.

In this article it states that he murdered a couple in Northridge on August 8th. He actually murdered a couple in Diamond Bar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Angelfan26 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Spelling

Does anyone have a source for spelling the subject's last name "Ramírez", with a diacritical over the "i"? While that may have been the correct spelling of the name of his ancestors, I can't find any definitive source for him using it, or for others using it to refer to him. If there are no such sources we should move the article back to "Richard Ramirez". -Will Beback · † · 21:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Rape/Sexual Assualt of RR's Victims

The claim that Ramirez sexually assualted at least one of his victims is supported by newspaper articles written at the time of the crimes. In fact, the scanned newspaper article on this very wiki page notes that Ramirez sexually assualted his victims. If this was not included in the A&E documentary it is possible that their research was insufficient. After all, as I am sure you all will agree A&E is not the final, authoritative source for every historical issue. These articles may not be available on the web, but they are available through library/college newspaper databases.Asedzie 13:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Possessed?

Anyone notice in a lot of this guy's pictures he looks completely possessed? Aside from the pentagram on his palm, just look into his eyes; looks like there's not even a human soul behind them. Some would probably say it's due to being a deranged serial killer, or whatever, but I'd say otherwise. Look at these pictures for examples:

http://www.evilkillers.com/Richard%20Ramirez_files/ramirez.jpg

http://www.allserialkillers.com/Richard-Ramirez-Mad.jpg

Hell, others even have thought the same. "She sometimes wished she had resisted longer and caused a hung jury. In her opinion, Ramirez had been possessed by the Devil, and his lawyers should have raised this issue."

--Tainted Drifter 22:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Why would this be relevant? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.131.228 (talk) 21:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Because some holly rollers seem to believe that "demonic possession" is the answer to mentall illnesses they dont understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.72.199.12 (talk) 22:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio from crimelibrary.com

Just look at this.--ID burn 06:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I was just going to post the same thing. Its quite blatant. Uncle Cheech 21:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Even though a certain Anthony Bruno wrote the Crime Library article, that article states "©2007 Turner Entertainment Digital Network, Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.". I doubt that the copyright holders were the ones who put this on Wikipedia. It's an almost exact copy and probably the only reason it's no longer an exact copy, but still very obviously a copy, is that it has been edited so often since. Unless someone goes through the trouble of completely rewriting it, I think this should unfortunately be nominated for deletion on Wikipedia:Copyright problems per Wikipedia:Copyright violations. wjmt (talk) 01:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite needed

The tone of this article is completely off base for an encyclopedia; it is way too sensationalistic and florid. I'm going to try cutting through some of the worst, but any help would be appreciated. Matt Deres 19:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Like a book

This article is written like it's some thriller book or something... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.216.222.12 (talk) 00:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Birth date

I'm adding a Template:Fact to his birth date. The article lists it as 29 February, but the reference (which CANNOT be accessed freely) description says "Richaro Ramirez, born 28 Feb 1960 El Paso County, parents Julian Ramirez, Mercedes Munoz". wjmt (talk) 17:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

This article is crap

Barely a single sentence of this mess is appropriate for Wikipedia; it's all sensationalized, romance novel-level dreck. I strongly suspect that, judging from the broken link to the Ramirez interview and the hilariously inept prose, Philip Carlo wrote most of this and linked to himself to sell his amateurish books. The entire thing may need to be re-written from the ground up. Carlo, you are almost as bad as the scum you're obsessed with. 71.239.124.173 (talk) 09:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The repetitive use of "horrific" in the first section describing the Vietnam war photographs Ramirez was supposedly shown as a child are a subjective rather than objective viewpoint of the event. I do not think I will be able to edit it sufficiently, but I suggest that somebody do. Skylarken (talk) 00:34, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

It's copyvio. I nominated this article for deletion. wjmt (talk) 04:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree completely! Reading this article made me angry. Honestly, I find it offensive. It's like this is some short story a disturbed little teeneager wrote, not a series of real events. I think the tone of this article not only embarrasses Wikipedia and its standards, but also downplays the tragedy. This article needs a complete rewrite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.46.132.1 (talk) 06:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Early Life and Influences section

I tried to reword this in order to make it more objective, which I have done, but it still isn't wonderful. It requires references - mainly to Ramirez's epilepsy, childhood and music tastes, and more information about 'Mike' and 'his wife' - surname, dates, name of the wife etc. In addition, I challenge the statement that 'five-point pentagram' was 'the symbol of the devil'. Ramirez may have mistakenly thought it so, but as far as I've read (mainly the wiki article about the pentagram), the pentagram has always had positive symbolism unless inverted. There thus needs to be some more information about Ramirez's 'satanism', and how these beliefs developed. At present, I do not have time to do an in-depth search for references, though I will try a basic web search for facts (such as his date of birth).Skylarken (talk) 05:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skylarken (talk • contribs) 05:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Nate Griffiths?

This entry in the list of victims looks suspicious to me. The mention of him being survived by his lover/manager and pet cat gives me the impression that it is vandalism. An internet search on Ramirez and Nate Griffiths only brings up this page. Also, to my knowledge Ramirez did not commit any known murders in Michigan. However, as I am new to Wikipedia I do not feel comfortable editing the article myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.211.98.180 (talk) 15:20, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Also, did he really kill Peter Pan? 21:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.131.228 (talk)

Quotes

I noticed that none of the quotes given at the bottom of the page are cited. Please provide the citations or else have the quotes removed until someone is willing to provide citations.

--BBUCommander (talk) 02:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

The section has been tagged requesting sources. Is there some particular reason why you would doubt them to the point of requesting their removal? Wildhartlivie (talk) 03:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

A few of the quotes seemed overly sensational and thus perhaps someone (other than Ramirez) manufactured them to give such an effect. Also, the quotes appeared to be made by different people due to their differing tones, implying again that some may be manufactured, though that may be due to the mental state of Ramirez. The reason for removing such quotes if no source is cited would be to prevent visitors from reading chronically unsourced information that could actually be fabricated (thus not wasting future visitors' time with contentious information in an already information-packed article). --BBUCommander (talk) 02:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

SargJohnLennon (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Yea, and look at this Philip Carlo's page too... all he does is cite his own website when he claims that he was shot in the head with a .22..... I think this guy is just a talentless hack who edits these and cites his own website