Talk:Ronald DeFeo Jr./Archive 1

Untitled
Tried to make the page sound more neutral. I would have liked to give the murder and the trial a separate section, but I don't have the resources. IzzyFerret 01:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know specifically what year DeFeo Jr. was born, but it couldn't have been 1941. That would mean he was in his 30s during the killings, when his parents were in their early 40s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.42.16.185 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Ronnie DeFeo Jr. was born on September 26th, 1951. In and out of psychiatric treatment due at least in part to abuse and a chronic drug user. (user ghost_boy) 10 June 2006 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghost boy (talk • contribs) 04:42, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

According to the article, DeFeo, Jr., "enraged at [his sister for Dawn killing their younger siblings], knocked her unconcious onto the bed, and as she lay there, he shot her in the head." Yet, if the crime scene photos from http://www.ogrish.com/archives/amityville_crime_scene_photos_victims_murdered_by_ronnie_defeo_Apr_13_2005.html are real, this seems improbable, as the photo labeled "Dawn - age 18" shows her lying on her bed underneath her sheets/blankets. Panastasia 21:14, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

"Attempts to contact the two alleged accomplices have failed, since one died in January 2001 and the other is said to have entered a witness protection program." Sorry, but this line bugs me. Who are the "alleged accomplices?" Where else is there any mention of them? Dave —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tprdave (talk • contribs) 02:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * accomplices were "Augie Degenero and Bobby Kelske", "Richard Romondoe" was also there but as a witness only. 194.207.86.26 (talk) 11:24, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

controversy after 2000?
"Until 2000, controversy surrounded the murders."

This needs to be addressed. There is no resolution in the controversy after Sept. 2000, since no one believes him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxedesa (talk • contribs) 20:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

172.203.1.125 writes on 26 October 2006: so can someone tell me what the controversy is, why would defoe jnr lie about killing his parents?? what would be the benefit, i undertsand that no shots were heard blah blah blah but why would there have been lies about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.1.125 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

There are several components of the "controversy".

1)Ronald DeFeo has attempted to have his conviction overturned and to be paroled by minimizing his guilt. The first account he gave in 1986 was that Dawn killed their father then Louise killed all his siblings and as Louise was trying to commit suicide he shot her in the heat of passion. Since 1990 he has tried to place the blame on his sister claiming she killed everyone else and that he only killed Dawn by accident or alternatively in the heat of passion.  In 1990 he filed a 440 motion to have his conviction vacated.  This was his last appeal chance.  He lost and thus now his only chance at freedom is through parole. He has continued to minimize his participation to try to get parole but has been turned down each time most recently in 2013.

2)To try to support his story at his 440 Hearing Ronald made being married at the time of the murders, made up having a brother in law and forged an affidavit from his nonexistent brother in law to corroborate his account. Ronald's account was that he was with his brother in law in the basement while Dawn and an unknown assailant murdered their parents. The assailant left before he could see who it was. Dawn then killed their siblings and Ronald killed Dawn by accident.

In fact Ronald met his wife in 1985 and married her in 1989. He doctored a marriage certificate from her first marriage to make it appear that they married prior to the murders. His wife, Geraldine Gates, had a notary friend illegally notarize the affidavit from her nonexistent brother. The authorities investigated the claims and uncovered the fraud. Geraldine Gates signed an affidavit admitting: that it was all a lie, that the marriage certificate was forged, that she had several affidavits illegally notarized and so forth. She admitted that she didn't know him at the time of the murders. Her affidavit was provided to the court to dispute his testimony. Naturally the court ruled against him.

3) Depsite Geraldine Gates admitting in her affidavit and during their 1993 divorce that she met him in 1985 and didn't know him prior to this, she told Ric Osuna that she married him in 1974 and knew the murder victims and made up various tales that she supposedly witnessed. These accounts were presented in Osuna's book.

4) Ronald denies telling Osuna anything. Thus it is unclear if he actually told Osuna the murder account that Osuna published or whether that acocunt was actually from Geraldine or made up jointly by Geraldine and Osuna. Many accounts in the book are clearly credited to Geraldine Gates

5)In Shattered Hopes Geraldine Gates claimed she married DeFeo in 1970 and thus has tells even more tales claiming to have intimately know the murder victims for years. Objective evidence in fact proves she was living in upstate New York married to a man named Joseph Pisani from 1973 until well after Ronald's conviction but none of this is addressed by Osuna's book or in Shattered Hopes. Geraldine's claims are presented in these works as true without ever seriously vetting any of her claims because then they would have to admit she made up everything.

These are really the most important controversies to be aware of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.197.222 (talk) 23:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

The controversy about the DeFeo murders is such a large subject that it is hard to give a brief summary. When Ronald DeFeo Jr. went into Henry's Bar and announced the killings he knew that his parents and the rest of his family were dead. The story about the mob hit man Louis Falini being in the house was shown to be untrue, and since then anything that Ronald DeFeo has said about the events on the night of the murders has been regarded with caution. The question of why Ronald DeFeo would lie about the killings is one that can be addressed only by a court, but when faced with a situation where he was the only person alive when all of the other members of his immediate family were dead, he would clearly have a lot of explaining to do before a jury, particularly when he had access to a Marlin .35 rifle. The article is intended to show that there have been controversies about the 1975 court verdict, but that Ronald DeFeo has been unable to show that other people were involved.--Ianmacm 18:41, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

