Truth and Consequences
After talking with so many people who had personally
known Rob Doe it was disheartening to review the published material on
the case from a new perspective and observe the various discrepancies between
what has been written by others and what was told to me by individuals
close to the family in question.
In Possessed Thomas Allen bases much of his investigation on a
series of alleged events culled from the mysterious diary kept by Father
Bishop during the St. Louis exorcism.
This diary, which also inspired William Peter Blattys novel and movie,
began chronicling events on January 15, 1949 and ended on April 19, 1949,
and was designed to act as a guide for future exorcisms. As a surviving
case artifact it is shrouded in mystery. No one really knows for sure how
many copies are circulating or even its actual page count (as previously
mentioned, Steve Erdmann says 16 pages, Thomas Allen puts the number at
26). Passages from this case study have been published by both of the aforementioned
writers and from their examples one discovers: the keeper of the diary,
Father Bishop, did not arrive on the scene or meet any family members until
Wednesday, March 9, 1949almost two months after the initial symptoms
occurredrendering much of his reported background information as
hearsay; Bishop does not always make it clear who actually witnessed the
events being describedhe often fails to mention when the priests
are in the room, when they are absent, and when the information comes secondhand
from the boys mother; the possibility of fraudulent activity is neither
considered nor investigated (for example, no control experiment was set
up where an individual could observe the boys actions when no one
else was in the room); no mention is made whatsoever of the alleged first
exorcism attempt by Father Hughes at Georgetown University Hospital; nothing
is written of the boys fathers feelings or level of involvement
(sources close to the family told me he did not believe the boy was possessed);
and the possible presence of psychosomatic illness within the boy is never
In addition to the diary, an array of places and persons play critical
roles in his story told by author Thomas Allen: the familys alleged
Mount Rainier homesite; the plight of the first exorcist, Father Hughes;
information supplied by local expert Father Bober; and interviews with
eyewitness Father Halloran. With so much questionable material being culled
from the diary, I felt it was imperative to study these miscellaneous factors
and sources with a critical eye.
I called Thomas Allen. After identifying myself and explaining what I was
doing, he declined to comment for this article. I had planned to offer
help in correcting the errors in Possessed (free of charge) for
any revised edition he might be planning. I also planned to ask him a number
of questions. Why, for example, does he have a mindset about the boy having
lived in Mount Rainier? Did he ever consider the possibility that the priests
involved in the case could have used Mount Rainier as a front to discourage
the discovery of the boys true identity? How come he never checked
the Cottage City address that Father Bishops diary listed with phone
directory listings for the family in question from 1939 to 1958? Why had
he never looked for former friends of Rob Doe in Cottage City (or talked
with long-standing community members like the town chairman, fire chief,
or residents of 40th Avenueall of whom could have provided him with
valuable facts)? Why did he never verify any of the information he wrote
regarding Father Hughess involvement with the family and post-exorcism-attempt
activities? And, finally, if he was really so concerned about keeping Rob
Does identity a secret, then why was he a writer of the video production
In The Grip Of Evil in which the boys home at 3807 40th
Avenue in Cottage City was shown, knowing full well that it would then
be possible for anybody to locate the house and identify its occupants
in local city directories from that period? Only Thomas Allen knows the
Possessed is based on the widespread misconception that the family
had resided in Mount Rainier. The books first four chapters are filled
with references to this erroneous location: Allen claims neighbors knew
something odd was happening at 3210 Bunker Hill Road; he claims neighbors
heard maniacal cries and saw lights radiating around the house; and he
claims the family moved to a similar house about a half-mile away. In reality,
none of these things happened, as I have demonstrated. In fact, sources
close to this case have verified that the diary kept by Father Bishop never
once mentions 3210 Bunker Hill Road, Mount Rainier as the familys
homebut it does identify the site as 3807 40th Avenue. Allen does
not mention this in Possessed.
Regarding the first exorcism attempt at Georgetown University Hospital
by Father Hughes, Allen makes several bold presumptions: Hughes apparently
visited the boy at his house, further claiming that there is some question
about this action stemming from the priests own confusion;
Hughes decided the boy belonged in a hospital, under restraints, and that
on Hughess orders the boy was strapped down; when Hughess
arm was allegedly slashed by the boy, the priest screamed and
struggled to his feet while his arm hung limp; Hughes subsequently disappeared
from St. James, suffered a nervous breakdown, and during later masses could
only hold the consecrated host aloft with one hand.
