250px-Jack-o'-Lantern_2003-10-31Halloween is the favorite holiday for all torts professors and personal injury lawyers. (Indeed, I am convinced it was invented by a personal injury lawyer). Common carrier hay rides, lighting vegetables on fire, handing out foodstuffs without a permit . . . It’s the most litigious day of the year. So, with no further ado, here is this year’s annual Spooky Torts and Crimes list of actual cases from Halloween. Happy Halloween everyone (except those avoiding the holiday due to demon-inspired soul-sucking candy or papal prohibitions).

This year, we have already seen flashlights that appear to burst into flames, politically incorrect costumes pulled from the shelves, and dead bodies mistaken for Halloween decorations. Yesterday, we also saw a tragic death of a teen who accidentally hanged herself, here.

For those taking down the cobwebs in the morning, we strongly encourage that you not use a blowtorch, here.

Dickson v. Hustonville Haunted House and Greg Walker (?) (2009)

Glenda Dickson, 51, broke four broken vertebrae in her back when she fell out of second story window left open at the Hustonville Haunted House, owned by Greg Walker.

Dickson was in a room called “The Crying Lady in the Bed” when one of the actors came up behind the group and started screaming. Everyone jumped in fright and Dickson jumped back through an open window that was covered with a sheet — a remarkably negligent act by the haunted house operator. She landed on a fire escape and then fell down some stairs.

OUTCOME: While no criminal charges are planned, this would appear a likely case for a lawsuit for negligence. Since it only happened yesterday, we may have to follow up next year to see if this got really scary.

Maryland v. Janik (2009)

Sgt. Eric Janik, 37, went to a haunted house called the House of Screams with friends and when confronted by a character dressed as Leatherface with a chainsaw (sans the chain, of course), Janik pulled out his service weapon and pointed it at the man, who immediately dropped character, dropped the chainsaw, and ran like a bat out of Halloween Hell.

Outcome: Janik is charged with assault and reckless endangerment for his actions. Charges pending.


Patrick v. South Carolina (2009)

Quentin Patrick, 22, an ex-convict in Sumter, South Carolina shot and killed a trick-or-treater T.J. Darrisaw who came to his home on Halloween — spraying nearly 30 rounds with an assault rifle from inside his home after hearing a knock on the door. T.J.’s 9-year-old brother, Ahmadre Darrisaw, and their father, Freddie Grinnell, were injured but were released after being treated at a hospital.

Patrick left his porch light on — a general signal for kids that the house was open for trick and treating. The boy’s mother and toddler sibling were in the car.

Patrick emptied the AK-47 — shooting at least 29 times through his front door, walls and windows after hearing the knock. He said that he had been previously robbed. That may be so, but it is unclear what an ex-con was doing with a gun, let alone an AK-47.

OUTCOME: Charges pending for murder.

Kentucky v. Watkins (2008)

As a Halloween prank, restaurant manager Joe Watkins of the Chicken Ranch in Paris, Kentucky thought it was funny to lie in a pool of blood on the floor. After seeing Watkins on the floor, the woman went screaming from the restaurant to report the murder. Watkins said that the prank was for another employee and that he tried to call the woman back on her cell phone.

OUTCOME: Under Kentucky law, a person can be charged with a false police report, even if he is not the one who filed it. The police charged Watkins for causing the woman to file the report — a highly questionable charge.

Mays v. Gretna Athletic Boosters
95-717 (La.App. 5 Cir. 01/17/96)

Defendant operated a haunted house at Mel Ott Playground in Gretna to raise money for athletic programs. The haunted house was constructed of 2x4s and black visqueen. There were numerous cubbyholes where “scary” exhibits were displayed. One booster club member was stationed at the entrance and one at the exit. Approximately eighteen people participated in the haunted house by working the exhibits inside. Near and along the entrance of the haunted house was a bathroom building constructed of cinder blocks. Black visqueen covered this wall.

Plaintiff and her daughter’s friend, about 10 years old, entered the haunted house on October 29, 1988. It was night time and was dark inside. Plaintiff testified someone jumped out and hollered, scaring the child into running. Plaintiff was also frightened and began to run. She ran directly into the visqueen-covered cinder block wall.

There was no lighting in that part of the haunted house. Plaintiff hit the wall face first and began bleeding profusely from her nose. She testified two surgeries were required to repair her nose.

