If I introduced myself as Morpheus, one would immediately recognize the personification of “dreams.” No, not Hypnos…and not Sandman. Good dreams, or bad dreams? Good dreams, of course. Bad dreams…nightmares, those are the purview of my brother, Phobetor. It comes as no surprise that he and I disagree on most things. As I set about my research, I felt the presence of the Bringer of Nightmares everywhere. Surely I walked into his realm, where he reigns supreme. Perhaps he was in Indianapolis in 1965, where, with a wave of his hand, he left nightmarish things wherever he went. Surely he lived at 3850 East New York Street. Or at least stayed there for a few months. Did Sylvia live in a world nightmares? The Canonical Story says she did. Did Phobetor’s night terrors hide within the Diabolical Games that others have found? No, not if those Diabolical Games didn’t exist. So I thought, having read “House of Cards”, that there may in fact be more. And so I found one. Surely nightmares were to be found in this game. If this game existed, it couldn’t exist anywhere but in the Realm of Phobetor.  

Now for the Diabolical Game. One that is puzzling, and certainly troubling and disturbing. I feel that is incumbent upon me to remind one and all that any and all contributions that deal with Diabolical Games employ many literary devices. These include comical presentations and even, perhaps, a touch of sarcasm. Such devices are only utilized, and I emphasize the word “only”, by contributors who firmly believe what have been dubbed on this website “Diabolical Games,” are ultimately fictions. Mockery? Indeed. But the stories perhaps beg for mockery:
 

Q. I will ask you this, Marie, can you tell this jury why these people here, including your mother, brother, sister, Hobbs and Hubbard, these neighbor children, did this damage to her?

A. No, I do not know. I could not tell you that. I know one thing, Paula was very angry at Sylvia.
Q. What for?
A. I don't know. Paula was very jealous of Sylvia.
Q. Did she say that?
A. No, you could see it in her eyes.
Q. Was your mother angry at Sylvia?
A. No, not that I can recall of.
Q. Do you recall anything Sylvia might have done to make Paula jealous of her?

A. Well, once Sylvia - my Mom went out and bought some popsicles for every one of us kids - Mom knew Mr. Softee and the truck came around - and Sylvia did not want a popsicle and Mom bought one too many. Sylvia volunteered to take that one and Paula was going to take it and Paula got real made at Sylvia and would not talk to her for a while.

According to Marie, Gertrude wasn’t angry with Sylvia. But Paula was! And why? Because Sylvia changed her mind and decided that she wanted the Popsicle. Paula, intent on getting a second Popsicle, became very angry with Sylvia. And thus the relationship between Sylvia and Paula was irreparably broken by a Popsicle bought from Mr. Softee. And so the downward spiral began.  

By looking at the details and forcing one to visualize the scenarios, all but shovel-scrapers, Canonikers and Popsicle Aficionados will see that what is found in the testimony is, to some degree, and perhaps in large part to a considerable degree, not the truth. One must stop, visualize, and quantify the scene. You are there…you are watching…not 50 years later, but rather at the exact moment that the scenario played out. Supposedly played out. I can see Mr. Softee, dispensing popsicles with no knowledge of the horrible fate that he inadvertently brought about. Cherry or grape? Do they sell popsicles at concession stands at fairs, carnivals and circuses? I don’t know.

There is nothing more repulsive than the victimization of a teenage girl…indeed two. But even more to the point…any teenage girl…actually, any girl…any woman. This has happened on a unbelievable and horrific scale in our society. It is not a question of number; one case is horrific. One case is a human disaster. One case begs for judgement, and one case demands justice. Unfortunately, of all of the problems that plague society, this one is perhaps the most overlooked and ignored. I have been told that the zoo is full, and that the Great Menagerie can welcome another animal only with great difficulty. Despite what others say, I would add yet another…an ostrich, and one with its head in the sand..or a triad of circus monkeys, well, perhaps two of the three, and as the song goes: two out of three ain’t bad. See No Evil…Hear No Evil. All good people must see..must hear..must act. And now more than ever; now, at the beginning of the Era of Carnage, so speaketh Morpheus, who, unlike my Trollish brother Phobetor, dreams of better things. Clotho, Lachesis, and Atropos do not, in the end, decide all things, nor decide the fate of everyone…or anyone. Standing at the crossroads, and with the benefit of Hecate’s torch, one may make the right choice and choose the right path. Hopefully.

It seems to me, reading through the rather large and imposing, yet definitely interesting, and even in some cases, insightful, material on this website, that most contributors believe in the tried and true “kernel of truth” notion that is ever present in scholarly work on ancient texts. And perhaps other types of texts as well. Even fairy tales and nursery rhymes. It didn’t take Gertie Wright to create Diabolical Ring around the Rosie. A warm and child-like tune about the Black Death? Surely not…Gertie Wright the Bringer of Plague? I find the “kernel of truth” persuasive, and that means that in many instances, there is important truth lying at the heart of the Shrekian Onion. Hey, Donkey! Do you know why Ogres are like onions? They smell bad! No, they have layers. I know, I know…someone else has cited this Ogrian Story. Do you know why Trolls are like onions? I don’t either. But I know that Ogres have layers. If the Great Fiasco has layers, then there must be something substantial remaining after we peel The Great Onion’s layers away.

I must say, in a spirit of admiration, and a little envy, that Smoke and Mirrors showed the truth of the Ogrian Theory. Yes! I can coin phrases too! By the end of that essay I found myself able to see through the smoke; indeed, I watched the smoke clear. And looking in those mirrors, I realized just how distorted the reflection was; what I saw. For a moment, after having said goodbye to a troupe of clowns and the Bearded Lady, and having finished eating the popcorn and cotton candy I bought from Lester, I took a second look in the Great Mirrors. I could swear I saw a different image. What I saw wasn’t nearly as wild, entertaining, or seemingly designed to help spawn a bizarre new cult 50 years later. I could content myself to describe that image as somewhat mundane. But yet more. It only contributed to the Great Heresy that is so at odds with a shovel-scraping world. The hot water nonsense was no longer the reflection I saw in a Lesterian Mirror. Gertrude had a mirror! Was it Gertie Wright’s Mirror of Horror? Or was the original mirror in Gertie Wright’s Only Bathroom replaced with a Bumpian Looking Glass that showed horrific things to people who so wanted, and still want, to see horrific things? If I played cards in Gertie Wright’s Casino, I might get dealt the Old Maid. Don’t you dare say it! I look nothing like her. Not yet. Nor would I risk carrying aces in my back pocket. Nothing gets past Gertie Wright’s All Seeing Eye, and having sidestepped a virtual “sock and smack”, I would hate to end up falling victim to “smack and whack”. And nobody tells me to Go Fish either! Instead, I might get dealt Card 13. It will seem an odd thing to say, but I find Relkin’s deck of cards far more interesting than whatever deck of cards sat on the gaming table in front of Anna the Fictional Terror, Judy I-Memorized-my-Speech-but-had-Considerable-Difficulty-Delivering-it-in-Court Duke, and the Queen of Fictional Cigarette Burns..Darlene McGuire. Perhaps everyone should look at Relkin’s cards. If Gertrude looked in her mirror, what did she see? Who did Sylvia see? Those are hard questions to answer. But how mundane is a scalp infection? How ordinary is a kid with Chicken Pox? If you had a kid with a scalp infection and Chicken Pox, and you were abusing and torturing her, my clean her scalp? Why help relieve the itch of the sores? The mundane reflection I saw in the strange mirrors was one of two people trying to help the poor kid suffering from such childhood maladies. Even Jenny had to concede that Gertrude showed her Sylvia’s scalp. Even Jenny had to admit that she saw pus, the clear and unmistakable sign of an infection. And even Jenny had to tell us that Gertrude told her what someone with a caring mind-set would say…if the scalp infection isn’t treated, it will only get worse. And the baths? Baths of Horror? Even without her thermometer, or Dr. Ellis’ X-ray machine, Jenny told us that the water in the tub was hot. She put her hand in the water. Did she show the court her burned and scalded hand? Of course not. Shirley said this:

Q. You did not put your hand in the water?
A. One time I did.
Q. Did you on the occasion your mother and Paula supposedly put her in the water?
A. Yes, it was warm.
Q. It was warm. Did it burn your hand?
A. No, it never.

There you have it. And Jenny, did the bathwater burn your hand? Well, I might quote Shirley Ann and say…no, it never. Thanks, Jenny. And thank you, Shirley! Of course, a rather apt question would be this one: why are we told different things about different bath episodes? Their commonalty is the fact that Sylvia wasn’t described as simply running the bath water, then getting in the tub and taking a nice war, bath. No. We are told that she was “put” in the bathtub by Gertrude or Paula, or perhaps by Gertrude and Paula, which then gave way to tales of a whole mob of kids participating in a Diabolical Game called “Put Sylvia in the Bath Tub.” So these are baths that Sylvia didn’t want to take. As Marie made clear, Sylvia wasn’t taking baths on her own, which was discernible by the way she smelled. Within the “bath” component, we are supposed to believe in two sub-sets of baths. The first is the Diabolical Bath, scalding water is run and Sylvia is put into it as a form of torture…perhaps we can call these Bumpian Baths. Gertie Wright’s Bumpian Bath House? At other times we see a different kind of bath. This kind of bath is a more normal type of bath…the water is warm. Just how many Bath Water Inspectors are there? Jenny puts her hand in the water. Yet Shirley is a Bath Water Inspector too.

