The Conjuring 4 (The Smurls) Part 2 | The True Story of the Warrens' Paranormal Case | Ep #40 - Madame Strangeways: True Spooky Paranormal Stories

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:01):
Are you kidding me? Diabolical insemination.
Ed would have loved to have saidthat.
He would have loved to have saidthose words.
It's crazy to me that he didn't.What a missed opportunity.
God, I'm so disappointed in you,Ed.
Come on. Welcome stranger to Madam
Strange Ways, where I, Madam Strange Ways occasionally break

(00:24):
up my true strange story narrations with deep dives about
strange topics like Ed and Lorraine Warren's paranormal
case files. This is the second and final
episode of the Smurl family haunting the subject of the
latest Conjuring movie, The Conjuring Last Rites.
In the first episode, I read youa short story recounting many of

(00:45):
the alleged demonic encounters that the Smurl family endured,
and I gave you my thoughts so far.
So if you haven't listened to the first episode, I hereby
banish you until you have. I'll go back to our usual format
of reading your true strange stories in the next episode, but
for now I sense it's about to rain Hellcats and Hell Hounds

(01:09):
outside, so you know what that means.
On to our strange and allegedly,possibly questionably true story
here on Madam Strange Ways. Quick content warning before we

(01:40):
get started that this episode includes a perhaps gratuitous
amount of discussion about demonsexual assault, so just FYI,
listen with care. Welcome to Part 2 of the Smurl
Family Haunting, AKA the true story behind the latest
Conjuring film, The Conjuring Last Rites.

(02:03):
So if you haven't listened to the first episode in the series,
you're going to have to go back and listen to that.
Sorry, it's necessary reading because otherwise I'll be making
references to stuff that you have no idea what I'm talking
about. So just as a as a quick nutshell
reminder, what we were talking about last time was the Smurl
family and the haunting that allegedly happened to them as

(02:25):
described in the book written byboth Janet and Jack Smurl and
Lorraine and Ed Warren and also the the actual author of the
book, Robert Curran called the Haunted One Family's Nightmare.
Now the year is 1986, which means that not only are we smack
dab right in the middle of the Satanic Panic, which is the

(02:47):
moral panic that happened in the80s and 90s specifically
surrounding Satan, Satan, Satan,Satan.
And not only that, but a ton of horror and classic slasher films
have come out in the 80s and thelate 70s leading up to all of
the events that happened allergically to the Smurl
family. Let's just just remember quick,

(03:10):
Cliff's notes, the Smurl family,Janet and Jack, they lived in a
duplex with their four daughters.
On one side of the duplex and then on the other side of the
wall were Jack's parents, John and Mary Smurl.
So they all lived in this littleduplex in West Pittston, PA,
about 25 minutes away from Scranton.

(03:32):
Yes, that's Scranton, and there were a lot of crazy paranormal
claims that they make up, but the largest claim that they make
that I have no doubt will be completely left out of the
movie. The biggest paranormal claim
that they make is that not only was Jack Smurl sexually

(03:54):
assaulted by demons, Janet Smurl, his wife, was also
assaulted by demons so sexually,to be clear, I just cannot
imagine that they're going to include even a shred of any of
that in the movie, which is interesting because what do you
mean? What do you mean?
I thought it was a true story. Is it?
It's based on a true story. Why would you leave out that

(04:16):
really important detail if it's a true story?
Anyway, moving on. Like I said in the first
episode, just to be clear, sexual assault, sexual assault's
not funny. Which is why it's so messed up
that the Smurls and the Warrens and Robert Curran treated it the
way that they did, used it as a plot device in order to sell

(04:36):
more books and more movies. And in the case of the book, it
is written borderline pornographically as in zero
respect. 0 respect given to sexual assault.
It's crazy to the victim, which is Janet and Jack.
Yeah, 0 respect there. So anyway, hate that, but they
talk about it, they put it in the book.

(04:58):
So you know what, we are going to talk about it and that is
where we are picking up here on Part 2 of the Smurls we are
picking up. Right where I know that you want
to be and that is jumping again face first into.

(05:18):
The succubus and the incubus nowright off the bat, what is a
succubus what is an incubus one of them is a band.
I know that what they really areA succubus is a female demon who
sexually assaults men, human menin their sleep, and an incubus
is a male demon who sexually. Assaults.

(05:39):
Human women in their sleep OK, we're starting This is great I
think generally when you hear the.
Descriptions. It's like, you know, demon women
who have sex with men. But you know, I think we got to
call spade a spade here. So unfortunately, this is, you
know what, like I said, I didn'tmake this bed.
The Smurls and the Warrens made this bed.

(06:01):
I am simply having to deal with the bed that they made.
I am just not letting them get. I am not letting people forget
that they made this bed. This is what I'm saying.
We're talking about it. So before I read you this
excerpt from the book The Haunted to show you just how
strange, strangely specific, anddetailed the sexual encounter
with the demons are, this specific excerpt reads like

(06:25):
smut. So trigger warning.
Trigger warning for NSFW content.
Just I didn't. Again, I didn't write it.
I didn't write it. And I cannot stress to you
enough that this is verbatim what is written in the book The
Haunted, written by as a reminder, the Warrens, the
Smurls and Robert Curran. Now, Robert Curran was a

(06:47):
journalist and he actually endedup doing the writing of the
book. He wrote the book.
OK. And and by the way, this part of
the story that you're about to hear, this is not the first
encounter with the succubus thatJack has.
If you'll remember, Jack had twoencounters with different
succubi in the book, but he alsosaid that he had a dozen

(07:10):
different encounters with the demon or multiple demons.
Unclear, but this is just This is the second one from the book.
This is This is not the scary old hag whose body is rotting
and it just seems like she's taken directly from the movie
The Shining. Instead, this is a different,
sexier succubus. I assume that this was written

(07:33):
entirely by Robert Curran based off of an interview with Jack,
meaning he heard Jack talking about his encounter.
And I just really wish I could have been a family on that wall.
Anyway, we're going to here's here's the excerpt.
Remember verbatim, The Haunted Book describes the sexual

(07:54):
assault of Jack Smurl. As such, the time was dawn.
A round red summer sun was pushing up past clouds, already
hazy with pollutants, casting analmost bloody glow over the
bedroom in which Janet and Jack Smurl slept.
And then, abruptly, Jack was awake.
A voluptuous young woman was on top of Jack, riding him in the

(08:18):
position of sexual domination Des M.
Despite her beauty and the pleasure she was obviously
enjoying, her eyes remained A shocking and sickly neon green.
Next to him, Janet slept. Jack knew that she was in a deep
psychic sleep. Despite his prayers, the
succubus would not be contained.Still in the form of a beautiful

(08:40):
young woman whose alabaster nakedness was only complimented
by the reddish glow of the rising sun, The succubus
plundered Jack sexually, sinkingdown and then moving up on him
several times. I am not making this up, and
we're not done. He exhorted the demon to be
gone, but he found that he was unable to move or speak, and the

(09:01):
succubus continued mounting him once more, hair flying wildly,
neon green eyes glowing larger and more lurid as its mouth ran
with the drool of satisfaction. There is 0% chance that anyone
Jack is not. Jack is not, do you see?
What I'm saying, Jack is not giving, sorry, he's not giving

(09:22):
anyone this amount of satisfaction.
Moving on. The curious thing was that for
all the movement and the succubus put on a dazzling show
full of tricks, Jack felt no sexual sensation at all.
He lay there and simply watched the demon perform, and then it
was over 1 moment. He had been the pawn of Satan

(09:43):
himself, and now he lay covered with the gelatinous sticky mess,
the same stuff the night hag hadleft on him when it had reached
a climax during his first attack.
I I read that this I how why? Who, Who, when, where, why?

