Animosity Continues to Brew Between Former Owners of the Conjuring House

 

So, a little over a month ago, I was watching my friend the "Side Eye Guy's" video on "The Boys at the Conjuring House." I just so happened to make a comment on the video when lo and behold, former Conjuring House owner, Corey Heinzen jumps on to argue with me. It seems that every time I am mentioned on Youtube regarding the history of the Richardson-Arnold house (aka the Conjuring House) or even when I just comment on a video relating to the subject, Corey shows up out of nowhere with something to say. Because I have been dealing with some health issues this year, I haven't been online as much as I have been in the past, especially within the last month, so I didn't really have a chance to reply in detail. So, it’s a little late today, but better late than never.

Today, I will be addressing his original comments as well as touching on the animosity that continues to brew between former owner Norma Sutcliffe and Corey Heinzen, which is all based on alleged dishonesty and unethical behavior on the part of Heinzen at the time of purchasing the property from Sutcliffe.

Although a lot of people out there think the Heinzen's are nice people, my personal experiences with them from the very beginning have been anything but nice. In fact, after finding out about them purchasing the property back in 2019, I reached out to them via snail mail with a letter sincerely asking them to preserve the factual history of the home and not to jump on the bandwagon with all of the paranormal groups perpetuating the false lore that has been spread for many years. I also provided them with a copy of some of my thorough research debunking Bathsheba Sherman's false attachment to the home's history, as well as debunking several false claims about deaths at the home claimed in Andrea Perron's books, so they couldn't say they weren't aware of the facts.  I was immediately met with a threatening message from their friend, Bill Brock on Facebook on July 27, 2019, which showed that someone had taken a sharpie and wrote the expletive “Fuck Off!” on my letter that I had sent to the Heinzen's.

I actually spoke to someone who was there at the house when this event took place and this person told me that he saw when Bill Brock took my letter and sent this and that Corey Heinzen was okay with it, despite Corey's email to me on August 1, 2019  claiming he had no idea that Bill had done that. 

But going back to the video on SEG's channel last month, this blog will be to set some information straight so that the public will actually have a chance to know Norma's side of the story, not just a one-sided story by the Heinzen's.

In Corey’s comment to me he states: “So why was Norma on Ghost Hunters, Season 2, Episode 2? Or better yet, why does she talk about it with Andrea Perron on countless videos?”  Then he goes on to ask: “Strange, it didn’t stop her from having other teams in to investigate? Or having her “tea time with the spirits”? Or talking to her former staff at the daycare about the ghosts? Would you like for me to continue? I honestly don’t think you were given the complete story by her.”

Originally my first response to Corey on the Youtube thread was this: 

"First and foremost G.H. Season 2 was filmed between 2005 and 2006. When Norma bought the house she was told a previous family claimed that the house was haunted. She found it interesting even though she was more skeptical than a believer. The Perron's, upon meeting Norma made vague claims about the house in the beginning. It wasn't until years later that Andrea started showing up at the house wanting to share stories with Norma. (Some of which were recorded). At that point Norma didn't know a lot about the history of the house and so Andrea made claims and Norma politely listened. One of Norma's friends talked her into doing the G.H. episode hoping to debunk the rumors. She regretted it later. After Norma started researching the facts about the house she saw that all the so-called " history" Andrea had tried to spread wasn't based on documented facts and Norma even tried to confront Andrea at a local Paracon. That was when Andrea got upset, screamed at her and ran off stage because someone had called her out on her over embellishments. So there you go....."--- --- 

Going back to all the questions coming from Corey on the Youtube video's comment thread, I decided to go straight to the source and reach out to Norma myself for her answers to provide to the public. But first, my question to Corey is how do you live with yourself knowing you tricked an elderly lady, a widow nonetheless, into selling her property to you under the guise you were going to use the property for people and/or children with disabilities and animal therapy? When Norma was told that the house would be in no way used for anything paranormal, and yet the ink hadn’t even dried on the property sales documents, and you were already planning paranormal business on the property.

NORMA’S ANSWERS: 

"Hi. To answer the questions, the only reason I did the Ghost Hunters show was out of sheer curiosity to see what they would claim, long before the movie or the return of Andrea to the farm.  Also, the only other group I had allowed in the home to investigate was Keith Johnson because they called me.  Seeing that he was the original investigator, both groups came because I was very interested in what they would claim, none of which used critical thinking, as Kent Spottswood and I did. 

Why would I speak about facts if I wanted to believe or to make claims about having ghosts? They just used Perron's claims, and Johnson made the same claims in his book without an investigation into the facts.  I never said I believed in the paranormal. Even during the filming of the show.  At the end I said it was “interesting” and would have this to show in the future.  If I wanted that attention I would have done my own ghost tours.  People will believe what they want….. no matter what evidence is given.  The hard evidence against Perron’s claims is at the library and town hall and all the lies about who died at the farm.   I confronted her (Andrea Perron) at the paranormal event in Harrisville in front of her followers and I was booed and told to leave."--

Regarding Operating a Daycare and “Tea Parties”:

"I operated the first group home day care in the state.  I was part of the development of home day care rules and began the home day care association in Rhode Island.  I never told the staff of my daycare that I believed in ghosts. I told them about the Perron claims.  We joked at times about ghosts but only jokingly.  Also, I never spoke of the claims at my tea parties.  I was given a lot of publicity for my “teas.”  In national magazines, local magazines, the news and on local radio and I never mentioned any ghost claims.   Also, my daycare was in Rhode Island Monthly and on the TV news as a great example of childcare in Rhode Island. 

I spoke of visits from the Perron family and Warren’s visit.  May I remind everyone that the Warrens said the Perron family were the most dysfunctional family they had ever met.  The Warren’s told the children their mother was possessed and never to play with Ouija board.  Never had any issues. I was well respected. Licensed in 1975.  Retired. 2012, at age 62. My daycare was unusual because I had sheep, horses, a dog and cats.  Long walks in woods on trails, swimming in the brook, sledding on the hill, etc.   I also did cooking workshops and was featured in many magazines for that.   I was well known in town, and I never received a complaint by any parent."---

Regarding the alleged drawings of the "Crooked-Neck Lady" that was revealed after the Heinzen's purchased the home: 

"There were never drawings in the house like that.  No children ever went to the basement. I saw a photo of  the drawing; they claimed it looked like it was inside door of white cabinet in cellar." --  According to Norma, this drawing was placed after the home was sold, and did not exist prior to her selling the house.     

Regarding the sale of the house and the many items Norma left in the house (antiques):

"Corey lied about his intentions and the neighbors and town were infuriated about it.  They knew me and my husband, how we fully restored the house and farm buildings.  Another lie claimed by Cory that he had to restore the house.

Corey and Roxanne claimed their intention was to open a farm for special needs children with animals. Roxanne was to raise funds having afternoon tea.  Right after closing, Corey forced Roxanne out.  I confronted Corey of their intentions of purchasing the house if it were due to the movie, he just said nothing but moved his head "No."  

Well, Corey lied to me about his intentions. I confronted him about exploiting the farm, he never admitted to his plan.  If he had, I would not have sold it to him.

Roxanne was the main person I spoke to throughout the days before closing.  She was the partner who told me the intentions they had planned.  She did the walk through.  I only saw Corey twice, at the initial meeting and one more time without Jennifer.   We never discussed why I was leaving.  Only asked Roxanne what she would like if I left items.  She was the one who showed the most interest in the books the other items.  During the walkthrough I had to schedule another clean out but Roxanne said don’t bother.  She would do it.  So, I told her what items I was going to leave.  