The suppositions regarding Father Hughes seemed so
absurd I decided to do some in-depth research into the actions of this
mysterious priest from St. James Church in Mount Rainier, Maryland. Born
Edward Albert Hughes on August 28, 1918, he was assigned as assistant pastor
of St. James (the pastor at the time was Rev. William M. Canning) on Wednesday,
June 16, 1948 and served without a break until Saturday, June 18, 1960.
Despite what is written in Possessed, there is absolutely no written
record of the alleged exorcism attempt by Father Hughes at Georgetown University
Hospital. A source close to the case verified for me that Rob Doe was admitted
to Georgetown University Hospital under his real name on the morning of
Monday, February 28, 1949 and released at 12 noon on Thursday, March 3,
1949. The facts surrounding this Georgetown stay are: Father Hughes never
initially visited the boy at his Cottage City home (Mrs. Doe took her son
to the St. James parish for their one and only consultation); there is
no evidence that Father Hughes was ever confused at all about this entire
situation; there is no evidence whatsoever that Father Hughes had the boy
admitted to Georgetown University Hospital or held under restraintsThomas
Allen himself gives no reference in Possessed regarding these
alleged actions; there is no evidence that while hospitalized Rob Doe ever
slashed Father Hughess arm or what the priests reaction to
the attack may have beenAllen even mentions that while Father Hughes
mentioned this exorcism attempt during a lecture at Georgetown University,
he made no reference to the alleged attack at all. Of further significance
is that the St. Louis contingency, Father Bowdern and Father Bishop, were
never informed of the alleged first exorcism attempt and their diary makes
no mention of the event.
Even if Rob Doe had slashed the arm of Father Hughes, would it really cause
the priest to have a breakdown and disappear from St. James Parish? I easily
located several individuals who were in daily contact with Father Hughes
throughout the spring of 1949, the time period that immediately followed
his alleged exorcism attempt on Rob Doe. I wondered if the priest showed
any signs of injury, any change in behavior, or if any evidence existed
of a breakdown or personal hiatus from his busy job. I found just the opposite.
Thomas Kearney, an eighth-grader at St. James during the 1948-49 school
year revealed that Father Hughes was the parishs CYO junior boys
baseball coach that spring: I saw Father Hughes every day at St.
James that school year and I dont remember him being missed and I
dont remember him being beat up or hurt or anything like that. He
coached baseball that spring and would pitch us the ball and there was
nothing wrong with him.
Another eighth-grade classmate that year was Joan Flanagan, who recalled:
The recent story going around now was that Father Hughess arm
was slashed back then. I never heard that at the time. I never noticed
a slash or an injury and he was the P. E. teacher for our class. He never
missed a class and I remember him pitching us softballs in the spring.
Something like that would have been a big story at the time. I just dont
believe it happened.
The prefect for the Ladies Sodality of St. James for all of 1949 and 1950
was Gloria Nowak, who today is 74 years old and is still a Mount Rainier
resident. She told me, I knew Father Hughes very well because he
was director of the Sodality and would come to each meeting and start it
off with a prayer. I never knew that he had any kind of arm wound. I had
heard about the possessed boy but it was something we didnt ask about.
Father Hughes was a very nice person, very outgoing and friendly and a
very holy priest. I never noticed any change in behavior or any absence
while I was prefect. He was always there and always in a good mood.
Furthermore, the neighborhood columns for Brentwood and Mount Rainier in
The Prince Georges Post throughout the spring of 1949 seemed
to go out of their way to document the activities of the very popular young
priest. In their pages they document that Father Hughes, among other activities:
attended a dinner given for Father William E. Kelly of St. Martins
Church on Sunday, February 27, 1949; missed a social given by the Mothers
Club of St. James on Tuesday, March 1, 1949 (possibly the night he was
visiting Rob Doe at Georgetown University Hospital); spoke at the Communism
in Religion seminar sponsored by the Washington General Assembly
Fourth Degree Knights of Columbus held at the Hyattsville Town Hall on
Monday, March 7, 1949; said mass at the KCs To Inaugurate Day Of
Recollection, an annual Day of Recollection inaugurated by the Prince
Georges Council of the Knights of Columbus on Sunday, March 20, 1949
at St. John de Matha Monastery in Hyattsville; presided over a wedding
between Mildred ODea and Edward A. Williams on Saturday, April 30,
1949 at St. Jeromes Church; performed a wedding on Saturday, June
4, 1949 for Francis Wersick and Sam Morina at St. James Church; addressed
Commencement Exercises for St. Jeromes first graduating class on
Sunday, June 12, 1949; and according to the June 16, 1949 Brentwood column,
hosted an outing and picnic for the St. James graduating class at Chapel
Point. Coverage of the dynamic Father Hughes in the pages of The Prince
Georges Post continued throughout 1949, all the way up to his
departure in 1960 without any noticeable break in the action. In the June
16, 1960 edition of The Prince Georges Post, Joseph Bianchini writes
in the Mount Rainier column that Father Hughes had performed 2,712 baptisms,
486 marriages, 251 baptisms of converts, and 247 burial masses during his
assignment. Not bad for a priest who disappeared. (Hughes was
later reassigned to St. James in 1973 and remained there until his death
in October 1980.)