(10:03):
Why? Why did this happen?
Why is this how we described this scene?
There's I so many, I have so many things.
Remember in the story, which youmay have listened to in the last
episode, you must have. If you're listening to this and
you didn't listen to the last episode, shame, shame on you.
But the story that I read in thebeginning of the first episode

(10:24):
where I specifically said she mounted him in the dominant
position, that is verbatim. I said that because it's such a
weird way to say that. I mean, I guess it's not wrong,
it's just weird. It's weird.
This is weird. This is weird.
And OK, before we move on, I have to say I think we all know
what the mysterious, gelatinous,sticky mess left on him was.

(10:45):
It's so strange. The book treats it like a
mystery. The book is like, it's stinky
and weird and he doesn't know what it is.
And he washed it off. He scrubbed himself raw.
And I'm like buddy, OK, OK, Anyway this?
Does not sound like the point ofview of someone who's being
sexually assaulted. I mean, it does say that Jack is

(11:06):
like, oh, I didn't feel any sexual sensation at all.
And, you know, it was not good. And that's fine.
But this is not the point of view of someone who's not
enjoying it. Put on a show, the succubus.
Put on a dazzling show full of tricks with her alabaster
nakedness and her voluptuous, beautiful young body.

(11:28):
Are you kidding? Me like Robert Curran the the
the author, Was he writing this one handed?
I ask you like was this? Literal testimony from Jack
Smirrell. Or is this dramatized by Robert
Curran or Ed? I mean if it was dramatized by

(11:49):
Ed and told to Robert Curran to really, you know, make it sexy
maybe, I don't know. I just feels like Curran, the
author, feels like he was havinga really good time writing this.
Am I wrong? Who would write that?
And be and he's a journalist. He was a journalist.
I'm telling you, somebody had a fetish for femdom at a minimum,

(12:13):
minimum. I mean, it really feels like
Curran was like he was just really into it.
And it feels like he was really into it, which is really fucked
up because if Jack really believed this happened to him,
if Jack really believed that he was being sexually assaulted by
demons over a dozen times. And then he tells the story to

(12:33):
be written in a book telling histrue story and this is how it's
written. That's so disrespectful.
I mean like current turned this into softcore porn.
This is like book talk. Book talk needs to know this
exists. I mean honestly, there's only
like 2 scenes that are. There's only two scenes that get
pretty no. Well, hold on, hold on,

(12:54):
actually. Because if you'll remember, Jack
is not the only one. Also, his wife also experiences
some demonic sexual assault. So you know what?
Let's just let's just see. Let's how did how did they treat
that? Did they treat that with any
more respect? Let's find out.
Here is the excerpt of one of Janet's assaults at the hands of
the incubus. Her fears about the incubus were

(13:16):
realized the next night. Oh, yeah.
Because right before this happened on like the page before
or something, she saw a shadowy figure, the shadowy male demon
figure with the Cape, a cloak. OK, she saw the figure in the
bathroom at night when she had gotten up to go get a glass of
water or something, and she saw it, and it saw her.
He saw her, and when it turned around and saw her, it was like

(13:40):
staring at her. And she, it said like she knew
what it wanted from her. And she found herself wishing
that she wasn't so exposed in her nightgown and that she had
been wearing something more substantial so that it couldn't
see her because she knew what itwanted.
What? OK, anyway, that's what she's
talking about. So her fears about the incubus
were realized the next night when Janet, relaxing next to

(14:03):
Jack on their bed, felt an invisible hand move up her body.
Jack, seeing that his wife was being attacked, grabbed the holy
water from the night stand. Because remember I said last
time, they keep holy water all over the house.
They keep it in aspirin bottles.It's weird.
Grabbed the holy water from the night stand after pulling the
covers off Janet. He said in a commanding voice.

(14:25):
In the name of Jesus Christ, I order you to leave.
Then Janet picked up the same prayer.
In the name of Jesus Christ, I order you to leave.
The unseen hands continue to violate her, but as they split,
as they sprayed holy water and uttered the words of the special
prayer, Janet eventually felt the hands withdraw her body her
own again. Finally, she collapsed and

(14:47):
Jack's strong and protective embrace.
This is written like smut. I mean, it's not good smut, but
it's. Smut this.
This is written like bad smut. It's supposed to be a true
story. And where is this in the movie?
Guys? The movie has come out.

(15:07):
Now that this episode's out and the movie is out.
Should be, I think so. Was the scene were these scenes
in the movie? I think not.
So the way I see it, the succubus incubus situation in so
far as it's written in the Smurls book, it can go one of a
few ways. So either Ed Warren one either

(15:29):
Ed Warren had a fascination slash hard on for succubi and
incubi and pressured Robert Curran to write about it, or two
Robert Curran had a fascination slash hard on for succubi and
incubi that had perhaps only been awakened while interviewing
the family because. Says #3 Jack Smirrel was the one

(15:51):
who brought up the succubi taking advantage of him.
Or #4 Jack Smirrel absorbed. Some of the horror based
succubus media that we talked about in episode 1 and conflated
it with reality or the imagery informed hallucinations that he
had due to his hydrocephalus, which we also talked about in

(16:14):
the first episode being the quote UN quote water on the
brain which causes delusions andhallucinations.
So if we're going by Occam's razor, which is, you know, that
the the solution with the fewestassumptions is generally true.
Knowing the Warrens as we now do, I would say that it was

(16:34):
probably Ed Warren having a kinkfor succubi and incubi.
I think that seems like the mostlikely.
But personally, I'm kind of still in the Jack is
hallucinating and having delusions camp.
But you know, two things can be.True at once.
But these weirdos, These particular weirdos.

(16:55):
And by weirdos I specifically mean Ed Warren.
And now I'm saying Robert Curran.
Honestly, these weirdos are far from the first humans to think
about sex with demons. Like a lot.
Humans have been thinking about and writing about sex with
demons since ancient Mesopotamia.
Seriously. Probably even before then.
This is just as as far back as we know it goes.

(17:17):
So here's a fun fact. Is it fun?
Maybe it's not fun, but here's afact for sure about succubi and
incubi. So succubi.
Are meant to steal men's semen, right?
Duh. Everybody.
Knows that, but unlike the witches and what we do in the
shadows, they aren't using usingthe stolen semen for skin care.

(17:38):
No, no no. The intent of a succubi stealing
men's semen is to use it to impregnate a human woman.
But you may be asking yourself, how the hell would that work?
Or more likely, you're probably asking yourself why the hell are
we talking about this in such detail?
But here we are again. I'm not the reason we're here.

(17:59):
OK? You can thank Ed Warren for
this. Succubi are said to be able to
shape shift into incubi, which are the male demons who are
meant to impregnate human women.Do you see where this is going?
You know what? I hope that you don't.
I hope that your brain does not work in such a way that you

(18:20):
don't see where this is going. But if it does work in a way
where you know where this is going, you know what?
You need to follow me, follow the podcast, follow me on social
media. Let's be friends, because
listen. There, I really can't stress
enough, there is a lot of ancient texts that discuss in
great detail exactly how succubiand incubi procreate.

(18:41):
Because if you didn't know, demons cannot create life on
their own because only God can create life, right?
So obviously, duh, demons can't create life.
Which means they need to steal men's semen and use it to
impregnate unsuspecting women inthe night by.

(19:01):
Kind of let you guess by first having sex with a man as a
succubus stealing his seed, thenshape shifting into an incubus
which is a male demon, and then having sex with sexually
assaulting a human woman and impregnating her with the stolen

(19:22):
seed in the form of an incubus. Again.
Look. I I didn't think.
I didn't think I'd be here either.
OK, but we're here. We're here now.
So when I. Say that somebody in the small
case is preoccupied with the concept of being seduced or
sexually assaulted by a succubus.