The controversies section needs major reworking. It should flow in chronological fashion for starters. The true start of the controvery is 1986 with the Newsday article. Having that at the end makes no sense. The story from that article morphed into the later stories and was used in an attempt to get the judgment vacated. A motion to vacate the judgment was filed in 1990 based on the tale that evolved from the 1986 article and in 1992 there was an evidentiary hearing. Ultimately the motion was denied. In bother the article and motion Ronald DeFeo used Geraldine Gates to assist him. She is the person who lied about being his wife. She is the main source of most of the information in the Night The DeFeo's Died and the upcoming movie by Katzenbach. All her firsthand accounts are bogus she on;y met DeFeo in 1985. That she is a source and her unreliable status should be mentioned somehow. The allegations about Augie and Kelske are coming from her. She is inaccurately referred to by Osuan as Geraldine DeFeo to try to give her lies more believability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 20:19, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Parole
One source says that Ronald DeFeo has a parole appeal every two years and that he had an appeal in 2005 turned down. I have not been able to confirm this, so any help would be welcome here.--Ianmacm 16:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC) ---Contact Has anyone ever tried to write to Defeo in prison and see if he writes back and what he says? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.153.5.6 (talk • contribs) 06:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

the thing about appeals is that you can only have 3, so i dont think he has a parole appeal every 2 years, but he may have done at some point —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.28.246 (talk) 01:10, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Henry's Bar
I removed this edit:


 * At around 6:30 on the evening of November 13, 1974, Ronald DeFeo, Jr. burst into Henry's Bar [incorrect. The name of the bar was "Dakota Rose"] (I grew-up in Massapequa through the 60's and 70's, ergo: 1st hand knowlege... Robert Arnsperger, NC)

This is a personal comment, and it is also contradicted by a wide range of internet sources about the DeFeo case (eg ). As with all statements of fact on Wikipedia, this is subject to review, but I have gone with the existing sources for the time being. -- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 14:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Henry's became the Dakota Rose subsequent to the murders and trial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 23:07, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Amityville osuna.jpg
Image:Amityville osuna.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Drugging of the victims
I removed this edit due to concerns about verifiability:

"However, the New York Times reported that there was a possibility of barbituates being secretly administered to the family with their dinner the night the murders happened."

Although it has been suggested that the victims were drugged prior to the killings, the official toxicology report said that they were not. A search of the New York Times website did not bring up anything to confirm the statement above, and it is a statement that would require a reference. -- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 08:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

When a story says a possibility it intrinsicly is saying there is uncertianty. It simply was suggesting a possiblity not a statement of fact. There were many articles like this alleging possiiblities.

Conspiracy theoriests including Osuana and Katzenbach keep seizing on the early suspicions and making the circular argument that these suspicions are proof that the suspicions were true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 23:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The shooting
Re: The exact sequence of events during the shooting has never been established, and some of the reports about it contain an element of speculation. It is uncontroversial that all of the victims were found lying on their stomachs in bed, but the full facts of the shooting may never be known.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 09:07, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

The sequence that Ronald DeFeo repeatedly gave during his confession is the order that police believe is the correct order and also what most serious students believe was likely the correct order. Ronald Sr, then Louise, then Allison, then Marc, then John and finally Dawn. The layout of the house lends itself to this as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 18:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The murder section leaves much to be desired. It tells about finding the bodies but not how the murders went down. The controversy secty provides alternative accounts of the murder. At minimum the official account that the controversies are challenging should be posted. The murder section should detail the account provided in his confession. The part about where the evidence was disposed of an found should also be listed as well as how they found the evidence because he told them where to find it. The murder section starts out like in High Hopes talking about the bar and the bodies being found then stops basically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.197.222 (talk) 00:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Keep in mind that it is not as simple as "official account" vs "alternates" because the killer himself constantly changed his story from day one, and is still changing it to this day. It seems likely that his first admission of being the sole killer is probably the most truthful version, simply because that is the version he had the least time to think about. He gave it immediately after the police found serious discrepancies in his initial "the mob did it" story -- and the truth is the easiest thing to remember when you don't have time to make up something else. All his other changed stories were after he'd had a long time to make lots more things up, comparatively speaking. 12.31.187.178 (talk) 22:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

transpired or admitted
Re: The words "transpired" and "admitted" are both less than ideal here. Police found the murder weapon in a nearby drain, but at the moment I can't find a reliable source for the article. DeFeo's accounts have been inconsistent, so his confessions and retractions mean very little. This needs some more research.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 13:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The wording may not be ideal, but nothing "later transpired that after the murders", as in attempting to say that he either did this after the murders, or confessed or admitted or said that he did this after the murders. My issue is with the use of the word "transpired", which is improper. Perhaps it is just as well to say "After the murders, he [did this]." Wildhartlivie (talk) 14:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

The murder weapon was found in the mouth of the Amityville Canal not in a drain. The shell casings and bloody clothing was disposed of in a stormdrain in Brooklyn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 18:13, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Dawn's nightgown
The following comment, "It has been reported that during the original police investigation, traces of gunpowder were found on Dawn's nightgown, indicating that she may have discharged a firearm" needs to be removed. Not only does it not cite what these "reports" are, but I have find no source other than the discredited Osuna book claiming gunpowder was found on her nightgown. Also, she was under the blankets on her stomach, how could she shoot a gun in such a position? Or are we supposed to believe that after killing her family, she calmly tucked herself into bed completely ignoring her brother still being alive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.58.124 (talk) 18:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

It is an absolute fact that the police found unburned gunpowder on her nightgown specifically the shoulder right under her ear where the bullet entered. I have copies of the police inventory log that reports this as well as the ballistics lab report that actually analyzed the sample. It was determined to be unburned gunpowder. The part that needs to be removed is the part that says this indicates she may have discharged a firearm. There not only is no source for such a claim it is objectively wrong. Unburned gunpowder indicates being near the muzzle of a wepaon hat discharges not firing a weapon. The only situation where a person who fires a weapon will have unburned gunpowder is where they shoot themself.

