From the unexplained to the mundane, come join
us on a Journey to the Fringe. Hello and welcome
to Journey to the Fringe, where the spirit of
the season is alive and well, but not in like
a possessed sort of way, more like we like to
exploit it for listens. So we are your exploiting
podcast hosts Taylor and Chelsea. Here today.
doing an episode on possessions in the criminal
law system. I just really like the idea of somebody
arguing in court that they were possessed, they
didn't have capacity to commit a crime. It surprisingly
happened more than you think. I just want to
put it out into the universe. I know that I'm
constantly saying, you know, I think I would
be good at this job. You put out into the universe
and just hope it comes back. I feel like the
vibes I get from what this episode what is going
to be so far. I could sit on a jury. No, maybe
I would be the professional expert on it. I don't
know. I'm just putting out all the vibes that
I get and we'll see what we come back with. And
I will in my life. And it changes depending on
what jurisdiction you're into. We don't quite
have a case that's really relevant in Canada.
However, I did put a Canadian case in here. Just
because I think it is. possession adjacent, but
you can be the judge when we get to it. Adjacent.
Okay, I will be the judge because I assume by
completing this episode I'm gonna be certified.
Basically an expert on the topic. At least in
some capacity in law towards possession or something,
right? That's what you were thinking for this
episode, right? Yeah, sure. at least for me whenever
doing a law episode i do feel the need to say
this is not legal advice please go find a real
lawyer get them to do some research and don't
just have them listen to our episode if you are
i was just gonna say facing some sort of murder
charge and you were possessed at the time This
is terrible way to start your defense. We see
here exhibit number one. This was an expert from
a Halloween episode of Journey to the Brand.
But only kind of. We had this discussion. It's
not really a Halloween episode because it's only
a Halloween episode for one day and then most
of our listens come after day one. So it can't
quite be a Halloween episode. It still counts.
It still counts. That's insane. In criminal law,
a successful defense often hinges on whether
the defendant had mens rea, the mental intent
to commit the crime, the guilty mind. When someone
claims they are possessed, they are hell -stem
from a mental disorder or involuntary state.
Courts typically reject supernatural claims outright.
But they may interpret them as signs of psychosis,
dissociation, or delusional thinking. In this
way, possession becomes a metaphor or symptom
of an underlying psychiatric condition. The challenge
is that possession lacks empirical grounding.
Unlike schizophrenia or dissociative identity
disorder, there's no clinical framework for diagnosing
demonic influence. So when defendants claim possession,
courts often pivot to evaluating their mental
capacity. In essence, the legal system doesn't
really say possession took place, but it treats
it as a red flag for deeper psychological dysfunction.
like quantifying it as something just not like
what the person lacked the guilty mind the actual
intention to do the crime is basically what you're
arguing Because when you have a murder, you have
two things. You have the actual death of a person,
the killing, the action, the actus reus, the
guilty act. What you also need to get murder
is the mens rea, the guilty mind. So that's the
difference between manslaughter and murder. Manslaughter,
you just need the actual killing. With murder,
you need both a killing and an intent to kill.
Yeah. And what they argue with... possession
is I didn't have the intent to kill because I
was possessed. Yeah, they're quantifying it as
a mental illness. They wouldn't take like a religious
stance on it that would consider it a possession.
Yeah, and I think we actually kind of saw this
exact same thing play out on the haunted house
lawsuit that we looked at, where the courts make
a lot of jokes about it actually being haunted,
but more so focus on like the legal technicalities
that they would want to do it under. I can't
remember, oh gosh. Instead of actually making
a finding that the house is haunted, it was.
yeah yeah okay so interesting what and why is
that just because like law wouldn't like that's
not the place you know that's not the place to
argue out whether or not possession can be something
that actually exists all we're looking for is
whether or not the person actually had the capacity
to commit the crime like mentally want to carry
out the action okay Okay, fair enough. And if
they can ground it on something an expert can
talk about, then yeah, that's what you're gonna
do. However, this does reveal a deeper tension
between belief and psychiatric evaluation. Judges
and juries may not accept that a demon pulled
the trigger, but they do consider whether the
defendant had the mental capacity to form intent.
In this way, possession often serves as a dramatic
mask for underlying psychological disorders,
reframed through the lens of insanity and automatism.