(19:43):
Obviously, these people are justcarrying the torch of our
ancestors who are also just a little too interested in the sex
lives of demons. Ancestors like the authors of
the Malleus Maleficarum or the Hammer of Witches, otherwise
known as the Witch Hunter's Manual written by Heinrich
Kramer and Jacob Springer. They also wrote about the sex

(20:06):
lives of demons. Or ancestors like Pope Innocent
the 8th, Everyone's favorite Pope.
Everyone knows that Pope, right?Pope Innocent the 8th?
Sure. Ancestors like Saint Augustine
of Hippo, whoever that is. That St. that St.
A Pope and a St. are also writing about how demons have

(20:29):
sex. I'm really you can Fact Check
me. Please Fact Check me.
Finally, ancestors like King James.
Yes, that King James. Yep, he also wrote a lot about
demon sex. King James of the Bible fame.
King James the Scott who hauntedwomen for sport.

(20:49):
Oh, did I say women? I meant witches.
Actually, I did mean women. The Scott who haunted women for
sport during the witch trials. So yeah, that King James,
seriously. Seriously.
All of these people wrote. A lot of stuff.
And King James in particular wrote a very long three-part

(21:10):
demon fanfic called Demonology that was used during said witch
hunts. So interesting.
Also, less fun fact, actually kind of more fun fact, babies
that were born from incubus impregnation were called

(21:30):
Cambians. A sort of demon spawn who I'm
not making this up again I can'tstress this enough.
A sort of demon spawn who are super hot and very capable and
also very evil. Which I mean, I feel like that's
just my type. That's just my type right there.
Super hot, capable, very evil. What can I say?

(21:54):
What can I say? So the following.
Historical figures are suggestedto be incubus spawn, and they
are suggested as they are suggested to be incubus spawn by
Ludovico Maria Sinastri in the 1600s.
Nailed it. So these people are supposed to
be cambions or cambions I don't speak Latin.

(22:16):
These people are supposed to be incubus, demon spawn, Romulus
and Remus of Rome fame. Alexander the Great, which we
touched. On in the Demon in the Woods
episode. Which seems like a stretch, but
please go back and listen. Caesar Augustus.

(22:37):
It doesn't list all of the Caesar's, but Caesar Augustus is
specifically mentioned as being demon spawn.
And also Merlin. Uh huh.
Yeah, that Merlin. So obviously the concept of.
Incubus and incubi and succubi goes back a really long time.

(22:57):
So incubus the word comes from the Latin incubare, which means
to lie or weigh upon. But also the Latin word incubus.
Interesting. Which can just mean nightmare,
which is likely where the concept of an incubus and
succubus even came from sleep paralysis and and this is just

(23:18):
yet another term I was just not expecting to ever say on the
show. Nocturnal emissions.
You know, here we are, here we are right?
So did Jack Smerl maybe just have a series of sleep paralysis
went dreams? I it's not fun for me to say
it's not, so I don't want to think about it either, but I'm

(23:39):
thinking about it. So now you're thinking about it.
Sorry again, blame Ed Warren, blame Ed, right?
Anyway, so did Jax Merl really just have a series of sleep
paralysis wet dreams? On a serious note though,
honestly, honestly, it wouldn't make the situation any less
terrifying for him if they weren't actually demons than if

(24:01):
they were just sleep paralysis. Because if you haven't had sleep
paralysis it is really terrifying.
And if you're super Catholic andyou believe in demons, then
guess what, you you're not goingto think that oh it's just sleep
paralysis, everybody has sleep paralysis.
No, nobody knew about this back then.
Not nobody. Most people did not know about
sleep paralysis back in 1986. Normies did not know.

(24:26):
So it would be terrifying to him.
So again, This is why I keep saying that I kind of feel like
Jack was having experiences, it's just that they weren't.
Necessarily real experiences, but also This is why I keep
saying that it's messed up that Ed Warren and Robert Curran
thought it was OK to kind of pornographize his experiences.

(24:50):
Is that a word? It is now.
So the case that the Warrens investigated right after the
Smurls like I have mentioned happens to be the Snedeker
family of the Haunting of Connecticut fame right?
And like I said, that married couple also encountered demonic
sexual assault which I still think is like interesting.
I am curious if it was Ed or Jack Smurl who mentioned it

(25:11):
first. Like did did Jack Smurl tell him
about his sleep paralysis dreamsand Ed was like.
Oh, that's a good idea. Oh, this is a good idea.
This is a great idea. This is going to sell.
Sex sells. Let's just put sex in the
situation. It's going to sell.
You know, is that what he was thinking?

(25:32):
And then he was like, OK, didn'tquite work out.
It didn't quite work out with the smorrel.
So I'm going to try it again with these Snedekers.
They're they're game, you know? Is that what was happening or
were the families? Did they just have demon sex on
the brain? I don't know, we'll never know.
Either way, the Warrens never brought up demonic sexual
assault ever again after the SNET occurs.

(25:52):
Probably because it was a terrible fucking idea.
Like I said, even if humans havebeen obsessed with demonic
sexual assault for centuries, it's not an excuse.
And that is just a perfect example of fear mongering, which
I've said before, Fear is actually what Ed and Lorraine
Warren actually peddled. It wasn't help.

(26:13):
It wasn't, you know, relief for these poor families.
No, no, no. They sold fear.
They are fear mongers. And like I've said, I'm telling
you like. Seriously, Ed had a real knack
for captivating and keeping people's attention and stocking
their fears especially. He was so good at it.
I mean, even down to the words that he uses and even the

(26:34):
confidence in which he says saidwords like demon infestation, no
one wants to be infested with anything.
I mean, it sounds like a nightmare on its own.
Just hearing the word infestation gives me like I
don't like it gives me the vapours.
You know, you might say I don't like it.
I don't want an infestation of anything, and I certainly don't

(26:55):
want a demon infestation. Now it's worse.
Now it's worse because a demon infestation can bring other
infestations, namely of the pestvariety.
You got swarms of flies you knowyou have.
OK, What other bugs? I don't know.
Probably more bugs. I don't want to talk about it.
I hate it. It's disgusting.
Pig. You know what?
It would be like a pig infestation because of how

(27:16):
obsessed they are with pigs and demons.
Anyway, Infestation is only the second step of Ed Warren's
made-up demon lore, because the more research I do, the more
clear it becomes that Ed createdhis own alternate universe
fanfic demon mechanics and and all the stuff that worked best

(27:37):
for him made it into the lore. And the stuff that didn't or
that he forgot or that wasn't convenient for him did not make
it into the lore. So by the time of the Smurl's
Haunting, here are the stages ofdemon possession according to Ed
Warren in his own little universe.
Step one. Encroachment, Step 2.
Infestation. Step 3.

(27:58):
Oppression, Step 4. Possession.
Step 5. Death.
The worst step? And by the way, let me just, OK,
quick, quick note, quick. It's a heavy note, but I'm going
to, you know what? I'm going to say it.
People die in exorcisms not because of demons.
They die during exorcisms entirely due to the so-called

(28:20):
exorcist's neglect and abuse. Of the allegedly possessed.
Person, they're not possessed and the exorcist is not
performing an exorcism. OK, if the devil exists and is
trying to kill people via possession, he's making the
religious folks do the actual killing.
My, my, my research shows that there isn't a well defined or

(28:45):
publicly available list of possession stages.
And just a reminder, layman, which includes Ed Warren layman
could not perform exorcisms. You can't perform an exorcism if
you're a layman. I'm a layman.
I'm a laywoman. I can't perform an exorcism and
neither could Ed. Anyway, here's what I found from
Father Gabriel Lamourth, who is really not a reliable source

(29:09):
considering that he claimed to have done 160,000 exorcisms in
his life, which is. It's just not true.
It's genuinely belong beyond thepale.
But mind you, Father Amorth alsomade it into Hollywood and had
his own books and was a recurring guest on Coast to
Coast AM with George Nori. And Father Amorth was also

(29:31):
quoted as saying practicing yogais satanic.
It leads to evil, just like reading Harry Potter.
So maybe take this with a grain of salt, but this actual priests
stages of possession are #1 diabolical infestation #2
diabolical obsession #3 diabolical oppression #4

(29:55):
diabolical possession. Death is not a stage of
possession in here. And just to give you an just to
remind you, Ed's started with encroachment.
That's not in this guy's list. He's got infestation neck, which
is this guy's number one. And Ed does not have obsession,
but he does have oppression. So they're not the same.

