American Hauntings: The True Stories behind Hollywood's Scariest Movies—from The Exorcist to The Conjuring: The True Stories behind Hollywood’s Scariest Movies—from The Exorcist to The Conjuring

Home > Other > American Hauntings: The True Stories behind Hollywood's Scariest Movies—from The Exorcist to The Conjuring: The True Stories behind Hollywood’s Scariest Movies—from The Exorcist to The Conjuring > Page 16
American Hauntings: The True Stories behind Hollywood's Scariest Movies—from The Exorcist to The Conjuring: The True Stories behind Hollywood’s Scariest Movies—from The Exorcist to The Conjuring Page 16

by Robert Bartholomew


  In watching two nationally broadcast TV programs on this case, Paranormal Witness and Unsolved Mysteries, one cannot help but be impressed by the use of firsthand interviews with people who were there. In fact, almost all of the dialogue in Paranormal Witness is from the witnesses in their own words. While these interviews were conducted two decades after the events, they are valuable pieces of primary evidence. But in reality, the TV reenactments were far from accurate, because of two processes: one intentional, through selective editing, and the other unintentional, through distorted memories. An example of selective editing occurred in 2012, when Mr. Van Why told a local reporter that when he first arrived at the house, he noticed nothing out of the ordinary, and that it was not until he sat in the living room that he first noticed very light rain coming from the ceiling.11 Yet on both the Paranormal Witness and Unsolved Mysteries segments, Mr. Van Why arrives to see heavy “rain” pouring down inside the house.

  At one point, the Keiffers took Decker out of the house to a pizzeria across the street. When owner Pam Scrofano saw Decker’s trance-like state, she too assumed that it was likely triggered by demonic influences. “You looked at Donnie and he was . . . in a trance. He would look at you, but not knowing you were there. I said to Jeannie, ‘He’s got to be possessed.’” Then she suddenly noticed that there was “water all over the pizzeria.” Instead of calling a roof specialist or plumber to locate where the water was seeping from, she immediately assumed it was demonic possession and went straight to the cash till to grab a crucifix. When it touched Decker’s skin, he said it made his skin burn.12

  Later that night, Officer Baujan returned to the house out of concern for the Keiffers. He said that when he entered, “there was panic in the room.” Jeannie Keiffer stood there, reading from the Twenty-Third Psalm and holding a bible in an effort to rid Decker of his possession, which eventually seemed to work. According to Paranormal Witness, which presented the events using the witnesses’ own words, the “rain” stopped by the next morning when Decker returned to the county jail. Inexplicably, Unsolved Mysteries reports that Decker’s ordeal at the house endured for three days.

  Decker’s Return to Jail

  When Decker reported back to jail, the rain supposedly followed. Yet before he arrived, word had spread of his rainmaking powers, and many guards and inmates were expecting some type of rain event. “All the inmates heard what was going on at the house. They were all scared. The guards—they were scared too,” Decker recalled. Keenhold said that after looking at Decker’s demeanor, he became convinced that “there was an evil presence around him . . . [that] was so abnormal that we felt that the supernatural was present.” Later, when his cell was found to have water dripping from the walls and ceiling, his cellmate screamed to the guards, who transferred Decker to another cell. Keenhold told Paranormal Witness matter-of-factly, “Water was all over his cell. Water was going horizontal, vertical, climbing up the walls, defying the laws of gravity.” Yet Keenhold told reporter Christina Tatu in 2012 that he never visited Decker in his cell.13 How can he appear so certain of this event if he is relying on second-hand accounts? At the very least, Paranormal Witness is guilty of giving the impression that Keenhold was there. What other selective use of evidence were viewers not told about? The documentary gives only one side of the story; there are no interviews with skeptics, and conspicuously absent is the testimony of then police chief Gary Roberts. Is the purpose of the show to uncover the truth, or is it to create the impression of a mystery when one does not exist, in order to attain high ratings? Where are the other witnesses? Surely, if one were to see water moving up a wall, one would summon others to observe this remarkable event. Why not contact university experts in physics to investigate? The news media? The FBI? The water in his cell could have been thrown there from the sink or a leaky roof at a time when ice dams would have been common. Instead of assuming one of these natural explanations or an optical illusion is responsible, Keenhold believes it is coming from Decker, who is possessed by the Devil.