To see how this plays out in practice, let's
turn to the cases themselves. where defendants
gripped by what they believed were otherworldly
forces, stood trial for crimes that shocked their
communities. And we have actually covered one
of these cases in a previous Halloween episode,
strangely enough. Oh, Halloween has the best
episodes. And this is the case of Michael Taylor,
the Aweset murder case. I believe this is in
the episode, Exercise is Good for the Soul. Yeah,
that was a good episode. And this is just a summary
of the case, because we go over it pretty in
-depth there, but it's just a fun way to get
the juices of possession flowing. Michael Taylor
lived in Osset, West Yorkshire in England, and
in 1974 the local vicar, Peter Vincent, called
in experienced ministers in preparation to cast
out demons residing in this man. the exorcism
occurred the night of october 5th going into
the 6th 1974 at saint thomas's church in gober
the exorcist believed that they oh my god how
many times has this happened to us look at the
date oh a lot recently this has happened to us
multiple times that is the day we're recording
That's so creepy. They stated in an all -night
ceremony invoked and cast out at least 40 demons
including those of incest, bestiality, blasphemy,
and lewdness. At the end they were exhausted
and they allowed Taylor to go home, although
they felt that there were at least three demons
left. Insanity, murder, and violence were still
left in him. I remember this one. And that's
the end of that quote. I can't believe if you're
gonna leave them with anything, I don't mean
Blasphemy can stay in there and take a birder
out Like I can imagine there's a good like 40
of them you can probably switch down. I think
you start with murder because i assume they're
picking and choosing what what they're casting
out you don't think they just put like a spiritual
fishing hook inside his navel or something like
that no i don't i don't imagine that's how it
works but this is just based on vibes from what
i can remember there's juice boxes involved but
i can't remember how you gotta go back and listen
to the episode yeah so taylor went home unsurprisingly
with insanity murder and violence left within
him brutally murdered his wife Christine. This
is very graphic. He attacks her with his bare
hands, tearing her eyes and tongue out and almost
tearing her face off. Oh, I remember this. And
then strangling their poodle. He was found by
policemen naked in the street covered in blood.
Jesus Christ, yep, that sounds like all three
of those demons too, doesn't it? I bet those
guys felt really awkward after they realized
that maybe they should have started with those
ones. yeah maybe but they're so hard they're
the toughest ones and i'm surprised they even
admitted to leaving those specific demons in
him i almost wonder if they should have been
held on trial for something i don't know what
because they were like yeah we definitely left
those in they i think they do have some responsibility
to be honest with you They were taking a break,
though. This isn't quite a possession case because
he's acquitted on the grounds of insanity. He
lacked the mental capacity. He was sent to Broadmoor
Hospital for two years and then spent another
two years in a secure ward in Bradford before
being released. He's released? Yeah, oh yeah,
after four years. Didn't recommit. Doesn't say
there if he was ever rid of those last three
demons. I really hope so, but no, it does not.
Okay, just curious. Before they released him,
you would... think they would have done their
due diligence, because look what happened leaving
them in. I don't know, just my two cents. I really
hope they at least got somebody else to do it.
The exorcists who were doing it the first time
around just did not seem up to the task. Incompetent,
at the least. Next up is the case of Arne Cheyenne
Johnson. They call this the Devil Made Me Do
It case in 1981 in Connecticut. Arne Cheyenne
Johnson and Debbie Glatzel, they provide firsthand
accounts of basically what happened to them in
a Discovery Channel show called A Haunting and
an episode called Where Demons Well. In this
they say that their father was an eyewitness
to demonic possession. Arn Cheyenne, Johnson,
and Debbie Glatzel assert that paranormal activity
began after they went to clean up a rental property
they had just acquired. Who's David? Why does
that say David right there? I don't know. David
recalled an old man suddenly appeared pushing
and terrifying him. Oh, David is Arn Cheyenne's
spouse. The couple initially thought David was
using the old man as an excuse to avoid cleaning,
but David informed them that the old man had
vowed to harm the Glatzels if they moved into
the rental home. David's vision of the old man
included the man appearing as a demonic beast
who muttered Latin and threatened to steal his
soul. Oh no. Although the family alleged hearing
strange noises coming from the attic, no one
but David ever witnessed the old man. And why
the fuck didn't David say anything? Well, he
kinda did. After David experienced night terrors,
exhibited strange behavior and obtained explained
scratches and bruises, the family called upon
the services of a Catholic priest who attempted
to bless the house. Nah, you gotta leave. The
terrified family concluded that the house was
evil and would no longer continue to rent it.
David's visions worsened, occurring in the daytime
as well. 12 days after the original incident,
the family summoned the demonologist, Ed and
Lorraine Warren, to assist. Oh, thank god. We
have a whole episode on Ed and Lorraine Warren,
you can go back and listen to that. It's a good
episode. Lorraine witnessed a black mist materialize
next to David and indi - of a malevolent presence.
Debbie and her mother told the Warrens they had
seen David being beaten and choked by invisible
hands and the red marks had appeared on his neck
afterwards. David had started to growl his speaking
otherworldly voices and recite passages from
the Bible or Paradise Lost. The Glatzels recounted
how each night a family member would remain awake
with David as he suffered through spasms and
convulsions. After receiving a prognosis of multiple
possessions from the Warrens, David was subjected
to three lesser Lorraine asserts that David levitated,
ceased breathing for time, and even demonstrated
the supernatural ability of precognition, specifically
in relation to the manslaughter Johnson would
later commit. Spoiler alert for the end of the
story here. In October of 1980, the Warrens contacted
Brookfield police to warn them that the situation
was becoming dangerous. According to the eyewitness
testimony, Aaron Johnson coerced one of the demons
reportedly within David to possess him while
participating in David's exorcism. After this
incident, Johnson returned to the rental property
to examine an old well that supposedly housed
the demon. Johnson said that this was his final
encounter with the demon while completely lucid.