(30:18):
You know, I don't think I feel like this is not a science or an
art, honestly. Anyway, I think Ed picked up on
the lingo by lurking around priests long enough.
And kind of latched onto the words infestation and oppression
because they sound bad. And I don't know, they just
sound bad. I think he picked up that those
make people feel a certain way. But honestly, I don't know why.

(30:41):
Why didn't Ed use the word diabolical in front of his
stages? Why didn't he use that in this
instance? It just means like demon, like
demonic, right? But like, why didn't he use the
term diabolical? That's such a good word.
That's such a good word, and it gives.
Again, a gravitas to these stages and it sounds really

(31:03):
cool. It sounds very metal.
It's crazy to me that he didn't use the words diabolical.
I just have to guess maybe he just had a hard time spelling
diabolical compared to demonic. There's just fewer letters in
demonic. I don't know.
But also, by the way, in my research regarding the incubus
and incubi and succubi, I discovered that there is an

(31:24):
official term for incubi impregnating human women and it
is called diabolical insemination.
And again, I ask you, why didn'tEd latch onto this?
Are you? Kidding me?
Diabolical insemination. Ed would have loved to have said
that. He would have loved to have said
those words. It's crazy to me that he didn't.

(31:46):
What a missed opportunity. Oh, God, I'm so disappointed in
you, Ed. Come on.
He also talks a lot though aboutpsychic sleeps in this case,
which is a term that I think started with the Warrens,
specifically Ed. I think he really made it up.
For his own lore, because in my research there is such a thing
as psychic sleep, but it's like a Yogi thing.

(32:08):
It's a yoga thing, which is you heard from father and N is evil,
just like Harry Potter. I think he just made-up psychic
sleep. And in yoga, it just means
you're, like, meditating really hard.
So you're kind of like, meditationally asleep.
That's what psychic sleep means in yoga.
I think he just made the term up, and it's just an excuse.
It's like psychic sleep. OK, Reminder, psychic sleep is
just how demons make your partner or family impossible to

(32:31):
wake up when you're experiencingsomething paranormally
terrifying. You know, like, ostensibly as a
way to drive a wedge between youand your family because you have
no proof of what happened. And they didn't witness it
because they were put into a deep psychic sleep.
OK, which seemed convenient to me.
Holy water also plays plays a big part in this real story, as

(32:51):
I've mentioned, at least in the books.
TBD on the movie because the family takes 2 just keeping holy
water on hand like literally 24/7.
Like it's really crazy. I think I mentioned this out of
order, but genuinely, Janet Smirrel keeps holy water and
aspirin bottles to keep handy iswhat she says in the book, which
is such a weird container. But like, I don't know.
Go off, Queen. Sure.

(33:13):
Remember in the first episode ofthe story that I told where
Janet was recording the knocks with the demon, where she was
communicating knock once for yes, knock twice for no, or
whatever it was she was recording it.
In the book, it specifically states that she went back and
checked that the tape actually recorded.
She played it back and she was so pleased to hear that there

(33:35):
really was evidence on the tape.She had successfully recorded
her conversation with the demon,regardless of the fact that if
it's just audio, someone could just be, she could just be
knocking on the wall. Regardless of that fact, let's
put that fact out of the that's not relevant.
The point is, is the book made apoint to say that she captured
evidence. It does not come back up in the

(33:57):
book. And Ed Warren claims that he did
have those audio tapes. In fact, he claimed that he had
more audio tapes of knocking andrapping.
And he actually included video. He he got video of like, dark
shadows that belong to the demon.
These are things that he says hehad.

(34:17):
OK, seriously, They go out of the way to say we have evidence.
So where's the evidence, Ed? Where's the evidence?
The Warrens never shy away from broadcasting evidence that they
have, you know, like the the admittedly creepy but completely
debunked photo of the the littledemon boy in Amityville or OK,

(34:37):
the audio recordings that Ed made in Enfield, which you can
still listen to even today on YouTube.
He they share those. We have that.
Evidence. I don't know that that's
evidence. It's just recordings.
The point is they share stuff with the public, Ed claimed.
Even to 1 reporter who asked, hey, can I have the tapes?

(34:58):
Where was the evidence that you said that?
You literally just told me that you have.
You told me to my face was out that there's evidence.
So can we have the evidence? Ed tells this reporter.
I gave it to someone, I don't remember who.
And they're like, what do you mean?
He's like, oh, I gave it to like, I gave it to like another
channel. I gave it to another news

(35:18):
station. I don't remember what the outlet
was. Oh, OK, that's interesting that
you can't remember, but OK. Then at another date on a on a
later date, he claimed that he would eventually show the tapes.
He yes, he would eventually release the tapes, but only to
the Vatican. Which means you would never be

(35:39):
able to see them. It also implies that he has a
connection to the Vatican, or that the Vatican gives a single
flying fuck about him, which they don't.
Interesting. But he wants you to think that
he felt very, he really wanted to be included in like the inner
circle of, you know, the Vaticanand priests and etcetera.
Now, I did say that we weren't going to address every single
claim, even though it's really tempting to, but I do have to

(36:03):
share this one quote from volume11 of the Skeptical Enquirer in
1986 wherein they are interviewing the Smirrels
neighbors. About the haunting.
Which by the way, the neighbors that they interviewed, None,
none, none of them were saying like the 26 or 28 or whatever
people that Robert Curran said that he interviewed.
Like none of the people that theSkeptical Enquirer talked to

(36:26):
said that they really witnessed anything paranormal.
So anyway, one skeptical neighbor pointed to a squirrel
in the tree in front of the smirrel's house and said there's
your demon, which as you know, squirrels and I have an ongoing
feud. So I totally agree.
That's the demon, the squirrel, every squirrel.

(36:46):
Little squirrels are demons. Squirrels are little demons.
That's what I'm trying to say. A part of the book that actually
made me laugh out loud and I think I couldn't keep a straight
face. I tried three times.
I could not keep a straight faceas I was reading it in the
story. So you probably picked up on
that in the first episode. But a part of the book that made
me literally laugh out loud, like genuinely belly laugh was
when Ed was goading the demon toget a reaction out of it.

(37:07):
And and then it started. The demon starts writing with
like ectoplasm or something on the mirror.
And in the book, it's like it starts with spells out why?
Oh, you. And I'm like, oh, what's it
going to say? You need to leave, You got to
go, you know, like, I don't know, I'm trying to think like
what would a demon right in the mirror?
You maybe your maybe it's going to say your soul is mine.

(37:31):
You know, this is where my head is going in the split. 2nd but
but before it says that the fullmessage is suddenly appears and
says you dirty bastard get out of here.
Like what are you talking about?That's not that's not what a
demon would say, right? Am I crazy?
Like, I know I'm not a demon andI don't know any demons

(37:52):
personally, but I just really can't imagine that the demon
would actually say, you dirty bastard, get out of here.
Like what are you talking about?It's just so insane.
Oh, man. OK, moving on.
Nearing the end of August 1986, Paul Kurtz with the Committee
for the Scientific Investigationof Claims of the Paranormal,

(38:14):
which is shortened to CSI Cop. CSI Cop.
OK, this Committee for Scientific Investigation
Cleansing the Paranormal, they called for a group of scientists
to offer free psychiatric and psychological help to the
Smurls, which I think is fair and also very kind of them.
However, the Smurls felt they needed no help, which I

(38:37):
understand there's a stigma against.
Psychiatric help and especially in the 80s, it's still around
today, so you can only imagine it was a lot stronger back then.
People go, I'm not crazy. No, no, no, no one's saying that
you're. Crazy.
It just means that maybe there'ssomething else going on and we
can help you, and then it'll be done and you won't have to worry
about seeing all these ghosts and demons anymore.

