The Haunted Boy of Cottage City (aka, the 'real' exorcist story)

[grego]

This is an old article (1999. I believe), but i still think its really interesting. Probably, in part, because its a 'local' story. Partly because it involved (allegedly) the supernatural. But mostly because its one of those things that people think (or thought) they know a little bit about, but nobody really bothered to find out the truth about, or so it seems.

Most people know that this didn't happen in Georgetown. Mount Rainier- just outside of DC near College Park- is the location William Peter Blatty, the author of "The Exorcist" gives. Fewer people are aware that the 'real' story is not about a 12 year old girl, but a 14 year old boy. And it didn't happen in Mount Rainier, but in nearby Cottage City, MD.

I originally read this about a year or two ago when a poster (Burgold, I believe) talked about interviewing Thomas Allen, who wrote the 1993 book 'Possessed- the True Story of an Exorcism'. Though Allen claims to be telling the true story, I noted he got the address of the boy wrong, despite getting most of his information from the priests diaries, which contained the boys real address.

Its possible that Allen, just like the priests, was protecting the boys identity. But its curious that he, apparently, didn't attempt to interview anyone who knew the boy.

Anyway, the house is still standing, contrary to popular belief, and the 'boy' is still alive (though he's never talked about his experience and would likely appreciate his privacy to be respected).

Its a bit of a long read, but pretty fascinating the way the author, Mark Opsasnick, painstakingly searches for answers.


http://www.strangemag.com/exorcistpage1.html
 

There have been dozens of newspaper and magazine articles that have tried to tell the “true” story. Books, television specials, and video documentaries on the subject have appeared, with the most recent offerings being the 1993 book Possessed: The True Story Of An Exorcism by Thomas B. Allen and the 1997 Henninger Media video In The Grip Of Evil. Most of the published works on this subject are poorly referenced and offer contradictory and even erroneous material. So much has been embellished and fabricated that it has become nearly impossible to differentiate fact and fiction. There is only one constant that seems to unite the biased writers who have tried to revise this story to suit their own agendas—none have ever actually talked with the possessed boy and none have ever interviewed anyone who grew up close to the family in question. I always felt the real story could only come from them.

 

[chipwhich]

There is a whole thread on this story. If I wasn't in the air flying to Denver on bad wifi on an iPad I woukd find it

[grego]

Ya, I spent like 10 minutes yesterday looking cuz I'd thought I'd seen something last year, but to no avail.

[Dan T.]

Here's a link to the Washington Post article that first piqued the curiosity of "The Exorcist" author William Blatty, from August 20, 1949, when he was a 20-year old English Lit major at Georgetown University.  

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/features/dcmovies/exorcism1949.htm

 

Priest Freed Boy of Possession By Devil, Church Sources Say

By Bill Brinkley

Washington Post Reporter

Friday, August 20, 1949

 

In what is perhaps one of the most remarkable experiences of its kind in recent religious history, a 14-year-old Mount Rainier boy has been freed by a Catholic priest of possession by the devil, Catholic sources reported yesterday.

 

Only after between 20 and 30 performances of the ancient ritual of exorcism, here and in St. Louis, was the devil finally cast out of the boy, it was said.

 

In all except the last of these, the boy broke into a violent tantrum of screaming, cursing and voicing of Latin phrases - a language he had never studied - whenever the priest reached the climactic point of the ritual, "In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, I cast thee (the devil) out."

 

In complete devotion to his task, the priest stayed with the boy over a period of two months, during which he said he personally witnessed such manifestations as the bed in which the boy was sleeping suddenly moving across the room.

 

A Washington Protestant minister had previously reported personally witnessing similar manifestations, including one in which the pallet on which the sleeping boy lay slid slowly across the floor until the boy's head bumped against a bed, awakening him. In another instance, reported by the Protestant minister, a heavy armchair in which the boy was sitting with his knees drawn under his chin tilted slowly to one side and fell over, throwing the boy on the floor.