After encountering the demon at the well and
making eye contact with it, he became possessed.
The Warrens claimed to have warned him not to
do this. What, make eye contact with the demon?
I don't know if they said don't go to the well
or don't make eye contact with it, but anyhow
they told him don't do something and he did.
Okay. As David's condition worsened further,
Debbie and Johnson, who had been living in her
mother's home, decided it was time to move. Debbie
was hired by Alan Bono, a new resident in Brooksfield,
as a dog groomer. Debbie and Johnson began renting
an apartment close to her place of employment.
After moving in, Johnson started to exhibit odd
behavior that was strikingly similar to David's,
causing Debbie to fear that he had become possessed
as well. According to Debbie, Johnson would fall
into a trance -like state wherein he would growl
and hallucinate, but later no memory of it. And
on February 16th, 1981, Johnson called in sick
to his job at Right Tree Service and joined Debbie
at the kennel where she worked, along with his
sister Wanda and Debbie's nine -year -old cousin
Mary. Bono, the couple's landlord and Debbie's
employer at the kennel, bought the group lunch
at a local bar and proceeded to drink heavily.
After lunch, the group returned to the kennel.
Debbie then took the girls to get pizza, but
insisted they return quickly anticipating trouble.
When they returned, Bono, intoxicated at this
point, became agitated. Everyone left the room
at Debbie's urging, except Bono, who seized Mary
and refused to let go. Johnson headed back to
the apartment and ordered Bono to release Mary.
Wander recounted the following events to the
police. Mary ran for the car as Debbie attempted
to mitigate the situation by standing between
the two men. wanted to try in vain to pull Johnson
away. Johnson, growling like an animal, then
drew a five -inch pocket knife and stabbed Bono
repeatedly. Bono died several hours later, according
to Johnson's lawyer. Bono had suffered four or
five tremendous wounds, mostly to his chest and
one that stretched from his stomach to the base
of his heart. Johnson was discovered two miles
away from the site of the killing. Sergeant Gordon
Fairchild of the Brookfield Police Department
said he helped arrest Johnson on a charge of
assault while Alan Bono was still being treated
at the hospital. He said Johnson told him he
did not mean to hurt anyone and was unable to
remember anything. While putting him in the police
cruiser, Johnson said, quote, I need help because
I've got a drinking problem, end quote, Fairchild
said. When Johnson was informed at police headquarters
that Bono had died, Fairchild said the suspect
became incoherent and then fell. asleep for 20
to 25 minutes. When Johnson awoke, police detective
Sergeant John Lucas advised him of his rights
and charged Arne Johnson with murder. They just
let him take a nap? Yeah, for 20 to 25 minutes.
They're like, oh, he fell asleep. He's probably
in a jail. Let's just wait until he wakes up
to read of his rights. Let's not do it now. Look
how cute he looks when he's sleeping. He just
murdered somebody. I think I would let him sleep
too. Do you think? Yeah. Okay. Okay, maybe it's
just me. Interestingly enough, apparently, if
this ever comes up in trivia, it's the first
unlawful killing in the history of Brookfield,
Connecticut. So if you're in like bar trivia
in Brookfield, that might come up. Wow. Interesting.
And I just feel like there are so many warning
signs ahead of this where Ed and Lorraine Warren
come in and they're just like, whatever they
said, don't make eye contact with it or anything.
Whatever you do, don't do it. I feel like if
there's an old man that was like telling me to
get out and all this stuff that I can't remember
what he said now, I'd be like, I'm gonna probably
just move out. Well, and they were renting too,
like was the rent that low? or was it that hard
to rent in Brookfield? That's true. You see it
again and again in haunting things like that.
People can't afford to like move when they're
in a bad situation. It's not just hauntings,
it's also bad landlords and stuff like that.
Oh yeah, a bad relationship with physical abuse,
yeah. And they can't afford because of financial
means, but I feel like this one is not that bad
relationship or stuff isn't a bad sign to get
out, but the signs were all there to probably
just like leave. Yeah. To be fair, this is looking
at back on it in hindsight of knowing there's
a murder that took place. No, they were well
aware that he was seeing an entity that was reciting
Latin. I would be out of there. Yeah, but I mean,
who amongst us has not had somebody just randomly
start spouting Latin at them and thought, you
know what, I'm not moving. That takes a lot of
work. It's never okay. It's never, you always
gotta move if there's any Latin being taught.