OUTCOME: In order to get the proper effect, haunted houses are dark and contain scary and/or shocking exhibits. Patrons in a Halloween haunted house are expected to be surprised, startled and scared by the exhibits but the operator does not have a duty to guard against patrons reacting in bizarre, frightened and unpredictable ways. Operators are duty bound to protect patrons only from unreasonably dangerous conditions, not from every conceivable danger.

As found by the Trial Court, defendant met this duty by constructing the haunted house with rooms of adequate size and providing adequate personnel and supervision for patrons entering the house. Defendant’s duty did not extend to protecting plaintiff from running in a dark room into a wall. Our review of the entire record herein does not reveal manifest error committed by the Trial Court or that the Trial Court’s decision was clearly wrong. Plaintiff has not shown the haunted house was unreasonably dangerous or that defendant’s actions were unreasonable. Thus, the Trial Court judgment must be affirmed.

Powell v. Jacor Communications

320 F.3d 599 (6th Cir.2003)

On October 15, 1999, Powell visited a Halloween season haunted house in Lexington, Kentucky that was owned and operated by Jacor. She was allegedly hit in the head with an unidentified object by a person she claims was dressed as a ghost. Powell was knocked unconscious and injured. She contends that she suffered a concussion and was put on bed rest and given medications by emergency-room physicians. Powell further claims that she now suffers from several neuropsychological disorders as a result of the incident.

OUTCOME: Reversed dismissal on the basis of tolling of statute of limitations.

Kansas City Light & Power Company v. Trimble
315 Mo. 32; 285 S.W. 455 (1926)

A shapely pole to which, twenty-two feet from the ground is attached a non-insulated electric wire . . Upon a shapely pole were standard steps eighteen inches apart; about seventeen feet from the ground were telephone wires, and five feet above them was a non-insulated electric light wire. On Halloween, about nine o’clock, a bright fourteen-year-old boy and two companions met close to the pole, and some girls dressed as clowns came down the street. As they came near the boy, saying, “Who dares me to walk the wire?” began climbing the pole, using the steps, and ascended to the telephone cables, and thereupon his companions warned him about the live wire and told him to come down. He crawled upon the telephone cables to a distance of about ten feet from the pole, and when he reached that point a companion again warned him of the live wire over his head, and threatened to throw a rock at him and knock him off if he did not come down. Whereupon he turned about and crawled back to the pole, and there raised himself to a standing position, and then his foot slipped, and involuntarily he threw up his arm, his hand clutched the live wire, and he was shocked to death.


Frankly, I am not sure why the pole was so “shapely” but the result was disappointing for the plaintiffs. Kansas City Light & Power Company v. Trimble: The court held that the appellate court extended the attractive nuisance doctrine beyond the court’s ruling decisions. The court held that appellate court’s opinion on the contributory negligence doctrine conflicted with the court’s ruling decisions. The court held that the administrator’s case should never have been submitted to the jury. The court quashed the appellate opinion.

“To my mind it is inconceivable that a bright, intelligent boy, doing well in school, past fourteen years of age and living in the city, would not understand and appreciate the fact that it would be dangerous to come in contact with an electric wire, and that he was undertaking a dangerous feat in climbing up the pole; but even if it may be said that men might differ on that proposition, still in this case he was warned of the wire and of the danger on account of the wire and that, too, before he had [**458] reached a situation where there was any occasion or necessity of clutching the wire to avoid a fall. Not only was he twice warned but he was repeatedly told and urged to come down.


Purtell v. Mason
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49064 (E.D. Ill. 2006)

“The Purtells filed the present lawsuit against Defendant Village of Bloomingdale Police Officer Bruce Mason after he requested that they remove certain Halloween tombstone “decorations” from their property. Evidence presented at trial revealed that the Purtells placed the tombstones referring to their neighbors in their front yard facing the street. The tombstones specifically referred to their neighbors, who saw the language on the tombstones. For instance, the tombstone that referred to the Purtells’ neighbor James Garbarz stated:

Here Lies Jimmy,

The OlDe Towne IdioT

MeAn As sin even withouT his Gin

No LonGer Does He wear

That sTupiD Old Grin . . .

Oh no, noT where

they’ve sent Him!

The tombstone referring to the Purtells’ neighbor Betty Garbarz read:

BeTTe wAsN’T ReADy,

BuT here she Lies

Ever since that night she DieD.

12 feet Deep in this trench . . .

Still wasn’T Deep enough

For that wenches Stench!

