Recurring footsteps on a deck and a hammer thrown in a workshop
A caller tells Art Bell what they introduce as “the third one.” A couple of years before the broadcast, they say, they and their husband heard footsteps two or three times a month across their patio and wooden deck, and they always found nothing. One night, while their husband was working in his workshop, he thought the caller had called him. Shortly after, a hammer flew across the workshop and just missed him, though no one was there.
This clip comes from the source recording. AI chose where it starts and ends, so it may start or end a little early or late. The word-for-word transcript is not published. You can hear the source recording on the Internet Archive (file “Ghost to Ghost 1993.mp3”, starting at 2:03:24). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller introduces the story as “the third one,” saying it happened [quote withheld] The caller says they and their husband had footsteps [quote withheld] According to the caller, each time they heard the footsteps they went to check and found nothing. The caller then describes one night when their husband was working out in the workshop. He thought the caller had called him, the caller told him they had not, and he went back to what he was doing. Right after that, the caller says, a hammer flew across the workshop and [quote withheld] and [quote withheld] The caller says plainly that they have no idea how the hammer traveled or who threw it, but that it [quote withheld] Art Bell replies, “Unmistakable message, nevertheless,” thanks the caller for the call, and moves on. He adds that he will have to listen to a tape of the program himself. The caller gives no location, no name, and no date beyond [quote withheld] No other witnesses are given in this part of the broadcast. The caller’s husband is described but does not speak on air.
Reported events, in order
- 0:00
The caller introduces the story as their third, happening [quote withheld] at their home.
- 0:07
The caller says they heard footsteps two or three times a month across the patio and wooden deck.
- 0:22
The caller says they checked each time and found nothing there.
- 0:25
One night the caller’s husband was working in the workshop and thought the caller had called him. The caller says they had not.
- 0:38
The caller says a hammer flew across the workshop and just missed their husband by a small margin.
- 0:44
The caller says there was no one in the workshop.
- 0:47
The caller says they do not know how the hammer traveled or who threw it.
- 0:55
Art Bell comments that it was an “Unmistakable message” and thanks the caller for the call.
Claims
Each claim is labeled as something the person telling the story noticed (observation), what they made of it (interpretation), something others told them (hearsay), or something the host said (host statement).
- observation· 0:07
Footsteps were heard repeatedly across the caller's patio and wooden deck, about two or three times a month.
- observation· 0:25
Each time they checked the footsteps, nothing was found.
- observation· 0:25
The caller’s husband thought the caller had called him while he was in the workshop. The caller says they had not.
- observation· 0:41
A hammer flew across the workshop and narrowly missed their husband, with no one there.
- interpretation· 0:47
The caller says they have no idea how the hammer moved or who threw it.
- host statement· 0:55
Art Bell calls the hammer incident an “Unmistakable message.”
Scores, with reasons
An AI model gave these scores using a fixed set of scoring rules (scoring-v1). They are editorial judgments and rough guides, not the odds that anything paranormal happened. How scoring works.
This is a brief first-person report with one relayed part, the husband's workshop episode. It holds together and the caller does not overstate it. But it is short, with no name or location, and ordinary explanations for both a wooden deck and a dislodged tool are plausible.
Evidence for and against
- The caller describes the footsteps as their own recurring experience: [quote withheld]
- The caller gives a concrete sequence for the workshop night: the husband thinking he was called, then the hammer, then no one there.
- The caller declines to explain the event: [quote withheld]
- No location, name, or exact date is given. The events are dated only as [quote withheld]
- The hammer episode is relayed from the husband, who does not speak on air.
- Simple causes are not addressed, such as animals, wind, or how the hammer was stored in the workshop.
- The caller does not say whether the footsteps continued after the workshop night or stopped.
- The automatic transcript does not describe the workshop conditions or where the hammer had been resting.
- 0:00
- 0:07
- 0:41
- 0:47
What the model inferred (not said on air): The score reflects a short story, not backed up by anyone else, with nothing that can be checked. The reliable-looking parts are the plain telling and the lack of escalation, not the truth of the events.
There is nothing beyond the caller's word and one claimed second witness who never speaks on air. No names, dates, records, or photographs are offered.
Evidence for and against
- A second person, the husband, is said to have been in the workshop.
- The husband is only reported, not heard, so there is no confirmation on air.
- No physical trace is claimed, such as where the hammer landed or any mark.
- No location, date, or documents are given that could be checked.
- It is unclear whether the caller or their husband ever told anyone else or recorded the events.
- 0:25
- 0:44
What the model inferred (not said on air): The score falls in the 11 to 25 range for claimed but absent witnesses. It lands at the low end because even the checkable details (place, date, names) are missing.
The repeated unseen footsteps at home give a mild, steady unease. The thrown hammer that narrowly missed a person adds a moment of physical threat in a building on the property. The story is short and flatly told, with no escalation and no ominous ending.
Evidence for and against
- Recurring footsteps around the home two or three times a month.
- A hammer reportedly flying across the workshop and narrowly missing the husband.
- No one was found there afterward.
- The caller treats the events as puzzling rather than frightening and conveys no dread.
- No injury or follow-up is claimed, and the story ends with the host's thanks.
- The automatic transcript does not say whether the couple were uneasy about the footsteps or how they reacted after the hammer incident.
- 0:07
- 0:41
What the model inferred (not said on air): The rating comes from the intrusion into a private home and the near miss, which are the usual sources of unease. The calm delivery is not counted either way.
Unexplained footsteps on a deck and an object thrown by something unseen are among the most common ideas in ghost stories. The only mildly distinctive part is pairing a tool shed with a low-key recurring sound, but the overall pattern is familiar.
Evidence for and against
- Footsteps with nothing found.
- A thrown object in a workshop with no one there.
- No strange event, rare combination, or distinctive detail appears in this part of the broadcast, such as an identified figure, a message, or a dated historical link.
- Compared with the rest of the archive, the novelty cannot be judged meaningfully for this pilot story.
- 0:07
- 0:39
What the model inferred (not said on air): This is judged against common ghost-story patterns alone. The score is a provisional estimate based on the content, not a comparison with the rest of the archive.
Scoring confidence 0.50 · analysis confidence 0.60 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller's firsthand account of the footsteps.; The caller's relayed account of their husband's experience with the hammer.; No physical evidence, documents, or second witness on air.. The originality score blends the model's score (28) with how rare the story's details are across the archive. This method is still provisional.
Ordinary explanations to consider
These are possibilities only. None is a finding about what happened.
- Animals, wind, or settling of the deck and patio could produce repeated footstep-like sounds on a wooden deck. · The footsteps are described only as sounds heard [quote withheld] with nothing visible found on checking.
- A tool could have been moved by vibration, an unstable surface, or another object in the workshop rather than thrown. · The hammer is reported as moving across the workshop on a night when the husband was working there. The caller says no one else was present.
- The husband could have misheard a sound or a call while working, since the caller says he [quote withheld] and the caller had not. · The only description of the call is the husband's impression, as relayed by the caller.
What stands out
The story pairs a low-key recurring strange event (footsteps on a deck) with a single abrupt physical event in a separate building. The caller reports it on behalf of their husband, and the caller ends by saying they have no explanation rather than offering one.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.