The one local clergyman that Father Hughes confided in before his death
was his assistant pastor Frank Bober, who has since figured prominently
in this scenario, mainly because of his accessibility to journalists and
general congeniality. Bober has appeared in literally dozens of television
specials, news broadcasts, and printed articles on the subject. In Possessed
Allen cites him as one of his extremely reliable sources for
the first exorcism attempt that Hughes was involved in. However, despite
the accolades, it was my opinion that over time the comments that these
journalists attributed to Bober began to take on a more dramatic tone with
At this point in my investigation I felt that it was Bober who had
been responsible during the early 80s for the implication that 3210
Bunker Hill Road had been the actual home of the possessed boy. I harbored
these feelings despite the fact that he told The Washington Post of
May 6, 1985 that Father Hughes never told me the exact spot (of the
residence). In the same article he later told the reporter, I
think it was common knowledge in Mount Rainier. At first Father Bober
claims Father Hughes did not reveal where the boy lived, but in later interviews
he maintains that Father Hughes told him the boy was from Mount Rainier.
This conflict over something as simple as where the boy resided calls into
question everything that Father Bober alleges was told to him by Father
Hoping Father Bober would straighten his stories out, I located him in
Washington, D.C., where he was enjoying an extended sabbatical. He was
extremely friendly and cooperative and told of what Father Hughes reportedly
experienced during his time with the boy: coldness in the room, the movement
of a phone, the speaking of archaic languages and of course the slashing
of his arm by the possessed boy during the aborted exorcism attempt. He
claimed that he thought Father Hughes told him the boy had lived in Mount
Rainier on Bunker Hill Road. All of this was interesting, but when I presented
to him my evidence that the boy never lived in Mount Rainier and attempted
to clarify Bobers original statements to the newspapers he became
a bit defensive. I never did any in-depth investigating, I just accepted
his word and thats what he said, Bober insisted. All
I know is Father Hughes gave me certain information which I communicated
to the press and the Archdiocese and so on and that was his information.
You know I was not around in 1949. I was ordained much later in 1969 and
was at St. James from 1980 to 1985. When people interview me I just tell
what I know and thats all I can do.
We discussed certain aspects of the case which curiously had never been
printed in any previously published accounts. My investigation led me to
conclude that the mother initiated contact with the church and that Father
Hughes never actually visited the family. Bober confirmed this. Father
Hughes never went to the boys home, he said. Basically
it was the mother that brought the kid to the rectory and the thing is
shes the one who gave Father Hughes all the information. Everything
that I know of that he shared with me took place in the rectory, not at
Bober continued, I cannot affirm where the family lived because I
was not there at that point in time. Maybe the guy did live in Cottage
City, I dont know. If the mother wanted to shield the identity she
might have said it was Mount Rainier, I dont know. It could be the
churchs approach. The church likes to keep it all secret. They might
suggest this is where it is to keep the persons identity secret and
leave it at that. I just dont know.
While Father Bober became entangled in the Exorcist
saga by simply lending an ear to his weary pastor, Father Walter Halloran
emerged as a central figure for his role in the actual St. Louis exorcism
conducted by Father Bowdern. In 1949 Halloran was a 26-year-old scholar
at St. Louis University studying for a masters degree and preparing
for priesthood. He was called upon by Bowdern to assist the priests in
different aspects of the exorcism and today is the one living eyewitness
to those events who is still willing to discuss his experiences. In August
1997 Halloran was reassigned from San Rafael Church in San Diego, California
to Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska, where today he works as the
When I contacted Halloran by phone, he sounded tired and clearly was not
interested in discussing the incident with me. Still, to his credit, he
thoughtfully answered every one of my questions. I first asked Halloran
if he would go on record as saying whether he thought the boy was possessed
or not. No, I cant go on record, he told me. I
never made an absolute statement about the things because I didnt
feel I was qualified. I hadnt studied the phenomena and that sort
of thing. All I did was report the things that I saw and whether I would
make a statement one way or another wouldnt make any difference because
I just dont think I was qualified to do so.