I had a dealer come who I had hoped would take all antiques I left but did not want large items.  So, I told Roxanne that I would leave big pieces since they belonged in the house. And she had shown great interest in books and large tables; I never discussed anything with Corey.  Except I said to him directly that I assume you do not have plans to exploit this home because of movie. He said nothing.  I went on to say because not only would I be angry, but the neighbors would retaliate.     

Never talked to either Jennifer or Corey about items in the house. That is why I signed a document describing items I left for Roxanne.   She was at the closing sitting right next to Cory.  Next day Corey told her she was out.   She had a key I gave her.  She went back to the house and took whatever she could handle and got a lawyer.   She has emails I believe discussing with Corey the terms of plan once the purchase went through.

This all began with Cory Heinzen’s lies.  Had I known, I would never have sold it to them.  Who would buy the farm now?   I had wished someone would have loved it for its own beauty and peacefulness."---     

What Norma has to say to those continuing to spread false information about the history of the home:

“You are all destroying truth and have no real evidence. So, if you claim the house is so obviously haunted, then get the real scientists and skeptics in to do the research.   But you don’t dare!"--   

In ending, as you can see from Norma's side of things, she has reasonable explanations for her side of the story. There are always two sides to a story, and Norma really hasn't been at the forefront lately stating her side of the story to the public, so unfortunately it's the attention whores who want to remain relevant in the paranormal field that keep spouting out their nonsense without actually stating the truth. Please use critical thinking and common sense to sift between the bullshit and the truth, and come to your own educated and informed opinion.

---- 

(copyright 2025 -- J'aime Rubio -- www.jaimerubiowriter.com) 

Discrepancies In the Perron's Story About Conjuring House Doesn't Add Up

I have so many blog posts to share with you all, and it is taking me a very long time to get them all up. So, please bear with me, as I slowly get all of my research out there to enlighten you all with the facts surrounding the true history of the "Conjuring House." (Did I happen to mention that I really hate that name?!) 

First and foremost, I have always had a hard time believing the Perron's story. It isn't that I don't believe in the spirit realm, because I do. I have had plenty of paranormal experiences in my lifetime which cannot be explained. I just do not usually delve into that subject with my writing. I am more about documented facts and finding logical explanations for the most part. But again, I do believe supernatural experiences happen. With the Perron's story though, it is more about the credibility factor, as to why I have a hard time believing their story. 

You see, the stories that the Perron's have shared over the years have consistently changed way too much. That is a red flag for anyone actually paying attention. Second, Andrea Perron's stories have started morphing into over the top scenarios as time has gone on, too. (I am not even going to get into the whole alien and bigfoot nonsense!)

Look, if you want to believe everything Andrea says, that is totally up to you, I cannot tell you what to think or what to believe. I can only lead you to the facts, and hope you come to a logical opinion of the situation once you have all the information. 

Do I think the Perron's experienced something at the home? Well, it's hard for me to say. 

On one hand, I think it is quite possible that they may have experienced something; but on the other hand, I think much of what they believe they experienced can be explained logically; and those explanations are not supernatural. We will get into all of that in another blog post very soon, but today we are going to go over some of the interviews and quotes that the Perron's have made about their experiences at the house to analyze how the story seems to have changed over the years.

For one, Andrea has become the "spokesperson" for the family, often being interviewed and giving first hand eye-witness accounts of various experiences, only for us to find out that some of what she so adamantly explains was not even her own experiences, but instead that of her mother's.

Did her mother tell her these stories after the fact? It just seems overly detailed for the memory of a young girl back in the early 1970's - we are talking over 50 years ago. 

A good example, the first encounter Carolyn had with the entity that Andrea would later claim was either Mrs. Arnold or  Bathsheba Sherman** in her book, "House of Darkness, House of Light." 

(**For the record, I have already proven that Susan Arnold did not hang herself at the property, and Bathsheba was also innocent and was wrongfully slandered posthumously in those books as well as in the film, "The Conjuring.") 

***DISCLAIMER: I have posted the interview quotes below under the protection of the FAIR USE LAW as a critical review in order to educate the public of contradictory information that has been published under the pretense of being factual. ***

In the quoted interview below, this was recorded after 2013, after the film had come out, a whole 42 years or more after the initial "experience," Carolyn was said to have had at the house. 

Andrea's Quoted Interview: 

"It floated. It didn't have any feet, and it had a long, kind of gray to brown linen dress, a very tight bodice, wide belt, lace around the neck, and the head was hanging off the neck, to such an extent, that it looked like it had been snapped and then just allowed to fall. It looked like a desiccated hornet's nest. It had no discernable features, the eyes were hollow black sockets, the nose were just two little holes, very, very thin lips, jagged yellow teeth, and the head had sprigs of hair, like wild sprigs of hair. And it looked like it was covered in cobwebs, or something meshy over it, and it was moving closer, and closer and closer to her.  It did not speak to her during the first encounter."-- Andrea Perron

(to watch the video and hear this for yourself, please click here).

That is a lot of discernable features, for something that had "no discernable features."

In an interview in 2013,  for the Channel 4 news, "San Antonio Living," Andrea mentions the day she moved into the farmhouse:

The interviewer asked in regards to the newly released film, "The Conjuring,"

"That was your life, but worse, right?"

Andrea's response:

"They really had to tone it down for the film. James, James Wan, the director was shooting for a PG-13 rating, he wanted to bring this story to as many people as he could, and when he got the R rating, I was with him, and he hit the roof! We had to pull him back down.  He said to the MDAA  (I think she meant MDA) 'what do I have to take out of the film in order to get a PG-13?'  and they said there's nothing you can remove, it's just too scary. And they had already toned it down so much, that he was shocked, but it worked out well, and God knows that it's on dvd now all the teenagers are seeing it........."

When asked about the day they moved in, how much time had passed before they knew that the house was haunted.

Andrea's response:

"About five minutes. We bought the house in December of 1970, but my mother refused to move at Christmas, imagine that! So, we moved in the first week of January, 1971, in the middle of a snow storm. Swirling ice storm. And my dad, it was a whole caravan, and it was chaos, of course, moving days tend to be.  But my dad handed me a large box of the back of the truck and said take this to your mother in the kitchen. So I went through the parlor door, so I had to walk the entire length of the house to get to the kitchen and pantry, and it was more than 110 feet long. 

So, I walked into the dining room, and I saw an oddly dressed man in the corner of the dining room, and I greeted him, because I was a polite child. I said good morning, and he didn't respond to me. His focus was entirely on the elder gentleman who was moving out of the house, who had sold it to us. And so I kept going, and I walked in the kitchen and said 'Mom, who's that other man with Mr. Kenyon in the dining room?' and she said ' there is no other man in the dining room.' 

And then Nancy came in, Christine came in, Cindy came in and then the last sister came in and said, 'that man in the dining room just disappeared.'" --

(you can watch this clip for yourself here)

Interestingly enough, Pam Kenyon was there that day and her recollection of the events were a bit different. Pam, who was an adult when this event occurred remembered that day vividly. Why? Because Pam was not happy with what happened that moving day.

You see, according to Pam, the Perron's decided to move in before her grandfather had even had a chance to move out. Mind you, this was the middle of winter in New England, and so this should have been planned out better. Poor Mr. Kenyon got a knock on the door and here they are moving in and he hasn't even moved out.  

"Perron (the father) had somehow gotten use of a moving van and we had to pack up my grandfather and move him all in one day.... We had to do this, as I said, all in one day. I have no idea why everything had to be done the way it was. Not at all."