The test for firing a weapon is a paraffin test which tests for the presence of primer gunshot residue. The ME testified at trial that he conducted paraffin tests on all of the victims hands and the result was negative. This is explored in Mentally Ill in Amityville by Will Savine on pages 43-46. Thus the unsourced claim that police never investigated the possibility of Dawn firing a weapon is not only unsourced but patently false. The trial transcript contains testimony about this veyr issue fromt he ME and Della Penna. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 18:20, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

"Ronald DeFeo, Jr. had a stormy relationship with his father, but why the entire family was killed remains unclear"
This statement should be deleted or altered. For one, Lutz also had a poor relationship with his mother. Second, the sentence ignores that Lutz was a violent, hateful, and anti-social man. Also, its simplistic implication that people always have a reason to kill and that there are never any senseless killings is blatantly false to anyone who has lived on the planet for a few years. Yes, there are controversies around the case but much of the info in this article seems to be an attempt to create more controversy where it does not exist. Why did he kill his entire family? Because some people are just sick bastards, that's why. Duh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.58.124 (talk) 18:47, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I think the reason why it remains "unclear" is simply because the only person who really knows is the killer himself, and he has never kept to one straight story about anything, including why he did it. He asked the police about how to file an insurance claim, which implies greed as the motive, and also suggests why he'd kill not just the father but everyone else as well -- too many inheritors to share with. However, he also said his father was abusive and everybody hated him, etc., which implies simple hatred as a motive, but fails to explain why he'd kill the others. So there's no ONE explanation because the only person who really knows won't give anybody a straight answer. 12.31.187.178 (talk) 22:52, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

More
"Louise DeFeo and her daughter Allison were reportedly the only victims who were awakened by the gunfire at the time of their deaths,[4] but according to Suffolk County Police the victims were all found lying on their stomachs in bed."

Yes, but so? Louise and Allison were only awake for a few seconds or so, is it not possible that once they were shot they feel back on to their stomachs? Again, more attempts to create more controversy than there is. Also, I keep reading "police determined that the whole family was asleep" over and over again. Huh? Since when do police have the technology to figure out whether a dead body was asleep or awake when it was shot? Last time I checked, there is is no way to determine, especially by mere sight alone, if a deceased person was asleep or awake when they died unless you saw their actual death yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.58.124 (talk) 19:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

You are right that the contradiction needs to be fixed the article should not claim they were awake in one part yet in a nother say none were awake. Moveover it is improper to use a but in between discussing them being awake and yet on their stomachs they are no tmutually exclusive. It is possible to be awake yet still lying on your stomach aand indeed that is what police believed happened. The work "and" not "but" is appropriate.

Police determined Allison had unburned gunpowder in her eyes. This indicates her eyes were open at the time the shot was fired. This is why police say there is evidence she was awake and the prosecution stated she was awake. Most people do not sleep with their eyes open. While her stomach was facing down, her face was not face down in her pillow it was to the side facing the door. People would be at risk of suffocation if while lying on their stomachs they had their face buried in a pillow. She thus was lying down on her stomach but opened her eyes and looked at the gun most likely as it fired.

The trajectory of the bullets indicates that Louise DeFeo was leaning on her right side when fired. It is believed she was in the process of lifting herself up when she was shot which would indicate she was awake. That is why police believe she was awake. She started to lift herself up but did not get very far and then fell right back down on her stomach after being shot. There is no evidence of a similar nature to indicate the others were awake at the time shot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 18:31, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

House photo
A photo of the house was deleted in this edit While the house is a different color and the upstairs windows have changed, it remains largely the same in structural appearance. In most normal circumstances you would think that such a basic image should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Americasroof (talk • contribs) 17:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * In an ideal world, I would like to include a contemporary press photo from 1974, eg this one, with the original "High Hopes" sign which became associated with the case. The trouble as usual is copyright. The Amityville 2005 photo relates to a different era for the house, and is also somewhat unfair to the current owner, who has to put up with tourists gawping on a regular basis. The 2005 photo does not really illustrate the 1974 killings.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 17:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The current owner is heavily promoting it in order to sell it.Americasroof (talk) 18:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The house has been in the news recently but this is beyond the scope of the article, although it is mentioned in The Amityville Horror. We seem to risk overusing the 2005 photo, because it is already in The Amityville Horror and Amityville, New York. It does not really look like the house at the time of the DeFeo killings.-- ♦Ian Ma c  M♦  (talk to me) 18:46, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Why not use a crime scene photo of the house? The crime scene photos are available for reference use without worry. The SCPD is not going to order the photo taken down from a reference site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 23:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Bobby Kelske
The citation mentioning Bobby Kelske looks speculative and also contains the words "Many believe it’s true", which is not WP:V for a claim as important as this. This would require stronger sourcing to be in the article.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 09:49, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, Rick Osuna falls short of mentioning the alleged accomplices; we're pretty sure that one of them was Bob Kelske by the date of his death. However, original research policies prevent us for making any conclusions inside the article itself. Thank you and regards.--Darius (talk) 12:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

It is patently false that Osuna doesn't mention the alleged accomplices. Chapter 5 which starts on page 53 is explicitly devoted to the planning of the murders. Both Kelske and Augie Degenero are clearly mentioned taking part in the plannings and are discussed in the previous chapter as well. Their names are mentioned so many times that the part about unnamed accomplices can only be coming from someone who never read the book.

The part about Augie being in witness protection is rumor that also was false, page 88 of the book mentions this as unproven rumor:

"Although Fine’s unwillingness to help me locate Augie was a disappointment, I found it fit a pattern. I had heard from sources tied to organized crime that Augie Degenero, at one point, had either turned state’s evidence and was under some form of witness protection, or was dead. For all intents and purposes, he had completely disappeared."

Unsourced rumor is not fit to be printed in this article and if mentioned at all should be mentioned as being an unsourced rumor not fact. Saying he disappeared so must have died or gone into witness protection is not evidence that either is true.

