CA: Dad tackles person convicted of sex offense who exposed himself in front of 5-year-old daughter

A brave dad tackled and duct-taped a person who is listed on the sex offense registry who broke into a California home and exposed himself in front of his sleeping 5-year-old daughter, according to a new report.

The man started creeping around outside the home in Grayson around 5 a.m. Tuesday, KOVR reported.

“He went and knocked the door, he tried to open the door, peeking through the window, trying to see and he was showing his private parts around the windows,” said the little girl’s sister, Ceci Ramirez, translating for her mother, Martha Zepeda.

He repeatedly said “I love you” as he touched himself, according to Ramirez.

The girls’ father warned the man to leave — to no avail.  The family learned the man — identified by the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Office as 39-year-old Diaz — had broken the screen of the kitchen window and entered the home, according to the report.

At some point, Diaz entered the little girl’s room.

“The man turned on the lights and that’s when my sister woke up and she got scared,” Ramirez told the outlet.

But then the girls’ father jumped into action — tackling Diaz and pulling him out of the house.

Security footage obtained by KOVR shows the family outside as he pinned Diaz down. He can be heard duct-taping Diaz to keep him from fleeing as they called 911.

Diaz was arrested and hit with charges including child endangerment, peeping and prowling, the local outlet reported, citing the sheriff’s office.

He was previously convicted of assault with intent to commit rape in 2009 and released in 2018, according to California’s Megan’s Law website.

Ramirez told the local station she is proud of her father for protecting the family — but is fearful after the incident.

Security footage obtained by KOVR shows the family outside as he pinned Diaz down.

“I was pretty scared because I thought the man would’ve taken and kidnapped [my sister],” she said.

Zepeda said her younger daughter is afraid but otherwise OK.

A next-door neighbor who only gave her first name, Erica, said she is also concerned.

“We’re girls and we didn’t know if it was going to happen to us,” she told the station. “It could’ve been us.”


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If you are on the registry then guess what…in the public’s eye this guy’s crime is something WE ALL did. That’s how the public is going to perceive it.

Hats off to the dad. This guy should be put in a secure facility. He obviously has issues. Unfortunately we the 99% will have to suffer for this dipshit’s actions while he enjoys three squares a day, a nice bed and medical attention. I guess no matter what level you are on, there’s someone lower. This guy might be the lowest though.

Funny just think if there was not so much stigma attached to not only being on this dang list , and made easy to get the “help” , and that “Help” in no way be punishment/shaming he very well may not have been out there creeping , punishment is not meds , its the (opposite) a little understanding about other peoples issues is a strength for all that truly care about meaningful change , and yep helping “all” live a life of dignity , I feel for all in this article , they are all victims to a system not geared to help , just punish and keep the doors rolling and allowing people to live inside their tortured mind with no true freedom

Disagree. This guy is insane or was big time tweaking, probably both, during this incident. No way the “public” is going to equate him with every registrant. The tiered registry passed because the public realized not all are equal. This is a good example.

“The father dragged the intruder outside. Zapeda said he tried to escape two times, but instead of running away from the scene he would try to run back into the house.

Read more here:

That’s crazy. The father is a hero who kept is cool yet took care of business.

And we can comment at that site.

I’m curious if the offender lived next door, or on the block where the victim/family lived. Or if he lived in the immediate neighborhood. Megan’s Law would theoretically have provided the victim’s family with a forewarning that this dangerous offender lived in close proximity, and posed an immediate risk. Therefore, the father would have been ‘on notice’ that this dangerous person could potentially do what he did at any time. What precautions did the father take? Was there no active neighborhood watch?

Seems that the theory of Megan’s Law failed in this instance. No?

I agree that this guy was pretty insane at the time of his acts. Likely psychotic, possibly as a result of substance abuse, possibly not. Certainly, he belongs in a locked facility until such a time that he “reasonably” no longer poses a risk to the community…which may be quite some time in the future.

Bullcrap reoffenders who give us all a bad name. Exposing himself to a 5 year old girl? Dude would of had a lot more wrong with him if I was around.

Not good!

Obviously, good report writing using proper English is a thing of the past. The very first sentence proves my point. I also note the absence of link to source, and the fact this is a ” report about a translated report. ” I am also certain this ” piece” was authored by a female with little training. I notice the use of the names of minors and witnesses involved, which raises ethical questions.

Unfortunately, in today’s world this kind of home invasion in not uncommon! Whether it has sexual connotation to the invasion is a matter of a rarer motive. If the man knocked at the door, his intent was to be noticed by those inside and that scenario is no different than the actions of an FBI task force knocking at my door on Aug. 20, 2010, at 11:50 pm, wanting to enter my home to search with no warrant.