(38:59):
So here we go. Doctor Robert Gordon, a
psychologist from Allentown, in a August 1986 Times Leader
article said people often look at demonology to explain many
tensions that they experience asindividuals and within their
families and they should consultmental health professionals that
are not looking at them as sick or bad, but will help to

(39:22):
alleviate their sufferings. So this is what I'm saying.
This is why you will always hearme saying here on the show or
you'll even see me commenting onReddit on on people's true true
paranormal stories. You will see me commenting on
threads that even if someone is hallucinating, that doesn't mean
they're crazy. If someone is exeriencing

(39:43):
exeriencing something that they think is aranormal, it doesn't
mean you're crazy. Needing sychiatric help doesn't
mean you're crazy. Like as a society we just have
this weird knee jerk assumption,I don't know that there's like
some inherently bad state of insanity that we might reach
that we can never come back from, which with modern medicine
and therapies, it's just really not true.

(40:03):
We have modern medicine, we havetherapy.
Like you'll be fine. You're not crazy.
You're not forever crazy. You know, we also have a knee
jerk reaction to being told thatwe might benefit from a trip to
the psychologist or psychiatristbecause again, it implies that
we're crazy. So like we get defensive.
So again, I can understand why the family might have been, you
know, like I. Don't know about that.
You think we're crazy? You think we're lying.

(40:25):
OK. And that's assuming, very
charitably, that no one in the family was intentionally
misleading anyone else, and theyall fully believed, which we'll
get into in a moment. I do wish that the Smorrels had
had taken it up and I wish that they hadn't taken such insult to
the offer and that they had at the very least gotten Jack into

(40:45):
a psychiatric assessment, you know, because he had that water
in the brain. He had the hydrocephalus.
I just, I feel like there was something else going on, like
with hallucinations and and delusions.
But even if that was happening, that still doesn't mean that he
was crazy, quote UN quote. I I will also always wonder.
If it was the Smurls who turned away the offer of the
psychiatric evaluation or if it was Ed Warren and Lorraine

(41:09):
Warren telling them to turn it down.
But what I can tell you right now with 100% certainty is that
Ed would never have encouraged them to do it.
He definitely would have encouraged them for sure.
And there's not a chance, because if they're going to the
psychiatrist, if they're going to psychologist, Ed's losing his
cash cow, which is fucked up. So he would prefer that they

(41:33):
stay on well than to get better.Gross, right?
So remember The Exorcist, the movie, which I never talk about
ever. I've never once talked about The
Exorcist. Do you remember The Exorcist?
Remember Father Damien Karis? The Hot 1, not the old one.
Well, he's not really a priest. And the actor, I should say the

(41:55):
actor that plays Father Damien Karis, is not a priest.
He's an actor. So then why would I be bringing
up him? Why would I be bringing up that
guy? Because oh, what's this is
weird. Hold on a second.
It looks like he visited the Smirrel House.
It was in the papers. It was on the news.

(42:17):
It was on the news that an actorwho plays a priest visited the
Smirrel House. For why?
For why? According to a sceptical
Enquirer article in 1986, indeed, according to news
accounts and several papers, Smerl has also met with Jason
Miller, who played the part of the priest and the Exorcist.

(42:38):
Miller, now living in Scranton, visited the Smerl house with his
publicist, William Mcandrew shortly after the story broke.
Huh, that's I wonder why? That's seems weird, doesn't it?
Janet Smirrell said Miller met with the family for about an
hour. She said he seemed very
interested and knowledgeable. He made some suggestions about

(43:01):
things we could try to do. She did not elaborate.
What are you talking about? He is not a priest.
He plays one on TVI mean movies.Like what are you talking about?
Why is he suggesting anything? But actually apparently even
though he was an actor, people would chase him down in the
streets and think that he was actually a real priest even

(43:23):
though he just played one in themovies.
Which is really weird. But honestly, this is just
another example of a stenchion like I mentioned earlier where
you're trying to give credence to the Smerls story by having
someone that you associate with priests visit the.
House. What?
Still, guys, he's just an actor.He's not really a priest.

(43:44):
This is crazy anyway, so then why was he really there?
Why was the priest actor really there?
Oh, well, Huh. It seemed that Miller.
Was actually interested in directing the movie based on the
Smerls story. He was going to direct that

(44:05):
film. That's why his publicist was
there with him. Because otherwise why are you
going anywhere with your publicist?
A Wilkes Barre paper at the time, which like I said this was
literally in the news. A Wilkes Barre paper at the time
reported that this wasn't just any paranormal movie.
This wasn't just any scary storymovie.

(44:25):
This movie would have A twist for it would feature the mini
rapes of Jack Smurl by a demon that is a.
Quote. From a paper that is a quote
from a paper. I just do you see?
Do you see why I feel like we got to talk about this?
Because it was everywhere. Everyone was talking.

(44:46):
About it all the time. It's crazy.
Anyway, the movie ended up beingdirected by someone else that
made for TV movie. It was directed by someone else.
I don't know who, but it wasn't Father Karis.
And finally, we move on to the theories, at least as I see
them. From what I can tell, it looks
like there's kind of four basic theories here with, I mean you
could say there's some sub bullets behind each one, but I'm

(45:09):
just going to, I am not going toget into the nitty gritty of
each one. I'm just going to list the four
of them and then I will get intothe nitty gritty.
I am saying this as much for your information as to keep me
accountable to not go off the deep end as I'm talking about
these. We're just going to go through
the four of them. Here are my 4 theories.
Number one theory #1 The Smurls were telling the truth, the

(45:32):
whole truth, and nothing but thetruth number. 2 theory. 2 the.
Children in the home were playing poltergeist, like in the
Enfield Poltergeist case and countless other poltergeist
cases, and the children happenedto whip up the rest of the
family into a frenzy, just like in all those other poltergeist

(45:55):
cases. That's three number two.
Theory #3 Jack's water on the brain disease, which I think is
hydrocephalus. Caused hallucinations and
delusions and then also caused ashared psychosis state, which
we'll get to in a SEC. But I do think it's important to
take Jack Smurl's medical history into consideration when

(46:17):
we're discussing the case and, and the veracity of the claims
in the case. You can't, you can't ignore that
fact. So #4 theory #4 the Smurls and
the Warrens concocted the entirestory from scratch, made from
scratch for fame and fortune. OK, now we're going to get into
kind of some thoughts on the theories.

(46:38):
Theory #1 truly paranormal question mark.
The problem with theory #1 beingthat everything is true is that
the Warrens are involved, which means that everything that the
Smorls claim is brought into question.
I'm sorry. That's just what if you
associate with a scammer? Now I have to look at you with a

(46:59):
a much more skeptical lens because the the Warrens are
involved. So sorry, it's not.
I'm not saying that the Smorls are necessarily bad people.
I think in some way they were definitely being taken advantage
of by the Warrens regardless of their motivations.
But you just can't. Anyone that worked with Ed and
Lorraine Warren, you have to just you have to question them.

(47:21):
Well, do you guys hear that? There's like a rattling in my
wall. Oh no, it's it's the demon.
So if you hear rattling, just no, it's a demon and we'll just
keep moving because you're not supposed to interact with it,
right? Hey, you know what?