For the record the mans real name was Augosto DeGennaro. He was not in Witness protection he simply moved to PA to be near his children. He was easy enough to locate by people using his correct name. Either the wrong name was used on purpose to prevent finding him or because Geraldine and or DeFeo Jr. did not know his real name. He died in 2011. Bobby Kelse died before the book was published thus never saw the allegations made against him by the book. DeFeo denies ever making these claims and this tale published by Osuna is not the version that DeFeo used at his hearing in 1992. DeFeo Jr sued Osuna for slander for falsely atributing these claims but the suit was dismissed because DeFeo Jr was deemed by the court as being defamation proof. he court said he had no good name to ruin. One of the elements of defamation is to ruin one's good name. Since he had no good name to ruin, lies can't hurt his good name. This effectively means people can lie freely about him at will without him having any legal recourse which is more reason to be careful about what to trust and post here.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 19:29, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Trial and conviction
This section is extremely sparse. More details about what was testified to and established at trial should be added. The part about DeFeo hearing voices in his head that ordered him to kill is not accurate. He claimed that he heard the voices of his family plotting against him and that he killed them in self-Defense. Trial Transcript P 5195. Naturally they were asleep so he can't have heard them plotting against him these voices of them plotting against him were in his head but not voices ordering him to kill. The voices ordering him to kill were conveniently made up by the haunting crowd though he did testify that he was handed a rifle by a pair of black hands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Recent edits
DeFeo's sentence had to be 6 years consecutive, not concurrent as the main article still states. I've noticed that others have pointed out the same thing but the article still states concurrent. If it was concurrent, he would have been out of jail a long time ago. Even if he did the full 25 year sentence (concurrently,) he still would have been out of prison in 2000. AngelynKrout (talk) 12:04, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Since this is a WP:BLP article, all substantial additions should have a reliable source. At the time of his trial, DeFeo admitted to the killings, and it was only much later in a 2000 interview that he implied that his sister Dawn was somehow involved. The claim that Dawn discharged a firearm is unlikely, and apparently rejected in this YouTube video. This cannot be used as a source because it looks like a copyright violation and original research. The names of the two alleged accomplices also need a reliable source, and if they are not given it is not a loss to the article.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

First of all the 2 accomplices are not unnamed or how would someone be able to make the claim that one was in witness protection and another died?

In the Night The DeFeo's died and various postings by Osuna before and after the book was published he made it very clear that the alleged accomplices were Bobby Kelske and Augie DeGennaro. In the book he referenced statements allegedly given to DeFeo's lawyer Jacob Siegfried by Frank Boyd and Augie DeGennaro though the names of both men were spelled wrong on these statements. Osuna claims that Ronald DeFeo and Geraldine Gates (who married Ronald DeFeo in 1989 while he was in prison even though she was already married to someone else at the time)provided these statements to him. They are obvious forgeries, had these men actually told him this they would have been called by the defense as witnesses. The alleged explanation that the lawyer planned to get these statements admitted into evidence by deposing himself further demonstrates they are forgeries there is no such thing as a lawyer deposing himself to get statements given to him into evidence. A lawyer must elicit testimony from witnesses it is impermissible to provide testimony. The allegations are that DeGennaro was to be the getaway driver and waited outside as Bobby Kelske helped commit the murders and shot Louise a second time with a Colt Python and then took the gun to Frank Boyd to have him melt it down and dispose of bloody rags.

Since DeGennaro denied this nonsense the false claim he was in witness protection was invented to explain away why he coudl not be interviewed and to discourage anyone else from attempting to interview him and his name was mispelled to try to make it harder to locate him. How would Osuna find out he was in Witness Protection? In fact he lived openely under his real name in PA near his children. He died in 2011 here is his obit

http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/timesleader/obituary.aspx?n=augustine-f-degennaro-augie&pid=148509079

The claim that police never investigated the line of inquiry about Dawn firing a gun is patently false and no source is listed because it is untrue. At trial Della Penna disinguished between PGSR and unburned powder and the ME testified that paraffin tests were performed on the victims and a number of oher people interviewed including Bobby Kelske. He testified the tests turned up negative. In Mentally Ill in Amittyville Will Savine discusses this on pages 43-46. If the video were a copyright violation then youtube woudl pull it. It is ok to use a snippet for certian reasons just not an entire video without permission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk) 15:18, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Sources are needed here. The claim about Dawn firing a gun was made many years later and is unlikely. The YouTube video has copyright and WP:OR issues.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 18:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Sources are needed for what? I posted a source which discusses the testomony of the ME and ballistics experts at trial. Will Savine's book that I listed as a source discusses how the ME testified that he did paraffin tests on the victims hands. I have the trial transcripts the book is correct tha the testified to such. Moreover the book discusses the whole issue of Della Penna's points about unburned powder including asking an expert to review and critique Della Penna's claims. What is unsourced is the claim that police never investigated the line of inquiry.

Moreover you are wrong about the timing, DeFeo's defense contended that Dawn fired a weapon prior to trial. The defense filed a pretiral motion to try to delay the trial and cited the belief that there were accomplices including the belief that Dawn had fired a weapon based on the unburned powder. The Defense had PI Herman Race testify that he neede dmore time to investigate the matter and thus wanted the trial date pushed back. The defense motion was denied by the court. However it proves that the issue was a concern ever since the defense first learned of the evidence about the unburned powder. What came about years later was the tale about Dawn killing the kids and in response Ronald killing Dawn.

Moreover the A&E video is not an original source it is a valid published documentary. Even if you don't want to have the youtube posting of the snippet you can't deny it should be able to be referenced as a source. This is the man who testified at trial as the ballistics expert and he was explaining on video what he testified about concerning the unburned powder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.0.249 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 15 April 2012 (UTC) ---

I rearranged the controversy section so that it flows more smoothly and makes more sense. The part about neighbors not hearing any gunshots seems to not have much relevance and be an oddball but I left it in anyway. It is also not entirely true. At least one neighbor acknowledged that in hindsight she had heard a at least 1 gunshot but wasn't sure what it was at the time she only recongized later that it was a gunshot. The windows were closed in the various houses so gunshots were muffled traveling house to house, it was late at night when people were sleeping, the gunshots were only intermittant but the dog was barking nonstop so when they did wake they heard the dog which was easy to recognize. All of these things combined are why the gunshots were not reported. While I could have put this in I figured why bother. At trial Ronald testified he heard no sound as he was shooting but I don't think anyone believes this and that it is necessary to explain why neighbors didn't call police saying they heard gunshots.

