From Earling to Amityville: Revisiting Landmark Exorcisms and Their Court Records

Introduction: Why revisit these cases?

Exorcism cases sit at the crossroads of religion, medicine, law and popular culture. Several 20th‑century episodes — notably the Earling exorcism (Emma Schmidt, often cited under the pseudonym Anna Ecklund), the Amityville episode that spawned books and films, and the Anneliese Michel case in Germany — remain reference points in debates about the limits of ritual, the role of evidence in court, and the responsibilities of clergy and families.

This article reviews the known facts, available public records and legal consequences associated with those episodes, and points readers to how and where researchers typically locate related court and archival materials. Key factual statements below are supported with primary secondary sources for further verification.

Earling (Emma Schmidt / "Anna Ecklund"): the 1928 convent exorcism

Summary: The Earling case — an extended exorcism conducted in 1928 by Capuchin priest Theophilus Riesinger at a Franciscan convent in Earling, Iowa — is one of the most widely cited American exorcism narratives. The woman at the center is identified in source material variously as Emma Schmidt and by the pseudonym Anna Ecklund; the account was widely circulated in a 1935 pamphlet translated as Begone, Satan!. Contemporary and later retellings describe prolonged ritual sessions, dramatic physical phenomena reported by eyewitnesses, and a pamphletized record that fed popular imagination and informed later fictional portrayals.

What court or official records exist?

• Unlike modern criminal trials, the Earling events were documented mainly in church publications, pamphlets and press coverage rather than in civil or criminal court dockets; researchers therefore rely on ecclesiastical accounts (for example, the pamphlet Begone, Satan! and contemporary magazine coverage) and later scholarly compilations to reconstruct the events.
• Because the exorcism was church‑sanctioned and kept largely within ecclesiastical and convent walls, secular court records are limited or non‑existent; the most reliable primary materials are the original pamphlet translation, contemporaneous press stories and archival holdings (diocesan and religious order records) where accessible.

Research tips

To pursue original materials: request diocesan or religious‑order archives (Franciscan Sisters in Earling; Capuchin community records for Father Riesinger), consult historical magazine issues (Time covered the pamphlet in the 1930s), and look for modern scholarly editions or anthologies that have reproduced or annotated the pamphlet. Many of the pamphlet editions and later scholarly discussions are digitized or cited in modern compilations.

Amityville (112 Ocean Avenue): the Lutz claims, media and legal aftermath

Summary: The house at 112 Ocean Avenue in Amityville, New York, was the site of the November 13, 1974 murders committed by Ronald DeFeo Jr. A year later the Lutz family moved in and reported a month of terrifying phenomena; their claims were popularized in Jay Anson’s book The Amityville Horror (1977) and the 1979 film adaptation. The narrative mixed reported experiences (a priest who believed something in the house told them to "get out", alleged swarms of flies, cold spots, and other poltergeist‑type phenomena) with fierce skepticism and allegations of fabrication and commercial motive.

What public records and legal proceedings are relevant?

• Criminal records: the DeFeo murders generated standard criminal‑court records (arrest, plea, sentencing) filed in Suffolk County; those are public criminal dockets and can be requested from the relevant county clerk or court records office.
• Civil and media litigation: several media, book and interview disputes (including later libel/denial claims and recorded statements) created a public paper trail: published interviews, deposition excerpts, and media‑law reporting are often archived in newspaper repositories and trade‑press databases.
• Contested claims and investigations: journalists, skeptics and some investigators have uncovered inconsistent statements and alleged coordination for profit; those investigative reports and documentary footage form part of the public record even when not part of a formal court file.

Research tips

If you want court files about the DeFeo criminal case, contact the Suffolk County Clerk's Office (criminal records) or search state archives. For the Lutz narrative and related civil/press material, consult newspaper archives, court dockets when litigation occurred, and recorded interviews; many of those documents are indexed in news databases and film/documentary archives.

When exorcism intersects with the law: Anneliese Michel and legal precedent on "stigmatized" properties

The Anneliese Michel case (Germany, mid‑1970s) demonstrates how ritualized practices can prompt criminal prosecution. Michel, who underwent dozens of exorcism sessions and later died of malnutrition, became the subject of a criminal trial: her parents and two priests were convicted of negligent homicide (suspended sentences), and the exorcism tapes were introduced during proceedings. The verdict and reporting around the trial had lasting effects on church practice, public debate about mental health versus possession, and legal accountability for caregivers and clergy.

Legal context & related U.S. precedent

Two types of legal records often arise in exorcism‑related research:

• Criminal dockets: deaths, assaults or neglect tied to ritual practice can produce ordinary criminal charges (as in the Anneliese Michel prosecution) and corresponding trial transcripts, judgments and appeals.
• Civil/property law: famous haunted‑house controversies have also produced civil law precedents about disclosure. For example, in U.S. property law the California Court of Appeal held in Reed v. King (145 Cal. App. 3d 261 (1983)) that a seller’s nondisclosure of a prior multiple murder — a stigmatizing fact that materially affected the property’s value — could support rescission or damages. That decision and similar rulings (and statutory disclosure duties) illustrate how courts treat non‑physical “defects” such as notoriety or stigma.

How to locate the records you want

1. Identify jurisdiction: criminal prosecutions (county courts), civil suits (county or state courts), and church discipline (diocesan archives) live under different custodians.
2. Contact the clerk: for court dockets and filings, start with the county clerk/records office where charges or suits were filed and request case numbers, minute orders, and transcripts (fees may apply).
3. Search newspaper and media archives: headline coverage, interviews and investigative reporting often preserve depositions, sworn statements and documentary evidence that supplement or predate formal filings.
4. Request ecclesiastical or institutional archives carefully: many religious orders and dioceses maintain internal records but have privacy rules; academic researchers should approach archivists with clear research proposals.

Note: laws about record access, privacy and sealed juvenile or medical records differ across jurisdictions; always confirm access rules with the relevant clerk or archivist before assuming availability.

Closing observations

These landmark episodes — Earling, Amityville and Anneliese Michel — illustrate three different record streams: ecclesiastical pamphlets and orders’ files (Earling), public criminal dockets and media/press files (DeFeo/Amityville), and criminal trial records where ritual practice was a central evidentiary issue (Anneliese). Researchers should combine legal‑records requests with archival searches and reputable secondary sources to assemble a comprehensive account. The landmark legal holdings (for example, criminal convictions in cases of neglect or negligent homicide, or civil precedent about disclosure of stigmatized property) show that courts will become involved when ritual practice intersects with harm, commerce or property law.