In addition, the Purtells placed a Halloween tombstone in their yard concerning their neighbor Diane Lesner stating:

Dyean was Known for Lying

So She was fried.

Now underneath these daises

is where she goes crazy!!

Moreover, the jury heard testimony that Diane Lesner, James Garbarz, and Betty Garbarz were upset because their names appeared on the tombstones. Betty Garbarz testified that she was so upset by the language on the tombstones that she contacted the Village of Bloomingdale Police Department. She further testified that she never had any doubt that the “Bette” tombstone referred to her. After seeing the tombstones, she stated that she was ashamed and humiliated, but did not talk to Jeffrey Purtell about them because she was afraid of him.

Defense counsel also presented evidence that the neighbors thought the language on the tombstones constituted threats and that they were alarmed and disturbed by their names being on the tombstones. James Garbarz testified that he interpreted the “Jimmy” tombstone as a threat and told the police that he felt threatened by the tombstone. He also testified that he had concerns about his safety and what Jeffrey Purtell might do to him.”

OUTCOME: The court denied the homeowners’ post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to and motion for a new trial. Viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences in a light most favorable to Officer Mason, a rational jury could conclude that the language on the tombstones constituted threats, that the neighbors were afraid of Jeffrey Purtell, and that they feared for their safety. As such the Court will not disturb the jury’s conclusion that the tombstones constituted fighting words — “those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.”


Goodwin v. Walmart
2001 Ark. App. LEXIS 78

On October 12, 1993, Randall Goodwin went to a Wal-Mart store located on 6th Street in Fayetteville, Arkansas. He entered through the front door and walked toward the sporting goods department. In route, he turned down an aisle known as the seasonal aisle. At that time, it was stocked with items for Halloween. This aisle could be observed from the cash registers. Mr. Goodwin took only a few steps down the aisle when he allegedly stepped on a wig and fell, landing on his right hip. As a result of the fall, Mr. Goodwin suffered severe physical injury to his back, including a ruptured disk. Kelly Evans, an employee for appellee, was standing at the end of her check-out stand when Mr. Goodwin approached her and informed her that he had fallen on an item in the seasonal aisle. She stated that she “saw what he was talking about.”

OUTCOME: Judgment affirmed because the pleadings, depositions, and related summary judgment evidence did not show that there was any genuine issue of material fact as appellant customer did not establish plastic bag containing the Halloween wig which allegedly caused him to slip and fall was on the floor as the result of appellee’s negligence or it had been on the floor for such a period of time that appellee knew or should have known about it.


Eversole v. Wasson
80 Ill. App. 3d 94 (Ill. 1980)

The following allegations of count I, directed against defendant Wasson, were incorporated in count II against the school district: (1) plaintiff was a student at Villa Grove High School which was controlled and administered by the defendant school district, (2) defendant Wasson was employed by the school district as a teacher at the high school, (3) on November 1, 1978, at approximately 12:30 p.m., Wasson was at the high school in his regular capacity as a teacher and plaintiff was attending a regularly scheduled class, (4) Wasson sought and received permission from another teacher to take plaintiff from that teacher’s class and talk to him in the hallway, (5) once in the hallway, Wasson accused plaintiff of being one of several students he believed had smashed Wasson’s Halloween pumpkin at Wasson’s home, (6) without provocation from plaintiff, Wasson berated plaintiff, called him vile names, and threatened him with physical violence while shaking his fist in plaintiff’s face which placed plaintiff in fear of bodily injury, (7) Wasson then struck plaintiff about the head and face with both an open hand and a closed fist and shook and shoved him violently, (8) as a result, plaintiff was bruised about the head, neck, and shoulders; experienced pain and suffering in his head, body, and limbs; and became emotionally distraught causing his school performance and participation to be adversely affected . . .

OUTCOME: The court affirmed that portion of the lower court’s order that dismissed the count against the school district and reversed that portion of the lower court’s order that entered a judgment in bar of action as to this count. The court remanded the case to the lower court with directions to allow the student to replead his count against the school district.

Holman v. Illinois
47 Ill. Ct. Cl. 372 (1995)

The Claimant was attending a Halloween party at the Illinois State Museum with her grandson on October 26, 1990. The party had been advertised locally in the newspaper and through flier advertisements. The advertisement requested that children be accompanied by an adult, to come in costume and to bring a flashlight. The museum had set up different display rooms to hand out candy to the children and give the appearance of a “haunted house.” The Claimant entered the Discovery Room with her grandson.