My questions to Halloran a were met with brief, direct responses.
Did the boy speak in any languages other than English?
Did it appear he understood the Latin he was speaking?
I think he mimicked us.
Was there any change in the boys voice?
When the boy struck you in the nose, did he exhibit extraordinary
I dont know, I never even thought very much about it.
It certainly wasnt [former world boxing champion Mike] Tyson hitting
me in the nose or something like that (laughs).
I asked Halloran to elaborate and describe to me some of the things he
witnessed that he could not explain. He paused and slowly said, I
saw a bottle slide from a dresser across the roomthere was no one
near it. The bed moving.... I interrupted and asked if the bed was
stationary or on rollers. He said, It was on rollers like any bed,
but I was leaning on it when it moved one time.
I inquired about the boys spitting, urinating and vomiting, all activities
that he was said to have indulged in with great vigor during various points
of the exorcism. Halloran responded, Well, spitting was frequent...it
wasnt significant...there wasnt any vomiting or urinating that
I wanted to know about the boys fathers level of involvement.
Had Halloran even met the father? Had the father been present during all
of this? I met him once, I think. I think that he was back home in
Maryland working most of the time. He wasnt really a part of this.
I asked about the markings or brandings that were said to have appeared
on the boys body out of nowhere. Did Halloran actually see them materialize
on his skin? Did he feel the boy or someone else was responsible? I
saw them...well, right on the skin...yeah, I did. It wasnt the boy
doing it himself, you know, as far as I could see. I wanted to know
if the markings ever formed numbers or letters or words, as other writers
had reported. It was kind of hard to really tell. Was there
blood dripping from the marks? It looked more like lipstick. There
were just some very clear marks like that. Continuing on this subject
I asked if the priests had ever bothered to check the boys fingernails
for flesh or blood deposits. Halloran was taken aback. After a long pause
he said, When I was there his hands were nowhere near the markings.
No, we didnt check.
And of course, I inquired about the famous diary of Father Bishop. I
dont have it any more, Father Halloran reported. I burned
It is a fact that no journalist has ever identified and spoken with
the subject of this alleged exorcism, Rob Doe. While I felt it was imperative
that I establish some type of contact with him, I realized that in all
likelihood an interview with him would prove anticlimactic. If Rob Doe
had actually been the victim of demonic possession, he very well may not
have any memory of the events. If his behavior had been staged and there
had never been a possession, he would probably not admit to the sham. With
that in mind I waited until my investigation drew to a close to contact
him. I believe that the strength of this investigation lies within the
factual framework that has been constructed. Several key issues have been
defined and verifiedwhere the boy actually lived, where he went to
school, what his friends had to say, and what he was like prior to the
questionable events that engulfed his family in the winter and spring of
1949. I wondered if Rob Doe would have anything significant to say even
if he was willing to discuss his life experiences.
From a Cottage City source I obtained an East Coast address where the Haunted
Boy now resides and his current phone number. I called and Rob Doe himself
answered. Our conversation was brief and direct and he gruffly spoke to
me in a very deep, gravelly voice. He admitted to me that he had grown
up in Cottage City and had never lived in Mount Rainier. He stated that
he had seen the movie The Exorcist but did not offer his take
on the film. He seemed very alarmed that I had contacted him and told me
there would be no cooperation on his part whatsoever. He would not confirm
that he was the subject of this investigation and firmly stated he did
not want me to ever call him back again. His response was typical of someone
who did not want to be reminded of some distant embarrassing event from
While Rob Doe was unaware of it at the time, the events that centered around
the troublesome teenage boy from Cottage City between January and April
1949 would later have a profound effect on people all over the globe. As
the inspiration for The Exorcist, this case emerged as one of
the most significant examples of paranormal phenomena in history. It spawned
movies, books, and videos, and influenced hundreds of copycat
cases around the world that led to exorcism-styled assaults, mutilations,
and even deaths.