  In 2011, Paranormal Witness depicts Keenhold sitting in his office, several locked doors away from Decker, when he is struck in the chest by a massive water droplet that hit “in about the center of my sternum about 4 inches long, two inches wide. I was just saturated with water,” Keenhold said. But in 1993, Keenhold told Unsolved Mysteries that he was unaware of having been struck by the water until a guard entered the room and pointed out that he had a wet patch on his chest and told him that Decker had said he would make it rain on him. It was only then that he attributed the moisture to Decker and became convinced that he was possessed by an evil force. Of course, it is not uncommon for people to sweat near their sternum. While Keenhold said he was “saturated,” the dampness could not have been too significant, as he said he was not even aware of it until the guard noted it! Keenhold said that his first thought was that he had spilled something on his shirt, but he had not recently been around water.14 Yet on Paranormal Witness, Keenhold said that prior to the incident, he “had just finished with the evening meal,” a scenario that would have placed him amongst a variety of liquids.

  Between Decker’s strange mental state and the mysterious water that had appeared in his cell, word quickly spread about his feats, and the entire jail was on edge. Convinced that Decker was possessed by the Devil, Keenhold felt that he had only one alternative: to contact a priest to conduct an exorcism. So he phoned the Reverend William Blackburn, who soon arrived and was placed in a room with Decker. Keenhold and the guards waited outside. The Reverend Blackburn said he grabbed Decker’s hand and began reciting passages from the bible in order to cast out the evil spirit. Eventually, Decker said that he felt a calm feeling come over him and that he was free from the Devil. The two men claimed that during the exorcism, it began to rain inside the room. Paranormal Witness shows rain pouring down and Decker observing, “I never saw the liquid as intense as it was in that room.” Decker reported that the rain fell only on the priest, drenching him and pooling on the floor. Yet in his 1993 interview with Unsolved Mysteries, Reverend Blackburn recounted a far less dramatic scene, describing the “rain” as “a mist.” If this much embellishment has occurred between the 1993 and 2011 interviews, one wonders if there was ever a “rain” to begin with. Would a priest lie about such an event? Perhaps not, but given the supernatural mindset of the two participants and their heightened emotional state, sweat is a distinct possibility. While ice damming may explain the “rain” in the Keiffer home, how do we account for the rain inside the local pizzeria and the jail cell? Leaky roofs and ceilings are common after such unusual weather conditions, and little drips and drabs often go relatively unnoticed. Years later they are described as rain.

  An Extraordinary Coincidence

  Building expert Sandra Ho rates Pennsylvania as being at “moderate to high risk for winter moisture problems,” with one of the most severe events being ice damming. This is caused by warm air entering an attic and melting snow on the outer surface of a roof, resulting in an accumulation of ice, under which pools of water form and eventually leak. Ice dams are common after major snowstorms in areas where temperatures rise above freezing during the day and drop below 32°F at night.15 Such conditions were applicable in Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania. According to weather archives for the nearby city of Scranton for February 11 to 28, 1983, 13 days before the strange indoor “rain,” there was a record snowfall across central and eastern Pennsylvania. Philadelphia measured its heaviest accumulation for any February storm, with 21.3 inches.16 East Stroudsburg University measured one inch of snow on February 10 and sixteen inches the following day.17 Scranton is the nearest weather station with temperature readings, 37 miles from Stroudsburg. After the storm on February 11, clear, cold weather settled in. Then between February 14 and 25, the daytime temperatures were above freezing by up to 20 degrees, and with three exceptions they were below freezing at night—ideal conditions for ice damming, as the snow would have melted by day and refrozen overnight. On t
he fateful evening of February 26, there was a mild cold snap, with a daytime high of 26° and an overnight low of 20°.18