Pam went on to describe how it was her, her dad, her mom and others there that day, moving her grandpa's stuff out of the house and the barn. She said that there was nothing paranormal going on, as she was was there. If Andrea and her sisters saw anyone with Mr. Kenyon, it was more than likely his son, Earl Jr. 

Roger claimed in a video taped interview, "On the first day, the owner said, do your family a favor, keep the lights on at night." 

According to Pam, that was not true at all. In fact Pam claimed that her grandfather was a practical, New Englander and he didn't believe in anything like that. She said he never had any experiences in that house for the 47 years he lived there, and if he had said anything along the lines of keeping a light on, it was because he was an elderly man, and had to keep a light on to see at night when he walked down the stairs to go to the bathroom, as he could have fallen and broke a bone, or worse. If he did say something about the light, it was so that the children wouldn't fall down the narrow stairs in the middle of the night, in the dark trying to get to the restroom. There is a logical explanation here! 

Also, going back to the beginning of the interview, remember how Andrea said "they had to tone it down," meaning the film was toned down in comparison to what they experienced in the home? Why is it that later Andrea claimed that the film was overly exaggerated? I have seen multiple interviews where she later backtracked and said it wasn't has bad as the movie led on, and then she would plug her books, so that people would read her story, as she claimed hers was the "true story", not the film.

In an email Andrea wrote to me back in 2016, she said this of the film:

"The Conjuring" and the Warren files did a huge disservice to Bathsheba's memory and I had no control over how she was represented and vilified in the film but I will always defend her because I do not believe she was guilty of what she has been accused of by Lorraine Warren."--- Andrea Perron's email via jaimerubiowriter.com web form submission. 

I can literally quote passages from Andrea's books where she demonizes Bathsheba. I can even quote interviews where over and over she brings up Bathsheba's name and blames her for the things that they allegedly experienced, even going so far as to claim Bathsheba was "lusting" after her dad, so we aren't going to cover that one today, but we are going to get into her comment where she blames Lorraine Warren solely as being the one to start the Bathsheba Sherman lies. 

I place the initial blame on both the Carolyn Perron and Lorraine Warren for the false stories about Bathsheba, as no stories about Bathsheba, or any sort of accusations about her ever existed before AUGUST of 1973. --

I think they are equally guilty of allowing such horrid slander to be shared about an innocent person, but I will not blame just one side and not the other. 

1) There are interviews of Carolyn Perron claiming she did research and found all these records about Bathsheba. 

Fact: There are no such records, so we know this to be untrue. Still, Carolyn perpetuated the false story in filmed interviews. 

2) There were interviews aired of Lorraine Warren claiming that she was the one who initially felt the presence of Bathsheba Sherman when she was in the house, and that she said her name first. 

Fact: She was told of Bathsheba's name prior to coming to the farmhouse, so she didn't just magically come up with that name when she came to the house, as much as she tried to pretend that she did.

So, both women will take an equal part in the blame here........ BUT (and there is a HUGE BUT)

3) Andrea Perron was an adult when she wrote her first book. As an adult, she had the responsibility to do her own research and not just take someone's word or someone's recollection as gospel and run with it. Had she done even the most basic research on Bathsheba Sherman's history, Susan Arnold's history, or any of the other people she has brought up in her books, she would have known that NONE of those stories she has shared in PRINT was true. 

As an author who has published five historical non-fiction books, I can tell you that research is the most important part of writing. If your research is not done correctly, you ruin the entire book. How can anyone believe anything you have to say, if you adamantly state things that you cannot prove?  

So, yes, I also place blame on Andrea Perron for stoking the flames of a forgotten fire that started with her mother and Lorraine Warren back in 1973, but snowballed into the monstrosity that is now "The Conjuring." 

Going back to Carolyn's interviews, on the television program "Paranormal Witness" (Season 4; Episode 10) titled "The Real Conjuring," which aired on October 28, 2015,  Carolyn states:  "I read the medical report, the coroner examined the baby and found that a needle had been embedded into the base of the child's skull. I couldn't believe it.....I wondered if Bathsheba had stabbed me with a needle and planted a curse on our property and on me."-- 

For one, there was no death of a baby, so there would be no medical report for a non-existent event about a non-existent baby. So either Carolyn was lying or she imagined the entire scenario. I am not sure which is worse. 

For the record, mental illness is no laughing matter and I am not a medical doctor, so I am not going to throw in some sort of diagnosis, because I am not in a position to do so. However, I do believe that one should seek help from a professional if they are truly imagining certain things are happening that can be proven did not actually happen. Either way, whether imagined or made up, it is very dangerous to spread false information about someone when you cannot back up what you are saying with documentation. Which is the case here. All the stories about Bathsheba have never been backed up by actual documentation. None! 

Carolyn claimed she did all this research, and yet when the family was asked about said research, they claimed the papers were either taken by the Warrens or were lost. Again, no such records ever existed because none of these events happened on the property. There were never any accusations about Bathsheba,  about a baby dying, and certainly nothing about the property such as tragedies, suicides, drownings, etc.

There is also no record of a Mr. McKeachern in Burrillville, the man Carolyn supposedly got so much information from. How convenient. There was a Mr. McEachern living in Providence at one time, but he died long before the Perron's ever lived there and he was not a historian. So where did she get her alleged information? 

Going back to Lorraine Warren, I found it laughable that she claimed she had stepped into the home and sat down on the bed in the room where the library/study is now, and stated, "I sense a malignant presence and her name is Bathsheba." -- Of course she would say that, but those who are "in the know," are aware that Donna from P.I.R.O. had reached out to Lorraine and told her about the house, about Carolyn, and name dropped "Bathsheba," whom she got the name from Carolyn, before Lorraine had ever stepped foot in that farmhouse. 

Do I think that Lorraine added to the story? Oh yes, most definitely. That is why I still think that both the Warren's and the Perron's are equally at fault for the slander of poor Bathsheba. 

Going back to that Paranormal Witness episode, Andrea never mentioned seeing anything on moving day, but she did in the other interview? That is strange. 

In fact, she claimed it was after they had been living there a while, when she saw someone in the reflection in the glass window as she was washing dishes. She also mentioned hearing a baby crying (an infant) but not knowing where the sound came from. Remember this as we will get to that shortly.

In other interviews they say Roger felt trapped in the basement, but they mention that one of the younger sisters got stuck in a trunk in the basement playing hide and seek.  

I am not sure what type of trunk she crawled into, but it has been known since the 1800's  that children have crawled into trunks to hide and got stuck in them and suffocated. There are plenty of reports of that going back over 100 years. There was even an episode about that exact subject on the hit television series, The Waltons, in an episode titled "The Foundling" where the youngest daughter goes into the said to be "haunted house" to hide during a game of hide and seek and got stuck in a trunk. This episode aired on September 14, 1972, the same time period when these alleged events took place in the farmhouse. Coincidence? 

In fact, there are a lot of things I have caught during different interviews and even in Andrea's books that are reminiscent of different television shows, movies and books during or before that time period. Again, that is for another day.

Going on, Andrea claimed to have witnessed her mother's initial experience with the female entity while in a dream state, and yet, the description Andrea gave in the television program was not anything like what she mentioned in the first interview I mentioned at the beginning of this post. In fact, she hardly described her, and only stated the entity of the woman was hanging over her mother, with wood protruding from the ends of her sleeves, and no hands. 

IS THIS THE FIRST ARTICLE? 