There are some real inconsistencies in this article. I think the entire story isn’t being told. The guy is exposing himself to the daughter in the window, so the father asks him to leave??? The daughter wakes up to find them man in the room, but she fell asleep after this guy was talking to her through the window exposing himself and saying I love you?? The guy is prowling around outside, but the father ignores the daughters bedroom long enough for this guy to break in the window and climb in? No, sorry, none of this makes sense. This guy was known to the family and he was in the house with access to the kids, the father is trying to cover up something. If a prowler was outside trying to look in the windows, the first thing a father would do would be sure the girls were safe and in his sight, them call the police, get armed, and keep a vigilant watch. No, sorry, not adding up.

This guy is probably a tier 3 sex offender with mental illnesses hes lucky the dad didn’t kill him.
Sex offenders have no equality among themselves some people got cought up in the system and some people are just plain sick and enjoy hurting others
Thats why the California new tier law SB384 was invented to separate the SVP’S from people who made a consensual mistake with someone a few years younger than them.
People like this guy belong in a mental hospital for life or should be [MODERATORS COMMENT: Edited for violation of policies]

Stories like this make me hate advocacy because we bash one another due to our opinion.
[MODERATORS NOTE: We moderators agree, which is why we have been more willing recently to delete comments that insult each other. Some of the more angry people have said they left because of this crackdown, but we cannot be united when our “right” to insult each other as keyboard trolls is greater than our willingness to keep discussions calm]

This article has done one thing for sure. It has shown how different registrants approach the entire sex offender problem. We have:

  1. Those that support the actions taken against him
  2. Those that feel his actions didn’t warrant the level of retaliation
  3. Those that think he is demented
  4. Those that feel his actions were not as harmful as described
  5. Those that try to explain away every single part of the story
  6. Those that feel that any one part of the story in conjunction with his priors makes him deserving of lifetime incarceration.

What this does for me is clarify that everyone of us has an altered perception of our own offense. Those of us with what would be considered ‘lesser’ offenses try to raise ourselves by looking on this man as a problem for us ( I include myself in this group). Those with more serious offenses are trying to level the field by explaining away this man’s actions. In a way projecting.
I can admit here and now that when the time comes for me to be removed from the registry ( tic toc , tic toc ) I will not be sticking around to lend a hand to others. Sorry. I will leave this chapter of my life in my rear view mirror.

The thing is that these stories always talk about those who re-offend. Why not shift gears and gather success stories of those who have NOT re-offended. The glass is half full, I thought. Focus on the positive for a change, reiterate the low recidivism rate and if someone believes otherwise, have them PROVE it. I can easily make up stories all day long, but unless I can back it up with evidence, I don’t expect anybody to believe it. Same for recidivism. Statistics prove, and I emphasize PROVE that the re-offense rate for sex offenders is low. So, how in the world can the contrary hold true anywhere, EVER? Nobody gets to make up rules and laws based on what they lie about and think the public wants to hear. Heck, if I were the public, I would want to know the truth rather than worrying about things that stem from lies being told. The public should be outraged that they are being lied to and in return have to live a life of worry. What if I tell people that I have a contagious disease, and people freak out and avoid going outside just to find out later it was all a lie and they could have lived their lives without fear for all these years.

Lot of good that ankle monitor did, right?

A lot of you are commenting about mental treatment. But as you know, court-ordered treatment is not confidential. So if this guy has an attraction to young girls, he could not get treatment about it in court-mandated therapy. There has to be a way for someone like him to be honest about what he’s attracted to and find ways to manage his thoughts and feelings so he doesn’t do something like this.

I don’t care about the age of who he exposed himself to or that he was already convicted of something in the past. Anyone hanging around anywhere who flashes someone without consent is simply inviting trouble their way. Even though he will probably be successfully prosecuted I don’t think it will do any good other than providing a false sense of justice. The guy needs help in at least one form or another in a controlled setting for some unknown amount of time. No I’m not suggesting civil commitment, prison, jail, a mental hospital, a rehabilitation center, or anything specific currently. Perhaps it’s a combination of help he needs. Let’s just hope he gets it.

The family is a separate concern and I hope they are able to access all the resources they need to move beyond the incident.

It appears that we are all in agreement that (1) this person needs treatment and should not be free as long as he presents as a danger to us all; (2) the victim/family should be provided support/counseling or anything else that would assist in them getting back to some level of normalcy, and (3) the registry and Meghan’s Law did nothing to prevent the offense from occurring. So what are we fighting about?

Two points:

  1. This guy is one of the 0.8% recidivists. Yes, it’s possible, and in this case it entirely true. He does not deserve an iota of our compassion or respect, though he has real mental issues to boot.
  2. And yes, this hurts the standing of registrants with the community at large. This is why we must be vigilant and provide the rebuttals to stronger laws, indicating that the strongest laws in place wouldn’t have prevented this crime.