Q. Did you see your mother and Paula put Sylvia in the bathtub?
A. Yes.
Q. Why?
A. Because.
Q. Did you inspect the bathroom before this happened?
A. No, I never.
Q. Why not?
A. Because Jenny was the Bathroom Inspector on duty at the time. So she did.
Q. But you said…
A. I was the Bath Water Inspector at the time.
Q. Was the water horribly hot and scalding?
A. No, it never.
Q. How do you know?

A. Well, Dr. Ellis listened to mom’s record in the front room. He forgot to take Jenny’s thermometer when he left. So I took it upstairs and put it in the bath water.

Q. Why?
A. To get an accurate reading of the water temperature.
Q. What did it say?
A. I don’t know. I dropped it in the water, and had to reach in and get it.
Q. Did you need skin grafts for your poor hand?
A. No.
Q. Why not?
A. Well, the water was…warm

Ok..ok..that was only hypothetical testimony, and so a creation of Morpheus. A nice warm bath? Watch Shirley blunder into the Great Contradiction between scalding hot torture baths and regular nice warm baths:

Q. Did you ever see anyone put a gag in Sylvia's mouth?
A. My mother.
Q. When was this?
A. When she was - in the two weeks, I think.
Q. And what happened when she did this?
A. She just stuck it in her mouth because she was screaming because they put her in a tub of water.
Q. Who put her in the water?
A. My mother.
Q. Do you know whether it was hot?
A. It was hot water. I seen the steam.

So the water is so hot that Sylvia had to be gagged when she was put in the tub. And it was during the mythical The Two Weeks! So we have a ludicrous differentiation to make:

1.  Regular baths with warm, or hot, water

2.  Bumpian Baths with water too hot to be considered a regular warm bath, i.e. hot water torture

An enigma, or a paradox? I wonder what criteria the Diabolical Mother-Daughter Team used to determine which kind of bath was appropriate at what time?

 Paula: “Hey, mom! It’s give-Sylvia-a-bath time!”

Gertrude: “Hey, Marie! Have you seen Mommy’s pills?”

Paula: “Mom! I said that it’s….”

Gertrude: “I heard you! So put her in the tub!”

Paula: “But what kind of bath? Should it be one of our Diabolical Baths, or should it be a nice warm bath?”

Gertrude: “What kind was the last bath?”

Paula: “I think…a Bumpian Bath.”

Gertrude: “Well, let’s start alternating…since it was Bumpian last time, just give her a nice warm bath this time.”

Here’s a question: “if the water is nice and warm, why does Sylvia have to be “put” into the tub by someone else? Why wouldn’t she just get in and take a bath? If it’s a Diabolical Bath, she’ll have to be forced into the tub. If it’s a nice warm bath, she still seems to require external force to get her into the tub. Why? The same forced action is required for both types of baths. Need I say that this is nonsense anywhere other than in the Shovel-Scraping World? The explanation is simple:

1. Sylvia wouldn’t voluntarily bathe because the sores from her childhood malady made it unpleasant

2. She was forced into the tub, which contained warm, or hot, but not too-hot, water

That, I believe, is the truth. But references to vague burns that may have been caused by hot water were requisite, so:

3. Fictional Diabolical Baths had to be incorporate into the story

How badly this was executed! Real baths, and Fictional baths! The two exclude each other. For this to have been executed in a convincing way, then there should have been no references to warm baths at all, and none of the Bath Water Inspectors should have been on duty at the time. No one should have put their hand into the bath water. That would at least have removed the conflation; it would have dispensed with mutually exclusive elements existing side-by-side. Children don’t see contradictions. Children live blissfully in a world where two things that can’t both be true can both be true. Ah! But so many bigger kids, and not just heavy-set 13 year old kids, along with a gaggle of adult shovel-scrapers, reside comfortably in a world where there isn’t a clock in Gertie Wright’s Front Room of Horror, but there is a clock there at the same time. Yet another hot-water-piece-of-nonsense:

Q. Did you ever see anyone put a gag in Sylvia's mouth?
A. My mother.
Q. When was this?
A. When she was - in the two weeks, I think.
Q. And what happened when she did this?
A. She just stuck it in her mouth because she was screaming because they put her in a tub of water.
Q. Who put her in the water?
A. My mother.

True, a gag will, when stuffed in someone’s mouth, keep them from screaming. The problem is that according to Shirley, Sylvia wasn’t tied up. I’ll bet that if you stuffed a gag in my mouth, and my hands weren’t restrained, I could simply pull the gag out of my mouth and scream so loud that Phyllis Vermillion could hear me!

Q. Was Sylvia tied then?
A. One time.
Q. Who tied her?
A. Johnny and my mother.
Q. Who put her in this tub?
A. My mother.
Q. Anyone else?
A. I think Paula helped her.
Q. Who put the gag in her mouth?
A. My mother.
Q. What did Sylvia do?
A. Nothing, but she sort of chattered her teeth all the time.

So now she is gagged, but she is also tied up. Perhaps the Diabolical Bath Givers learned their lesson from the last time. Having gagged the girl only to have her pull the gag out of her mouth and scream away, this time it dawned on them to tie her up as well. Then we get Details of Absurdity. First, Johnny is involved. We know that within the Canonical Story, when Sylvia is put in the bath after receiving head trauma in the basement, she must be put in the tub with her clothes on because of the presence of boys. To follow through on this, Sylvia must have been put into the tub, in Shirley’s silly story, with her clothes on. Strange. If this were a true Diabolical Bath, having the girl wearing clothes would reduce the physical impact of the hot, i.e. scalding, water. Detail of Absurdity…despite the fact that the water is too hot, Sylvia’s teeth chatter, and all and sundry know that “chattering teeth” are associated with cold…a too-cold bath, or standing around in Gertie Wright’s Magical Back Yard when it’s 5 degrees below zero without your winter coat. And if she’s gagged, she shouldn’t be able to “chatter her teeth” at all. Let’s do an even worse job of executing the lies:

Q. Was she tied?
A. Yes.
Q. Where?
A. Her arms were tied behind her and her legs were tied together.
Q. Who lifted her in the tub?
A. Paula and Richard.
Q. What was your mother doing?
A. Getting the soap.
Q. Was she standing there in the bathroom?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. O.K. What did Sylvia do when she got dumped in the hot tub?
A. Tried to scream but they had a piece of cloth in her mouth.
Q. Did you see that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long did you see her in the tub?
A. Five minutes.

The “Put Sylvia in the Bath” Game is getting stranger. Wait! If you followed Anna, Darlene, and Judy into the casino, and it was Diabolical Poker day, no truancy officers allowed, you could ask…what type of Poker? Gertie the Diabolical Card Dealer might tell you that it’s Texas Hold’em. Or she might say that you’re playing Seven Card Stud. So if it was actually “Put Sylvia in the Bath” day, you would have to find out whether you were playing Diabolical Bath, or the Nice Warm Bath variation. And just how many kids play this game! If Shirley’s Absurd Detail is the presence of Johnny, then Marie must have been looking in the bathroom carnival mirror and beheld a similar, yet strangely different, reflection. A boy is present! This time Ricky. To follow through, since what’s true of Johnny must be true of Ricky, Sylvia goes into the bath with her clothes on. It’s Diabolical Bath day, so the water is so hot that the girl must be tied and gagged. Then a Towering Detail of Absurdity…the girl is put in this scalding hot water, not just clothed, but for only five minutes. Five minutes? Five minutes! What terrible torturers Paula and Gertrude are! Why not ten minutes? The pain would be worse; her clothes are greatly diminishing the abuse, so I would think that she would have to be left in the tub even longer to make the abuse effective. And if this is torture…why get soap? Soap? You are torturing a girl by putting her in scalding bath water, but you make sure you have soap? And soap doesn’t work so well if you have clothes on. Five minutes? Hey, Marie! Do you have a watch? Wait, I just saw Jenny run into the bathroom. She plunges her thermometer into the water. Wait, I just saw Marie run into the bathroom. She has a small kitchen timer in her hand, one that would allow Gertrude to know when to take dinner out of the invisible stove. How long are we playing, mommy? Ok. So Marie sets the timer to five minutes…finally…ding! If my feet and hands were tied, there’s no way I could fight with the players of this game. I also couldn’t get the gag out of my mouth, and with the gag in my mouth, I couldn’t scream, so Phyllis Vermillion wouldn’t hear me. But my hands and feet being tied will not stop me from squirming, writhing, and thrashing around in the water. So if it were me, though I’m glad it isn’t…This isn’t fair! There’s too many of them, and I’m gagged, with my hands and feet tied. So I’ll lose this game, this time. But not completely. They’ll win, but it will be a costly victory to say the least! So I shall morph into someone else. If Paula, unable to defeat me at “Push Sylvia Down the Stairs,” is able to morph into a group of kids, then shall I morph into Publius Valerius Laevinus. No, he is not the “other side neighbor.” Despite the presence of Emperor Gertrude, this isn’t ancient Rome. Still, as the Roman consul did at Heraclea in 280 BC, so shall I lose this game of Diabolical Bath. But Emperor Gertrude morphs into King Pyrrhus, who wins the battle, but the victory comes at such a high price that she actually loses. As I recall, the Romans didn’t put Pyrrhus into a tub full of too-hot water. But I thrash about in the tub so much that I splash scalding hot water all over Gertrude, Paula, and Ricky. Hey, Marie! Get a little closer. Then..splash that water all over her too. Jenny stoops down to put her Thermometer of Horror into the water? I’m gonna enjoy this…splash! Hmm. Where’s Shirley? I’ll give her something more to complain about than I hit her for no reason!