Especially backwards. Especially. The day after
the killing, Lorraine Warren informs Brookfield
police that Johnson was possessed when the crime
was committed. Just has to get her nose in there.
Yep, as they do. A media blitz soon surrounded
the story fueled in part by the Warrens, and
I think the in part is a little misleading with
that, whose agents promise that lectures, a book,
and a movie detailing the gruesome case were
in the works. Martina Mannella, Johnson's lawyer,
received calls from all over the world about
what was being called the Demon Murder Trial.
Mannella traveled to England to meet with lawyers
who had been involved in two similar cases. We
know one which we just talked about. He planned
to bring an exorcism specialist from Europe and
threatened to subpoena the priests who oversaw
David Glatzel's exorcism if they did not cooperate
with the defense. The trial took place in Connecticut
Superior Court in Danbury, beginning on October
28, 1981. Manila attempted to submit a plea of
not guilty by virtue of possession, but the presiding
judge, Robert Callahan, promptly rejected this
defense. Callahan argued that no such defense
could ever exist in law due to the lack of evidence
and that it would be irrelevant and unscientific
to allow related testimony. That answers my question.
The defense chose to imply that Johnson acted
in self -defense. Because of this, the jury was
not legally allowed to consider demonic possession
as a viable explanation for the killing. The
jury deliberated for 15 hours over three days
before convicting Johnson on November 24th, 1981,
of first -degree manslaughter. On December 18th,
1981, he was sentenced to 10 to 20 years behind
bars, though he served only five years, or approximately
one month shorter of five years. On second thought,
I feel like I couldn't be on the jury on something
like this, because as soon as they even hinted
at possession, I don't know that I would ever
get it out of my head. And therefore, I would
fuck everything up. You would actually be pretty
terrible on a jury, just because a judge does
have to say, okay, don't think about this. Don't
consider this. You can not consider what - What?
Yeah, if something's stricken from the record.
That's all I would think of. Like an objection?
Yeah. You'll say, Kate, no, you can't consider
that. And then I know you would be like, I can't
think of anything but this. And then when you're
deliberating, I'd be like, has everyone ever
thought of whatever this thing is that was stricken
from the record? Are we considering that in this?
Yeah, I'm just saying this off the record. So
if I'm ever on a jury, then I have to start with,
I just have to be honest, I cannot... Don't tell
me what not to do. Yeah, I cannot mentally get
around something that you tell me not to think
of. And if there's even a small chance of possession,
I'm gonna side with possession. Okay? Okay. And
I'm sorry, we just need to look at the speed
of the 1980s court system. The murder happened
on February 16th, 1981, is convicted on November
24th, 1981, and sentenced on December 18th, 1981.
But this was their first one. Yeah, true. But
you think that maybe it took longer. I should
say first in that town, this court system, he
stood trial in sorry, where was it? Connecticut.
Yeah, thank you for that. It was somewhere else
in Connecticut that would have been able to handle
a murder trial. See, I was right. Okay, while
we're on the topic, this is not on the topic,
there's no Ed and Lorraine Warren of our time,
is there? Possession -wise, no. Spirituality
isn't as popular as it used to be in the haunting
and possession sort of way. That's true. It's
more so alien stuff, and I think bigger people
are in the UFO community than the spirituality
community these days. And this one is a movie,
right? Yes. It's actually been many movies. Really?
Oh yeah. And I find this defense lawyer seem
to do a terrible job. Do you agree with me, Chelsea,
in that they wouldn't let her use possession,
so she used self -defense? Instead of saying,
I don't know, lacked mental capacity, insanity,
something along the lines of that. No, that's
true. Even I know that. And I don't know much
about love. This lawyer seemed a little butthurt
that she couldn't go with something that would
be like groundbreaking. So she said, screw it,
I'm not gonna represent well at all now. Okay,
and what happened to him again? Sorry, he was
found guilty. He was found guilty, served just
under five years in jail. Yeah, because those
lawyers sucked. Five, under five years? Yeah.
Actually, in possession cases with murder, we're
averaging right around four and a half years,
which is kind of crazy. That is super crazy,
and especially because none of them can be, like,
ruled possessed. Like, they're still being found.
I'm almost wondering if it's taken into account
in sentencing or something. They can't, but you
also, you take into account all these factors.
Because this one said that it was self -defense.
And could the judge rule on that? I doubt it.
On convicting, you can't. But I'm wondering under
sentencing if that's a factor that they take
into account for how many years you should get.
Well, it seems like it is around four. Yeah.
