User Reviews

The premise of this film is to give the impression that someone other than Ron DeFeo killed his family or he killed some of them but others participated as well. One of the claims aimed at establishing someone else helped him is the assertion more than 1 gun was used. Basically it is an extension of the claim made in the book "The Night The DeFeos Died". In that book the assertion is made that Bobby Kelske fired the second shot into Louise with a Colt Python. The producers seem to admit that 7 of the bullets were .35 caliber rifle rounds but insist one of the bullets in Louise was a .38 special.

DellaPenna identified this bullet at trial and in his report as a jacketed .35 rifle round like the other 7. His report asserts it was fired by a Marlin 336c rifle but he could not tie it definitively to Ron's Marlin rifle because it did not have enough incidental markings. At trial he testified it definitely was fired by Ron's rifle not just any Marlin 336C because the casing was matched to Ron's rifle. So he used both the casing and bullet to assert it was fired from Ron's rifle. The producers assert that DellaPenna misidentified the bullet. They cite hand notes he made detailing that the bullet has 8 lands and grooves remaining, weighs 169 grains and has a diameter of .363 then assertthese characteristics mean it is likely a .38 special. Apparently the producers didn't bother to consult a firearms expert because they seem to be under the impression that a .38 special round is larger than a .35 rifle round because the number 38 is bigger than 35. A .35 rifle round is longer than a .38 special, heavier and has a slightly larger diameter. A jacketed .35 rifle round weighs 200 grains while a jacketed .38 special round weighs 148 grains. The bullet in question is only a portion of the original bullet so the original bullet weighed more than 169 grains. How could it be a fragment from a .38 special round if a complete .38 special weighs less than this fragment? A portion of the bullet that brushed against the lands and grooves was missing. Hence why the notation stated only 8 L&G remain. This means that the gun tha fired the bullet had more than 8 L&G. There are no .38 specials that have more than 8 L&G and until the 1990s there were none that had more than 6. At the time of the murders every .38 Special in existence had either 5 or 6 lands and grooves. A gun with 5 or 6 L&G can't leave impressions indicating 8 L&G. So the supposed evidence meant to refute DellaPenna in fact supports his assessment and renders their assessment that it was a .38 special impossible. Mind you even if more than 1 gun had been used Ron still could have used both anyway. But the evidence proves all 6 were killed with the same rifle.

Documents allegedly created by Ron's first attorney are no more convincing. Allegedly Ron's lawyer found witnesses, took down notes and wanted their statements admitted into the record to use at trial. He didn't get affidavits from them but rather simply wrote down what they said to him, he typed it up and then supposedly was going to depose himself at trial. Statements can't be used at trial, you need to produce witnesses so that they can be cross examined. A lawyer cannot depose himself or give testimony so the entire convoluted tale is obviously nonsense. If any of these people actually said any of the things claimed they would have been subpoenaed to testify at trial. These documents conveniently appeared after the lawyer who supposedly wrote them was dead and could not deny writing them. They were not in the defense file handed over to Weber though nor in the Court record though it was alleged that a motion was filed in January 1975 to get them admitted. If that were the case there would be a record of the motion and copies of these documents would be in the court file. They are not in the file and no motion was filed in connection with them. It is pretty obvious that they were forged long after DeFeo's conviction.

The remainder of the conspiracy claims are founded upon innuendo and rank supposition no evidence at all. The quality of the film itself is like it was put together by high school students so you have bogus conspiracy claims that are presented in a manner not even amusing to watch.

Though billed as being told by the participants in fact the majority of information comes from the producers and Geraldine Gates, none of whom have any personal knowledge at all.

The producers chose to film dramatizations of events that never actually happened. In one case they actually admitted the scene never happened. Fake trial testimony features Bobby Kelske saying police told him that either he or Ronnie was going to confess and suggesting they were beaten to get one of them to confess. On camera Ryan Katzenbach admits this testimony was made up but insists this is what Kelske would have stated had he remained on the witness stand longer. How does he know this is what Kelske would have stated? Did they interview Kelske? No. Did Kelske ever publicly state such? No. What is Katzenbach's source then? Geraldine as always. Yes Geraldine the woman who never met Ronnie until 1985. The same Geraldine who made up tons of stories about knowing the murder victims and all of Ronie's friends including Kelske intimately, even though incontrovertible evidence proves she never met any of them until the late 1980s and even then only had very limited contact with them.

Kelske denied being beaten or threatened. Ronnie claimed he was beaten in a failed attempt to get his confession tossed. The producers want to try to convince viewers that police misconduct occurred so put in this fake exchange that is sourced to a woman who is a known liar and has no basis of knowledge at all.