The Court: I do not see Johnny Blake in the court room.

Tektonikus: That’s because he’s not here.

The Court: I thought you were indisposed.

Tektonikus: I was. But I’m not now.

The Court: Oh, that’s different. Wait! I do not see Gertrude Baniszewski in the court room.

Tektonikus: That’s because she’s not here. Gertie Wright isn't here either.

The Court: I see. Paula?

Tektonikus: Same thing.

The Court:  Is Marie here?

Tektonikus: Nope.

The Court: Ricky? Shirley?

Tektonikus: Let me explain. We know from the Testimony of Horror that the victim was forced to undergo hot water torture. This was done by putting her in a tub of scalding water with her clothes on for five minutes.

The Court: Clothes on? Five minutes? They weren’t very good at Diabolical Baths, were they?

Tektonikus: No! And it is because of that they aren’t here!

The Court: Please explain.

Tektonikus: Well, you can keep someone from fighting back by tying up their hands, and their feet!

The Court: True! And you could keep Phyllis Vermillion from hearing you scream if you were gagged.

Tektonikus: Good point! But unless you tie someone down to something, you can’t keep them from thrashing about.

The Court: How does any of this explain the empty court room?

Tektonikus: Gertie, Paula, Ricky, Johnny, Marie, Jenny, and Shirley are all getting skin grafts necessitated by having scalding water splashed all over them.

Attorney: Your Honor, I object! No they are not! They are all right here. I respectfully ask that you order this Ruiner of the Canonical Story to stop pointing out logical things and thereby ruining the Canonical Story. Besides, we'll do a good enough job ruining the Canonical Story all by ourselves!

The Court: He has a point.

He has, indeed, though that is only hypothetical testimony. How about real testimony? Marie:

Q. You did not testify anything someone else told you concerning these bathings then?
A. No, I did not talk with nobody.

As Paula would instantly recognize, although Mr. School’s ex-wife Stephanie School would probably not, that is a double negative. So, Marie did talk to someone about these bathings! I know…I know…I have over-analyzed the English grammar.

Q. Did all of you children make use of the same bath tub?
A. Yes.
Q. You yourself also bathed in that tub when the need arose?
A. Yes.

That’s a relief! Otherwise the house would have been full of not-so-good smelling people! I can’t resist, although a digression is always annoying:

Q. Were you in the room when the water was drawn?
A. I was downstairs at the present.
Q. Could you hear the water running?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. When did you go upstairs then to observe what you testified about?
A. I went upstairs when someone called Sylvia.
Q. You responded to the call of Sylvia, although that is not your name?
A. No, sir.

Sylvia! Marie: “I’m coming!” Wait, my name isn’t Sylvia. Why should I respond? It would be far more logical that I not answer to a name I don’t bear. Sylvia! Marie:  oh no you don’t! Not this time! Marie! Marie: once bitten, twice…hold on…I’m Marie! Who’s yelling from upstairs? It’s me…Shirley! Marie: fine! I’ll answer to Marie! But not to Sylvia! And Shirley! won’t fool me! What do you want Shirley!? Come upstairs and do something? What? I don’t know…something! Oh, that’s different.

Q. I see. When you came to the head of the stairs was the tub filled with water?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was the door to the bathroom open?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you able to see into it?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who was there when you looked?
A. Paula, Johnny, Richard Hobbs, Stephanie and Sylvia.
Q. Were they standing there?
A. They were standing there.
Q. Were they all dressed on this occasion?

Now you stop right there! You want to know if Paula, Johnny, Richard, Stephanie and Sylvia are in the bath room together…dressed? And I thought Gertie dancing in the front room was bad enough. Five naked teenagers in the bathroom? What would a Sensationalist make of this? Now the Great Story is becoming a Bumpian Great Rated-R Story. Where is Gertrude? “Hey! All you kids up there better get your clothes on right now! What do you think, this Card 13?” Hey, Relkin! I looked at your card. What do I see? Five naked teenagers in the bathroom. Relkin: You do need help!

A. They were not dressed up. They had their work clothes
Q. Play clothes on, rough clothing?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was Sylvia also dressed on this occasion?
A. Yes, she was in play clothes too.

How cool! Much to our relief, the five kids crammed into Gertrude’s bathroom, which appears to be much like her dining room, bigger on the inside than it looks like on the outside, are dressed. But not dressed up! Ricky and Johnny aren’t wearing suits, and Paula, Stephanie, and Sylvia are not wearing polyester pant suits. They are wearing their work clothes? So following this game of “Put Sylvia in the Bathtub,” Ricky and Johnny will head off to their jobs. Paula, Stephanie, and Sylvia too! You better hurry up, if you don’t want to be late to work! Wait, work clothes and play clothes are the same thing? I know how I will dress when I go to work on Monday! The attorney doesn’t like “work clothes”? Surprise, surprise! Marie is messing everything up badly, and needs a little “leading”. And yet again, Sylvia is dressed when put into the tub. Is this Diabolical Bath? Perhaps the Nice, Warm Bath variant?

Q. Did you have an opportunity to go in to test the water yourself?
A. No, sir.

Q. Do you know whether or not the opportunity was taken by your sister Shirley to put her hand in the water and test it? Did you see her do that?

A. No, sir.

Shirley? Wait! Marie responded to “Sylvia!” Then she responded to “Marie!” So where is Shirley? Of course. There are too many people crammed into Gertrude’s Magical Bathroom; there’s no room for Shirley.

Q. You did not see that? Were you able any way to tell whether the water was hot or cold?
A. I saw steam.
Q. You saw steam? Do you know at all what was the temperature in the room that day?
A. Once it was during the summer time.
Q. We were speaking, I think, either late September or October here, were we not. It would be autumn, would it not?
A. It was in the autumn.

Did you know the temperature of the water? After all, there’s no way that Jenny could fit in the bathroom, though her thermometer would be handy! No, but like Shirley said, I saw steam. What was the temperature in the bathroom? I know…summer! Stick to the script, Marie. It was autumn. Hey, attorney! Why don’t you just answer your own questions!

Q. Was the window to the bathroom open?
A. No, sir.

Of course not…we wouldn’t want to disturb Phyllis! Raymond might call the police.

Q. Was she still wearing her clothing when this was done?
A. One time she was.
Q. On one occasion she was clothed and on another she was not clothed?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was she gagged?
A. Yes.
Q. Then put in the water by a group of children?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was your mother there on this occasion?
A. Yes, sir.

Is anyone else getting dizzy? Ah, I know. There are two sub-variations to “Put Sylvia in the Bath Tub.” One variation requires that the girl is dressed. Another variation requires that the girl is not dressed. Why is she dressed at some occurrences, but not dressed at others? How many ways there are to play this game!

1.  Variation One: Diabolical Bath

            Sub-variation One:  dressed

            Sub-variation Two: Not dressed

            Choice One: gagged

            Choice Two: gagged and tied

            Choice Three: not gagged or tied

2.  Variation Two: Nice Warm Bath

            Sub-variation One:  dressed

            Sub-variation Two: Not dressed

            Choice One: gagged

            Choice Two: gagged and tied

            Choice Three: not gagged or tied

Let’s make it worse:

Q. What was Sylvia's reaction?
A. She - when she first got in the water it sounded - she acted like it was awful cold.
Q. Awful cold? What makes you say that?
A. Because every time they putted her in the water her teeth started going up and down like it would be if you're cold.

“Putted.” Ah, yes! But then a Shirleyian mistake! The water is hot, but Sylvia is cold! It’s opposite day, you know, when you are forced into a too-hot bath tub full of water and you get…cold! Dr. Kebel said that a body submerged in cold water will get…colder. AI'll bet he didn’t know that a body put in scalding hot water will get…colder. Hey, Dr. Ellis! Did you find any cold water burns on the body?

Q. How many people were in the room on the first time you saw her bathed in this way?
A. Six.
Q. Who were the people, if you can remember?
A. Hobbs, John, Stephanie, myself and Shirley and Jimmy and Mom.
Q. Standing there together?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Were you in a position where you could see Sylvia while you stood there?
A. I was holding little Denny, getting ready to go downstairs because me and him just woke up from a little nap.