Despite the widespread popularity of this story in the aftermath of William
Peter Blattys novel and movie, no one had ever actually investigated
this case prior to my involvement. Rob Doe had never been interviewed,
nor identified. No investigator had ever talked with his childhood friends
or people from the neighborhood in which he grew up. In fact, no journalist
ever got the location right in the first place. All previous accounts had
placed the boy at 3210 Bunker Hill Road in Mount Rainier, an inexcusable
With the completion of this adventure we now know who the boy was, where
he really lived, where he attended school, who his friends were, what his
family life was like, and what behavior and personality traits he exhibited
before his alleged possession. The credibility of the mysterious
diary has now been called into question. I have shown that Father Walter
Halloranthe one living, talking eyewitness to the St. Louis exorcism
attempts, maintains that he did not witness any supernatural behavior by
Rob Doeno strange foreign languages (other than mimicked Latin),
no changes in tone of voice, no prodigious strength, no excessive vomiting
or urinating, andto top it offhe is uncertain about the nature
of the markings or skin brandings on the boys body. Perhaps most
important of all, this case illustrates the need in paranormal investigation
for close scrutiny of both initial newspaper accounts and highly touted
individuals as providers of information. In this instance, both sources
muddled the picture by embellishing the story when facts were uncertain.
Personally, I do not believe Rob Doe was possessed. There is simply too
much evidence that indicates that as a boy he had serious emotional problems
stemming from his home life. There is not one shred of hard evidence to
support the notion of demonic possession. The facts show that he was a
spoiled and disturbed only child with a very overprotective mother and
a non-responsive father. To me his behavior was indicative of an outcast
youth who desperately wanted out of Bladensburg Junior High School at any
cost. He wanted attention and he wanted to leave the area and go to St.
Louis. Throwing tantrums was the answer. He began to play his concocted
game. For his efforts he got a collection of priests (who had no previous
exorcism experience) who doted over him as he lay strapped to a bed. His
response was that of any normal childhe reacted with rage, he wanted
out. Without delving into the dynamics of psychosomatic illness, there
is no question there was something wrong with Rob Doe prior to January
1949, something that modern-era psychiatry might have best addressed. Rob
Doe was not just another normal teenage boy.
Each of the parties involved in this case approached it from its own frame
of reference. To psychiatrists, Rob Doe suffered from mental illness. To
priests this was a case of demonic possession. To writers and film/video
producers this was a great story to exploit for profit. Those involved
saw what they were trained to see. Each purported to look at the facts
but just the opposite was truein actuality they manipulated the facts
and emphasized information that fit their own agendas.
While my efforts in this investigation were not meant to be all-inclusive,
we now have a wealth of previously uncovered information about the alleged
possession of Rob Doe. Future investigative work into this case will hopefully
begin at the heart of the matter, rather than weave its way through a confusing
maze of myths, false leads, and self-serving propaganda.
Thomas B. Allen, Possessed: The True Story Of An Exorcism (New
York: Doubleday July 1993, Bantam Books, April 1994). (Discussed in this
William Peter Blatty, William Peter Blatty On The Exorcist From Novel
To Film (New York: Bantam Books, 1974). (The 41-page introduction
provides some valuable information on how Blatty became aware of the story
and how he developed his novel. The rest of the book deals with the movies
Denis Brian, The Enchanted Voyager: The Life Of J. B. Rhine (Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1982). (Chapter 29 consists of six pages on
the case. J. B. Rhine learned of the case from Reverend Luther Miles Schulze,
the first clergyman called in by the family. It is revealed that Rhine
never witnessed any of the phenomena himself and actually wondered if Reverend
Schulze unconsciously exaggerated some of the facts. Rhines
feelings have been conveniently ignored by other journalists.)
Martin Ebon, Exorcism: Fact Not Fiction (New York: Signet Books,
January 1974). (This pocket paperback reprints the April 1951 Fate
article and mainly summarizes the early newspaper accounts of the case.)
Rosemary Ellen Guiley, The Encyclopedia Of Ghosts And Spirits
(New York: Facts On File, 1992), pp. 226-227.
Dennis William Hauck, The National Directory Of Haunted Places
(Sacramento: Athanor Press, 1994), page 184.
Rev. John J. Nicola, Diabolical Possession and Exorcism (Rockford,
Illinois: Tan Books and Publishers, Inc., 1974), chapter 10. (Nicola poorly
reconstructs the case that inspired The Exorcist, providing no
documented sources for his sensational version of the alleged possession.)
Peter Travers and Stephanie Reiff, The Story Behind The Exorcist (New
York: Signet Books, 1974). (A rather disappointing treatment of how the
movie was filmed. There is very little here on the actual background of
the 1949 possession.)
Periodicals (in chronological order):
Bill Brinkley, Pastor Tells Eerie Tale of Haunted Boy,
The Washington Post, 10 August 1949.
