On March 10, 1978, a brutal attack in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, captured wide local attention and is often referenced in academic and journalistic discussions as an early instance of ‘‘copycat’ murder hysteria.’’ The incident involved a visibly violent assault that drew heavy coverage in area newspapers and on local television, prompting public anxiety about the possibility of imitation. While scholars debate which incident should be considered the first documented case of copycat-driven violence, the Cleveland Heights case is notable for the timing—coming during an era when mass media reach was expanding—and for the public reaction that followed. Contemporary reports described shock and heightened vigilance among residents after the attack. Local authorities and community leaders publicly warned about potential copycat incidents, and the media’s repeated descriptions of the method and circumstances of the attack likely contributed to the community’s fear. Researchers who study media effects and criminology point to clusters of similar violent acts after high-profile crimes as evidence that detailed publicity can sometimes increase the risk of imitation, especially when the original act is sensationalized or extensively described. Historians and social scientists caution against simple causal claims. The term ‘‘copycat murder hysteria’’ implies a clear linkage between publicity and a wave of imitative crime, but evidence is often complex and contested. In many cases, multiple social factors—such as local tensions, availability of weapons, mental health issues, and preexisting criminal behavior—interact with media exposure. Because contemporaneous records sometimes lack detailed, systematic data tying subsequent crimes directly to media reports, describing cases as ‘‘copycat hysteria’’ can reflect interpretation as much as incontrovertible fact. The Cleveland Heights episode is significant, nonetheless, for how it shaped subsequent discourse on media responsibility and crime reporting. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, scholars in sociology, psychology, and journalism increasingly studied whether and how news coverage could inspire imitation. Those debates informed later guidelines adopted by some news organizations about avoiding explicit descriptions of methods used in violent crimes, and by public officials aiming to reduce the risk of contagion. When writing about early cases like this, historians emphasize careful sourcing and nuance. The claim that the 1978 Cleveland Heights attack was ‘‘the first’’ case of copycat murder hysteria should be treated cautiously: earlier events may fit similar patterns, and retrospective labeling can depend on the available records and scholarly framing. What is clearer is that the incident contributed to a growing awareness—among media, officials, and scholars—of the potential for high-profile violent crimes to influence subsequent behavior. For readers seeking more detail, primary sources from March 1978 include local newspaper archives and contemporaneous police statements; scholarly discussions appear in later studies of media contagion and criminology. Where interpretations differ, it is important to distinguish between documented facts (date, location, content of coverage) and inferences about causation (whether subsequent crimes were directly inspired by media reports).