 

The final rite of exorcism in which the devil was cast from the boy took place in May, it was reported ...

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/longterm/movies/features/dcmovies/exorcism1949.htm

[Kilmer17]

Great movie.

 

Complete bs that the real kid was ACTUALLY possessed.

[Dan T.]

The piece in the OP is an interesting read.  Author Mark Opsasnick does a hell of a job tracking down the true story behind the book and movie.  Through exhaustive detective work, he identifies the house where the boy lived

 

3807 40th Avenue

Brentwood, Maryland

 

(in Cottage City, a tiny neighborhood across Route 1 from Mt. Ranier, the place otherwise widely reported as the site) and ends up tracking the person down.  After the events of the exorcism in the summer of the boy's 14th year, he goes on to graduate from Gonzaga High School.  Opsansnick talked to people who knew the kid and paints a portrait of a somewhat odd only child of a superstitious, overbearing German mother and an aloof father.  The kid is a bit of a loner with a nasty, mean-spirited disposition.

[Jumbo]

Keeping an open mind in all but the most ludicrous of matters is a big deal to me. 

 

That said, on this matter I find the reality where humans over the ages make things up to explain what they don't understand (especially in response to fear and insecurity) more rational and supportable than the reality where "demonic possession" is just as religious folk describe it or the Syfy channel would present it.

 

Call that an understatement.

[Dan T.]

So here's the high school yearbook photo of the kid:

Ronald Edwin Hunkeler.

 

 

 

 

 

He had been known as "Robbie Doe" to protect his identity.

[Dan T.]

Class photo of Ronald Hunkeler, identified by the green X on his shoulder:

 

[Dan T.]

Ronald Hunkeler later worked for NASA at the Goddard Space Flight Center.  He helped develop a lightweight foam compound used to protect electronics aboard space vehicles.

Here's a page from the 1964 "Goddard News" newsletter with photos showing him mixing the compound.

 

The link below is to the whole newsletter, with the front page article about the compound,

"For Space Electronics We Bake A Cake"

Hunkeler is first mentioned at the bottom of the front page.

http://library01.gsfc.nasa.gov/goddardnews/July_27_1964.pdf

[grego]

The piece in the OP is an interesting read.  Author Mark Opsasnick does a hell of a job tracking down the true story behind the book and movie.  Through exhaustive detective work, he identifies the house where the boy lived

 

 

 

 

ya, i thought so too. he did a hell of a job. when i started reading the article, i was really drawn into the story.

 

still kinda surprised that nobody had tracked down the 'true' story before. but, then, he put a lot of work into it. lots of letter writing and time and patience. i imagine some may have tried to felt like they hit brick walls. 

 

i did drive by the house last year when i was in college park just cuz i had to take a look, not that i expected to see demons in the windows or anything although i would caution to pay cash at the nearby burger king. i used my credit card there and shortly after, my card (card number, anyway, since i had my card the whole time) was used at several nearby businesses shortly after. i blame the exorcist house

[grego]

Keeping an open mind in all but the most ludicrous of matters is a big deal to me. 

 

That said, on this matter I find the reality where humans over the ages make things up to explain what they don't understand (especially in response to fear and insecurity) more rational and supportable than the reality where "demonic possession" is just as religious folk describe it or the Syfy channel would present it.

 

Call that an understatement.

 

 

it is a bit anti climactic that this all seems to be a the result of exaggeration, superstition and all the silly stuff that happens when people get involved.

 

the only remotely supernatural nugget was when his childhood friend talked about how 'ronnie' was sitting in his desk as it shook, which was the last time that year he was in school before being shipped off to st louis. still, its not like someone couldnt make their desk shake, or that the guy might be remembering it not quite as it was. eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. 

[grego]

btw, though its a bit of a bummer that there doesnt appear to be much substance behind the exorcist story, if you want to be creeped out, you could always google the recording of the exorcism that the 'emily rose' movie was based on. 