Minister Tells Parapsychologists Noisy Ghost Plagued
Family, The Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), 10 August 1949.
William Flythe Jr., Haunted Boys Parents Tell Of
Ghost Messages, The Times-Herald (Washington, D.C.), 11
Priest Freed Boy of Possession By Devil, Church Sources Say,
The Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), 19 August 1949.
New Details of Boys Exorcism In Catholic Ritual Disclosed,
The Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), 20 August 1949.
Bill Brinkley, Priest Frees Mt. Rainier Boy Reported Held in Devils
Grip, The Washington Post, 20 August 1949.
Report Of A Poltergeist, Parapsychology Bulletin,
Number 14, August 1949.
D.R. Linson, Washingtons Haunted Boy, Fate,
Chris Chase, Everyones Reading It, Billys Filming It,
The New York Times, 27 August 1972.
Gwen Dobson, Luncheon With Father John J. Nicola, The Evening
Star and the Washington Daily News (Washington, D.C.), 3 November,
Sally Quinn, Exorcism: Beating The Devil, The Washington
Post, 6 November 1972.
Curtis Fuller, I See by The Papers: Exorcism And Possession,
Fate, March 1973.
Gary Arnold, Exorcist: The Word Made Flesh, The Washington
Post, 23 December 1973.
Jeremiah OLeary, The Exorcist: Story That Almost Wasnt,
Washington Star-News, 29 December 1973.
Ronald V. Borst, The Exorcist, Photon, Number 25,
Tom Shales, Exorcist: No One Under 17 Admitted,
The Washington Post, 3 January 1974.
Pauline Kael, The Current Cinema: Back To the Ouija Board,
The New Yorker, 7 January 1974.
Cathe Wolhowe, Bedeviled By Film, Curious Go To GU, The
Washington Post, 10 January 1974.
Movies: The Ghoul Next Door, Newsweek, 21 January
James L. Foye, M.D. A Psychiatrist On Rites Of Exorcism, The
Washington Post, 22 January 1974.
William Gildea, Confronting Satans Wrongs With Rites,
The Washington Post, 29 January 1974.
Elizabeth Peer, The Exorcism Frenzy, Newsweek, 11
Steve Erdmann, The Truth Behind The Exorcist, Fate,
Lynda Hoover, The Devil In Prince Georges County? The
Prince Georges Journal, 19 June 1975.
Sharon Page, Q And A: Father Nicola Pursues Trail Of The Devil,
The Washington Star, 19 August 1975.
Spencer Gordon, The Exorcist: The real incident involved a Mt. Rainier
priest in 1949, The Prince Georges Sentinel, 4 February,
Brenda Caggiano, Exorcism: Demonic possession still haunts Mt. Rainier
residents, The Prince Georges Sentinel, 28 October
Arthur S. Brisbane, Youths Bizarre Symptoms Led To 1949 Exorcism,
The Washington Post, 6 May 1985.
Arthur S. Brisbane, Violent Deaths Plague Old Exorcist
Haunts, The Washington Post, 6 May 1985.
Vincent F.A. Golphin, Is Town Viewing Live Rerun Of The Exorcist?
Some Say Demons Have Come Back, National Catholic Reporter,
24 May 1985.
Vincent F.A. Golphin, Priest Says Not Devil, But Force Of Evil,
National Catholic Reporter, 24 May 1985.
Marybeth Burke, Exorcist Based On 1949 Event, The
Prince Georges Journal, 22 July 1986.
John M. McGuire, The Exorcist Revisited, The Post-Dispatch
(St. Louis, MO), 17 April 1988.
Mary Mann, Setting The Exorcism Record Straight, South
Side Journal (St. Louis, MO), 14 March 1990.
Thomas B. Allen, Possessed, Washingtonian, June 1993.
Susan Adeletti, The Exorcist: The Real Story, The Prince
Georges Journal, 11 July 1997.
Issue 20 of STRANGE MAGAZINE is available from the Strange Bookshop.
For further information contact Mark Chorvinsky at Strange Magazine, c/o Dream Wizards, 11772 Parklawn Drive, Rockville MD 20852, phone 301-570-7561, fax 301-570-7562, or
This article is Copyright 2000,1999, Strange Magazine. All rights reserved.
No part of this article may be retransmitted in any form without the express
permission of Strange Magazine. Any use of this original, copyrighted material
in any media without the permission of Strange Magazine will be vigorously
For television and motion picture rights information,
E-mail us at: email@example.com