North Smithfield-Burrillville Observer, 1977

In this "Halloween" themed article for the North Smithfield-Burrillville Observer, dated October, 28, 1977, the story isn't as sensational as you see in the movie or in the books, but this seems to be the first published article that I could find mentioning the slanderous story of a witch who murdered her child as a sacrifice to the devil.  In this piece though, they do make the claim of someone being frozen to death on the property, two suicides, and three drownings. We all know there were no suicides or drownings on the property. Yes, Jarvis Smith died from exposure in a rickety shack along Douglas Road (now Round Top Road, the outskirts of the property) after passing out drunk, but that isn't anything sinister, and he was literally just passing through.

This article is the first mention of Carolyn witnessing an "apparition of the old woman with head hanging to one side," and that the ghost spoke, "Get out, get out, or I'll drive you out with death and gloom."  It does not give details on what she looked like, and you would think that if it was a fresh memory, given the time period this was published, this would have been the time to describe the event as vividly as it has been described in the last decade or so.  The "other incidents" mentioned that the Perrron's allegedly experienced was hearing a child's voice crying "Momma," doors banging open after they had been secured shut, being attacked with a clothes hanger, and the orange that bled when cut into it. 

Now, remember Andrea said it was an infant crying that they heard, but in this article now it's a child crying "Momma." So which is it? An infant or a young child? 

Fast forward a few years and now this ghost has changed yet again, and a lot more details than the original article. Like I said, these stories seem to get more and more detailed as the years go by. In investigations usually the first recollection is the clearest, because it is the freshest memory in your mind. As time goes on, the memory becomes more vague, less detailed. It just seems odd to me that the more time that passes, the more elaborate the stories became. 

What happpened to the HEADLESS GHOST??!!

For those of you who aren't aware, one of the other original stories was that Carolyn was seeing a "headless ghost" in her house. Yes, that is right! 

According to a tabloid article that Carolyn and Roger were part of (but their names were changed) which was written by none other than Tony Spera back between 1981-1985, the story was not anything like what was told in later years.

Headline: "Fashion Model Meets Headless Ghost" 

"A former fashion model and her husband were forced to flee and panic from the dreadful headless ghost of an old woman and a host of other unholy terrors they encountered in an old haunted house. Even an exorcism by America's most famous husband and wife ghostbusting team Ed and Lorraine Warren, was unable to cleanse the ancient house of its demonic influence. 

Carol and Ronald Barron thought they were escaping the harsh, cold, city life when they purchased the three hundred year old farm in rural Rhode Island. They were blissfully unaware that this was the beginning of a hair raising horror ordeal--and waiting for them were heart stopping encounters with an ugly, disgusting apparition of a headless woman. 

Vicious beatings by unknown, unseen attackers.  Dirge like music coming from an unattended piano early playing by itself. Terrifying screams in the night and psychic light shooting down the chimney, snuffing out the fire.

 Not even an exorcism could rid the house of its evil presence-- In fact it only increased the strength and determination of the wicked forces. Mrs Barron well remembers the first hair-raising encounter a bare two weeks after she and her husband had moved in. 

"I turned over in bed and standing there at the foot of my bed was this apparition or entity it was wearing a dark gray dress and had NO head. I was literally frozen in my bed," she shuddered. Then this voice began reverberating from the walls getting louder and louder "get out! get out!"

It wasn't long after Mrs. Barron was dressing in her clothes closet after a bath and suddenly an iron coat hanger flew from the rack and began pounding her on the head and upper back," she recalled. 

"I was so frightened ,I ran from the room screaming. The next morning I had ugly welts on my body." 

Yet another time she was snacking on an orange by the fireplace. 

"I cut into the orange to peel it and my God it began oozing red thick blood. In fact it dripped onto my feet and coagulated!"

She and her husband were constantly tormented by doors bursting open and slamming shut for no reason at all hours of the day and night. 

"We even tied heavy rope to the doors and placed heavy deadbolt locks but the doors kept bursting open." 

Equally frightening the phone would ring and kept ringing after it was answered. 

"In the middle of the night our piano which isn't a player type, would start playing this horrible dirge like music. I'd get out of bed and go over to it--- I could actually see the keys depressing. Then the horrible blood chilling screams started like nothing I've ever heard before." 

"One bright summer morning, I went out to my vegetable gardena and I heard the voice of a small child crying out for his mama. One night at dinner party for 12, a small beam of light, no thicker than a pencil came shooting down the chimney and snuffed out the fire in the fireplace." 

"And then shot across the room, withdrew itself, then went back up the chimney-- all in a split second."  (***) 

In desperation the frantic family summoned the Warrens to their troubled farm home. 

The Warrens knew the house well, " it has been plagued by many tragedies over is 300 year existence, murders, suicides and drownings. A 98 year old woman who practiced black witchcraft had lived there," says Ed. 

"In her earlier years, she had murdered her own child ---by driving a nail through her head ---as a gift to Lucifer!"

The Warrens did their best to rid the house of its evil spirits, including conducting a light exorcism. It did no good, if anything it made matters worse. The terror-stricken Barron finally fled the house and moved to Georgia. The Warren say they are now hopeful that the location will at last be freed from its dreadful supernatural captivity when a reservoir scheduled for construction buries the haunted house under 60 ft of water." ---(Tabloid Article, Circa 1981-1985) 

***For the record, that light coming down the chimney swirling around the room and going back up did not happen to the Perron's. This was a story that happened to the Kenyons, when a lightning storm caused lightning to shoot down the chimney and the electricity shot around the room and back to the chimney. Scary? Probably for whoever was there, but it was not supernatural. It was lightning and it did damage to the house, which was repaired. Sarah Butterworth sealed up all the chimney's after that episode. Again, probably scary for anyone who experienced it, but definitely not supernatural. They were lucky the house didn't catch fire and burn down. How did the Perron's hear of the story? Who knows...neighbors maybe? 

So the story went from a woman with her head literally hanging off of her body, to a headless woman and now in recent years she is described as a bent-neck or crooked-neck lady? Okay....

Going back to the television program that interviewed the family, when the mention of the seance came up the reenactment had actors in the show with cameras as if the seance was being filmed. Where is the footage? Where are the photos? 

Kenny Biddle, a very open-minded skeptic famous for his logic based research published in the Skeptical Inquirer, and who has his own Youtube channel on various subjects, brought up that very point the other night on one of his live streams where he mentioned that Andrea even talked about the "shutters" of the camera taking photos during the seance. Yet, no one has ever come forward with any evidence of this event -- the Warren's or the Perron's. 

At the end of the television episode it mentions that the footage was "mysteriously destroyed." Again, how convenient. Family member Cindy Perron, stated "If we had stayed, the house would have killed us all."  If that is the case, why did the family stay there until 1980?  Also, why was Nancy allowed to remain at the house for an entire year, by herself, after the rest of the family had moved to Georgia? Not only that, but it was stated that one of Nancy's friends had stayed at the home with her newborn baby for a short period of time, prior to the Schwartz family taking over the property. 

If the house was so evil, if it had terrorized this family so much, why on earth would you allow your daughter to stay there by herself for a year, or allow anyone with an infant child to live there? 

I think any logical person can come up with that answer. 

In ending this blog post today, I hope you are opening your eyes to see the truth about this whole story. And I have plenty more to share with you coming very soon.

Again, I am not going to flat out say the Perron's didn't experience something, I truly believe they think they experienced something, but I do not believe for one second it was anything as dramatic or sensational as what has been told in interviews, the books or the movie. I will leave that up to you, to weigh out the facts and decide for yourself. 

Until next time........

-- Copyright 2024 - J'aime Rubio- www.jaimerubiowriter.com 

A Look At "The Harrisville Haunting" -- Did the Documentary Get it Right?

