Ramiro Gonzales, Saint of Serial Rape and Murder
Ramiro Gonzales, serial rapist, killer, and, according to the Austin Chronicle, “Spiritual Leader on Death Row,” has been executed in Texas. The media is full of the usual lies about his original trial testimony, especially about the appeals-rejected claim that his testifying trial psychiatrist has reversed his original testimony that Ramiro was a danger to society. This shrink now claims that Ramiro is not a danger to society, and that the science he relied on then is not science now.
Only, it wasn’t science then either, and it was actually Dr. Edward Gripon himself who said so in court. In the original trial, Dr. Gripon admitted that the American Psychiatric Association’s official position was that ‘predictions of future dangerousness were highly controversial,’ and ‘that such predictions are unscientific and unreliable’ [these are probably direct quotes, but I don’t have time to research them, so I don’t just make random stuff up and call it facts, like real journalists do].
Now Dr. Gripon agrees with what both he and the American Psychiatric Association said then, except he didn’t believe in the science then, and he conveniently believes in some completely imaginary science now.
Hmmm, said the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas in 2015, the time of one of Ramires’ appeals. Hmmm, they said, for about five seconds, until they dispatched Saint Gonzales’ latest effort to get away with raping, torturing, and murdering Bridget Townsend with his rifle on his ranch, where he later abducted another woman, brutally raped her, and locked her in a closet.
So, apparently, from the very first moment Dr. Edward Grippon testified in the trial over the rape and murder of Bridget Townsend, he already sucked as both a clairvoyant and a psychiatrist.
Dr. Edward Grippon, Rocking a Stereotypical Psychiatrist Turtleneck,
Yet Really Bad at Predictions
Ramiro Gonzales perhaps did change in prison. But it was too late to bring Bridget Townsend back to life. It was too late to take the trauma and violation of his other victim away. And according to sciency science, he probably raped and tortured other girls and boys and women. He just didn’t get caught.
So, yes, I believe the spiritual growth he experienced may have been partially sincere. Except, constantly trying to get his case overturned is very strong proof against that. Maybe he did think it would help his case to feel terrible. Maybe he did regret … something. Maybe, this time, he wouldn’t have raped Bridget Townsend before killing her. There’s no science to measure this, but …
…But say her name. Say what happened to her.
Of course, the media doesn’t. They used to ignore and dehumanize crime victims by getting weepy hug-a-thug journalists to publish the killers’ last suppers, as if the sadists were Christ incarnate. Now, as more editors feel the pressure to cut the cringing detail of reporting the last meal story (45 chicken wings? Chocolate milk? Didn’t finish dessert?), they have turned back to the time-worn, full-court press “rehabilitation” theme. Ramiro even has a creepy YouTube channel where his defense attorneys have creates a vaseline-smeared memoir of his beautiful heart, his deep regret, his terrible childhood — everything except what he did to those poor women and likely many others. They do mention in the video that Ramiro raped a six-year old boy. But they don’t blame him for that either.
So now we have three victims, and counting, including a six-year old boy. There is no statute of limitations on raping a six-year old boy. Maybe these preening death row ministers and activists should have been working to convict Ramiro for that rape, and healing that victim, instead of the thrill of going to the prison and hanging out with a rapist-killer and deciding that he was Christ on earth. Similarly, the media actually did a worse job reporting this case, despite Ramiro’s additional confessions.
Instead, what they did was replace Ramiro’s “Last Supper” with a smeary tape about his purported rehabilitation despite the fact that he simultaneously tried to be cut loose for his crimes.
On death row, Ramiro also tried to gain sympathy by offering his kidney to someone who needed it. I can speak directly to that. Gonzales gained some fame by offering to donate a kidney in return for leniency. As the sister of a brother who died recently after decades of dialysis and failed transplants (type 1 diabetes from birth), I have considered this issue deeply. My answer is this:
While I appreciate all living kidney donors, and one may donate a kidney to a stranger, Mr. Gonzales’ history of drug use, apparently unhygienic tattoos, and other health history and choices exclude him as a donor. But even if they didn’t, I believe any offender who wishes to donate a kidney and who meets the medical society requirements, but especially limits on exploiting one’s choice for any reason, including self-serving publicity, should have the choice to do so just like any other person. But it should have absolutely no bearing on his or her sentence or any court case or appeal in which he or she engages. Kidney donation has nothing to do with the criminal justice system unless it is the subject of a malpractice or negligence case relating to the donation itself. And only kidney donations are appropriate, because organs cannot and should never be donated on the eve of an execution. That’s too close to government involvement. We should never go down the road of coercion. If it’s a family member, give the offender the right any other family member might have, but that’s it.
In Ramiro’s case, I smell a lot of rats. His defense attorneys, who are using social media to promote a picture of innocence and pure rehabilitation. In his psychiatrist’s case — well, the guy’s just subpar. He’d probably be subpar as a rat. In the media’s case — a media that usually mocks religion — they are doing something even worse now. They are literally using Christ to dehumanize victims who were already horrifically murdered and dehumanized.
I think I liked it better when they just incontinently prattled on about how many chicken wings their killers ate.
This is the New Last Supper. If Manuel Ramires really repented his evil, sick deeds, we wouldn’t even know his name. From anonymity, he might have even actually advanced the cause of anonymous kidney donations from inmates. If he really repented, the appropriate response would have been to not appeal, not seek media attention, not post YouTube tapes, minister in anonymity in prison, and seek neither release nor outside attention for his conversion.
Instead, with a lot of sick lawyers and psychiatrists, he did the opposite of all of that.