And you thought Lester couldn’t count! There are six people in the bathroom:

1.  Ricky

2.  Johnny

3.  Stephanie

4.  Shirley

5.  Jimmy

6.  Mom

7.  Marie

8.  Little Denny

Hey, I just created a nursery rhyme! “Two become one, four become two, Paula becomes a whole bunch of kids, eight become six, and we all fall down!” Why is it that the laws of the Universe don’t seem to apply to 3850 East New York Street? Was the house built on top of some strange, Dimensional Anomaly? Wait:

9. Sylvia

Alas.

Q. Can you describe for the ladies and gentlemen of the jury the dimension of this bathroom, how many feet long it was and how many feet wide?

A. It was no longer than from down to the edge of the judge's desk down at the attorney.
Q. It is a relatively small bathroom?
A. Yes, sir.

A relatively small bathroom that fits nine people. Bathroom Inspector Jenny! Please report to the bathroom! I’m not on duty…Marie is! Besides, there’s nine people in there, I won’t fit! Sure you will! After all, the same Dimensional Transcendentalism that applies to the dining room applies to the bathroom as well, it’s just mapped unto a different set of continua. And, get your Tape Measure, the attorney wants to know the dimensions of the bathroom. What? Dr. Ellis took your Tape Measure because there wasn’t one in his Autopsy Room? Dr. Ellis! Please report to Gertie Wright’s Dimensionally Anomalous Bathroom! And bring Jenny’s Tape Measure back; we’ll trade you a Downdraft Autopsy Table, a Cryostat, or, better yet…some scales. He’s not available? Hey, Little Denny, what are the dimensions of the bathroom? 5’ x 8’! Everyone knows that! Smart kid. Who's bathroom is this? If we believe what we're told, like good shovel-scrapers, it is Gertie Wright's Magical Bathroom. If it is, how many people can we cram into it? You don't need Morpheus to reveal that to you in a dream. Is this Gertrude's bathroom? We are no shovel-scrapers! Who knows whose bathroom it is?

Please…please…please tell me that everyone was dressed! I’ll take anything…formal wear, tuxedos, wedding dresses, work clothes, police uniforms, rough clothes, play clothes, baby clothes, second-hand clothes, just tell me that they’re dressed! And Jimmy is present? Baby Denny? Say it isn’t so! How about a new game! Let’s all swim laps in Gertie Wright’s Olympic Pool!

Q. You were standing in back of these children?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Facing - was Sylvia facing toward you or facing toward the tub?
A. Toward the tub.
Q. Were any of them taller than you?
A. Yes, sir. I was nearly as tall as Johnny.
Q. Was he the shortest one - the next shortest one to you in the group?
A. Paula compared to Johnny and he was nearly the smallest.

We know how important dimensions are. And what are Johnny’s dimensions? It’s bad enough that your eleven year old sister can brag that she is almost as tall as you. But he was “nearly the smallest”? So how tall is Jimmy Monroe Baniszewski? If Dr. Ellis gives Jenny her Tape Measure back, we can find out how much taller than Johnny his eight year old brother, who goes by the gangsterish nickname “Little Jimmy”, is. Here’s one for you! If Johnny is barely taller than Marie, and Johnny is the “next shortest one” to Marie, then Baby Denny is taller than Marie and Johnny! That’s a big baby.

Q. How long did you remain?
A. Two or three minutes.

Marie, when did you get a watch? Wait! Don’t tell me…Gertie Wright’s Magical Clock disappeared from the front room and materialized in the bathroom! And Marie, how is it that you remember that you were in the bathroom for 120 to 180 seconds looking back about six months later?

Q. What did you do?
A. I went downstairs with little Denny.
Q. Did you stay in the house on that occasion?
A. I had to.
Q. You were being disciplined for something?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How soon after you came downstairs did you have occasion to see Sylvia?
A. When we went out to play kickball.
Q. Did she go out to play kickball with you?
A. Yes.
Q. Was she able to play this game?
A. Yes.

Disciplined? For what, playing with her mother’s stockpile of copper tubing? Paula get the board! So Marie carries Baby Denny, who is taller than her, and taller than Johnny, downstairs. Perhaps Marie has been pumping iron rather than copper. She is in trouble for doing something naughty, and so can not go outside. But that won’t stop her from playing kickball! Wait! If you can’t go outside because you’re being punished, but you can play kickball, then you’re probably playing kickball in the dining room! What is more impressive than Gertie Wright’s Dining Room Stadium? Boxing matches, bottle fights, and kickball games. I think Jenny fixed the Chameleon Circuit. Move the dining room table, and Gertrude’s bed, lay out the bases and…game on! Marie can’t play kickball by herself, although the rather large Baby Denny probably packs a powerful kick! And as if it couldn’t get more ridiculous, we learn that after torturing Sylvia with a game of Diabolical Bath, Sylvia suddenly appears in the dining room. Why? Well, she doesn’t want to miss kickball!

Q. Did she say anything concerning the incident?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did she complain?
A. She was awful red afterward and said her body felt like it was in real deep pain.
Q. Did you notice any blisters on her body or face as a result of this bath?
A. No, sir.

The cold water burns caused by the hot water when she was, moments ago, being tortured by being put in the bath tub left her looking “awful red.” But it was much worse! She said her body felt like it was in real deep pain. Still, that didn’t stop her from playing kickball! I’ve heard of professional athletes playing with injuries, but they have nothing on Sylvia!

Don’t be fooled. I was in no way making fun of Marie’s testimony. It all made complete sense, and fully conformed to what we know about reality. Teams? I pick…Sylvia! What a kick! Rounding first base, Sylvia’s headed for second base. Paula’s playing second base? I’d get out of the way, Paula! Two broken wrists would be a shame. Well, I’m done with that. For now.

Kickball is a game, but we have no real indication that it was Diabolical Kickball, although I’ll bet Gertrude could find a way of making it so! But how can “Tie Up Sylvia” be anything but Diabolical? What we have seen is that “Tie Up Sylvia” was one choice when playing “Put Sylvia in the Bath.” Of course, it is utter nonsense. It’s obviously meant to explain how you get a kid into a bathtub when she doesn’t want to get into it. It does not prevent her from splashing water all over anyone who “putted” her in the bath tub. Sometimes you have to tie her up, and sometimes you don’t?

It’s too bad for Johnny, but he often gets blamed for tying Sylvia up. Marie, who went badly off script about the use of the Bumpian Burning Wand to brand Sylvia in the basement, to protect Ricky, shoved Johnny and Paula under the bus. Ricky gets a pass, and Paula gets stuck with the IRON FURNACE POKER WRONGLY ENTERED INTO EVIDENCE AND PRESENTED DECEPTIVELY IN COURT EYE-HOOK SCREW-HOOK in her hand. Now in Ricky’s version of the events in Gertie Wright’s Basement of Horror, Sylvia is not tied up when he and his partner Shirley brand Sylvia. 

Q. What did Shirley do?
A. She was standing next to me.
Q. Was Sylvia tied any way?
A. No, sir.

And:

Q. She just stood there facing you?
A. Yes, sir.

So you have to, sometimes, tie Sylvia up to get her into a bathtub full of burning cold water, but to inflict a third degree burn by branding her, she will just stand there. Ricky uses the Silent, Suffering Sylvia character to the full in his testimony. In so doing, he lessens his guilt by dividing it three ways:

33% Shirley; 33% himself; 33% Sylvia

He did the same thing with the mutilation in the kitchen:

33% Gertrude; 33% himself; 33% Sylvia

In other words, if Sylvia would have simply done something, anything, other than just stand there and take it, he wouldn’t have been able to do what he fictionally did. Ricky is obsessed with guilt…his own guilt. So he performs the mutilation in the kitchen, yet cauterizes the needle.

Q. Did you ever tie her up?
A. No, sir.

And:

Q. Did you ever tie Sylvia Likens yourself in the basement?
A. No, sir.
Q. Is it a fact, you and Coy Hubbard actually tied her up on Saturday before she died?
A. No, sir.
Q. Were you present when I read Exhibit No. 25, being a statement by Coy Hubbard?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did you hear that Coy Hubbard stated in the presence of Officers Kaiser and Campbell, in answer to this question, Q. "Did you and Ricky Hobbs ever do anything to Sylvia Likens"? He gave the answer, A. "Yes, last Saturday we tied her in the basement"., Did you hear that?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is that true?
A. To my best recollection, no.
Q. You would not say it did not happen?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You would say it did not happen?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Coy Hubbard did not tell the truth on the 27th of October?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Yes, he did tell the truth, or yes, he lied?
A. He did not tell the truth.

Of course, with Silent, Suffering Sylvia…there is no need to tie her up. In fact, the only reason to tie her up in order to inflict abuse on her, is because she has adopted the guise of a different character…Sylvia the Fighter…Sylvia the Wrist Breaker…Sylvia the Girl who Could have Pounded on Johnny All Day if She Wanted to! That character was not the one Ricky favored. Why? Because if she fought, if she resisted, if she landed a right cross to Ricky’s jaw and thereby left him with a bruised ear, then Ricky would have been stuck with 66% of the blame. Or at least 50%. Silent, Suffering Sylvia is not present in Marie’s description of what happened in the basement:

Q. Who else was holding Sylvia down?
A. Shirley was holding Sylvia by the feet.
Q. Shirley was down there?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You are sure?
A. Yes.
Q. You said a moment ago she was not. Are you sure she was there?
A. I am getting all confused.