That is just one example of fake things put in to advance their agenda. Much of the narrating simply levels unsupported allegations aimed at convincing the audience to support the revisionist account presented. For instance the revisionist nonsense claim that Kelske was involved in the murders. We never get any hard evidence instead just repeated suggestions aimed at getting the audience to ignore the lack of evidence. The narrator announced, "If you talk to residents who knew Bobby Kelske and Butch DeFeo, residents of Amityville, they always had a suspicion that Bobby was involved with the murders." First of all suspicions of residents doesn't amount to evidence in the least. Suspicions are often wrong and often not based on anything solid. At any rate, these supposed residents never speak for themselves. There are no interviews with friends shown where they say anything about suspecting Kelske. For all we know the producers made this claim up.

For sure the supposed legal documents implicating Kelse that Osuna presented were made up. It is never announced on screen where Osuna obtained these documents from but most likely Geraldine. Osuna's book heavily cited these documents and gave some background about their alleged creation, all of this background was attributed to Geraldine.

The first thing to note is that these documents are not affidavits they were purportedly written by Ronnie's first lawyer, Jacob Sigfried. Jacob Sigfried supposedly tracked down various people and recorded what they told him. Thus they are allegedly his attorney notes but they are not in the form of typical attorney notes they appear to be more formal. In his book Osuna claims Sigfried planned to depose himself to get these statements and his attorney notes admitted into evidence in court. The book asserts that in January 1975 Sigfried filed a disclosure motion to get the statements admitted into evidence but such motion was denied. The problems with these claims are two-fold. First there is no such thing as a lawyer deposing himself to get notes or statements allegedly made to him entered into evidence. Nor is there a motion that can be filed to try to get such statements admitted- especially not a disclosure motion. The way to get testimony admitted at trial is to have a witness appear and testify at trial. If a motion had been filed to get the statements admitted as claimed then the motion would be in the court file as would the "affirmations" because they would have been filed along with the other motion documents. The court record doesn't contain these documents or have any record of such a motion being filed. This is not surprising since no motion of this type even exists. So the explanation of why these documents were created is completely bogus as is the claim they were filed in court. Someone simply made them up to support the story Geraldine made up. Had any of these witnesses actually come forward stating what was claimed you can rest assured they would have been called to testify and grilled by Ronnie's defense counsel. But these interviews never happened and these documents were created well after his conviction.

How did Sigfried even learn about these witnesses? Sigfried allegedly sent a discovery request to police asking who they questioned. The police responded with a list of people who they claimed they didn't question but in fact had questioned and intimidated into not talking to the defense. Sigfried did not believe them and contacted these individuals and found out police did in fact question them and he then took down their statements.

Discovery requests are sent to the DA not the police so the whole story is absurd. But it is even more ridiculous to suggest police would provide the defense with a list of people they wanted to keep quiet and wanted to pretend they never interviewed.

The producers obtained the entire police file including officer notes. Did it contain any records of police interviewing any of these individuals? No. So the producers found absolutely no evidence whatsoever to corroborate the claims made in these forged lawyer notes. Nothing to authenticate them either, no evidence these notes were in the Defense's legal file or court files. They just magically appeared out of no where after Sigfried was dead so he couldn't deny writing them. If you want the truth look elsewhere.

Ronald DeFeo Jr and Geraldine Gates got together in 1985 and made up a bunch of nonsense. Over the years DeFeo has changed such nonsense claims either because he could not remember the fairytale he told previously or people disbelieved it so he tried to make up something that was more credible. Indeed his tales at his parole hearings are never the same.

This movie either presents tales made up by Geraldine. How much of the tale she took from what DeFeo told her we have no idea but the combination of recounting lies he told her along with her own lies added in makes a complete mess.

Conspiracy theories are often presented in a spectacular fashion but this is downright boring and not even entertaining to laugh at.

The fact the producers decided to bill her as Geraldine DeFeo-Gates though they know she never ever went by that name shows how desperate they were to try to give credence to her.

Geraldine Gates married DeFeo in 1989 and he divorced her in 1993. She never legally changed her name at any time during the marriage. Indeed she was already married to Gerald Gates at the time she married DeFeo. Since their marriage to Gates took place in New Jersey, New York was unaware of it and permitted her to marry DeFeo. She kept using the name Geraldine Gates on her bank accounts, identification and all other records. She also used that name around acquaintances. The only time she used the name Geraldine DeFeo was when she was talking to someone about Amityville. Subsequent to the divorce she did the same thing. In 2002 she gave a statement to the press to publish about an unrelated issue and the name she gave them was Geraldine Gates.

So despite the fact that legally she was going by the name Geraldine Gates and day to day she was going by the name Geraldine Gates the producers and Geraldine decided to have her last name billed in the credits as DeFeo-Gates. If the producers cared about being impartial and accurate they would have listed her real last name. They added the DeFeo in hoping that would somehow lend credibility to the crap that popped out of her mouth. If the producers can't even be accurate in how they bill participants of the film how can they be taken serious on any other respect? In fact, while advertising the film on their website they present a County ID from 1986 that is no longer valid. The application for such ID proves that Geraldine used a fake address and forged marriage certificate to receive an ID that she was not entitled to. (It is the same forged marriage certificate Newsday referred to being shown) This ID is held out as proof she was married to him prior to their 1989 marriage. Seriously? The producers need to come up with something better than that.