Go one rate. After this all happens, Lorraine
Warren defends her work with the family, claiming
that the six priests who were involved in the
incident agreed at the time that the boy was
possessed and that the supernatural events she
described were real. Unfortunately, I don't think
she ever took the stand here, because I would
have loved to see her as an expert and get cross
-examined under oath. Because you know this woman
has lied so much in her life. Oh yeah. No independent
verification of this claim about the priest's
alleged views was provided. Glatzel's father,
Carl Glatzel Sr. denies telling the author that
his son was possessed, Johnson and Debbie now
married, wholeheartedly support the Warren's
account of demonic possession, and have stated
that the litigants were suing simply for the
money. Then this gets so like I'm sure Johnson's
doing pretty well from like everything that he's
been represented in a media. So starting in 1983,
he's still in jail at that point, like sort of
two years into his five -year sentence. Gerald
Brittle, with the assistance of Lorraine Warren,
published a book about the incident entitled
The Devil in Connecticut. Lorraine Warren states
that profits from the book were shared with the
family. However, sources confirm that $2 ,000
were paid to the family by the book publisher.
So not that much. And that comes up again and
again with them. Upon the book's re -publication
in 2006 by iUniverse, David Glatzel and his brother
Carl Glatzel Jr. sued the authors and book publishers
for violating their right to privacy, libel,
and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Carl also claimed that the book alleged he committed
criminal and abusive acts against his family
and others. He said that the possession story
was a hoax concocted by Ed and Lorraine Warren
to exploit the family and his brother's mental
illness, and that the book represents him as
the villain because he did not believe in the
supernatural claims. He asserted that the Warren's
author, Brittle, author of The Devil in Connecticut,
says he wrote the book because, quote, the family
wanted the story told, end quote, that he possesses
videos of over 100 hours of his interviews with
the family and that they signed off on the book
as accurate before it went to print. According
to Carl Glatzel, publicity generated by the incident
forced him to drop out of school and lose friends
and business opportunities. In 2007, he began
writing a book, titled Alone Through the Valley,
about his version of the events surrounding his
brother. I don't know if that book ever got made.
The events inspire the premise of the 2021 film,
The Conjuring the Devil Made Me Do It, and an
earlier made -for -TV film is also based on the
case, The Demon Murder Case, which was produced
again in 1983 and starred Kevin Bacon. I have
never heard of this. What? Nope. Netflix produced
a documentary in 2023, The Devil on Trial, based
on this case. It includes interviews with Carl
Glatzel, whose comments suggest a naturalistic
alternative to demonic possession in the influence
of Salmonex. One thing that actually just made
me think, they must have had a pretty terrible
case for insanity if they dropped it right after
they said, no, you can't do possession, then
say, OK, self -defense. The case could not have
been good. This really fucks everything up. No
kidding, either that or they were just a really
terrible lawyer. Just like a fuckup, like just
barely passed the bar. Yeah, I don't know. It's
one or the other. Maybe both. Yeah. It's so weird.
One does not preclude the other. But yeah, that's
the conjuring case that is probably the most
famous of all of this. I think it's the most
made up of all of them, too. Really? Mostly because
of the Warrens. If you get the Warrens names
involving anything, I'm like, oh, they're lying.
They just wanted to make money off this. Oh,
sorry. Of all your cases? Yeah. Oh, okay. I thought
you just meant of... Actually, I don't know what
I was thinking. Of law in general. Now that I
think about it. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know
what the fuck I was thinking there. The warrants
are just absolutely full of shit. My next case
although you definitely know this case But you
would not think of it as a possession case and
that is David Berkowitz the son of Sam killer
Maybe I would think of it as a possession case.
There was something with him. Oh, yeah, it's
very direct Although it's gonna be very short
because it's not that great of a possession case
But nonetheless super famous case and because
it does get brought up. I thought it's important
to kind of include it here Yeah, okay. I like
this one. We haven't really talked serial killers
on the podcast before but I did just watch the
document well maybe like a month like no month
two three months ago I did watch the documentary
on Netflix Okay, well, I'm gonna give everybody
a Coles Notes of this case just so that you can
kind of like, oh right, that famous serial killer.
Between July 1976 and July 1977, New York was
gripped by fear as a series of seemingly random
shootings left six people dead and seven wounded.
The killer targeted young couples, often while
they sat in parked cars late at night. The assailant
used a .44 caliber revolver and left behind cryptic
letters signed, Son of Sam. These letters taunted
police and the media, fueling a frenzy of speculation
and panic. The city was paralyzed with residents
altering their routines and police launching
one of the largest manhunts in New York history.
The breakthrough came when a parking ticket issued
near one of the crime scenes led investigators
to David Berkowitz, a 24 -year -old postal worker
from Yonkers. Upon searching his car and apartment,
police found the murder weapons, another incriminating
evidence, and Berkowitz was arrested on August
10th, 1977 and quickly confessed to the killings.