So are we. 10 year old Shirley can hold Sylvia’s feet down? Sure! Hey, Shirley…get just a little closer to my feet kiddo…I’ll give you something to tell on!

Q. Shirley was holding her feet and John was holding her shoulders. Did Johnny put a gag in her mouth?
A. Yes.
Q. Was she tied any way?
A. Her hands were tied right behind her.
Q. Were her feet tied?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What with?
A. A rope.
Q. Do you know who tied her?
A. Johnny.
Q. Johnny tied her hands and her feet?
A. Yes, sir.

Who’s confused now? Mr. Attorney, I thought you just said Shirley wasn’t down there. She was, then she wasn’t when she was, then she is, and…I am the Walrus! You tie her up because she will resist. Perhaps we have Bifurcated Sylvia…the girl who can be the Silent, Suffering One and the One Who could Kick Shirley Across the Basement, at the same time. Please, make up your mind! Hey Shirley, did Sylvia give you an ouchie? An owie? Telling a story will make it feel better:

Q. Did you ever see anyone tie Sylvia up?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. When did you see this, Shirley?
A. Within the two weeks.
Q. Before Sylvia died?
A. Yes.
Q. Who tied her up?
A. Coy and my brother John.
Q. And where were they when they did this?
A. Downstairs in the basement.
Q. Was anybody else there?
A. No.
Q. Just you and Coy and Johnny and Sylvia, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. How did they tie her?
A. They put her arms up and tied them against the banister of the stairs.
Q. What did they tie her with?
A. A rope.
Q. Did they tie any other part of her body?
A. Her feet. They tied her feet to a board that was holding the stairs up.
Q. And where - were her hands over her head?
A. Yes.
Q. How long did they leave her tied up, do you know?
A. No.
Q. Did they do anything when she was tied up?
A. Not that I know of.

So rather than Coy and Ricky, Shirley says that Coy and Johnny tied Sylvia up in the basement. Shirley saw it, but doesn’t know how long Sylvia was tied up. Why did they tie her up? Paula accused Johnny of tying up Sylvia, but doesn’t accuse him of doing anything to her after doing so. Shirley tells us that Coy and Johnny didn’t do anything to Sylvia after tying her up, but isn’t aware of either boy doing anything to Sylvia. Tying her down like this is deeply troubling. It has obvious sexual overtones to it. She is being restrained, but Shirley indicates that this is the only instance of Sylvia being tied up that she is aware of outside of the ridiculous bathroom setting. As for Shirley’s tale about the basement, Jenny will tell the same story:

Q. Did you ever see anyone other than Coy Hubbard tie Sylvia up?
A. Yes
Q. Who?
A. John Baniszewski.
Q. When was this?
A. It was in the two weeks.

Coy, Johnny, and The Two Weeks.

Q. What happened then?
A. I don't know. He tied her hand up to the wall.
Q. Where was Sylvia then?
A. She was down in the basement.
Q. What did he use to tie her up with?
A. A rope.
Q. How did he tie her?

A. He tied her hands up above her head. He tied her hands together. Then he had her feet tied to a board. I think he had her feet tied to a board.

Q. What board are you talking about?
A. I don't know, there is the stairway and then I don't know what it is.
Q. A board attached to the stairway?
A. Yes.
Q. Was it a wooden stairway?
A. Yes.
Q. The board was attached to the stairway?
A. Yes.
Q. What were her hands tied to?
A. I think there was another board. He tied the rope around it to hold her hands up, I guess.
Q. You say this - was anyone else present other than John?
A. I went down to see her.
Q. No one else was there other than you and John and Sylvia?
A. No.

The basement, and the same basic account of how she was tied up. Of course, Jenny apparently missed the presence of…Shirley. But then:

Q. Was something said at this time?

A. I went back upstairs and Gertie told me to tell Sylvia she could have another chance, that she could have a cracker and see if she would take it and some water. Shirley got a cup of water and I got a cracker and Sylvia said, "I don't want it, give it to the dog, it is hungrier than I am". I said, "I know you are hungry". She said she did not want it. I knew she would get in trouble. Shirley put the water to her mouth and Sylvia drunk it. Shirley ran to her mother and said she drank the water. She could not force it away because her hands were tied. Gertie comes to the basement and said, "You know you were not supposed to have water". Sylvia said, "I did not want it but Shirley made me drink it". Gertie took her fist and kept hitting her in the stomach.

Q. Go on.
A. I don't know then - if I remember, Gertrude said, "Let her stay that way awhile", so we went upstairs.
Q. What was John doing during this time?
A. He was not down there. Me and Shirley went down there.
Q. Did you hear John say anything about this?
A. You mean about the water and crackers?
Q. Tying her up?
A. No.
Q. Did he say why he tied her up?
A. No, I guess he just wanted to tie her up.

Shirley appears, Coy disappears. Shirley says that she knows nothing about the circumstances. Jenny knows all about the circumstances, and even composed the Sylvia the Messiah speech. Jenny uses the opportunity to insult the intelligence of all who hear or read this account. Gertrude decides that Sylvia can have a “second chance.” She could have one cracker and some water. Shirley gets the cracker, Jenny gets the water. Marie is so strong that she can carry around a baby that is bigger than her. Jenny is so weak that if she carries a glass of water, she needs the ten year old to carry a single cracker. Saint Sylvia tells Jenny to give the cracker to the Ghost Puppy. He is hungrier than her? So Gertrude is starving Sylvia and the little dog? Fiend! Paul Harmon claimed that while in the basement, he found dog food. Of course, if there were no dogs, ghostly or of the shrinking variety, then there was no dog food in the basement. I feel a bible verse coming on!

“For I was hungry and you gave me food….”

If you looked in Sylvia’s bible, you might be reading Matthew 25:35. Still, there is more on this subject a bit later. Then Jenny offers a second reason for not eating the cracker…Sylvia would get in trouble. Shirley lets Sylvia drink the water, and then promptly runs upstairs and tells Gertrude that Sylvia had the nerve to drink the water Gertrude said she could have. Gertrude is furious, goes down into the basement. How dare you do what I said you should do! I can’t stand obedient kids! Doing what you’re told naturally leads to punches in your stomach. Hey, Gertie! If you’re going to hit Sylvia, make sure she’s tied up. If not…get just a little closer and…lights out for Gertrude! And as she lies there, staring at the ceiling, and pondering the basement, Gertrude might just quote one of the best movie endings of all time:  “My God, it’s full of stars!” Or not. Sylvia blames Shirley for forcing her to drink the water, and then Gertrude pounds on Sylvia for the transgression. All this, despite the fact that Gertrude had just proclaimed that Sylvia was to get a second chance, sending Jenny and Shirley down into the basement with a single cracker and a glass of water. The entire story makes no sense, and apparently, Shirley didn’t remember any of it!

Q. Go on.
A. I don't know then - if I remember, Gertrude said, "Let her stay that way awhile", so we went upstairs.
Q. What was John doing during this time?
A. He was not down there. Me and Shirley went down there.
Q. Did you hear John say anything about this?
A. You mean about the water and crackers?

Careful, Jenny! Crackers? You said only one cracker. If you give crackers to a Ghost Puppy, what kind of crackers are they? Saltines? No! Animal crackers! Sorry. So Coy disappeared, and then Johnny disappeared. Gertie Wright’s Haunted House? Where else would you find so many specters, so many wraiths? Don’t ask me! Ask my brother! Still, there is no explanation for why they did this. And! Apparently Shirley was walking around in a serious fugue state; so it is that she remembers watching Sylvia being tied up in the basement, but not making Sylvia drink water or anything else for that matter.

Q. Tying her up?
A. No.
Q. Did he say why he tied her up?
A. No, I guess he just wanted to tie her up.

This is important. It was not Gertrude’s idea to tie up Sylvia. This was something that Coy and Johnny, then Johnny, did on their own. Why? Johnny just wanted to tie Sylvia up. In other words, this act of tying Sylvia up in the basement was not done as a means of confining her to the basement. So why did he do it? Just ‘cause.

Jenny relates a second occurrence. She dates this to The Two Weeks, and more specifically, to a week before Sylvia died. Gertrude was present, as was Jenny, who is present for so much horrible abuse and does nothing other than raking leaves for money or going out to get lunch. Other, otherwise unknown, people were there too:

Q. You may answer.
A. He put something in a rag or something in her mouth to gag her.
Q. How did he do this?
A. Just stuffed it in her mouth.
Q. Then what happened?
A. He hit her with his fist.
Q. Where did he hit her?
A. The arm, and face.
Q. What did Sylvia do then?
A. She just stood there.

Johnny gags Sylvia to hit her, yet doesn’t tie her up. Jenny, like Ricky, falls back on Silent, Suffering Sylvia. But Johnny can hit Sylvia without tying her up. Then:

Q. Did you see John do this at any other time?
A. Yes.
Q. When was this?
A. About three days before her death.
Q. Who was present then?
A. Sylvia, John me, I can't exactly think who all was there.
Q. Then what happened?
A. The same thing.
Q. Tell the jury and the court what happened?
A. He hit her with his fist and gagged her.
Q. What did he put in her mouth this time, if anything?
A. Just rags.
Q. Was she tied?
A. Yes, he tied her up with a rope, her hands.