Under normal conditions the room is arranged with tables and low-seated benches for children to use in the museum’s regular displays. These tables and benches had been moved into the upper-right-hand corner of the Discovery Room next to the wall. In the middle of the room, there was a “slime pot” display where the children received the Halloween treat. The overhead fluorescent lights were turned off; however, the track lights on the left side of the room were turned on and dim. The track lights on the right side of the room near the tables and benches were not lit. The room was dark enough that the children’s flashlights could be clearly seen. There were approximately 40-50 people in the room at the time of the accident.

The Claimant entered the room with her grandson. They proceeded in the direction of the pot in the middle of the room to see what was going in the pot. Her grandson then ran around the pot to the right corner toward the wall. As the Claimant followed, she tripped over the corner of a bench stored in that section of the room. She fell, making contact with the left corner of the bench. She experienced great pain in her upper left arm. The staff helped her to her feet. Her father was called and she went to the emergency room. Claimant has testified that she did not see the low-seating bench because it was so dimly lit in the Discovery Room. The Claimant was treated at the emergency room, where she was diagnosed with a fracture of the proximal humeral head of her left arm as a result of the fall. Claimant returned home, but was unable to work for 12 to 13 weeks.

OUTCOME: “The Claimant has met her burden of proof. She has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the State acted negligently in placing furnishings in a dimly-lit room where visitors could not know of their location. The State did not exercise its duty of reasonable care. For the foregoing reasons, the Claimant is granted an award of $ 20,000.”


Ferlito v. Johnson & Johnson
771 F. Supp. 196

Plaintiffs Susan and Frank Ferlito, husband and wife, attended a Halloween party in 1984 dressed as Mary (Mrs. Ferlito) and her little lamb (Mr. Ferlito). Mrs. Ferlito had constructed a lamb costume for her husband by gluing cotton batting manufactured by defendant Johnson & Johnson Products (“JJP”) to a suit of long underwear. She had also used defendant’s product to fashion a headpiece, complete with ears. The costume covered Mr. Ferlito from his head to his ankles, except for his face and hands, which were blackened with Halloween paint. At the party Mr. Ferlito attempted to light his cigarette by using a butane lighter. The flame passed close to his left arm, and the cotton batting on his left sleeve ignited. Plaintiffs sued defendant for injuries they suffered from burns which covered approximately one-third of Mr. Ferlito’s body.

OUTCOME: Ferlito v. Johnson & Johnson: Plaintiffs repeatedly stated in their response brief that plaintiff Susan Ferlito testified that “she would never again use cotton batting to make a costume.” Plaintiffs’ Answer to Defendant JJP’s Motion for J.N.O.V., pp. 1, 3, 4, 5. However, a review of the trial transcript reveals that plaintiff Susan Ferlito never testified that she would never again use cotton batting to make a costume. More importantly, the transcript contains no statement by plaintiff Susan Ferlito that a flammability warning on defendant JJP’s product would have dissuaded her from using the cotton batting to construct the costume in the first place. At oral argument counsel for plaintiffs conceded that there was no testimony during the trial that either plaintiff Susan Ferlito or her husband, plaintiff Frank J. Ferlito, would [**9] have acted any different if there had been a flammability warning on the product’s package. The absence of such testimony is fatal to plaintiffs’ case; for without it, plaintiffs have failed to prove HN9proximate cause, one of the essential elements of their negligence claim.

In addition, both plaintiffs testified that they knew that cotton batting burns when it is exposed to flame. Susan Ferlito testified that she knew at the time she purchased the cotton batting that it would burn if exposed to an open flame. Frank Ferlito testified that he knew at the time he appeared at the Halloween party that cotton batting would burn if exposed to an open flame. His additional testimony that he would not have intentionally put a flame to the cotton batting shows that he recognized the risk of injury of which he claims JJP should have warned. Because both plaintiffs were already aware of the danger, a warning by JJP would have been superfluous. Therefore, a reasonable jury could not have found that JJP’s failure to provide a warning was a proximate cause of plaintiffs’ injuries.

The evidence in this case clearly demonstrated that neither the use to which plaintiffs put JJP’s product nor the injuries arising from that use were foreseeable.