  One of the features that perplexed the house occupants and Officer Baujan was that the “rain” was confined to one room. Patrick Huelman of the University of Minnesota is an expert on environmental design and ice damming. He says that it is common for ice damming events to be limited to a small portion of a house, such as a room. But how does one explain Bob Keiffer’s remark that the “rain” dripping down the walls had a strange consistency? “It wasn’t water as you know water . . . it was a sticky, tacky feeling,” he said. Huelman says that such observations are common: water running down ceilings and walls often mixes with resins in the wood or residue from plaster, giving the water a tacky feel.19 The first sign that anything was amiss with the house, water was seen dripping down the walls and was soon falling from the ceiling.20 Huelman observes that ice dam events commonly involve “symptoms beginning at the outer edge and working in toward the ceiling.” Just as the “rain” first appeared in the Keiffer home, the occupants reported hearing a loud crash from above. Such sounds are consistent with ice damming. Why would the ice crack on February 26? As water expands when freezing, it commonly results in popping and crackling noises, accompanied by what was likely a section of ice cracking or falling off the roof, releasing the dammed water.

  The occupants noted a damp chill in the house, particularly in the living room, where the “rain” was falling. “Within seconds of entering that room I had this cold feeling,” said Baujan. This observation is consistent with ice damming. As water began seeping into the insulation, the house turned cooler because it was a poor insulator of heat. Combined with the cold water dripping from the walls and ceiling, this could easily make the indoor temperature feel several degrees cooler—and damp. In folklore, the presence of ghosts, spirits, and demons is traditionally associated with a chill; this only served to enhance the belief in a demonic presence at the house. The sensation of a cold chill is also a common reaction to stress.

  Enter the Poltergeist

  In many instances, “poltergeist” outbreaks soon evolve into “demonic possession.” Just such a transformation happened in the case of the “true story” behind the 1973 horror movie The Exorcist, as discussed in Chapter 2. The teenage boy was always around when objects went flying, and in time, scratches began to appear on his body as he showed additional signs of “possession,” including “trance.” An analysis of the case, based on information in a priest’s diary, showed that all of the phenomena could have been accomplished by the teenager, who was indeed observed on one occasion inflicting scratches on himself.21 Such cases illuminate the Rain Boy poltergeist manifestations.

  How do we explain Lt. Davies’s observation that when he and two colleagues visited the Keiffer home, Decker levitated, and that when he gave Decker a gold cross to hold, he dropped it on the floor, complaining that it burned his hands? In reality, Davies never said the cross was so hot as to burn him. “Not hot hot, but it’s hot,” he told Unsolved Mysteries. Sensations of hot and cold are notoriously subjective. As for the levitation claim, it is worth recalling the context of the visit by Davies and his colleagues. Decker reportedly exhibited a variety of supernatural powers, and the next day police visited the house to verify it; that was their explicit purpose for being there. Surely they would have taken a camera or video recorder, and that they did not do so immediately raises red flags. Perhaps the events were so unremarkable that the officers did not deem them worthwhile. It is more likely that Decker flung himself into a wall and this event became exaggerated with time. It stretches credulity that the officers did not think to record these remarkable events—if they were as remarkable at the time as we have been led to believe.

  In 2012, reporter Christina Tatu asked both Keenhold and Mr. Van Why why they did not take photos. “He [Keenhold] said most people used Polaroids back then which would have been too slow to capture the events. Van Why said people just didn’t carry around cameras back then.”22 This is untrue on both counts. Pocket cameras were inexpensive and plentiful at the time. The 1983 Montgomery Ward Catalogue lists pocket cameras for as little as $17.95.23 Also, there is no reason why a Polaroid would have been too slow to capture the alleged events! Such a claim is absurd. The difference between a Polaroid and a conventional camera of the period is that the former produced no negatives, and the image developed within a few minutes instead of waiting to undergo chemical processing. If these key witnesses failed to recall that cameras were plentiful at the time—and clearly they did—what else did they get wrong? Another example of how events likely became exaggerated over time is claims about the mysterious “rain” pouring down inside the Keiffer home during police visits. It could not have been too perceptible, as at one point police placed a bag over Decker’s head to eliminate the possibility of his causing the “rain” by spitting!24 Yet in both the Paranormal Witness and Unsolved Mystery versions of events, those inside the house are drenched by a heavy rain. Both programs also show rain pouring down in the jail cell. In 2013, Keenhold was asked why, if there was so much water as was reported, no one thought to take a sample for scientists or investigators to analyze. “It evaporated within a minute or so,” Keenhold asserted.25

  Natural or Supernatural?