I also added some tidbits such as the version of events that Ronald provided during his 440 hearing. The section claims he has repeatedly changed his story, this should be documented by providing more of his various tales. Some wonder why he changed his story and how it helped him. Including the account he gave at the 440 motion provides that. It explains how he only took credit for killing Dawn and that he claimed it was an accident not murder. Thus he stated he murdered no one and deserved a new trial. I could have gone into more detail about his allegations at the 440 hearing such as mentioning how he tried to support his new account by inventing a fake brother in law named Richard Romondoe. He claimed this brother in law was with him as the murders occurred and could testify he was innocent. He forged a marriage certificate to pretend he married his wife in 1974, though they actually only married in 1989, forged an affidavit from Romondoe providing him wiht an alibi, had his wife get the affidavit illegally notarized by a friend and had her assert that her brother provided the affidavit but now they can't find him. The entire tale fell apart as police investigated and even Geraldine ended up admitting it was all a lie. I don't know if it would be too unwieldy to post all of this though. Then it would require going into more detail about the 440 motion ruling. Since this is supposed to be a bio page I don't know if that level of detail is appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.197.222 (talk) 00:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Most bio pages have a section on personal life including spouses this page doesn't. First Wife Geraldine Gates is a major player in the controversies of the case. Her claims are key to many of the conspiracy allegations that are made. The 1986 Article which began the controvery interviewed her as well as DeFeo and both assert they were married with a child, that they were living in New Jersey at the time of the murders and that he traveled to Amityville the night of the murders with her brother.

These allegations were made in court in a 440 motion filed by DeFeo to vacate his conviction. The evidence that was presented and rejected at this motion is much of the same claims made in Ric Osuna's book. It is essential to mention this and not to just pretend it appeared in 2000 suddenly and important to mention the evidence used by courts to reject it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.3.33 (talk) 17:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The question of Ronald DeFeo's alleged marriage to Geraldine is difficult because there have been various claims and counterclaims. In any case, court records should not be used as they fail WP:BLPPRIMARY.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 18:25, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

What is difficult? A marriage is an official government action. A marriage is undone by court order. Court records are the appropriate place to look for evidence of divorce. Government marriage records are the place to look for marriage records. It is fact that the only marriage record in existence between Geraldine and Ronald DeFeo Jr is the one from 1989 and that the divorce is from 1993. It is a fact that in 1990 under oath Geraldine signed an affidavit admitting the only marriage to Defeo was in 1989. It is a fact all of Gerladine's former husbands and her current husband who she married in 1978 gave police statements. It is a fact that that from 1973-76 she was married to Joseph Pisani and living in upstate NY with him and that the girl she claimed is Ron's was in fact born in NY. There are also deeds proving she was living in upstate NY with Pisani at the time of the murders. The claim it is not appropriate to mention any of the evidence and to just pretend her claims might be true is pathetic and unbecoming of a site that wants to be considered accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.3.33 (talk) 20:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I have seen a lot of this before, but did not add it to the article for two reasons:


 * Direct use of court records fails WP:BLPPRIMARY, and blog articles or personal websites citing court records are not much better. Wikipedia articles are based on reliable secondary sources.
 * Geraldine Gates is not a major player in the 1974 murders. The question of whether she was ever married to Ronald DeFeo, Jr. is not of absolute key importance when discussing the murders. If it was, there would be more mainstream media coverage mentioning it. This leads to an issue with due weight and WP:BLPNAME. There is also the possibility of a conflict of interest here.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 05:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Removal
This material was removed. The sources are:
 * Which is not ideal because it is self-published and relies on the word of Ronald DeFeo, Jr.
 * Stark, Thomas J.S.C: People v DeFeo Memorandum Denying Motion To Vacate Conviction.dated January 6, 1993, p. 3-4 is a WP:PRIMARY source.
 * New York Supreme Court DeFeo v. DeFeo.159 Misc. 2d 490; 605 N.Y.S.2d 202; 1993 is also a primary source.

It should be said that I am not denying that Ronald DeFeo, Jr. attempted to drag in other people while attempting to prove his innocence in the November 1974 shootings. However, this material has a range of issues including WP:BLPPRIMARY, WP:SPS, WP:DUE and WP:BLPNAME. What is needed here is reliable secondary sources mentioning this material.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 11:54, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Everything in the Newsday Article is his word. If you are going to cite the Newsday article about his changed claims then you need to cite what it claims in full not just little snippets. Moreover what he claimed at the 440 Hearing is significant. The controversy presented in Ric Osuna's Book comes from these claims. Evaluating their accuracy requires knowing about the claims. They are the controversy.

This is from the Newsday Article:

''This is the new story of the murders told by DeFeo and the woman he calls his wife:

His father, DeFeo and others said, was a violent man who often beat his wife. He gave DeFeo all the money he wanted, and DeFeo supplemented that allowance by running a stolen-outboard-motor ring. Ronald Jr., usually called Butch, got away from his family as often as he could and spent his money buying drinks and impressing people in bars in Amityville, Brooklyn, Manhattan and New Jersey.

"One way or another, Ronnie found a way to escape," said Geraldine. "If the drinks didn't make him numb, he'd put the needle in his arm."

It was on one of his bar visits, just before Thanksgiving, 1973, that DeFeo claims he met Geraldine Rullo, who had grown up in Long Branch, N.J., and already had two daughters from a relationship with another man.