When he was arrested, He quickly confessed and
claimed that a demon named Harvey had possessed
his neighbor Sam Carr's dog and was sending him
messages to kill. Berkowitz said he was tormented
by voices and compelled to obey their commands,
describing himself as a soldier in a satanic
war. This narrative was reinforced by the cryptic
letters, he sent to police and media science
son of Sam, which reference occult themes, paranoia,
and a mysterious network of evil forces. The
possession claim wasn't just a personal delusion,
it became a public spectacle feeding into the
era's growing fear of satanic cults and ritualistic
crimes. However, The legal system didn't entertain
the possession defense at all. He was found completely
competent to stand trial and pleaded guilty to
all charges. Over time, He recanted on the demonic
story, admitting it was a hoax designed to mislead
investigators and amplify its notoriety. In later
interviews and writings, Berkowitz claimed he
fabricated the possession angle to mask deeper
psychological issues and to manipulate the media.
He eventually goes on to become a born -again
Christian while he's in prison, renouncing his
past and urging others not to glorify his crimes,
and even now goes by the Son of Hope. He's still
alive, too. He really loves that son of a...
Yeah. No idea why. You know what? I really don't
think that I finished the documentary because
I didn't know that last part. I knew the other
stuff. And about the dog, it was the dog that
was the weird part. The freaking dog, yeah. And
yeah, he's technically not possessed, but also
he said there were voices commanding him. So
he was kind of, if you take it literally in that
way, he also was, um... possessed, but also he
wasn't because he says he made the whole story
up. Interesting how that works. That was a pleasant
surprise. This one is really weird. I like this
story a lot, but viewer discretion advised on
this one. It's not as gory as the first one,
but it just it's kind of a little sad at the
end. Oh no, I hate sad at the end. It doesn't
involve a pet, does it? It does not. You're fine.
OK, OK, because that needs a different viewer
discretion advice. It does. So this is the story
of Sean Richard Sellers. Sellers and his best
friend Richard Howard had been discussing how
it would feel to kill someone. Sellers confesses
during this time to the September 8th, 1985 murder
of Robert Paul Bauer, a 32 year old Circle K
convenience store clerk who had refused to sell
beer to Howard. According to Howard, who was
present for but did not participate in the murder,
Sellers wanted to see what it feels like to kill
somebody. And sorry, I should say Sellers is
born in 69. This is all happening in 85, so he's
16 years old. Sellers said he decided to kill
his mother after a fight over his girlfriend
whom his mother didn't like. He'd served his
mother several cups of coffee, laid him with
rat poison, but this didn't work. On March 5th,
1986 Sellers shot and killed his mother and stepfather
Vonda and Lee Belafato with a .44 caliber revolver
while they were asleep in the bedroom of their
Oklahoma City home. Wearing only underwear to
limit blood splatter on himself, he first shot
his stepfather. The shot awoke his mother, whom
he shot in the face. Sellers tried to disguise
his guilt by arranging the crime scene to look
like an intruder had committed the killings.
Howard testified that after the murders Sellers
came to his house and said he killed his parents.
Howard was also initially charged with first
-degree murder, but the charges were dismissed
when he received a five -year suspension sentence
for being an accessory after the fact after agreeing
to testify against Sellers. So at his trial Sellers
said he was a practicing Satanist at the time
of the murder and claimed that demonic possession
by the demon Ezerate Oh for fuck sakes caused
him to murder his victims. In later documents
he claimed to have read the Satanic Bible by
Anton Levy hundreds of times between the age
of 15 and 16 when the crime were committed and
in a confession letter written from prison he
reflected on this period of his life quote I
got very involved in Satanism I truly thought
it was an honest way to live and the rituals
of it would enable me to control my life end
of quote his attorneys also argued Sellers was
addicted to the game Dungeons and Dragons although
Sellers would later write that the game had no
part in his crimes in that quote using my past
as a common example of the effects of the game
is either irrational or fanatical end quote sorry
what year was What is this? 85. This is the height
of the satanic pen. I almost feel like this is
the lawyers trying to push this angle to say
he can't be held accountable for it because there's
all this going on with children. The jury refused
to consider either claim and Sellers was found
guilty of multiple homicides and sentenced to
death in 1986. At the time, Oklahoma law did
not give juries the option of giving a life sentence
without the possibility of parole. That choice
became available the next year. One juror later
said that the jury feared that Sellers would
be paroled in 7 to 15 years and that this prison
term was not lengthy enough. This led the jury
to vote for a death sentence. However, other
jurors denied that this was part of their deliberation.
Now while in jail Sellers became a Christian.
His friends started a website on his behalf and
he campaigned for clemency based on his religious
conversion, age, and involvement in Satanism.
While on death row, Sellers made numerous appearances
in the mass media, appearing on Oprah Winfrey,
on a notorious segment of Geraldo about Satanism,
when he appeared in documentaries about Satanism
and serial killers on 48 Hours, MSNBC, and A
&E Network. Sellers married in prison in February
of 1995, but the marriage was annulled in 1997.
Sellers' step -siblings doubted that his conversion
to Christianity was a sincere one. Of this, many
surviving family members, only his step -grandfather
believed his conversion to be sincere. However,
the prison chaplain believed he had truly converted.