So if he needs to tie Sylvia up to hit her now, why not before? What’s happened to Silent, Suffering Sylvia? Maybe, tie her up because she is now I’ll Break Your Wrist Sylvia!

Q. Did you ever see Coy Hubbard do anything?
A. Yes.
Q. When?
A. Oh, about three nights before she died, he tied her up.
Q. Where was she then?
A. Up on the mattress, upstairs on the floor.
Q. Who was present?
A. Me and Shirley, Marie was asleep in the bed, and Coy Hubbard, Stephanie was in the hall.

Ah! How important is this! Three nights before Sylvia died she is sleeping on the mattress…upstairs. Wait! Why is the Canonical Story destroying itself?

Q. You said Sylvia slept in the basement. When did she start sleeping in the basement?
A. I'd say it was about the 10th or 11th or October.

By this point in time, Sylvia is supposed to be confined to the basement. Yet here she is, on October 23rd, sleeping in the upstairs back bedroom? Coy is allowed in the girls’ bedroom at night? Please! Why did he tie her up? Surely he wasn’t confining her to the bedroom. He also runs the real risk of Marie or Shirley untying Sylvia. We can, of course, negate the possibility that Jenny, who describes herself continually as not doing anything to help her sister, would actually untie Sylvia. Again, tying up Sylvia has no stated purpose. Let’s let Jenny tell us something ridiculous:

Q. Who tied her up?
A. Coy Hubbard tied her up and Sylvia wet the bed.
Q. When she was tied up who else was present, if anyone?
A. Stephanie was standing in the hall.
Q. Where did this take place?
A. Up in the bedroom.
Q. What did he use to tie her up with?
A. A rope.
Q. How did he tie her?
A. He tied her hands and tied her feet, I don't know how.
Q. Was this in the daytime?
A. Night.

Coy Hubbard, young man! Stay out of the girls’ bedroom! Hey, Gertie! It’s nighttime and Coy is upstairs in the girls’ bedroom. Really? Out of my way!

Q. Then what happened?

A. They all went downstairs and Sylvia whispered to me and said "Jenny, Jenny" and asked me to get her a drink of water.

Q. What did you do then, Jenny?
A. I got up and got her a drink of water.
Q. What happened?
A. Sylvia laid back down and turned over.
Q. Is that the night Sylvia urinated?
A. Yes.
Q. Did she stay tied up all night?
A. Yes.
Q. Did someone untie her in the morning?
A. I think Stephanie did.

So let me get this straight. Jenny refused to untie her sister. Instead, she gave her a drink of water. She gave the kid tied to the bed a drink of water, and then, surprise…surprise, Sylvia wet the bed. Hey! I have a question. If she’s tied up, why is Sylvia sitting up? Then she laid back down? As Dr. Stephanie could tell us, falling backwards on a mattress from a sitting position can kill you! And I have another question. We know that two kids sleep in the bed, and two kids sleep on the mattress. If Sylvia urinated during the night, then which kid slept in Sylvia’s urine? Did Jenny wake up with urine all over her? Did Marie? Did Shirley? Warm bath time for someone other than Sylvia! One last question. Why did Stephanie untie Sylvia in the morning? Stephanie doesn’t sleep in the back bedroom…remember? She’s not allowed to sleep with the other girls. She sleeps with mom…a bummer for a fifteen year old girl. Stephanie sleeps with mom! Hah-hah-hah-hah! Tell the kids at school that Stephanie sleeps with her mommy! Well, it comes as no surprise that Sylvia’s dearly beloved sister…the angelic one…Saint Jenny…didn’t bother to do it. Maybe she was in a hurry to get in the bathtub and wash the urine off of her. In a strange way, I think that Jenny is holding herself out as Sylvia’s benefactor in her little story. If Jenny were still alive, she would probably object to the opinion just given. I did nothing wrong! She wanted a drink of water, and I alone got it for her! How can you criticize me? I am a doer of good deeds! After all, Sylvia didn’t ask me to untie her. I must say…you have a point. Since your sister is Silent, Suffering Sylvia…she knows that she must remain tied up to serve some unknown, unknowable, and outright fictitious, purpose.  Paula reads the bible. Sylvia reads the bible by the window. Benny had a bible…and Shirley had a bible. Shirley the Bible Scholar? Perhaps, Benny the New Testament Exegetical Scholar? I think that Jenny read the bible from time to time too. The story Jenny gave appears to be strangely similar to this:

“And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple..truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward.”

Roy Julian…the Pastor of the Lord’s Flock…the one who watched a sixteen year old girl get up in front of his congregation to accept the Lord as her Savior…he’ll remember that! Only months later, that girl is a prostitute who has be falsely imprisoned, which is a felony, in Gertie Wright State Prison. What Man of God is this? How has the Mighty Spiritual Leader fallen! Nothing strange here. Did you believe her when she made her statement of faith? Was that a sham? If so, why? No, it was not a sham…and you know it. I insist on seeing her! Go ahead. Wait, Jenny says that Sylvia takes Big Baby Denny’s milk? Raids the fridge for a midnight snack? Have you ever encountered a sinner such as this? Prostitution? That’s nothing. Milk Stealer and Fridge Raider? The Lord’s judgement must be nigh. It’s Sunday…church time. All rise for the reading! Jenny opens Scripture and reads…Matthew 10:42. And I also like the double calling:  Jenny, Jenny! One “Jenny” won’t do. As someone who plays a biblical scholar on TV, although I’m sure I’m not in the same league as Benny and Shirley, and I’m almost certain that Paula could give me a run for the money, I instantly think of 1 Samuel 3:10

“The LORD came and stood there, calling as at other times…Samuel! Samuel! Then Samuel replied…Speak, your servant hears you.”

And so the boy Samuel becomes the Prophet Samuel. I hope that the reading is not Matthew 7:21

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven…”

So we must be careful about double shout-outs. Still, how different is this water story than the other one she gave us! Shirley gives Sylvia a drink of water in the basement? Gertie said so? Shirley tells Gertie…well…as we all know, Shirley is a tattle-tale!

And what of Jenny’s good friend? I speak, of course, of Sylvia’s twin sister. The one who participated in the double little kid wedding? Ah, yes…Stephanie. She seems oddly familiar with Jenny’s bed wetting story. And Stephanie manages to outdo Judy Duke by giving us the most ludicrous Detail of Absurdity encountered in the testimony, although Ricky the Contract Killer is a close second. Take it away, Stephanie!

Q. Did you ever see anyone tie Sylvia?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who was that?
A. Me.
Q. O.K. Anyone else?
A. Johnny.
Q. How often would you and Johnny tie her?
A. Well, I don't know if you would actually say she was tied up.

If tying up is involved, then we must have Johnny present. She was tied, but she might not have been tied up?

Q. Why did you tie her?

A. Well, Mom said that she was wetting the bed and she wanted to make sure she did not go to the bathroom, and if she ever wet the bed again she could not go to the bathroom till she quit wetting the bed.

Q. Did she tell you what to do?

A. She said to tie her up. All the kids took her upstairs and Mom was standing by the door and I told Sylvia to put her hands this far apart and I wrapped it around her hands and about once or twice and put it under and took it down to the foot and wrapped it around her toe. I wrapped it around her leg and took it to the doorknob and tied it around the doorknob.

Wow. I’m disturbed. Where is Relkin? Stephanie gives considerable detail describing how she tied up another girl. Is she describing a hog tie? No. The rope would go around the ankles. Stephanie says that she wrapped the rope around the hands, ran it underneath Sylvia’s body, and then wrapped it around Sylvia’s toe. Her toe? Then she wrapped the rope around her leg…both legs? And then tied the rope around the doorknob. I am unaware of any real restraint technique that involves tying the toes. By real, I mean one that would be employed legitimately, such as by the police. When restraining a suspect under arrest, the hands are cuffed at the wrist. If the suspect begins kicking, either at officers or at the windows in the back of the police car, then officers will hog tie the suspect. The person is forced to lie face down, and the wrists and ankles are bound behind them. But not the toes. I will not say definitely what is actually intended, but I will momentarily enter the Darkest of Places. No, not the basement, even if only to gaze at the stars. And let me say categorically that I am making no ultimate accusations, but simply stating what I know. But restraining someone in a way that involves the toes is a defining characteristic of, and I say it only by way of stating a fact, what is called toe-tied bondage, or as a toe-tied element in bondage-play. Is she a teenage girl who, when describing how a girl is tied up, knows enough to include the toes? Motivation? Reason? Is Stephanie playing a game? After all, Stephanie is a game player! Has she intentionally included an element from bondage-play to see if anyone in the courtroom would notice? How fun it might be to toss something like that out and then watch the faces of the people around her to see just which adults are kinky enough to recognize it? Do someone’s eyes widen? Hey…I see you! You looked shocked! I know what you get up to! Stephanie accidentally and without knowledge manages to include the toes purely by chance? Oh, I didn’t know that! Really I didn’t! What a coincidence. And if she has added this component for shock value, one may find oneself sitting, not tied at the toes, in the Darkest of Places wondering how a girl her age in 1965 knows about this detail. We are a long way away from the development of the Internet. And video tapes. Exposure would take the form of magazines, reel-to-reel films, or seeing it done in person. No matter how hard you try, a detailed analysis of the testimony during the Sylvia Likens trial, and an effort to find the truth, will lead to some disturbing sexual elements.