But in Trivino v. Jamesway Corporation, the following result:

The mother purchased cosmetic puffs and pajamas from the retailer. The mother glued the puffs onto the pajamas to create a costume for her child. While wearing the costume, the child leaned over the electric stove. The costume caught on fire, injuring the child. Plaintiffs brought a personal injury action against the retailer. The retailer filed a third party complaint against the manufacturer of the puffs, and the puff manufacturer filed a fourth party complaint against the manufacturer of the fibers used in the puffs. The retailer filed a motion for partial summary judgment as to plaintiffs’ cause of action for failure to warn. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the actions against the manufacturers. On appeal, the court modified the judgment, holding that the mother’s use of the puffs was not unforeseeable as a matter of law and was a question for the jury. The court held that because the puffs were not made of cotton, as thought by the mother, there were fact issues as to the puffs’ flammability and defendants’ duty to warn. The court held that there was no prejudice to the retailer in permitting plaintiffs to amend their bill of particulars.

OUTCOME: The court modified the trial court’s judgment to grant plaintiffs’ motion to amend their bill of particulars, deny the retailer’s motion for summary judgment, and reinstate the third party actions against the manufacturers.

Happy Halloween everyone. Remember to get those signed waivers from the children. I am personally proud to report that my oldest son Benjamin has chosen to go as a safety cone (I kid you not). It shows that risk adverse traits are dominant in the progeny of torts faculty.


  1. CCD. It fits. Quinn, Gaynor and Hayes were all Dedham names, and East Dedham was the immigrant quarter of the town.

  2. CCD. Don’t know. Is this it?

    “Cahersiveen, County Kerry, Ireland can justly boast that it was the only town in Ireland to rise against a mighty empire. All Ireland was to rise in rebellion on February 12, 1867, but at the last moment the Rising was called off. Messengers were sent on horseback throughout the country with their message of postponement. No messenger reached Cahersiveen, County Kerry, Ireland or the villages of Iveragh. The Kerrymen rose alone. They crossed to the gathering place at Ballycarberry Castle in Cahersiveen, County Kerry, Irealnd. At dawn on February 12th, the ill-equipped, but resolute band set out for Killarney, to try and alter a nation’s history. The small band of Kerrymen, heavily outnumbered, and with few weapons, fought gallantly, but was forced to retreat. In the wild caves by the Atlantic they hid until the ghostly Luggers [a type of small sailing vessel setting lugsails on two or more masts and perhaps lug topsails] came to bring them to America-and to freedom.”

  3. Well, it’s nearly time for the transformation. No one here will worry about laws anymore, Vince. Laws are for humans. Fires aren’t a problem for demons. I guess Witchcraft is just stronger than Christianity after all. Except for a few children who are protected by Evil Awareness parties, the rest will be young demons by tonight.

    I had always believed the world would end in 2012, but witches praying over commercial candy are stronger even than prophecy.

    Adieu good people. I will see you on the other side!

  4. As the hallowed evening fast approaches, following the setting sun, consider, or, as they say in law school, query, why did a town have enact a law like this one?


    Town of Dedham [Massachusetts]
    Town Bylaws: Chapter Thirteen- Police Regulations


    (Adopted Nov. 16, 1959 59STM1)
    (Reenacted April 8, 1996 96ATM33)
    (Amended April 12, 2004 04ATM46)
    (Amended April 11, 2005 05ATM34)
    (Amended November 1, 2005 05STM10)


    Section 26. Fires, Transport of Inflammable Materials on Public Ways Prohibited

    No person shall set fire to or burn, or cause to be moved through any way or street of the Town, any waste material, paper, wood or any inflammable substance on any wagon, cart, buggy, push–cart or on any vehicle, with the intention of setting fire to or burning same on any way or street of the Town.


    This is no joke. The law is real. The reason? The town custom in East Dedham used to be to parade burning wagons through the streets on Halloween.

    Why? Nobody knows.

  5. “If the King James Bible was good enough for Jesus, it is good enough for me.”

    wow..just wow

    as my aunties would say…bless your heart

  6. The wind is howling and blowing the leaves across the lawn. It’s cold and a gray drizzle is falling. Lake Erie is angry and pushing dark green waves onto the rocks. The grandkids are excitedly laughing at their Dad as he tries to carve the pumpkin. I’m hanging sticky cobwebs and rubber spiders in the doorway as the smell of mulled cider is rising from the wood burner stove. It’s going to be a great Halloween party.

  7. pardon me?

    Home made grenade parties? What a great idea! You could sell tupperware containers for storing the necessary blood and bones at the same time.