Photo: Courtesy of Scott Shumas

In early March of this year, I was scrolling through my streaming services and stumbled across a documentary by Matt Benton & Joe Vitale, "The Harrisville Haunting." I had seen another short film "A Sleepless Unrest" on the same subject not long before, and perhaps I will write a review and run down on that one in the future, but for today we are going to take a look at this particular documentary that was filmed at the old farmhouse on Round Top Road.

First off, I have to state that after I had watched the film, I was left very confused about the filmmaker's stance on Bathsheba Sherman all together.  You see, on one hand it appeared in the beginning of the film that they wanted to clear her name, which I was happy to see. They interviewed both Carl Johnson and Kenny Biddle who both explained that none of the accusations made against Bathsheba in recent years had any basis in fact, and no record historically of ever having occurred. At first it appeared that this film was trying to clear her name, but then they allowed someone who has been one of the biggest causes of all of the false stories concerning Bathsheba to spread even more false stories about her. Andrea Perron was filmed on a web cam video at the end of the film literally trying to claim that she communicated with Bathsheba and once again painted her out to be a negative spirit, stating that this entity was was even "mimicking" her own voice. 

As I told Andrea Perron directly in an email back in 2016, after she had emailed me on my website attempting to deny the false information that she had published in her book : 

"No one can without a doubt blame all the supernatural activity that you or your family experienced on Bathsheba, it isn’t right nor is it fair. History proves that Bathsheba did not live or die there on that property, which is supported by documented evidence. To give any “entity” an identity and attach to them the name or stories of people who were once actual living human beings and then sully them in death is so very wrong."

When someone spins a yarn, for whatever intent or purpose they choose to, it can and will spin out of control. With that will come the addition of  more false details until eventually it takes on a life of its own.

Instead of owning up to her mistakes and admitting that she never did any prior research before making such claims in her book, Ms. Perron has and continues to dig a deeper hole of untruths that she cannot now seem to pull herself out of.  

NOT BATHSHEBA!!

I have to point out that the photograph used in the film when mentioning Bathsheba is actually NOT a photo of Bathsheba. In fact, there are NO KNOWN photographs of Bathsheba Sherman in existence. The photo pictured here (as was shown on the film) is of a woman named Caroline Rebecca Grundy of Minersville, Utah. She had no affiliation to the Arnold's, Bathsheba or Burrillville at all. She has been erroneously attached to Bathsheba Sherman online and the photo should never have been used.

As I mentioned above, Andrea Perron's little web-cam session towards the end of the film was just another attempt for her to attach Bathsheba Sherman's name to that house, and unfairly so. 

We know by way of actual documented facts that Bathsheba had no attachment to that property at any time in her life, so there would be no reason for her to be haunting that house. 

Also, Mrs. Arnold never killed herself on the property as Andrea tries to insinuate when she brings up the story of her mother seeing a woman with a bent neck, and trying to claim that it was Mrs. Arnold. In fact, no one committed suicide in that house.

There are also other factors that the film leaves out which I would consider the most important part -- the actual history!

The film doesn't go into the history of the home at all, which is sort of expected if you are going to do a documentary on an allegedly haunted house. You would want to find out who lived there before, and the actual history of the home to try to find out why or what is causing the phenomena taking place on the property, but the film doesn't delve into any of the history, nor any of its former residents except for the Perrons.

I am sorry, but this house's family history goes back to the late 1680's, with the structure itself having been built between 1725-1736. There are numerous family units that have lived there, some of which included the same family bloodline that inhabited the home for nine generations.

Out of all of the former residents or owners of the home, the only ones that were really given any mention in the documentary were the Perron's, and then the Heinzen's, who had only purchased the home from Norma Sutcliffe for $439,000 on June 21, 2019 and quickly sold the property for $1.5 million on May 26, 2022, making over a million dollars profit.

As usual, it appears that the house's background beyond the Perron family didn't interest anyone enough to share the facts. The truth is that Bathsheba Sherman had no affiliation to the house in any way whatsoever so there was no reason for Andrea to continue to bring her up in the documentary. I really wish people would stop pushing the false narratives. 

Also, just so everyone out there knows, there is no record that anyone named Mr. McKeachern ever lived or worked in that area of Rhode Island. In fact, there is no record of a person with that name in that area at all, meaning he more than likely never existed and is a made up person to put the blame on for their historical errors. 

Again, there were no suicides, no drownings in the basement well or on the grounds of the property, nor were there any murders on the property. 

There was no mention of a CROOKED NECK LADY prior to the Perron's living in the home--- that was clearly inspired by Shirley Jackson's 1959 novel, "The Haunting of Hill House."  In fact, in a tabloid magazine article back in the late 1970s-possibly early 1980's written by Tony Spera, he claimed that Caroline Perron (whom he used the name Carol Barron to describe her) was seeing a "headless ghost," not a woman with a broken neck. It was the same house and definitely Caroline in the photos of the article.  It appears that the story keeps changing over the years.

With all the build up on the haunted aspect in the beginning of the film, the meat of the documentary went into the actual paranormal investigation, which was very anti-climactic in my opinion. The claims of books falling off shelves, a hot wheel truck of some sort rolling off of a rounded pillow cushion onto the floor and doors shutting by themselves, although are considered "paranormal" by all means, they are not what I would call "next level." 

I am not doubting that something is in that house, especially after there have been hundreds of people investigating in that small space in the last 3 years, inviting spirits into the home that probably were not there to begin with. 

I get that they wanted to show the world their investigation of the house, but what did they really prove? They didn't identify who or what is there, only that they claimed to have had experiences there, just as other investigators who have been there. Still, the film was lacking core ingredients to get down to the marrow of the issue here, the who and the why of it all.

More questions that should have been asked in the documentary were these:

• Why had the allegations of haunting on the property never been mentioned before, but only during the brief time the Perron's lived there? 
• The home never had a reputation for being haunted prior to or after the Perron's lived there. Why do you think that is? 
• Did you know that the tall tales surrounding the house only began shortly after the Perron's bought the house, right after Mr. Kenyon died? 

I know for a fact that the house did not have anything malevolent in it before the Perron's lived there because members of the family who lived there before confirmed that with me. 

To my readers out there, if you truly seek the truth, I hope you will really ask yourself those questions. The answers are there if you really want to find them. I know the truth and I plan on publishing even more information on the real story on this blog.

(Copyright 2023 - J'aime Rubio, www.jaimerubiowriter.com)

Bathsheba Sherman's Vindication

 

Photo Credit: Kent Spottswood

Chapter Seventeen, from "Stories of the Forgotten: Infamous, Famous & Unremembered"-

"Sometimes histories about people from the past become distorted due to overactive imaginations and just the passing of time itself. Like the childhood game of “telephone,” after so many re-tellings it is hard to find where the facts of a story stop and where the fantasy begins.  Take the story of Bathsheba Sherman as one example. No one knew her name or her history besides maybe a local historian or two, prior to being mentioned in the film titled, The Conjuring. In fact, most people nationally, and globally, had never heard of her until the movie came out in 2013.

The movie was said to be based on the files of paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren, who had visited the home of the Perron family in the 1970s. The family claimed to have been tormented by evil spirits in their home in Burrillville, Rhode Island.  Let me make this perfectly clear from the beginning, there was a real person named Bathsheba Sherman who lived in Burrillville, but she was not the person that the movie portrayed her to be. Bathsheba lived in another part of Burrillville. She neither lived nor worked on the old Arnold Estate, which was the property the Perron family purchased in 1971.