One night, she was in Greenwich Village with a friend and stopped at a place called The Ninth Circle. DeFeo offered to buy her a drink. She resisted. "At first, I didn't really like Ronnie," she said. "I thought, what an arrogant, brash person he was. But he persisted and persisted and persisted."

The drink led to dating. Despite his swaggering way, she said she found something to love. "Ronnie DeFeo is a very sweet, tender, loving, giving young man - he really is," she said. "I saw all the big macho image he did was a facade."

Before long, Geraldine was pregnant. She and DeFeo claim their daughter was born in New Jersey on Aug. 21, 1974. But there is no record of her birth on that day, or any day in 1974, at the state registrar of vital statistics.

Once the child was born, they claim, marriage followed. "My father just about forced me into doing it," DeFeo said. The marriage supposedly took place on Oct. 17, 1974, at the Garfield Grant Hotel in Long Branch, not far from her home in Elberon, N.J. Geraldine produced a photocopy that she says is their marriage certificate, but no such certificate is on file in the records maintained by the City of Long Branch or the State of New Jersey. The city magistrate whose name appears on the photocopy, Thomas J. Baldino Jr., said in a telephone interview that he left the city's service in 1964 and stopped acting as a justice of the peace. "I did not perform any {marriages} after 1964," he said.

By late 1974, DeFeo said he was spending much of his time at Geraldine's home in Elberon and very little in Amityville. "I was never home," he said. "If I wasn't with Gerry, I'd be out running around someplace."

On the evening of Nov. 12, 1974, DeFeo said, he was in Elberon with Geraldine, her children and her brother, Richard Romondoe. "I was drinking all day with her brother," he said. "I was playing around with the heroin, which was my regular."

At about 8 p.m., Louise DeFeo called. She wanted her son home right away. "She was screaming," Geraldine said. "She said, `Dawn is fighting with Daddy.' "

The fight was triggered by Dawn's desire to move to Florida to be with her boyfriend, DeFeo claims. Before the murders, Dawn spoke to a classmate, Beverly Nonnewitz, whose mother cleaned the DeFeo house. She asked Nonnewitz to take her with her to Florida. "She asked me numerous times," Nonnewitz said in a recent interview.

But, DeFeo said, "There was no way my father was going to let her go to Florida."

The father's violence was common knowledge. He was a powerfully built man of about 280 pounds, and he often used that bulk on his wife, DeFeo and others said. Roger Nonnewitz, Beverly's father, said: "It must have been hell for the people living there with this man." William Weber, who represented DeFeo at the trial, agreed. "It was the most crazy family you could imagine," said Weber.

One source of the problem, DeFeo said, was Louise's close relationship with her father, Michael Brigante, and the family's dependence on him. Brigante paid the mortgage on the Amityville house, employed both Ronald Sr. and Jr. at his Buick dealership in Brooklyn, and showered his daughter with gifts. When she asked for a bottle of perfume, her father would send a case. When she asked for a washer-dryer, he bought her two.

Geraldine said that even Butch, despite his animosity toward his father, once said: "How the hell can my father be a man when her father's always there?"

In the last weeks of her life, Louise DeFeo became more and more upset for a variety of reasons, including her husband's violence and what she considered his dishonesty at the car dealership. "They were ready to get a divorce," DeFeo said of his parents.

"She wanted to die," said Linnea Nonnewitz, Louise's housekeeper and confidante. "She wanted to put her head in the oven." Just a short time before she died, Louise DeFeo had a premonition, Nonnewitz said: "She said to me, `Linn, I'm preparing you. Something so tragic is going to happen.' "

DeFeo said: "My mother's out of her mind. She's running around making statements, `You're all better off dead.' "

When she phoned on Nov. 12 and asked that DeFeo come home, he and Romondoe drove to Amityville. "My brother-in-law came home with me to the house, because I was a mess," DeFeo said. He said they found his father and sister embroiled in a long, angry quarrel. "Then she picked up a knife and tried to kill him. I took the knife away from her." He said he gave her his car keys and told her to disappear and cool off.

His plan was to give Dawn some of the $38,000 he had stashed away from his theft ring and send her to Florida. "This was the last straw," he said. "After that knife incident, I seen it all. I didn't like that at all."

Dawn returned before 11 p.m., he said. "Her and my mother had words. My father yelled something smart out of his room."

DeFeo claims that he and Romondoe were in the basement, playing pool and watching television with the sound turned very low. He left the door open to the upper part of the house. He called Geraldine to tell her they'd be home soon, but Romondoe wanted to stay and watch a war movie called "Castle Keep."

`WE HEARD a noise," DeFeo said, "but I can't tell you it was a gunshot. . . We came up and went in the foyer. We stood there maybe two min utes. We didn't hear nothing. So we went back downstairs."

Later, as they were in the hallway, getting ready to leave, he said, they heard a gunshot and rushed upstairs.

"The lamp on my mother's side of the bed was on," DeFeo claimed. "There was a rifle on the floor in the hallway. . . . My mother is laying in the bed, shot. There is a .38-caliber Smith & Wesson right there, her handgun. She had one hand on her chain, saying, `Oh, my God, Butch.' I'm looking at my father, see two holes in his back.

"I picked the rifle up. I hit the lever and an empty cartridge jumped out. I shot my mother. My mother was already shot. I was mad. I just went out of it."

He and Romondoe looked into the other bedrooms. "We went from room to room," DeFeo said. "Everybody was dead. . . . I was sick.There's no doubt in my mind that Dawn killed my father. My mother killed Dawn and the kids."

He said that Romondoe started going throughout the house, picking up cartridge casings and cleaning up evidence. "He was trying to protect me," DeFeo said. "That was the first words out of his mouth: `They're going to hang this whole thing on you and me, we're going to get electrocuted,' all that crazy stuff."