  8. Grenades sold to undercover authorities overshadow human bones found at San Juan property

    October 29, 2009 10:52 PM
    Jared Taylor
    The Monitor
    SAN JUAN — Federal authorities arrested a 38-year-old man on felony weapons charges at a house where investigators said he manufactured scores of grenades and performed occult ceremonies with human bones.

    Ruben Ambrosio Fonseca Jr. had his initial appearance in U.S. District Court on Thursday after undercover agents posing as drug cartel members purchased 183 grenades from him that he allegedly manufactured at a San Juan house, law enforcement officials said.

    Federal agents and the San Juan police SWAT team raided the property Wednesday morning, finding weapons, firearms and a blood-stained altar alongside human and animal bones in the backyard…..


  9. Jill asked, “Do demons give lawyers professional courtesy possessions?”

    Only when jerk chicken blood is used in the ritual.

    Some of us will be dewomans tomorrow.

  10. Halloween is my favorite time of the year except when it is 40 degrees here in Northern Illinois and a wind chill! Any celebration that upsets the radical religous Right is OK with me.

  11. I posted this on an earlier thread but thought it fits better here…

    My husband passed a church whose sign said: “Evil Awareness Party Oct. 31″ Are YOU aware today???

    P.S. Did you ever notice that question marks turned upside down look like 6???

    Happy Halloween to Everyone. Tomorrow we’ll all be demons.

    BTW–Do demons give lawyers professional courtesy possessions?

  12. I think I posted this last Halloweentime.
    From John Hartford’s Mark Twang album, The Lowest Pair:

    “Much further out than inevitable
    Halloween is thy game
    Sky King is come
    and Wilma’s done
    Uncertain as it is uneven

    Give us today hors d’œuvre’s in bed
    As we forgive those who have dressed up against us
    And need us not enter inflation
    But our liver, onions, and potatoes.

    For wine is a shingle, and a mower, and a story for your father.

    Happy Halloween! Praise all o’ y’all!

  13. FFLEO:

    That is precisely why each of the candies that I hand out are wrapped in my business card.

  14. Well, every profession has a gimmick. Halloween is just lawyers’ way of getting back in the ‘black’ for the fiscal year, just like businesses use the christmas holiday to rake in the dough.

    Have a boo-ntiful harvest with your lawyering cornucopia of legalize, fine print, and legalistic witch’s brew of tort claims.

  15. There’s some great stuff on that website. Particularly amusing is the discussion of how doubt is a sin of the flesh, as is the horrendous crime the pastor’s daughter performed: soaking up pork fat with her biscuit.

  16. “If the King James Bible was good enough for Jesus, it is good enough for me.”

    I am amazed that Jesus spoke English. I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer but did not Hey Suss speaka da form of Arabic like aramic (sp) nal need help))?

    Now to the rest, if ya don’t wanna get shot stay home. Wait, most people are accidentally shot at home. Go out and just be careful. Stay away from anything south of the Red River.

  17. All aboard for a good old-time, rip-roaring Halloween bookburning!

    Be careful not to commit any torts while toasting books by Billy Graham, Chuck Colson, Mother Teresa, and The Pope!

    Get yer red-hots now!

    “We are burning Satan’s bibles like the NIV, RSV, NKJV, TLB, NASB, ESV, NEV, NRSV, ASV, NWT, Good News for Modern Man, The Evidence Bible, The Message Bible, The Green Bible, ect. These are perversions of God’s Word the King James Bible.

    “We will also be burning Satan’s music such as country , rap , rock , pop, heavy metal, western, soft and easy, southern gospel , contemporary Christian , jazz, soul, oldies but goldies, etc.

    “We will also be burning Satan’s popular books written by heretics like Westcott & Hort , Bruce Metzger, Billy Graham , Rick Warren , Bill Hybels , John McArthur, James Dobson , Charles Swindoll , John Piper , Chuck Colson , Tony Evans, Oral Roberts, Jimmy Swagart , Mark Driskol, Franklin Graham , Bill Bright, Tim Lahaye, Paula White , T.D. Jakes, Benny Hinn , Joyce Myers , Brian McLaren , James White, Robert Schuller, Mother Teresa , The Pope , Rob Bell, Erwin McManus , Donald Miller, Shane Claiborne, Brennan Manning, William Young, Will Graham , and many more.

    “We are not burning Bibles written in other languages that are based on the TR. We are not burning the Tyndale, Geneva or other translations that are based on the TR.

    “We will be serving fried chicken, and all the sides.”


    If the King James Bible was good enough for Jesus, it is good enough for me.

Comments are closed.