It was not until the 1970's that mysterious rumors sprang up out of thin air, ruining Bathsheba’s reputation posthumously. No one in town had ever heard of any questionable events regarding Bathsheba, but all of a sudden, stories were spreading like wildfire in this small community. Older folks who respected history became agitated by the false accusations, while the younger more superstitious ones wondered about the possibilities of this spine-chilling folklore actually being real.

In the movie, it was stated that Bathsheba Sherman was a witch who worshiped the Devil, sacrificed her baby to Satan and then hung herself from the tree in the back yard.  Accounts in the movie portray Bathsheba’s spirit allegedly terrorizing all who live in the home, also causing all the different tenants over the years to kill their own children, and allegedly possessing Carolyn Perron. This is false.

None of the so-called history that was told in the film, The Conjuring, has anything to do with the real Bathsheba Sherman or the true history of the house on Round Top Road. It is a disservice to the memory of both Bathsheba Sherman’s family and that of the Arnold family that these horrific fabrications have been spread, whether it was done purposely or not.

The facts are not hard to find with thorough research and diligent investigating by truth seekers.  The real Bathsheba Sherman was born on March 10, 1812, to parents, Ephraim Thayer and Hannah Taft. Ephraim's first wife was named Bathsheba Pain. It is safe to assume that his daughter was named after his first wife or a relative in the family, as that was quite common given that time period.  For the record, Bathsheba was not an Arnold as Andrea Perron claims in her book House of Darkness, House of Light.*  In fact, Bathsheba was born a Thayer. Another point to mention is that Bathsheba never worked on the property of the Old Arnold Estate, nor did she care for a child that died on the property.  She was never accused of being a witch, nor was there any accusations of any accidental death or murder involving either Bathsheba or any other persons or infants.

* Pages 299 & 453, Kindle Version, Volume One. 

By the age of 32, Bathsheba married Judson Sherman, and soon after the couple started a family.  Herbert Leander Sherman was the only one out of the four Sherman children to live to adulthood. Herbert’s headstone states that he was born in 1850, however the 1850 census records show him to be one year old at the time it was recorded in August of that year.

Herbert Sherman’s first marriage was to Georgianna Irons, and took place on January 7, 1872.  Not much is known about Georgianna except that her parents names were William and Mary Irons and that they were from Glocester, Rhode Island. The young couple were happily married for only three short years when tragedy struck. Georgianna passed away on February 11, 1875.  She is buried with the rest of the Sherman family at the Riverside Cemetery in Harrisville.

Her headstone epitaph reads:

"Why should we grieve for one so pure,

 Our loss to her is gain,

 Her happiness is now secure,

 Our sorrows still remain."--

Herbert married for a second time, to a Ms. Anna Jane Phair on December 4, 1880. The pair had two sons, William, born in 1881; and Fred, born in 1883. Sadly, William died in 1900, at the age of 19.

All of the Sherman’s children, including Herbert, are interred at the Cemetery in Harrisville with Bathsheba, Judson and Bathsheba’s family. None of the children died of any suspicious or questionable circumstances.

Judson Sherman passed away on October 1, 1881, at the age of 68 years. Probate records indicate that Herbert was listed as the sole heir to the family estate after his mother. The Sherman estate at the time of Judson’s death was worth a little over $15,000.00.  By January 2, 1883, Bathsheba had remarried, this time to Benjamin Greene, a farmer from Providence.  Both parties had lost their spouses in death, and it appears that more than likely the pair may have married out of necessity, as many did in those days.

Bathsheba eventually succumbed to old age, dying from a stroke of paralysis in her bed at home, on May 25, 1885.  Her obituary, from the Burrillville Gazette read, “Bethsheba [SIC], widow of the late Judson Sherman, died at her late residence Monday morning last, from a sudden attack of paralysis, aged 72 years. The funeral services were held on Thursday, Rev. A.H. Granger officiating, and the interment took place at Riverside Cemetery, Harrisville. She was the last member of the Thayer family, once numerous and well known in this town, her son, Herbert Sherman, being the only near relative remaining.”—

As you can see by the documented records, Bathsheba Sherman died an old woman in her bed at home. She did not hang herself as the movie would have you believe. The question now would be, “where did all these over the top stories come from?”  The answer is actually more simple than one would think. But first, let’s go over the other stories that have also gained infamy by their erroneous attachment to the old Arnold Estate on Round Top Road as well.

We have already established that Bathsheba never lived at the old Arnold Estate, nor did she work there. She did not commit suicide either, but died of old age. So where did this idea of a woman hanging herself come from? The stories that started in the 1970s also included one about a lady named Susan Arnold who allegedly hung herself in the barn on the property.  I believe that whomever started this rumor assumed, given the same last name, that Susan Arnold must have lived at the old Arnold Estate. The fact was that Susan Arnold lived in another part of town, and did not commit suicide in the house or outside in the barn, as told and retold over the years.

The Black Book of Burrillville, a macabre record of unusual deaths in town, which has been added to over the years, lists various unusual deaths ranging from murder to suicides, also listing them by category.  Although it is noted that Susan Arnold did kill herself, as I stated before, she did not live at the old Arnold Estate.  According to her obituary in the local paper, dated April 13, 1866,  it read, “Susan Arnold, wife of John, hung herself in a chamber of her residence on Sunday, April 6; aged 50 years. She was the daughter of Dexter Richardson, Esq. The circumstances were as follows: on Monday morning, she went about her household duties as usual and while Mr. Arnold (who is an invalid) was conversing with a neighbor; she went upstairs. In about ten minutes the neighbor left, and Mr. Arnold started to go upstairs, as was his custom, to try his strength. At the head of the stairs he turned to go up another flight, when he missed the key from the door of a store-room, and then he had suspicions that something was wrong.

He immediately tried the door and found it locked on the inside. He tried to push the door in, but was so weak he could not. He then went through another room and through a window into a shed-roof and into another window, and there found his wife suspended from a wardrobe hook with a very small cord.

They immediately cut her down, but the vital spark had fled. She had evidently made every preparation for the act. She had a loaded gun, a dirk knife and a phial of mercury in the room with her; and had also laid out upon a bed in another room all the clothes for her burial. It is a sad affliction to her friends. “ —-

As terrible a story as that one is, the fact of the matter is that she didn’t commit suicide at the old Arnold Estate on Round Top Road. That makes all the difference in the story. If that wasn’t bad enough, there were more stories of suicides, rumors of drownings and a few suspicious deaths that seemed to somehow become attached to the home. All untrue of course.  The next story thrown around was the suicide of Mr. John Arnold, the son of Edwin Arnold and brother to Abigail Butterworth. When Edwin Arnold died, he did not pass the old Arnold Estate to John, he passed it to his son-in law, William Butterworth, Abigail’s husband. 

Although John Arnold did commit suicide, he did not kill himself in the attic of the old Arnold Estate because he did not live there. According to the Black Book of Burrillville, John Arnold committed suicide in 1911, at his own home which was near Tarkiln.  His obituary in the Pascoag Herald mentions that he had been in poor health for several years, and “in a fit of despondency he took a dose of paris green* and the efforts of a physician to save his life was unavailing.” John Arnold was 57 years old when he died, and his funeral was held at the Universalist Church, with Rev. W. S. Turner officiating the services. He was later interred in Douglas.

*Paris Green is a highly toxic crystalline powder used as a rodenticide and insecticide.

  

We have established that neither Susan Arnold, nor John Arnold died at the old Arnold Estate, but what about Edwin Arnold?  Although he did once own the property on Round Top Road, even he died elsewhere. His obituary dated in 1903, mentioned that his body was found “beside a stone wall on the Smith Aldrich farm north of the Sherman Stock farm.”  This information was kindly provided to me by current owner of the home, Norma Sutcliffe.