During his 1999 appeal to the 10th U .S. Circuit
of Court of Appeal, Sellers contended that he
had multiple personality disorders. The appellate
court ruled that there was uncontroverted evidence
of Sellers' religious conversion that he may
indeed suffer from multiple personality disorder.
The panel of judges concluded that while Sellers
might have been insane at the time of the crime,
the claim was made too late to be raised on appeal.
Human Rights Watch condemned this decision to
quote uphold the sentence on narrow procedural
grounds despite the acknowledged uncontested
clinical evidence that Sellers suffers from multiple
personality disorders and quote adding in its
letter to Governor Keating that quote no civilized
society can accept the execution of a who was
a child at the time he committed the crimes and
who was and remains afflicted with a mental disorder.
Such an execution offends the most basic principles
of international justice and morality. Psychiatric
experts scoffed at Sellers claims, arguing that
any true mental illness would have been diagnosed
soon after Sellers' arrest and not seven years
later. Prison officials also cast doubt on Sellers'
mental illness by saying they saw Sellers rehearsing
the evidence of mental illness and receiving
coaching from his attorney, which is very illegal
spying on a lawyer with a client. He did appeal
to the Supreme Court, but the court declined
this appeal. Sellers' imminent execution brought
documentation from a wide variety of sources,
including the European Union Archbishop Desmond
Tutu, the American Bar Association, and Bianca
Jaeger. Nearly all raised issues about his age
at the time of the crime, and many argued that
this religious work from prison outweighed the
state's need to execute him. However, he was
still executed by lethal injection on February
4, 1999 at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in
McAllister, Oklahoma at 12 .17 a .m. For his
last meal, he had Chinese food, He began his
final statement by addressing his step siblings.
Don't hate all your lives. I love you all." In
the final minutes before the injection, Sellers
sang modern Christian music and then loudly said,
Here I come, Father, I'm coming home, and then
turned to the ward and said, Let's do it, Gary.
Let's get it on. Sellers finally saying his last
words set my spirit free that I may praise thee
set my spirit free that I may worship thee Sellers
step -siblings objected to the substance of this
final remarks that instead of apologizing or
mentioning their mother He only addressed the
fact they still feel the same. It's very presumptuous
that he would know how we would feel said his
stepsister I don't know just the when you get
to that point in like the death row where they're
actually getting to the death I don't know. I
find that really dark in a weird way. I don't
know how to quite explain it It is especially
given some of the stuff that they brought up
which I think is relevant I don't know Everyone
has their views on stuff like the death penalty
and stuff, right? Yeah, there's a whole other
political side of that, like Oklahoma, 16 year
old, completely disregard the mental health thing
and be like, well, not for us to say you couldn't
have had capacity at this point, so just gonna
have to kill you. Yeah. Yeah, we're too far into
it now, so I guess you gotta die. An eye for
an eye. We're gonna move on to the last case
here, which like I said, I'm curious whether
or not you can consider this in the same category
as a possession claim. Interesting you chose
to include it. Yes. It is a very famous Supreme
Court of Canada case that you have to read, not
all criminal law classes, but the criminal law
class I took in Canada. This came up in the early
morning of 1947, sorry, May 24th, 1987. We had
very different times. Same thing. Kenneth Parks.
the main character of the story. Gets in his
car, drives 20 kilometers from Pickering, Ontario
to the house of his in -laws in Scarborough,
Ontario. Enters the house with a key they had
previously given him and used a tire iron to
bludgeon his mother -in -law to death. He then
turns to his father -in -law, attempting unsuccessfully
to choke him to death. Covered with blood, Parks
gets back in his car, drives straight to a nearby
police station and confesses, turning himself
in and saying, quote, I think I have just killed
two people, end quote. At trial, Parks argues
that he was automatastic and not criminally liable.
In his defense, a doctor testifies as to his
mental state at the time of the murder. From
the doctor's evidence, it was determined that
the accused was sleepwalking. at the time of
the incident and he was suffering from a disorder
of sleep rather than neurological, psychiatric,
or other illnesses. What? Five neurological experts
also confirmed that he was sleepwalking during
the time of the incident. How are they confirming
this? Sorry, continue your story. Originally,
he gets acquitted and the issue ends up getting
all the way to the Supreme Court. What? And the
question is whether or not the condition of sleepwalking
can be classified as non -insane automatism or
should be classified as a disease of the mind
and warrant a verdict of not guilty for reason
of insanity. See now here's something that would
be interesting to sit on the jury of because
what evidence would they have for the doctors
to weigh that he was in fact sleepwalking? Yeah
I know but like so many experts that were fully
able to convince judges all the way to the Supreme
Court that he was not guilty. Okay, so they would
have been able to provide some sort of substanciation.
Must have been convincing enough to do that.