Geraldine said that Romondoe was willing to corroborate DeFeo's story, but he left town on business. "He called and he said he was afraid to talk . . . because the cops would pick him up as an accessory," she said. Later, Romondoe said by telephone that he was willing to be interviewed, but he did not keep the appointment or explain why. They got back to Elberon at about 4 a.m., Geraldine said. Her brother took two bottles of liquor from under the sink and disappeared into his room upstairs. DeFeo simply said to her, "Later," and left. He said he went to Brooklyn and bought two bottles of Dewar's scotch, then went to Harlem and bought some heroin. "Somewhere along the line, I forgot everything that happened," he said.

But he ended up back in the Amityville house that evening, and what had happened there was all still very real. "It was like a nightmare," he said. "I almost defecated all over myself."

It was then that he ran to Henry's Bar, nearby on Merrick Road, and gathered some friends to come back to the house with him. Shortly afterwards, police began a long interrogation, during which DeFeo told them that he had shot everyone in his family. "It all started so fast," he told Lt. Robert Dunn and Det. Dennis Rafferty. "Once I started, I just couldn't stop."'' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.3.33 (talk) 15:37, 11 June 2014 (UTC) --

What is the point of linking to this article and mentioning some things claimed in it but not mentioning the most controversial claims in a section supposedly devoted to these controversies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.3.33 (talk) 15:37, 11 June 2014 (UTC)


 * This still has problems with WP:BLPPRIMARY, WP:BLPNAME and WP:DUE. The need to cite original court documents to include this goes against WP:BLPPRIMARY. Mentioning peripheral players by name violates WP:BLPNAME. Wikipedia articles are written more conservatively than blogs, personal websites and books designed to stir up controversy.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:34, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

There seems to be a complete misunderstanding by some here of what a reliable source is. Why is a website created by Ric Osuna that fails to contain primary documents and who posts claims sourced to someone who lied about knowing the victims and made up interacting with them a valid source whereas a site that compiles primary documents and evidence is not considered a valid source? At minimum a facebook page of an organization with with primary documents qualifies as a valid external link.

Why is opinion from Joe Nichol posted on his website a valid thing to post but not a site with primary evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.54.33 (talk) 16:14, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Sentence and parole
DeFeo was given six consecutive sentences of 25 years to life. The sentencing was done this way so that if any of the individual murder charges was overturned on appeal, he would still be facing a minimum of 25 years in prison. The part about his next parole hearing being in July 2013 needs to have a source.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Sourcing on the sentence is here. DeFeo was not given one sentence for all six murders. If the judge had done this and he had been cleared for one of the murders, he would automatically have been released. Some of the sourcing on this issue is not very accurate, but the correct sentence is as given in the article, which is six consecutive sentences of 25 years to life.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 12:01, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

This is incorrect. Had Defeo been sentenced to consecutive life terms, he would not have been eligible for parole for 150 years. His 6 life sentences are running concurrently.Please see the New York State Department of Corrections website, inmate lookup. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ken2112 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

For the record there is no such thing as getting one sentence for multiple crimes. You receive a sentence for each count. Naturally each murder was a separate count. Sentences run either consecutively or concurrently. Consecutively gives the most time behind bars. Concurrent sentences means they run the same time so in effect you are really only serving for the longest sentence. Most sentences are concurrent it is rare that conditions allow sentencing to be consecutive for crimes that are related. Had sentencing been consecutive then he would have faced more jailtime not less even if one count were overturned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.197.222 (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2013 death?
The edit stating that he died on February 12, 2013, was sourced to findagrave.com, which is not a reliable source. Given the amount of media coverage of the recent death of Richard Ramirez, it is unlikely that DeFeo would die without one mainstream media source mentioning the fact. The death of a person in a WP:BLP article should never be reported without a reliable source.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 05:45, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

February 2014
Re this edit. The exact sequence of events in the six killings has never been established clearly, and the article should not attempt to fill in the gaps with speculation. Ronald DeFeo, Jr's version of events has varied considerably over the years and he is not a reliable source as to what happened.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 19:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Ronald DeFeo, Jr. and marriage to Nissa Burkhalter
Re this edit. As explained at User talk:Nrbdefeo, as a general rule people should avoid editing Wikipedia articles about themselves per WP:AUTO. On the question of the marriage, WP:CITINGIMDB says that IMDb is not a suitable source for statements about living persons. Wedding photos would be a form of WP:PRIMARY source material. The claim that this is DeFeo's third marriage is controversial, because there are various primary documents disputing that Geraldine was ever officially married to him. as she has claimed to be married to someone else at the time, despite a divorce being granted in 1993. This is an area which needs reliable secondary sourcing, not primary documents or the recollections of the people involved. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be any secondary sourcing online (newspapers etc) reporting the marriage of DeFeo and Nissa Burkhalter in 2012. This leads to an issue with verifying the statement, as even if it is true, it would need a source.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 07:30, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Moved here from the article:

"Ronald DeFeo married June 27, 2012 to Nissa Burkhalter of South Carolina [imdb] This is Ronald DeFeo's third Marriage. I do not know how to communicate to the folks that take my news edits about DeFeo down, which is why I'm replying to you all here. I do have a wedding certificate, and wedding photos, that I want to share. When I type in Ronald DeFeo in the Google bar and see a box to the right of the screen showing his wives, it hurts my feelings that it isn't accurate. For example, it reflects Geraldine Gates was his wife in 1969, while I have documentation that said the two hand never met until he was incarcerated, and Geraldine was married to her brother Gerald Gates in 1969, thus, technically making this marriage a fake, and eventually the courts ruled that they had to have their scam of a marriage divorced; they were not legally married. His first wife is Barbara Pucoo(m. 1994–1999), Ronald's second wife is Tracey DeFeo (m.2004). Not long after his second divorce to Tracey, Ronald married Nissa Burkhalter on June 27, 2012, however Wikipedia will not make the appropriate corrections without proof. I have wedding photos, our marriage certificate. So from now on, for those who maintain my husbands Wikipedia, how and where do I communicate with you. This site is too complex and I have tried to reach out to those that keep a close eye on proper editing. This site is too complex. I have tried to upload photos, which resulted into two blank boxes. I want to see the changes not only on the Wikipedia website, but also when Ronald DeFeo is typed into the Google bar, to the left is a list of websites, and to the right a great big box of images of he and his family. I'm his family now, and I want our wedding picture there. I'm publishing his biography/ part autobiography. Please, someone help me get the box containing his last wife Tracey corrected, and reflect our marriage date. Also in that same box there are family photos and because I am family, I want on picture of us on that box, as well as in Google Images. I have plenty of photos. So many photos to share. And although imd is not a good resource, I found another http://live.dbpedia.org/page/Ronald_DeFeo,_Jr. Please help me. I love this man so much."