 Apparently, Mr. Arnold had stopped to rest there and he “died of natural causes resulting from exposure.” He had been missing for seven weeks, before Frank Pierce had found what was left of his body.  His remains were taken to Waterman’s undertaking rooms to be prepared for his funeral and subsequent burial. With all these misrepresented stories, it seems not even one can hold up when examined thoroughly.

You might ask yourself then, if Bathsheba Sherman, Susan Arnold, John Arnold and even Edwin Arnold did not die at the Arnold Estate, did anyone?  The answer is, yes; however, those deaths were from natural causes, such as illness or old age. Remember, the farm is over 300 years old, so it would be ignorant on anyone’s part to think that house has never seen one death.

Are there any documents of deaths at the old Arnold Estate? Yes.  According to family records of remaining descendants of the Arnold family, Sally Eddy passed away at the home, as did her two children, after suffering from Typhus.  I am sure over the span of the 300 years that the farm has stood, there are other relatives who have lived and died in the home, or on the property, but none of an unusual nature. 

There was one man who died on the property who had been tied to a notorious scandal a few years before. Jarvis Smith was born in April of 1844, in the state of Rhode Island. According to the 1860 census, he was living with his mother, Elizabeth, 44; and brother, Clovis, 18, in Smithfield, Rhode Island. The United States Civil War Index notes that at some point between 1861-1865, Jarvis served as a private, in Company F of the 9th Regiment, Rhode Island Infantry.  By 1898, Jarvis met a turning point in his life when he was charged with the murder of Brinton Rounds. Born in 1863, Brinton was the son of Arnold and Marcy Rounds of Foster, Rhode Island. According to the 1885 State Census, his listed occupation was a farm laborer in Foster.

 In October of 1898,  Brinton was stabbed to death, and Jarvis was charged with his murder. I could not find any further details on the circumstances of the case,  but I did find that Jarvis was acquitted of all charges.

 His name was well “known  around the state” as the newspaper stated, “as the man who stabbed Brinton Rounds at Foster, in October, 1898.”  So how did Jarvis Smith die? His body was found, laying face down in a “rickety shed along the highway,” by two men who were “passing along the road leading from Round Top to Douglas.”  The shed was on the property of the old Arnold Estate. The Butterworth family was notified and Dr. Wilcox was called. When the doctor finally arrived, he ascertained the Jarvis had died from natural causes, predominately exposure to the elements after passing out from extreme drunkenness.

The 1900 census lists Jarvis as having worked for William Mowry in Smithfield as a laborer at Mowry’s steam sawmill. The newspaper stated that “since his trial for the murder of Brinton Rounds, he had been working at various things in Foster and Burrillville.”  The two weeks prior to his death, Jarvis had worked at a sawmill in Douglas. The Saturday before his death, he went on a bender lasting several days, eating little to nothing and drinking his cares away. Jarvis was 57 years old when he died, with no wife or children of his own. The final words of his obituary notice stated, “He was possessed of rather more than usual intelligence of his class and was a peaceable, kindly disposed citizen when sober.” —

So, we have learned that although there are a few deaths we can tie to the property, there are no documents of truly unusual types of deaths having occurred at the old Arnold Estate.  But what about the murder of Prudence Arnold that Lorraine Warren claimed took place in the pantry of the home?

The Uxbridge Tragedy, as the newspapers labeled it, was truly a very sad story, but it didn’t take place at the old Arnold Estate. Instead, it took place at the Richardson house in Uxbridge, Massachusetts in 1849. According to the Rochester Republican, William Knowlton, 22, cut the throat of 12-year-old Prudence Arnold, after she refused to marry him.

The Woonsocket Patriot also covered the story, adding that little Mary Thayer of Burrillville, was at the house with Prudence that day. Although Knowlton convinced Prudence to go upstairs, Mary remained downstairs and did not witness the actual act. She did say that when she saw Knowlton come down the stairs, she could see that he had a lot of blood on his hands. She ran up the stairs only to find Prudence laying on the floor, making noises. She eventually bled to death.

After apprehending Knowlton, the constable interrogated him. It was reported that Knowlton resolutely stated he had every intention to kill Prudence and followed through with it, because as he said, “love and jealousy would lead a man to do anything.” 

Some of the papers revealed that Knowlton was of low moral perception, and was prone to drinking a lot. The defense tried to use the insanity plea, but that failed in the end. Knowlton was found guilty of the murder of Prudence Arnold, convicted and sentenced to death by hanging.  Again, as horrific as this story may be, it did not take place at the Arnold Estate in Burrillville, Rhode Island.

Now that I have proven to you that none of the alleged murders or suicides took place at the old Arnold Estate, let’s look go back to Bathsheba’s story now and analyze how on earth this urban legend of sorts could have possibly started and taken on a life of its own over the years. 

For starters, you have to think back to when the rumors began.  The Kenyon family owned the property before the Perron’s bought it in 1971, and before that, the Kenyon’s ancestors, the Butterworth’s and even earlier, the Arnold’s had owned it since the 1700s.  Prior to the Perron family purchasing the property, there was no mention whatsoever of any sort of murders, witchcraft accusations or any sort of scandalous events tied to Bathsheba Sherman.

So were there any sort of terrifying stories in the local area that could have inspired the Bathsheba Sherman story? Yes. During my research of the history of Burrillville, I found another interesting tale about the Old Paul Place or "The Old Paul House."  It was said to be in ruins even at the time the book," Burrillville: As It Was, As It Is" was written in 1856. The home, or "castle" as it was called, was said to have been originally built and lived in by the Ballou family. Years later, Paul Smith and his family took up residence on the property.

“Not far from the center of the town, is a house, fast crumbling down, which has long been known as the above title ("Old Paul Place"). It was originally the residence of an ancient family of Ballou’s, a common name in this town.  A little to the east of the old castle are four graves where they were buried.

It was afterward occupied by Paul Smith. The old man met with many misfortunes which gives the place a romantic interest. His wife was insane for many years. She was confined in a lonely room, and with none of the appliances with which modern science and philanthropy soothe and improve the stricken mind, she sank into hopeless idiocy. One of the sons, an athletic young man, was engaged in a foot race in Slatersville, when he burst a blood-vessel and died in a short time.

Several families have resided there since Paul Smith died, but the edifice is at present forsaken,  the moss-grown roof has partly fallen, the massive chimney is breaking down, and the wild wind shrieks through the crazy fabric like the pitiful wail of its ruined  mistress. The forest is growing up all around it, and timersome do not like to frequent the place after nightfall. The raven croaks hoarsely from the open gable, and the twilight bat flits undisturbed through the forsaken and desolate apartments."---- "Burrillville: As It Was, As It Is." (Horace Keach, 1856)

Could this story have inspired part of the idea of the Bathsheba tale? Quite possibly. Not only does it speak of the mistress of the house becoming insane, but it speaks of the fact that many in the area were easily frightened by old, scary houses.  Then comes the story of Laura Sherman who is buried in her family cemetery on Buck Hill. Local teenagers have been flocking to this spot for decades due to the legend that if you circle her grave three times on a full moon, that she will appear.

The story about the Old Paul Place could have been passed down through the years and perhaps parts of that mixed with the old legend tripping tales of Laura Sherman’s grave on Buck Hill could have made for one big ghost story that has mistakenly become attached to the wrong person.