Now, I may have been able to be convinced if
it was maybe a part of his routine to have been
trying to murder people while he was sleepwalking.
that could that have been the evidence? In which
case, I would probably say, yeah, okay, like
I think you got something here. And this time
he succeeded. And I can't quite remember the
evidence behind this, but he had a pattern of
sleepwalking and doing fairly intricate things.
However, he had never actually like attacked
anyone before. and driven a car maybe he did
drive a car no i think he had driven a car before
what yeah and you know what from my sleepwalking
like maybe you could drive a car because you're
just like dreaming i don't feel like i would
drive a car good though because you're not using
your rational mind in which case i could see
maybe murder but he drove 20 kilometers Take
that out. Don't let me admit to it. Okay. 20
kilometers. Yeah. No, I don't believe it. Like
that's a good half hour drive in like a population
dense part of Canada. But you're on autopilot.
No, I don't believe it. I don't believe it because
I sleepwalk. Nothing for sleepwalking. You're
dreaming. You're in a dream. Like it's just your
body not shutting off during that. So it's not
rational. Like you don't do normal everyday things.
Like you don't get in the car and drive to work.
You don't get in the car and go and murder your
in -laws. Like that's not, I mean, I haven't
gotten in the car. I have gone outside in the
middle of winter though and like I wouldn't otherwise
Yeah, no, I wouldn't otherwise go outside in
the middle of winter in my pajamas It's not rational
thinking not that murdering someone is but Chelsea
this goes to the Supreme Court of Canada and
they uphold the acquittal They say that there's
evidence presented that no has reasonable doubt
about whether parks acted voluntarily Chief Justice
of the time Antonio LaMare held that the trial
judge was correct and his analysis of the evidence
and his decision not to characterize sleepwalking
as a mental disorder. And this was agreed to
by many of the judges who also added in the characterization
of the evidence, they agreed, but looked further
into the public policy of the defense. You know,
it's not worth getting into the nitpicky details.
We're not a legal podcast, so I can just kind
of end it there. But I am curious. I'm very curious.
I don't know. I intuitively felt this fell into
the criminal cases that kind of had a possession
defense. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know. I was talking
to a lawyer friend who got that at me and said
this is a categorically different thing and I'm
like, it's not really though. No, I don't think
it is. I think it's very adjacent. I would agree
with you there having not have any lawyer law.
I think it might be because we've talked about
old Hagues before and that could be a type of
possession of sleepwalking and murder people.
I would be intrigued to know the evidence here.
What kind of evidence they would have to say
That everybody seems to agree. Oh, yeah, there's
a good chance he actually didn't. This is definitely
sleepwalking and how you would prove that it
like it would have to be without a doubt, right?
But that's what was happening for him to know.
So he didn't end up going to jail and it's remember
you need to be found guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt. So the evidence was at least enough to
cast doubt. Oh, that you did not have capacity.
Okay, yeah, huh. So it's not like oh, yeah fully
a hundred percent. This is what happened It's
like yeah, the likelihood of it is more likely
see that's another thing that would get me on
a jury I feel like that without reason like the
reasonable doubt thing I feel like I would always
be second -guessing myself as well. So I feel
like I'd always like what yeah I don't know.
With what we talk about on this podcast, what's
reasonable seems different than the average person
at this point. It's true. And if I ever get called
a jury duty, I'm just going to tell them about
this episode. Look, it's hard to explain. Just
listen to this episode that's an hour long. You'll
get it. Just listen to the whole thing. Like
us, follow us, share it if you like it. The other
thing is I listen to true crime all the time.
I'll be listening to something. I'm like, they
fucking did it. And then the next second I'm
like, they didn't do it. And I just can't like
I would do the same thing if I sat on a jury,
right about like a case like this I'd be like,
I don't fucking know one second. I'd be like,
oh he totally was sleepwalking and the next second
I'd be like, there's no way he was sleepwalking
It's a tough thing listening to true crime Well
yeah Chelsea, those are the cases I could find
that are possession and possession adjacent defenses.
It turns out if you want it to work out, probably
go with the adjacent or your lawyer might be
at all upset and just like completely screw up
the case. It was the most successful of the night
and super Halloweeny too. And with that, I have
been Taylor, here with Chelsea. We are Journey
to the Fringe. Thank you all for listening. We'll
see you next week. Goodbye. Thank you for listening
to Journey to the Fringe. If you have liked what
you have listened to, please like, share, subscribe,
or follow, depending on what. venue you are listening
to us through. Also, please, if possible, leave
a five -star review, as that really helps us
in the algorithms. Should you wish to interact
with us, please check us out on your social media
of choice. I bet you we are there. And if you
really want to communicate with us and give us
ideas for new episodes or tell us that we're
wrong and terrible, either way, please send us
an email at journeytothefringe at gmail .com.
For now, I'll see you in the next episode.