(47:41):
If it is a demon, knock once forno and twice for yes.
I didn't say what knock 0 times was, but that's how many times
it knocked. All right, moving on.
OK, so they're basically saying,well, the swirls were suffering,
so why shouldn't they get something out of it by, you

(48:04):
know, getting a book deal or a movie deal like it It's they're
owed that, you know? I don't know.
I don't know. I don't know how I feel about
that argument. It just doesn't quite ring true
for me. But assuming that there really
was paranormal activity in the small home, and assuming that Ed
and Lorraine witnessed some of it, then, yeah, Ed and Lorraine

(48:27):
would be milking that small cashcow until it dried up.
And then they would continue making money on it by talking
about it and their little lectures that they charged
people to attend. Oh, wait.
They would do that regardless ofwhether they witnessed any
actual paranormal activity. The paranormal activity, it's
just kind of it's, it's, it's unnecessary, it's optional.

(48:49):
They don't even need it. It's it's not needed for them to
make money. OK theory #2 it's the kids
fault. It's the kids who are wrong.
Like we discussed in the EnfieldPoltergeist episode, weird
little girls who I have the utmost respect for have been
tricking grown men into believing in poltergeists and
fairies for a very long, long time.

(49:10):
And the Smirrel case, remember, happened in the middle of the
Satanic Panic, which is a time when Americans especially were
expecting to find evil lurking around every single corner, even
in their own homes. And as in most cases of
poltergeistic hoaxes, that's a word.
Now the kids wouldn't even really need to work that hard to

(49:32):
trick the adults, thanks to the power of suggestion.
Highly recommend that you go back and listen to my Infield
Poltergeist episode because I doshare some historical examples
of weird little girls, weird little kids fooling a lot of
adults, and some seemingly very smart people such as Sir Arthur

(49:54):
Conan Doyle, author of Sherlock.Holmes so he writes a genius,
but I don't think Sherlock wouldfall for the tricks that.
His author 100% fell for all right, So theory #3 Jack's
disease and Folli A Familia, which is French for family

(50:15):
Madness, which you may may seem familiar to you because it's
just one word off from Folli do.I didn't practice how to say
that. I did practice how to say Folli
A familia. So, you know, you're welcome.
I don't know how to say you're welcome in French.
But you know what? If you don't speak French, but
you think that I nailed it, e-mail me

(50:37):
madamstrangevoice@gmo.com. If you do speak French and I
didn't nail it, you know what? I don't need to hear it.
I don't need to hear. About it so.
Let's just moving on theory #3 Jack's disease and family
madness. So Jax Merle told a newspaper
reporter that he had surgery to remove water from his brain in
1983 because he had been experiencing short term memory

(51:00):
loss due to a case of meningitisin his youth.
Now I'm no MD, but my research makes me wonder if it was
something called normal pressurehydrocephalus, which is actually
an abnormal buildup of cerebrospinal fluid in the brain
and interestingly can occur as acomplication of meningitis,

(51:21):
which he specifically said that he had as a child.
Interestingly, hydrocephalus canalso cause hallucinations and
delusions and it accounts for 5 to 6% of dementia cases.
So maybe Jack is the one who started this all.

(51:41):
Maybe he was confusing fiction for reality.
Maybe he was experiencing hallucinations that weren't
there. But then you may be asking, why
would his wife and kids go alongwith it if it was just him
hallucinating? Well, and that's where follie
ephemie comes in, otherwise known as shared psychosis or

(52:01):
family madness. So a scientific paper on this
phenomenon states. We describe here a case of
follie ephemie involving a Why does it sound Italian when I say
it? We're just going to say family.
Madness from now on, I feel, I feel silly continuing to say it.

(52:23):
We describe your case of family madness involving a nuclear
family consisting of the husband, the wife, and their
three children, which is really close to 4.
Just FYI for this example, the primary patient was suffering
from paranoid schizophrenia withprominent delusions of
persecution that were imposed upon and later shared by his

(52:45):
family. Temporary separation decreased
the intensity of shared delusions and the other family
members. But also I've heard arguments
that if Janet and Jack had made this up from the jump that the
kids wouldn't necessarily have gone along with this ghost thing
if it wasn't really happening. But I find that hard to believe.

(53:07):
Even if Jack started out seeing things and then it kind of
spread to Janet and the kids weren't necessarily involved
yet. I mean, here's here's why I find
this hard to believe. The family was devoutly
Catholic. Like the book.
Beats us over the head about they were devoutly Catholic.
And what do Catholics love more than spirits and ghosts?

(53:28):
Nothing. You got the Holy Ghost, You got
the Holy Spirit. They love them.
They cannot get enough ghosts and spirits.
So of I think it's completely understandable that the kids
could have easily gotten wrappedup in this, even if they didn't
understand that it was hallucinations or delusions.
Plus if it was family madness orshared psychosis, it's not as if

(53:51):
the kids or wife even had a choice.
That's the thing that's that's the whole thing is they don't
have a choice. You're not choosing to have
psychosis. So I really think that it's
possible that Jack could have been patient, patient.
Patient zero. I think that Jack could have
been patient 0 when it came to this case.
And I think he kind of like infected to kind of like take a

(54:15):
cue from Ed Warren. I'm going to say he infected his
family and even parents. You might even say that he in
in, he made an infestation. His psychosis became an
infestation. But not a diabolical 1.
And once, once Ed and Lorraine got involved, I mean, you know,

(54:38):
Ed just had dollar signs in his eyes the entire time he's
talking to his family. So even if he thought that maybe
they did need help because there's not a chance, I cannot
imagine a world in which Ed Warren 100% fully believed in
everything that he was doing. I think he knew exactly what he
was doing. Maybe when he was older, maybe
he kind of forgot, but I think especially when he was a little
bit younger, he definitely knew exactly what he was doing.

(55:00):
And so he just had dollar signs the entire time.
In his eyes, he was like, this is going to be so lucrative for
me. In which case, it could have
been the Warrens that were taking advantage of this family
who was just in need of psychiatric help because
remember, Ed Warren was quoted as saying that everybody who
calls them for help is crazy. Uh huh.

(55:23):
Yeah. Listen to this Ray Garton, who
was the writer of their first book.
Nope. He was the writer of the book
about the Snedeker family haunting, which will be my next
Warren deep dive, by the way. Stay tuned.
So the guy that wrote the book about the Snedekers for Ed and
Lorraine had this to say about Ed Warren in an interview with
Damned Connecticut. He said, when I found that the

(55:47):
Snedekers couldn't keep their individual stories straight, I
went to Ed Warren and explained the problem.
They're crazy. He said.
All the people who come to us are crazy, and that's why they
come to us. Just use what you can and make
the rest up. You write scary books, right?
Well, make it up and make it scary.
That's why we hired you. Interesting, so interesting,

(56:11):
right? So theory #4 the Smurls were
just after fame and fortune, andobviously so were the Warrens
because duh. So the Smurls not only had a
book written about their story in which Ed and Lorraine also
got a cut of the profits from, but there was also a made for TV
movie based on the Smurls story in 1991 called The Haunted,
which was named after the book that was published in 1988.

(56:34):
And the made for TV movie was released by 20th Century Fox, in
which the Warrens were the main characters.
Which that was Ed's dream. I mean, well, a feature film
would have been his dream, but amade for TV movie?
It was close enough for Ed. Although this wasn't even the
first made for TV movie about the Warrens.
That honor goes to the Demon Murder case in 1983 starring
Kevin Bacon and Cloris Leachman,which was based on another case

(56:56):
file of the Warrens. The Devil Made Me Do It, which
is the story of David Glaxo as dramatized in The Conjuring film
of the same name. Do you like, do you think like
I'm just saying, do we really think that people that are
genuinely out to help people arealso making book and movie
deals? I just, I don't know.