Q. That is what you mean by masochistic?
A. Yes.
Q. Just what is plain everyday language is meant by that?

A. Masochistic? A person - well, who really enjoys being hurt or allows himself to be hurt. Froyd used the term in a sexual way mostly, but used it in sexual activity, being hurt sexually. It can be used in a general way too.

Actually, the name is Freud. Proof-reading? I’m sure that masochists don’t mind a little toe-tying. In fact….I’ll stop right there.

Q. Did she ever discuss to you any pregnancies of her children?

A. Well, she mentioned the oldest child just had a child, the older daughter, and she felt that it was sexual behavior going on among the other children too.

Sexual behavior going on among the other children too? I see, not just Paula.

Q. I will ask you if on December 8, 1965, Mrs. Baniszewski, this question was not asked you before the Marion County Grand Jury and you gave this answer under oath? Q. "Did you tell them that"? A. "I think they did. I want to say right now, those girls were not unhappy with me except the one thing that Sylvia was unhappy about was I wouldn't let her date like she wanted to or I objected to her picking boys up off the street like she wanted to. She was unhappy with me that way but as far as any other way, I don't know".

A. I might have said that to you, yes, sir.
Q. Is that the truth?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You did object to Sylvia about wanting to pick up boys on the street?
A. I objected to my own daughters, sir, even about something like that.

So would I…be sure of that. The subject is really “street-walking,” which is a description of prostitutes looking for customers. And I would point out that certain types of sexual activities are a lot like lobster. You may have a taste for it…but you won’t get it at home. Like…masochistic toe-tying. The inclusion of Sylvia here is not factual. But if Photo1Girl became Sylvia, and Photo1Girl had the slogan on her, and if Photo1Girl was in fact a prostitute, then her street-walking would have to become Sylvia’s street-walking. But which of Gertrude’s daughters engaged in street-walking? After all, to object to something…you have to have something to object to.

Returning from the Darkest of Places, one can easily see the Detail of Absurdity. The reason for tying Sylvia up was because she was wetting the bed. Of course, wetting the bed means that the girl is not getting up in time to make it to the bathroom. And how do you teach a kid to stop wetting the bed? You tie them up and thereby ensure that they can’t get to the bathroom. Gertrude approved of this? She doesn’t want the kid wetting the bed…we all get that. She’s stupid enough to believe that you solve this by tying the kid up? And if she doesn’t want to clean urine from the mattress, and I’m sure that was the case, she would naturally have to sought to deal with the problem in a way that avoids the stupidity that Stephanie apparently found so entertaining. Of course, Jenny will make this worse by giving the kid a drink of water! Let’s get more absurd:

Q. How many times did you do that to keep her from using the bathroom?
A. I doubt if that stopped her from using the bathroom.

Really? Mr. School’s ex-wife is brilliant indeed! Stephanie is having fun, isn’t she?

Q. I understand that is why you said you did it. Your mother told you to?
A. Yes.
Q. How many times?
A. Just that once.

So! Sylvia wets the bed. Stephanie ties her up in a manner with touch points to bondage play in order to cure the girl of this problem. And apparently Gertrude believed that it would only take one time to do this! Attention all parents whose kid is having trouble with Nocturnal Enuresis! Tie them to the bed one time…and voila! The problem is gone. How clever is Stephanie! What a good little game-player she is!

We’re not done with the subject that Stephanie made so much more insidious. The other witnesses cited earlier have no idea why Johnny tied Sylvia up. He does it, then disappears. But note a little detail:

Q. How many times did you see Johnny tie her?
A. Just once.
Q. Where did he tie her?
A. In the basement.
Q. In the basement?
A. Yes.
Q. After she had gone down there to stay and sleep?
A. I don't know.
Q. How did Johnny tie her in the basement?

A. Well, at first he had her hands over her head. She got a kind of funny look on her face and he untied her and tied her back on again looser.

The act of tying the girl up has nothing to do with keeping her in the basement. Johnny doesn’t tie her up to hit her, or even to make fun of her. He is playing with her. He ties her up, then notices that he has tied her up too tightly. So he unties her, and ties her back up…this time, looser; i.e. safer. Almost as if the safe-word was used. If Johnny, within the confines of Stephanie’s game-playing, Stephanie’s subtle challenge to the sexual knowledge of the proper folks in the courtroom, was tying Sylvia up as a means of abuse, then why would he care if she got a funny look on her face? Why tie her up looser? He wouldn’t. There is only one plausible explanation to Stephanie’s description. And that is obvious. Of course, she makes it clear that Johnny is not nearly as good at this as Stephanie herself. Her technique was more sophisticated, and she got it right the first time. But for a boy who is barely taller than his eleven year old sister, and smaller than Big Baby Denny, what do you expect?

Q. Did he leave her there?
A. Not too long.
Q. How long is too long?
A. About fifteen minutes.
Q. You saw him tie her?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Do you know why he tied her?
A. No.
Q. Did you see anyone do anything to her while she was tied with her hands above her head?
A. No, sir.

15 minutes? That won’t keep her in the basement. But it’s longer than a five minute Diabolical Bath. Stephanie is referring to the same event Shirley and Jenny did. But my how more realistic of a story Stephanie’s actually is. And no abuse, no confinement, and no Jennyistic nonsense about crackers and puppies.

Q. Would your mother - did you ever hear your mother scold Sylvia on account of any sex activities?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Was there any basis for it, any reason for it?
A. Just what Sylvia told her.
Q. What did Sylvia tell her?
A. Just that she had gone to bed with boys before.

Ah, yes! I wonder how possible it is that Gertrude had this conversation with Stephanie, rather than Sylvia. But I would object to street-walking too, not to mention my daughter knowing about the toes. That reminds me…just a moment…Young lady, you get down here right now! I want to talk to you! Excuse me for a moment, I’ll be back in a minute.

Q. Is it a fact your mother used to - on several occasions - give Sylvia some motherly advice about sex, did she?
A. I don't know if you would say "motherly" or not.
Q. Did you say she said she should not engage in sexual activities till after she was married?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you say that?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Would you call that motherly advice?
A. Not the way she told it.

Not motherly? Wait until you’re married before having sex? What could be more motherly? Certainly more motherly than smacking and whacking a kid who cheated at Diabolical Poker. Of course, if this was a lecture that Gertrude gave Stephanie, perhaps while objecting to some objectionable things, Stephanie might be rather peeved. It’s none of your business, mom! The answer to the question seems a bit…and I’m not the first person to use the word so don’t blame me…Froydian. Oops…Freudian. Take that, Court Reporter! The word “tie” doesn’t appear in the testimony of Judy Duke except as a component of the word “panties”, which even Stephanie managed not to use.

I don’t know if Stephanie is more disturbing on this point, or Marie is.

Q. Did you ever see Sylvia's hands tied in the air?

A. Yes, our bedroom, on the wall round about four feet from the ground - up from the floor - and Johnny would take Sylvia and have her hands tied behind her and stretch her arms in back of her up till he could slip it over the nail up on the wall.

Q. Did he leave her there?
A. No, he took her down.

Sorry, Kryptikus, but this is torture. What, you object? I wonder. According to Dr. Ellis, the girl he autopsied was 5’ x 4’’ tall. According to Marie, the nail in the wall is approximately 4 feet from the floor. This means that Sylvia would not have been in a full standing position when this supposedly happened. Nor could she have been seated. Marie says that Johnny hung Sylvia from the nail. This isn’t possible based on Sylvia’s height. A close shave from Occam’s Razor would lead one to conclude that Marie’s story is nonsense. Wait, hanging from a nail?

Q. I want to show you this, State's Exhibit No. 11. I want you to look at it. Have you see it before?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What is it?
A. A hook.
Q. Did you ever see that heated up?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you ever see anyone put that to the paper you said Paula lit?
A. No, sir.
Q. Where did you see that iron?
A. Downstairs on - in the basement, hanging up on a nail.

Interesting. Tying someone’s hands and hanging them by whatever is restraining the wrists is definitely torture. And that is what I think Marie is trying to describe. She messed it up when she gave the height of the nail vis-à-vis the floor. Why is there a nail sticking out of the bedroom wall? I’m certain that Gertie Wright the Hardware Woman doesn’t keep eye-hooks in the upstairs back bedroom. Perhaps it was left bare when Marie’s mother donated a classical painting to a museum. Perhaps when Gertie Wright’s Museum of Horror was turned into a casino. Even 3850 East New York Street can’t be the quintessence of everything. Pull the nail out of the wall, and hammer it in at, let’s say, 6 feet from the floor, hang the victim from it…then you have torture. How would Marie know about this particular sort of torture? How in the world would Marie be able to describe this? I suspect that she was told to say this. She wasn’t told to use Jenny’s Tape Measure and mention the height of the nail from the floor. Kryptikus, who is not above butting into other writers’ contributions, has just asked me a very good question. This is a description of torture? It is, in its general presentation. And forgetting the distance of the nail from the floor, Marie says that Johnny didn’t leave Sylvia there. So Johnny is versed in real torture techniques, not ridiculous hot water nonsense, and seeks to practice them on Sylvia, only to take her down? I wonder if Morpheus, although perhaps her brother Phobetor, Bringer of Nightmares, is more relevant here, pondered how odd it is that a torture expert shows off his knowledge by using this technique in a way that does not torture his victim? Hey! You said one question, not a speech! But you made a good point.