 * Please read the above comments. WP:AUTO and WP:BLPPRIMARY are issues here.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 16:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

false
"The case is notable for being the real life inspiration behind the book and film versions of The Amityville Horror." The book is about the LUTZ family who claimed paranormal events. the murder had nothing to do with that. You didn't even read the Wiki article on the book, let alone the book. 71.163.117.143 (talk) 11:33, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The DeFeo murders did happen, but whether the paranormal events in Jay Anson's book and the various films happened is open to question. Jay Anson's book clearly refers to the DeFeo killings by name.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 11:47, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I have read in a number of places that the only reason the Lutz family ever moved to the house in the first place was because they'd heard about the DeFeo murders, and they were planning on faking all the paranormal stuff and blaming it all on the place being a "murder house" in order to create fodder for an allegedly "true story" book, which was the whole crux of the "Amityville Horror" hoax. That is how it was the "real life inspiration" for the book -- they were planning a book all along before they even moved there. So yes, the murders were real, but it was all that other stuff after that was made up. A number of people have lived in the house since and experienced absolutely nothing. 12.31.187.178 (talk) 23:04, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
 * This needs a reliable source, as it assumes that the Lutz family acted in bad faith. The hardline skeptics have argued that the Lutz family planned the whole thing, but this would need proof. This is more on topic at the article about the book, as this article is about the murders which undoubtedly did happen in November 1974.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:44, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Ronald DeFeo, Jr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081205033935/http://www.castleofspirits.com./amitycultural2.html to http://www.castleofspirits.com/amitycultural2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Incarceration
I looked up DeFeo's current location on the NY Corrections inmate lookup page. It clearly states that he is incarecerated in Sullivan Correctional Institution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Njm05 (talk • contribs) 12:20, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Sure enough, he is in Sullivan Correctional Facility as of February 2017 so the article wording has been changed. Incidentally, this also shows that he has another parole hearing coming up in July 2017 so maybe it will (or will not be) more successful than the previous ones.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 18:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * We're now in September 2017, and can safely assume that he wasn't paroled in July. No media coverage however.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 16:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Re this edit: according to the inmate lookup tool on ny.gov, he is still in Sullivan as of May 2020.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 05:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Work?
DeFeo carried out the killing around 3.15 am. He was at a bar by 3.30 am. That gave his very little time to bathe and change before rushing to the bar. How exactly did he arrive to work as usual?122.59.212.9 (talk) 11:20, 18 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Somehow an editing mistake had crept into the article. The murders most likely occurred some time between 3 AM and 3:30 AM on November 13, 1974. DeFeo burst into Henry's Bar (around half a mile from 112 Ocean) and "announced" the discovery of the murders some time between 6 PM and 6:30 PM on the evening of the same day. This meant that he had plenty of time to dispose of the gun, wash and change, then go to work as normal. According to this contemporary newspaper article, he claimed that he went to the house shortly after 6 PM and found the front door locked, and managed to crawl in through an open window. This was rejected by police very quickly when they learned that the murder weapon was a Marlin rifle belonging to DeFeo himself.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 17:55, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Ronald DeFeo Jr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081217113838/http://www.amityvillemurders.com/csgallery/slides/gunbox.html to http://www.amityvillemurders.com/csgallery/slides/gunbox.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081108053947/http://www.amityvillemurders.com/murders.html to http://www.amityvillemurders.com/murders.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707134040/http://www.amityvillemurders.com/facts.html to http://www.amityvillemurders.com/facts.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150510092918/http://www.amityvillefiles.com/murders.htm to http://www.amityvillefiles.com/murders.htm/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:06, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Reference
There is no reference to Harold_Alexander_Abramson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.217.146.133 (talk) 22:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)


 * But why is this relevant to the DeFeo case? I can't find any source with a mention of the two together. DeFeo used LSD but the court did not accept that drug use was the main cause of the murders.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Controversy section
The first paragraph of this section is very odd. It seems to cast doubt over whether there were any shots or murders at all, when that was obviously the case. It's also unsourced. Prinsgezinde (talk) 00:26, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Consecutive or concurrent sentences?
Re this edit: people have pointed out that DeFeo had his first parole hearing which was turned down in September 1999, 25 years after he was imprisoned. He would not have had parole hearings in 1999 and since then if his minimum recommended term was 150 years, ie 6 X 25 years. The sourcing is confused on this, and other sources say concurrent. The New York Times source says "25 years to life" which also seems to support the idea that the sentences are concurrent. DeFeo might well have been paroled by now if he had given a clear and consistent admission of his guilt over the years, but the 1999 hearing said that "Mr. DeFeo has 'gained little insight' into his 'violent anti-social behavior' while incarcerated."-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)


 * DeFeo is still in Sullivan, according to the New York Inmate Lookup tool. This also confirms that his aggregate minimum sentence is 25 years with a maximum of life, and that he first became eligible for parole in 1999. I think it's best to skip the consecutive/concurrent wording as the sourcing is confused. However, he is not serving a minimum 150 year sentence as the inmate lookup tool makes clear.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 13:22, 24 October 2020 (UTC)