(57:17):
I don't know. Anyway, Ed Warren made a point
to say that the Smurls didn't want any dramatization of their
made for TV movie. His exact quote was no Hollywood
hype. I think that's Ed.
Telling on himself, because he definitely did want Hollywood
hype and something about Ed thatI've been picking up as I'm

(57:38):
doing all this research is just whatever he says, it's the
opposite. Whatever he says, it's the
opposite if he says. Oh, we don't want any Hollywood
hype, He means. We do want Hollywood hype if he
says there's a demon. In your house, there's not a
demon in your house. It's pretty simple.
Just literally take whatever he says and flip it around.
That's what's the truth is goingto be.

(57:58):
Anyway, the theory that the Smurls were purely motivated by
greed is probably the simplest explanation.
Occam's razor and all that, but I don't know if that's the whole
story. I don't know.
And I would love to hear y'all'sthoughts to make sure to e-mail
me madamstrangewas@gmail.com. But some of the imagery in the
book is just so specific and frankly strange.

(58:19):
Kind of dreamlike almost, one might say.
Hallucinatory or delusional? Just as just off the top of my
head, those. Are the words that I would use
to explain the things that Jack saw.
But anyway, back to fame and fortune, though, because that's
the theory that we're on. It's the simplest explanation,
right? But so you can tell it's not my

(58:39):
favorite. However, I do not dismiss this
theory for the reasons that I'veheard a lot of people dismiss
this theory for. Most people that I hear dismiss
this theory argue that greed isn't a solid motivation simply
because it's a lot of trouble. To go through.
For what they assume wasn't a large amount of money in the
scheme of things, in the scheme of schemes, it wasn't a lot of

(59:03):
money. So most people that I hear make
this argument, they say that, you know, the Jews just wasn't
worth the squeeze in this case. So why would they go through all
that trouble dealing with the media circus, making themselves
into the haunted succubus demon family for not a lot of money in
the long run? That's what they say.

(59:24):
They go, it's not really worth it.
I don't think they did it because I didn't think it was
worth it. But I think what they're
missing. Is that?
Here's what I think. I think they are vastly
overestimating the amount of logic and discernment that
people who run hoaxes and get rich quick schemes actually
have. Because the thing about get rich

(59:47):
quick schemes, which is what this would be, you know,
claiming that your house is haunted, getting a book and a
movie deal and getting in advance of cash.
The thing about get rich quick schemes is that.
People falling for them. In this case, the Smurls don't
know that it's not going to workor they wouldn't even try it.
They they didn't. They don't get that the scheme

(01:00:09):
part and get rich quick. Scheme means that they will in
fact not. Get rich quick.
OK, they don't. Understand that that's the
that's the thing about get rich quick schemes.
Because listen, you, dear listener, you probably know that
nobody gets rich quick from a get rich quick scheme.
You may think then, perhaps understandably, that most other

(01:00:30):
people also think just like you do, and they know that.
Get rich quick Schemes are schemes, and you do not get rich
quick. But humans love instant
gratification. They love instant gratification.
We love instant gratification, and we especially love the
fantasy of our whole. Life changing for the better and
the blink of an eye. Just you take a pill, you get a

(01:00:52):
shot, you go out on a limb and your life is completely changed
for the better. We love shortcuts.
People fall. Forget rich quick schemes.
Constantly, all the time, daily,hourly.
Look at Las Vegas. What else is gambling other than
a get rich quick scheme? Well, it's also.

(01:01:14):
AI guess it's also a get poor quick scheme but no one likes.
To talk about that part, they only talk about the getting rich
quick, right? Or hey, Lotto tickets, that's a
get rich quick scheme, one in which you are actually three
times more likely to die drivingon the way to the store to get
the Lotto ticket then you are toactually win the Lotto.

(01:01:36):
I'd say those odds aren't good. I would say the juice.
Isn't worth the. Squeeze there, Wouldn't you
often get rich quick schemes even take more effort and more
energy and time than just putting in the actual work?
In which you would have ended upwith more money in the long run
because look, there's MLM's, multi level marketing or pyramid

(01:01:58):
schemes like Lula, Roe, Herbalife, Amway, just to name a
few. Where people have shelled out
their life savings and worked themselves to the bone and gone
into deep debt, all because theywere sold this fantasy of living
in luxury and making it to the top.
In 2017, by the way, the FTC estimated that approximately

(01:02:20):
800,000 people were victims of pyramid schemes.
And that's just the number that's being reported.
And that was in 2017. That's just that number is 24.6%
of the population in the US who thought that they could get rich
quick. 24.6. We're going to round that up
1/4. Of the population of the United

(01:02:42):
States thought they could. Get rich quick and fell for a
pyramid scheme or an MLM and they ended up worse than when
they started. I'd say that juice wasn't worth
it, wouldn't you? But they still.
Did it some of them for a long time, but my absolute favorite
example of someone doing way more work in the attempt of
getting out of doing work. Yes, listen, this is relevant.

(01:03:07):
I promise you this is not an unrelated rabbit hole, but we
are going down a rabbit hole, sobuckle up.
My favorite example of someone doing way more work in the
attempt of trying to get out of doing work is Joseph Smith, the
founder of the Church of Latter Day Saints.
Now, as I always say, always, I am not a historian, I'm no Dan

(01:03:30):
Carlin. I'm no Tony Soprano.
But I do. A concerning amount of research
into rabbit holes, as you know, and I love reading about con
artists and flim flammers. And when I say Joseph Smith is
definitely one of those, I am really not even putting enough
emphasis. I'm not putting enough emphasis.

(01:03:53):
On just how much of A con artistJoseph Smith was so Joseph Smith
of Mormon fame started off running an illegal but oddly not
uncommon scam called treasure seeking.
Meaning that he would claim thathe alone was able to speak to
these spirits who you can't talkto, but they also happened to
secretly know the location of buried treasure and he.

(01:04:16):
He could talk. To those spirits who knew where
the buried treasure was and and the spirits would tell him where
the buried treasure treasure was, but he would only tell you
where the spirit spirits told him the treasure was if you paid
him money. And then when you did pay him
money and he told you where to go dig, there wouldn't be any
treasure. Because that there.

(01:04:36):
Wasn't any treasure. That's the scam.
That's the scam and people fell for it a lot.
And that's probably why he was convicted of running said scam
and had to flee the county he lived in.
But then you Fast forward a little more after he's been
trying to run scams and he's trying to make ends meet and he
just doesn't want to do manual labor and he doesn't want to do

(01:04:58):
normal work for a living, which I feel ya, Joe, I'm right there
with you. I get it.
But one day, Joseph Smith claimed that he had spoken to a
very, very special spirit named Moroni who definitely knew where
spirit treasure actually was. He definitely knew there was
treasure there this time, for sure.
There was definitely treasure there this time.

(01:05:21):
And he told him correctly, the location of that very, very
special treasure that was definitely there.
And when Joseph Smith went and dug up the place where Moroni
told him to dig, it turned out that there were these gold
plates in the ground, but he couldn't show anyone because
you're not allowed to see them. You can't see them.

(01:05:43):
No, no, he can't show you. He can't show you, No, no, he's
the only one that could see the gold plates because if you look
at them you will go crazy. And also he can't show them to
you because he actually gave them back to Moroni, who
actually isn't just a spirit, he's an Angel actually.
And Moroni actually told him to never show the place to anyone,

(01:06:07):
even though this might make themquestion if the plates are real
or not. This is sort of what God is
going for. Does that?
Does that remind you of anyone? Does that remind you of anyone?
Do you see how I. Told you this isn't totally
unrelated. Does it remind you of anyone
finding excuses for why people can't see the evidence that he

(01:06:29):
claims to have? And then he claims he's given
that evidence away to some powerful person who will never
share it with anyone. If you zoned out earlier, I'm
talking about Ed Warren with this Smurl case that we're
talking about right now because Ed Warren specifically said he
had evidence on the case, but hejust didn't remember where he

(01:06:49):
gave it. He's just a baby.
He doesn't remember. Oh, he doesn't know.
Where did the where did the evidence go?
He doesn't know it's gone. Someone else has it.
He comes up with a bunch of excuses as to why he can't show
anyone the evidence because there is no evidence.
It's almost like scammers are all using this spoken playbook.