  The most plausible explanation for the events in Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania during February 1983 is that Decker cut and scratched religious symbols into his skin to gain attention and sympathy from the Keiffers, knowing they were religious. Whether this was deliberate or subconscious is open to debate. Coincidentally, an ice dam broke on the Keiffers’ roof, which served to reinforce the belief in a demonic force that was also responsible for the “rain.” It just so happened that most of the key people who were called on to explain the mysterious “rain” were themselves devoutly religious and interpreted a series of natural events (Decker’s self-harm and the ice dam) within a Christian frame of reference. Where most residents would phone a building expert at the first sign of a leaky ceiling, the Keiffers rang the police. Where most people would have sought medical or psychiatric aid for someone who was unresponsive and in an apparent trance, neither the police nor the Keiffers did so. Where most corrections supervisors who saw a prisoner with a “strange look” would have thought little of it, Keenhold assumed that Decker was possessed by a demonic presence. When most police go to a house and cannot explain something such as dripping water, they do not automatically assume that one of the occupants is possessed by the Devil. The events that took place in Monroe County in February 1983 can best be summed up using an old medical adage cautioning against drawing exotic conclusions when more mundane explanations are likely: “When you hear the sounds of hoofbeats in the night, first think horses, not zebras.”

  The most likely explanation for the “rain” is snowmelt seeping through the ceiling from the attic as a result of ice damming, in conjunction with psychological stress and human imagination. Deception is also a distinct possibility. Decker could have augmented an existing phenomenon with tricks. As for his purported levitation, it is a recurrent pattern in poltergeist cases that the central figure is caught throwing objects or engaging in other trickery to convince those present of his or her powers. In this instance, the one person who supposedly could make objects move and who levitated had a criminal record. Three years after the episode, Decker was back in jail after pleading guilty to burglary.26 In October 2012, Decker was again arrested and charged with arson and mail fraud.27 He claims that during the 1983 saga, he was twice flung through the air. In the one instance where detail is provided, we are told that he traveled just five or six feet, landing against a wall. Did he hurl himself through the air when no one was looking directly at him? That is the simplest explanation.

  The Rain Boy case is seductive, because if accepted at face value, it offers modern-day proof of the existence of the Devil (and hence God) and, ultimately, evidence of life after death. Keenhold would later observe, “One o
f the officers actually told me, ‘We were looking into the eyes of the devil. We didn’t realize who we were messing with.’”28 This is a major reason why the story appeals and endures.

  Despite the overwhelming evidence against Decker’s supposed ability to make it rain and levitate, the events continue to be touted widely as a genuine mystery. For instance, in October 2012, shortly after Decker turned himself in to authorities for arson, Pennsylvania TV station WNEP reported that Decker was “the rain man”—a case that “remains a mystery to this day.” The news presenter observed that the events continued to baffle Stroudsburg police, who considered it unsolved. There is no mention of former police chief Gary Roberts, who visited the house and labeled what he saw as unremarkable. 29

  When believers in the paranormal attempt to support their claims that a certain event happened, they often cite the number and credibility of the witnesses. There is no doubt that the officers involved in this case were credible, respected members of their community who have since risen to positions of high responsibility. Officer Baujan was eventually promoted to police chief, while patrolman Wolbert became a detective. Then there is the numbers game. Not counting Decker and his cellmate as credible, due to their criminal records, we are still left with no fewer than eleven respected witnesses: officers Rundle, Davies, Wolbert, and Baujan; warden Keenhold; Mr. and Mrs. Keiffer and Mr. and Mrs. Van Why; Pam Scrofano; and the Reverend Blackburn. Despite so many experienced and responsible people claiming to have witnessed these strange events that lasted over several days, how is it possible that not a single person documented these happenings with so much as a photograph? Why did they fail to seek outside help? The answer is clear: they were blinded by their religious worldview and became carried away in the excitement of the moment.

 

‹ Prev