Q. What did he do while she was tied with her hands above her head?
A. Then he took a long piece of rope and tied it around the other rope and than he had her on our bed and had the thing right under -
Q. What thing?
A. Under the top part of the hand. It was something like a - it was on a roll-a-way bed, something like you would use on a hose.
Q. Metal?
A. Yes, sir.

She hangs from a nail, he takes her down, then he ties her to the bed with another long piece of rope…just how much rope does Gertrude have in her house? I know! The dining room, they hold rodeos in there too! Of course, Johnny had the “thing right under”...what thing? “something like you would use on a hose.” Use on a hose? Fireman Marie!

Q. What did he do?
A. Pulled on the rope till it put pressure on her head and she would say, "Stop it, Johnny" and Johnny would stop.

Don’t be mistaken…Marie is describing torture. This isn’t bondage-play. Why is it that Johnny knows real torture techniques, but is only described as using them during this one event? Paula says that Johnny tied up Sylvia, but then claimed that he teased her and made fun of her. There is absolutely nothing else in the testimony that I have scene that comes close to what Marie has described. Marie would not have thought this up on her own. The adults wanted torture…Bumpo wanted torture..and they told Marie what to describe. This is clear from the following:

Q. You testified yesterday that Sylvia slept up in the bedroom with you, in the same room you did before she went the basement?

A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you know anyone who ever tied her hands and feet and had Sylvia sleep that way all night?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who did that?
A. Johnny and Paula.
Q. Do you know when they did that, with reference to when Sylvia died?
A. Two or three days before she died.
Q. Did you know why they did it?
A. No, sir.

I say clear because Johnny, in the torture story, acts without Paula. But when Marie is directed back to the subject of tying Sylvia up, she falls back on her “Paula and her evil henchman” theme that prompts her to connect Johnny with Paula, exactly like in the branding story. And regardless, Marie’s torture story uses the act of tying Sylvia up for something that is not…confinement. Coy described himself and Johnny as tying Sylvia up. But he, like all the witnesses except for I’m-too-young-to-know-about-bondage-techniques Stephanie, offers no reason for tying Sylvia up. We’re left with:

1.  To get her in the bathtub

2.  To teach her not to wet the bed

3.  Bizarre behavior involving Johnny and Coy.

4.  Bizarre behavior involving Stephanie

I would like to make a final comment about the “Tie Up Sylvia” Diabolical game. Based on what the witnesses said, excepting Dr. Ellis and Dr. Kebel, who I will discuss shortly, this was a game that was played frequently. It is a very important element in the Canonical Story. But which Canonical Story? Yes! There is more than one! In the middle of Dr. Ellis’ testimony, Mr. Erbecker launched into an amazingly long speech. And this speech is his version of the Canonical Story. What makes his speech so interesting, in more ways than one, but the one that is important here, is that he makes the following claim:

“Another daughter, Stephanie, tied the deceased to the bed”

Sylvia was only tied up one time? Only by Stephanie? Stephanie who claimed to have tied Sylvia up one time, including a detail that could strike one as deeply disturbing?

It is very interesting that Dr. Ellis referred to the “wrists” only four times. He referred to the “ankles” only once, and in relation to the immaculately laundered pants that Mattress Girl is wearing in the Person Photo. Oh, despite her filthy feet.  And on the subject of feet, he uses the word only once, and in relation to telling us that the height of the victim was 5 feet, 4 inches. The Scales-less One refers to the “hands” only five times. Sorry, Stephanie, but he never mentions the toes. And he makes no mention of the word “rope” or “ligature.” The word “tie” appears three times in Dr. Ellis’ testimony.

A. However, the blood in the subdural location was found almost diagonally of the blow I described underneath the scalp, which would make this contrecoup position tend to tie it up with that.

So that use of the word “tie” is irrelevant. What about the second use?

“Another daughter, Stephanie, tied the deceased to the bed”

Wait! Dr. Ellis didn’t say that. We saw earlier that this claim is found in the exceedingly long, yet Canonical Story destroying speech made by Mr. Erbecker.  What about the third?

Q. Doctor, if exertion and force was used in tying this girl to a bed, could that force of exertion any way contributed to the head injury?

A. If in the process of a struggle in a situation like this, the head was struck or the head struck something with moderate force, it could have caused the head injury.

Q. Would it have been possible for those particular injuries to have occurred?
A. If, in the struggle, the head struck something at that time.

Notice what has happened here. The attorney specifically asks about the effects of tying a girl to a bed. But only in relation to a head injury. That’s a strange question. And I love the Ellisian answer:  a head injury could have happened if the head struck something. But what is missing in Dr. Ellis’ testimony? It is the same thing that is missing in Dr. Kebel’s testimony. He says nothing about ligature marks on the wrists, hand, ankles, or feet. In fact, there is nothing in his testimony that relates to any injuries observable, no ligature marks, no nothing, that evidences that the girl in question had ever been tied up, tied down, etc. Just how many times have we seen in the discussion to be found in this essay that it was claimed that Sylvia had been tied up? They are numerous to say the least, and some are dated to the final days of Sylvia Likens’ life. How then can there be no reference by the pathos-generating Pathologist indicating that the girl had been tied up? Take rope, tie it around your wrists, and then move around. In no time you will have nasty rope burns. Your ankles too! If anything the witnesses said was even remotely true, except perhaps Stephanie’s claim that she tied Sylvia up, then the girl’s wrists and ankles should have shown severe rope burns and ligature marks. Yet the Pathologist says absolutely nothing about it. Why? Because the whole “Tie Up Sylvia” game, one that generates nightmares that would even startle my brother Phobetor, are completely fictional. Below is a blow-up of the arms and hands of Photo1Girl. We see the alteration, the falsification, of the hands. The left had wears a glove. Not really, that happened when they altered the hand so as to hide the fingers...and thereby the fingernails. Notice too something very strange. That swirl seen on the right side of the chest...a funny blouse indeed. But notice the way that the linear design on the blouse actually runs across the right hand. Interesting, isn't it? I do not see ligature marks or rope burns, which would have been severe if she were tied up as often as the children said she was. So Dr. Ellis and Dr. Kebel told the truth when they didn't tell us about evidence that the girl had been tied up. Truth in silence. It does happen.

Some on this website have made references to a mythology that has grown up around this case. The strange thing is, the Canonical Story World seems to think that what is found in the lying testimony of the children isn't disturbing enough. It isn't horrific enough. It must be made more so. It needs more kick, it needs to become more dramatic..much more dramatic. My brother, Phobetor, showed me this:

Actually, he showed me the movie. Now I ask you, where in any of the nonsense-testimony that was discussed in this essay was Sylvia described as hanging from the basement ceiling? When was she ever described as being blindfolded? In fact, if they had only raised her body up another two feet or so, they could have presented an almost Crucifixion image; well, with ropes instead of nails. But the visual effect would be the same. Tied to the bed, tied up in the bathtub, tied to the doorknob, tied to the stairs...but I must tell you, Phobetor, this image is absolutely a lie. Of course, it is dramatic, and I'm sure that the Canonical Story World loves this picture. And so...mythology. Why believe the truth, when the lies are so much more flashy? Of course, if you're not looking for the truth, but would rather make titillating forays into a world of nightmares, this is a good start. Or so says Phobetor.

Was it my intention to take away yet another key element in the Canonical Story? No. I approached the material in an unbiased manner. Yet I ended up in the same place that so many others on this website have ended up…the element in question is totally fictional. The Canonical Story is becoming a Great Void. By my count, we have lost almost all of the evidence of abuse, not to mention torture. I sought out nightmares, certain they would be here. They were in the statements of many of the witnesses. Phobetor agreed with that. Of course, if you have a nightmare, then you awake, you quickly discover that what you saw in your nightmare wasn’t real at all. While you sleep, it’s real. But when you awake, it’s not. And so my brother leaves us. He will reside within the Canonical Story. After all, there are nightmares aplenty there. It seems that so many people who live there are rather too fond of nightmares…and torture. But all good Houses of Horror must have those elements; they sell tickets, and they sell books. They never go out of style. A girl hits her head and dies? That won’t sell books or tickets. Such a case will fade away in no time. Perhaps it’s too bad that one remembers a girl who lost her life while so young and so tragically only if she lived and died in a world of nightmares. Perhaps that’s a judgement on our society…a judgement on all of us. If Gertrude lies on her back in the basement contemplating the stars in her subterranean sky…maybe that’s a dream too.