According to retired journalist and local historian Kent Spottswood, “This whole story is one of 1970’s folklore fantasy.”  Spottwood’s opinion is that after the publication of the Satanic bible, which was first published in 1969, that was when stories of devil worship really hit the mainstream. He also mentioned that many young women who were lonely and seeking power, turned to Wicca, becoming solitary practitioners of the craft, which became almost fashionable at the time.  It appears that someone, influenced by current events happening at that present time may have taken pieces of Burrillville history- real events, real people, and intertwined them with grossly fabricated, false stories. This not only sullied the reputation of Bathsheba Sherman, but all who were involved or lived on the property during those times.

“It’s not a matter of making up a theory and saying prove me wrong,” remarked Spottswood. “But that is exactly what has happened in the case of Bathsheba Sherman, and the old Arnold Estate’s history.”

The idea that out of all those years, one day this story just happened to come out of the woodwork to reveal itself is quite ludicrous. Bathsheba Sherman was not related to Salem witches, nor was she a witch. She was never suspected of witchcraft and was never accused of any crimes, murders or suspicious deaths. That entire idea was “conjured” up in the mind of someone either overly imaginative or delusional.  To make matters worse, once the rumors had spread, there was no taking them back.  Again, like the game of “telephone,” after this story was told and retold more and more, ridiculous claims have become attached to the story. And now we have the biggest fabrication of all, the film The Conjuring.

Kent Spottswood searched tirelessly for the history of both the Arnold property and Bathsheba Sherman’s life. At one point he even asked some of his lawyer friends to do some digging in the archives, in places the average person would not be allowed to look. After all the time spent searching for any shred of evidence that would back up the slanderous claims about Bathsheba, they “came up with nothing.”   There are no inquest records about any deaths of infants in the care of Bathsheba or of her own children dying of a suspicious nature. The facts are that there are no records in existence, because none of these events ever happened. According to the current owner of the old Arnold Estate property, Norma Sutcliffe, she also did thorough research on the home’s history and came to the same conclusion as Spottswood, that none of the accusations against Bathsheba ever took place as portrayed in the movie or Andrea Perron’s book.   

Norma insists that while visiting her house several years ago, Lorraine Warren walked around the home and told her, "This is such a loving home and the most wonderful place for the children.”  When asked by Sutcliffe why the Perron’s had experienced supernatural events and her family had not, Norma claims that Lorraine’s explanation was that certain dynamics within families can give rise to supernatural activity in a home. Whatever the case may have been, Norma and her husband have lived in the home since 1987, and besides the occasional creaking noises and doors being opened by drafty rooms, she states there hasn’t been any events she would credit to the spirit realm.  “Nothing has ever happened here that could not be explained by other things,” Norma added. Sutcliffe went on to mention that she told the same thing to the Providence Journal back in 1997. 

I received a package of sorts from Norma  while working on this chapter in my book. Among the many invaluable newspaper clippings dating back as early as 1849, up to the present day, I found a clipping of what appears to be a magazine article with the year “1985” scribbled on the margin. The headline of the piece read, “Fashion Model Meets Headless Ghost.”  At first glance it looked like a common tabloid story you might find while standing in line at the grocery store, but as I read the text of it something else became quite clear, it was all too familiar. 

The article described a couple by the names of Carol and Ronald Barron, giving accounts of their horrific experiences in their Rhode Island home.  The photograph actually shows the Old Arnold Estate, although the names were obviously changed for the article. From vicious attacks to horrific sounds, it details accounts one by one, as claimed by the lady of the house, Carol Barron, a former fashion model turned housewife. It highlights that the Warrens came to the rescue, per the Barron family’s request, but that although the Warrens tried to do their best to rid the home of the evil entities, their efforts failed.

 The most intriguing part of this article was towards the end, when Ed Warren was quoted mentioning that the 300 year old home had seen tragedies, such as suicides, drownings and even murder.  He also went on to mention that an 98-year-old woman had lived there who practiced witchcraft and as a gift to the Devil, she murdered her own child by driving a nail through it’s head.  Interesting, isn’t it?

Another thing to mention is that the article was written by a journalist named Tony Spera. Upon further  investigating, it turns out that he is Ed and Lorraine Warren’s son-in-law. The article then ends with the mention that the home was set to be buried under a huge reservoir planned to be constructed.  Of course we all know that didn’t take place, as the house still stands today. 

If this was the same home, and the Warrens claimed it was so plagued with problems that the only option was for it to be buried underwater, why did Lorraine tell Norma years later that the home was such a lovely place?  I think only  Lorraine Warren has the answer for that one.

My personal opinion on the “haunting” aspect of the home is that no one truly knows what happened in the house, except for the people who lived there at the time.  The fact that current owners of the home claim they do not experience negative activity leads me to believe that perhaps whatever was plaguing the Perron family while living there was brought there and left  when they moved.  Still, this chapter is not meant to be about the paranormal, but instead it is about the true history of the property and of Bathsheba.

Bathsheba Sherman was buried at the cemetery in Harrisville, alongside her first husband Judson, her children and other immediate family members. Her funeral was officiated by Rev. A. H. Granger, who was a well known and highly respected Baptist minister. Had Bathsheba been suspected of any sort of wrongdoing in her lifetime, there would have been a mention of it somewhere.

Another thing to consider, if such suspicion of her being involved in any sort of satanic rituals or witchcraft had been raised, she would have been shunned by the community and would not have had the full honors bestowed on her as a member of her church in her beloved hometown. 

To give any entity an identity and attach to them the name or stories of people who were once actual living human beings and then sully them in death is so very wrong.  This has happened to poor Bathsheba, and for far too long. My job as a writer is to sift through the story and get to the raw facts. Sometimes we find out that stories are not fact based, and so we have the responsibility to provide the true information to the public in order to set the stories straight. I truly hope that with this chapter, and the information I have posted on my blog, that Bathsheba’s true story will finally be told correctly.

I also hope that the stories of Susan, Edwin, John and Prudence Arnold will be told accurately, as well as the story of Jarvis Smith’s life and death.  A wise man once  told me, “It’s how we treat our dead that defines who we are.” So let us all treat these stories with the care and respect that they so deserve."

----------- Copyright 2016, "Stories of the Forgotten: Infamous, Famous & Unremembered," by J'aime Rubio 

( ISBN-13:  978-1523981175)  www.jaimerubiowriter.com

All rights reserved.  J'aime Rubio identified as the AUTHOR and PUBLISHER of the work in accordance with all U.S. Copyright laws. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written permission by the author/publisher.

Source Citations:

U.S. Census, 1850, 1860, 1870, 1880, 1885, 1900; United States Civil War Index, 1861-1865; Marriage, Death records from Burrillville Town Hall, Vol. 1. Deaths, 1854-1900, Vol. 1-A Marriages, 1846-1900; Bathsheba Sherman’s Will, (5-BUR-5-511), Public Records; Black Book of Burrillville; “Burrillville: As It Was, As It Is,” Horace Keach, 1856; Thayer Family Genealogy Records, Ancestry & Family Search; Information courtesy of Norma Sutcliffe: Copies of obituaries in archived Burrillville Gazette and Pascoag Herald, 1885, 1866, 1903, 1900, 1911, “Fashion Model Meets Headless Ghost,” Tony Spera, (unknown publisher), 1985; Providence Journal, 1997; Harrisville Cemetery records; U.S. Register of Historic Places; Find-a-grave; Baptist Missionary Magazine, 1848; Rochester Republican, 1849; Woonsocket Patriot, 1849; “House of Darkness, House of Light”- Andrea Perron, Author; Interview with Norma Sutcliffe, owner of Old Arnold Farm; Interview with Kent Spottswood, retired Journalist and local Historian.