 

creepy, indeed. 

[Rocky21]

Mark Opsasnick has written a couple of books about rock 'n roll trivia in the DC area so I guess this is an extension of that. Thanks grego for the link in the OP. This appears to be an exaggerated version of the telephone game where the original story get told, embellished, retold and embellished again until we have Linda Blair spitting up green vomit.

[Dan T.]

it is a bit anti climactic that this all seems to be a the result of exaggeration, superstition and all the silly stuff that happens when people get involved.

Mark Opsasnick has written a couple of books about rock 'n roll trivia in the DC area so I guess this is an extension of that. Thanks grego for the link in the OP. This appears to be an exaggerated version of the telephone game where the original story get told, embellished, retold and embellished again until we have Linda Blair spitting up green vomit.

Don't lose sight of the fact that an exorcism really did take place. The boy was strapped to a bed for periods of time, he screamed, cursed and spat at the priests, and shouted out Latin gibberish, etc. That stuff all happened, and it was convincing enough to fool people. Opsasnick theorizes that Hunkeler, a loner and an odd kid, wanted out of school because he was ostracized and bullied. His increasing acting out found a receptive audience until it metastasized from psychological problems into a whole demonic possession thing. Interesting that one of the first messages supposedly scrawled on his skin was "No School" before more demonic messages started appearing.

Also, I ran across a tidbit of interesting speculation. Because author Blatty had access to the priest's diary of the exorcism through one of his Jesuit professors at Georgetown, he presumably knew the subject's real name - Ronald. When he agreed to change the subject to a girl in his 1971 novel "The Exorcist," to protect the real life person, he named his new protagonist Regan.

Get it? Ronald = Regan. Ronald Reagan. Coincidence, or just a sly little joke from Blatty?

[The Sisko]

Don't lose sight of the fact that an exorcism really did take place. The boy was strapped to a bed for periods of time, he screamed, cursed and spat at the priests, and shouted out Latin gibberish, etc. That stuff all happened, and it was convincing enough to fool people. Opsasnick theorizes that Hunkeler, a loner and an odd kid, wanted out of school because he was ostracized and bullied. His increasing acting out found a receptive audience until it metastasized from psychological problems into a whole demonic possession thing. Interesting that one of the first messages supposedly scrawled on his skin was "No School" before more demonic messages started appearing.

Also, I ran across a tidbit of interesting speculation. Because author Blatty had access to the priest's diary of the exorcism through one of his Jesuit professors at Georgetown, he presumably knew the subject's real name - Ronald. When he agreed to change the subject to a girl in his 1971 novel "The Exorcist," to protect the real life person, he named his new protagonist Regan.

Get it? Ronald = Regan. Ronald Reagan. Coincidence, or just a sly little joke from Blatty?

 

Wellll...

[jobaga]

Weird. I remember being taught in an abnormal psych class that the Exorcist was based on a kid with Tourette's Syndrome. I never questioned it, because that seemed like a very plausible scenario

[Bliz]

Wellll...

 

*grumble*

 

such a frustrating cut-off.  The 30-45 seconds after that are incredible.  Need a re-cut, up to where granddad yells at him for telling white folks the truth.

 

"I'm gonna find me a white man and lie to him right now..."

[pjfootballer]

Awesome read. Took me all day being at work, but it was fascinating.

So basically, the author of this article was the only person that did any in-depth investigating, while the rest hung on to an urban legend at the wrong address. Kudos to him for doing all the work.

Conclusion: the boy was never possessed and was basically an asshole who suffered from mental illness. Probably depression, anxiety and schizophrenia.

[grego]

Awesome read. Took me all day being at work, but it was fascinating.

So basically, the author of this article was the only person that did any in-depth investigating, while the rest hung on to an urban legend at the wrong address. Kudos to him for doing all the work.

It was fascinating. Opsasnick is just as good at telling the story as he is at doing research.