Melvin Carter

Melvin Alfred Carter (born 1944) is an American serial rapist who confessed to at least 100 rapes of women in Northern California, between 1971 and 1980.

Early life Carter was born in Colorado. While intellectually gifted, he had limited social and emotional skills, and would later describe his mother as domineering. He was a successful student at the School of Mines, during which time he was arrested several times for voyeurism. He later worked as a research engineer for Kaiser Aluminum in Livermore, California.

Other attacks Carter also attacked women in San Francisco, Davis, Berkeley and other California cities. However, he became known as the College Terrace Rapist by first being identified as a serial rapist there and eventually being arrested in Palo Alto. One, Susan, was raped the night after seeing the flyer.

A decoy house was established in one residence, staffed by a female undercover officer who left her doors and windows open in an attempt to lure in the rapist. A different ploy by an officer, John Costa, ultimately led to solving the case. Costa suspected that the rapist knew that undercover officers were in the area, and was as a result intentionally lying low. Costa pretended to be called away from the area, leaving loudly with lights flashing. This caused the rapist to drop his guard, and when Costa returned more quietly, he immediately found and questioned Carter. Eventually enough evidence was found to arrest Carter. In 2018, he was jailed again in Livingston County, New York after being accused of failing to register as a sex offender as required by his earlier convictions.

Impact Carter's case led directly to an increase in the statute of limitations for rape in California. The new law was authored by Assemblyman Byron Sher and was praised by law enforcement officials throughout the Bay Area. The previous statute of limitations – three years – had often been ineffective in prosecuting serial rapists because often by the time all leads could be fully explored, the time limit would have nearly expired. Six years was considered a more appropriate limit because there was precedent for that in other states – and that is about the limit beyond which witnesses' testimony might become unreliable.