The Amityville Horror

Summary

In December 1975 the Lutz family moved into a house in Amityville, New York, where six members of the DeFeo family had been shot dead thirteen months before. They left after 28 days, and their account of supernatural attack became a best-selling "true story" whose details failed every independent check that was made.

The murders are real and are not in doubt. The supernatural story rests on the Lutzes' word, and on a book written from it. Every detail that could be tested from outside, the snow, the police, the damaged doors, tested the other way. The lawyer who says he helped shape the story says it was created over bottles of wine.

What is documented

The murders. On 13 November 1974, Ronald DeFeo Sr., his wife Louise, and their two sons and two daughters were shot dead in their home at 112 Ocean Avenue. The surviving son, Ronald DeFeo Jr., confessed. He was convicted of the six murders in 1975, and was serving 25 years to life when he died in state custody on 12 March 2021 (CBS New York). In later years he gave several different accounts of that night. None of them changed his conviction. The registry records the killings here only because the later story was built on them.

The Lutzes' stay. George and Kathy Lutz and their three children moved into the house in December 1975. By their account they left in January 1976, after twenty-eight days.

What was claimed. As published, the house and whatever was in it ripped open a heavy door and left it hanging from one hinge, threw open windows and bent their locks, made green slime ooze from a ceiling, peered in at night with red eyes, left cloven-hoofed tracks in the snow, filled a room with hundreds of houseflies in midwinter, and afflicted a priest who had blessed the house with painful blisters on his hands (Nickell's summary of the book).

The television séances. Before the book appeared, New York's Channel 5 looked into the story by bringing in psychics together with the self-described demonologist Ed Warren and his wife Lorraine, a professed clairvoyant. The group held a series of séances in the house (Nickell).

The book. Prentice-Hall commissioned the professional writer Jay Anson to tell the Lutzes' story. The Amityville Horror: A True Story appeared in September 1977 and became a runaway best seller. Anson asserted that there was "simply too much independent corroboration" of the Lutzes' narrative to support the idea that they had imagined or invented it. A film followed in 1979.

The lawyer. William Weber, who had defended Ronald DeFeo Jr., said that the Lutzes came to him after leaving the house, and that he told them their "experiences" could be useful to him in preparing a book. He later told the Associated Press: "We created this horror story over many bottles of wine that George Lutz was drinking." He added: "We were creating something the public wanted to hear about." Weber also filed a two-million-dollar lawsuit against the Lutzes, charging them with reneging on their book deal (Nickell). He was therefore not a neutral witness: he had a financial dispute with the people he was contradicting.

The checks. The researchers Rick Moran and Peter Jordan, writing in Fate magazine in May 1978 under the title "The Amityville Horror Hoax", found that the police had not been called to the house, and that there had been no snowfall at the time the Lutzes said they had found cloven hoofprints in the snow (Nickell).

The next owners. James and Barbara Cromarty, who bought the house after the Lutzes gave it up, found the old hardware, hinges, locks and doorknob, still in place, with no disturbance to the paint and varnish around them (Nickell). They later sued the Lutzes, Anson and the publishers, arguing that the claims about the house had brought sightseers who destroyed their privacy.

What was said in court. Joe Nickell, writing in the Skeptical Inquirer in 2003, states that during the litigation the Lutzes admitted that virtually everything in the book was fiction. The registry has not seen the court record that would confirm this, and records it as Nickell's statement.

Leading explanations

A fabrication developed with a book in view. The leading explanation, and the only one consistent with the checks.

By Weber's account, the Lutzes came to him after leaving the house and a book was discussed; the story was then published as one. Weber says it was invented, and the independent tests agree with him: the tracks in the snow have no snow, the police were never called, and the wrecked door has its original hinges and undisturbed paint. Investigators have also pointed out that the claimed phenomena are a mixture of traditional ghost story, poltergeist disturbance and demonic possession, with elements that seem to come from the film The Exorcist (Nickell). Weber's own account needs the same caution as the Lutzes': he was suing them.

Genuine paranormal events (the Lutzes' and Anson's account). Unsupported.

This rests on the Lutzes' testimony, the book written from it, and the Channel 5 séances. Anson's "independent corroboration" does not hold where it can be tested. No police record, weather record or physical trace supports any of the published events.

Current status

Debunked. The murders of 13 November 1974 are documented and solved. The supernatural story that followed is not supported by any record that could have confirmed it, and it is contradicted by every check that has been made: the weather, the police, and the house itself. The lawyer involved says the story was created for a book, and Nickell states that the Lutzes conceded in litigation that virtually everything in it was fiction.

The registry cannot confirm that concession from the court record, and it does not need it. What would reopen the case is independent evidence from the 28 days themselves: a police report, a contemporaneous medical record for the priest, a photograph of damage. In half a century none has been produced.

Last reviewed: September 2026. Records are provisional. Where the evidence changes, the entry changes. Found an error? Tell us.