(01:07:09):
Honestly, it's wild. And you know, apologies,
apologies, apologies to any of my Mormon listeners, but I doubt
that I have any of those. But if you are Mormon, I would
love to hear your thoughts. E-mail me
madamstrangeways@gmail.com All to say, the effort that old Joe
Smith went to in order to continue his scheme in order to

(01:07:31):
avoid having to do actual work for a living is truly, honestly
mind boggling. The the I haven't even gone
into. I'm not even getting into all
the things that he had to do there.
He didn't just stop there. He went through a lot of effort,
made-up a. Bunch of stuff.
And honestly, since he died at the hands of an angry mob
because of Mormonism, because ofthe gold plates that he

(01:07:54):
supposedly found. I would say that this probably
wasn't worth the squeeze. This juice was not worth the
squeeze. Wouldn't you say that in
hindsight? So I don't think that we can.
Discount the theory that the Smurls were just greedy purely
because we don't feel that the ROI on their scam was good

(01:08:15):
enough. I mean especially consider that
by that point the warrants had already been portrayed in one
made for TV movie that the Smurls almost definitely had
watched because there was limited television channels and
limited options for entertainment in 1986.
So just remember that made for TV movies were a big deal.
It was on normal prime time television, not cable.

(01:08:38):
So you know, like just keep thisin mind that the Warrens had a
had a history of getting books published and being on made for
TV and they were probably on thenews and they saw an
opportunity. I think it's completely
possible, and I genuinely don't know that that is the entire
explanation for this case. But I also don't like when

(01:09:01):
people discount it just because it seemed they personally think
that it would be too much work for not enough payout.
Like yeah but you wouldn't run this scam like you wouldn't do
this in the 1st place. So let's not put ourselves in
those shoes. So we will just literally never
know exactly what happened. But those are my main 4
theories. I would love to hear if you have

(01:09:22):
other theories. Like I said, you can do a little
column A, a little column BI would love to hear it.
I really want to hear your thoughts, so leave a comment on
Spotify or e-mail me about strangers@gmail.com.
But I will leave you with this final little nugget of
strangeness that I was delightedto unearth.
Somewhat like. You might say some golden

(01:09:43):
plates, although I do have evidence that I unearthed this.
And Lorraine's grandson, Chris Mckinnell, is mentioned in the
haunted book as having taken part in the investigation.
So when I saw him doing a TikToklive the other day, you know, I
had to join and there weren't that many people.
So I was like, well, I got to shoot my shot.
So I asked him a question about the Smurls.

(01:10:05):
I asked what was his most memorable experience with the
Smurls. I think that's a fair question
because he wasn't a huge part ofthe book, but he was in the book
a little bit. And I didn't mention that in the
story because there's already somany moving parts.
OK, but he was he was following in his.
Grandparents footsteps, which you'll see.

(01:10:27):
I was really not prepared for the answer that I got.
You know, he, he said. You know, Oh, he repeated my
question. Oh, you know, what was my most
memorable experience with the Smurls?
Well, Janet Smerl told me that she had gone to the doctor and
that they had discovered that she had a partially digested
remnant of a twin inside her body.

(01:10:52):
What do you mean? What are you talking about?
I was expecting him to say something.
About the house, or like the demon or a succubus or an
incubus. I was expecting something in the
house. Instead he tells me that Janet
Smirrell ate her twin in the womb.

(01:11:12):
And honestly, I feel like there could be some truth to it
because they did have twins. Like the the Smirrels do have a
do have twin daughters. I feel like it's completely
honestly, this is the least strange thing in this story, but
also it I my jaw dropped. I was like I furiously was
screened recording right before he said this.

(01:11:33):
I didn't think he was going to answer me so fast.
He answered me like within seconds of me asking the
question. So I immediately started screen
recording and I'm so glad that Idid because I have evidence that
he said this. This is insane.
I've never heard this before. Genuinely, that was the first
thing that he said. Then he kind of went on to say,
oh, and I was. You know, levitated off the
floor, but luckily people grabbed me by my feet and my

(01:11:55):
hands and pulled me back to the ground.
Sir, you shouldn't have. You should have led with that
one. Because I don't care about that
now. Because you have just told me
that Janet Smrol ate her twin inthe womb and there's remnants of
said twin in her body. Come on.
And let me tell you, that is notin the book.

(01:12:16):
I even went back through the book.
I was like, did I completely miss this part in the book?
Is he telling me something new? Yeah, it's it's new.
It's not in the book. It might not be totally new to
everybody. Have you heard this before?
Have you heard that Janet Smirrel ate her twin in the
womb? I know that's not the actual.
I know that's not the actual science, but it's just funny to

(01:12:37):
say. Have you heard this?
Is this news? Have you heard it before?
Let me know Madam strangeways@gmail.com Anything.
That's the final, final little nugget that I'll leave you with.
But what do you think about the smol case?
Were the Smols being totally genuine?
Were they being a little bit genuine?
Were they being not genuine at all?

(01:12:57):
Perhaps. Would the Warrens have even
cared one way or the other whether or not they were being
genuine? I think that's really, honestly,
that's the bigger question. Do they care?
Did Jack Smirrell's medical condition play into the story at
all? Or were any or all of the four
daughters in the home? Just playing Poltergeist because
they're weird little girls or. Since this all happened so close

(01:13:23):
to Scranton, PA, was the real cause behind the Smirrell
haunting? Perhaps the Scranton Strangler?
All along, Yep, I waited. I waited 2 full episodes to
really make an office joke, so you're welcome.
Let me know your thoughts on thestory madamstrangeways@gmail.com

(01:13:46):
or you can leave me a message onSpotify.
I would also love to hear from you on social media.
You can follow me on Instagram and on Tiktok and I look forward
to seeing you soon. So thank you so much for joining
me for yet another episode of Madam Strangeways.

(01:14:13):
Thank you for joining me for more true strange stories of the
unexplained. Remember that you can feel
afraid and not be in danger. You're safe here with me,
probably. Please follow the podcast, leave
a rating on Spotify or Apple, ortell your friends and foes about
the show. It would mean the world to me.

(01:14:35):
The underworld, obviously, I mean, come on.
Was that not? Was that not clear?
Madam Strange Ways is produced and narrated by me.
Madam Strange Ways theme music is by
marina.ryan@marinamakes.co. Cover art is by Andrea Chisel
Roldan at Cult of Teddy on Instagram.

(01:14:56):
You can submit your own true strange story at
madamstrangeways.com or e-mail it to
madamstrangeways@gmail.com. See you soon, she said
ominously. Found out was in an obvious

(01:15:27):
place. Or her spoons.
I believe all her spoons were taken out of her drawer.
And she was, you know, blaming the kids, saying you guys are
digging in the yard, you're taking all my spoons.
But then she never realized thatall her spoons were gone, so her
spoon started showing up a couple at a time.
It took us several days for her,all her spoons to come back.

(01:15:48):
Very, you know, very par for thecourse really.
It has very common for this. It has taken sheets and towels
and baking pans, household items.
It takes it. Not that it's expensive or just.

All Episodes

The Conjuring 4 (The Smurls) Part 2 | The True Story of the Warrens' Paranormal Case | Ep #40

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Breakfast Club

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Conjuring 4 (The Smurls) Part 2 | The True Story of the Warrens' Paranormal Case | Ep #40