Figure resembling roommate walks past door in Lawrence, Kansas, house
A caller who gives the name [name withheld], from Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood, tells Art Bell that they once lived in a house in Lawrence, Kansas, said to have been haunted. Their roommate had described poltergeist-type episodes there. The caller reports that one night, while sitting with friends, they saw what they took to be their roommate walk past the doorway, but the roommate was not in the house. The call is cut off mid-sentence as the caller begins to describe what later occupants of the house reported.
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 1994.mp3”, starting at 2:12:00). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller gives their name as [quote withheld] The caller presents the story as [quote withheld] meant for first-time listeners. The caller says they lived in Lawrence, Kansas, in a house [quote withheld] and that their roommate had told them about [quote withheld] The caller reports that one night they were sitting in a large room with [quote withheld] when they thought their roommate had come home. The caller says they saw the roommate walk past the doorway and got up intending to play a trick on the roommate. When the caller went after the roommate, the roommate “wasn't there.” The caller thought the figure had turned the corner at a bathroom at the end of the hall and gone into the roommate's room, but the roommate was not there either. The caller then begins to say that after they moved out of the house, people they knew who lived there [quote withheld] things. The call is cut off mid-sentence, and the host says the caller [quote withheld] and that it happened on the caller's end. The caller offers no explanation of their own for the sighting. The idea that the house was haunted comes from what the house was said to be and from the roommate's reports.
Reported events, in order
- 0:17
The caller says they lived in a house in Lawrence, Kansas, that was [quote withheld]
- 0:20
The caller's roommate told them about [quote withheld] in the house.
- 0:28
One night, sitting in a large room with friends, the caller thought their roommate had come home and saw the roommate walk past the doorway. The caller got up intending to play a trick on the roommate.
- 0:42
The roommate was not there. The caller thought the figure had turned the corner at a bathroom at the end of the hall and gone into the roommate's room, but the roommate was not there either.
- 0:52
After the caller moved out, people they knew who lived in the house reported “some really strange” things. The call was cut off before any detail was given.
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).
- hearsay· 0:20
The house the caller lived in was described, by the caller and by their roommate, as a house [quote withheld]
- hearsay· 0:20
The caller's roommate told them about [quote withheld] in the house.
- observation· 0:28
The caller says that while sitting with friends they thought their roommate had come home and saw the roommate walk past the doorway.
- observation· 0:42
The caller says the roommate was not there when the caller went after the roommate, and was not in the bathroom at the end of the hall or in the roommate's room.
- hearsay· 0:52
After the caller moved out, people they knew who lived in the house reported more strange events. The call was cut off before details.
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.
Firsthand but very brief and partial, with an easy ordinary explanation and no detail that can be checked. The story hangs together and the caller does not exaggerate, but it is a fragment cut off mid-sentence, so the [quote withheld] cap of 40 is applied.
Evidence for and against
- Firsthand story: the caller places themselves in the scene ([quote withheld]).
- A concrete place is given: [quote withheld]
- A consistent, calm sequence told in order: sighting, failed pursuit, roommate absent.
- Only a single brief glimpse is described, with no detail beyond the figure passing a doorway and the layout of the hall.
- A brief mistake about another person in the house fits easily. The caller was already primed by their roommate's haunted-house stories.
- The call is cut off before the part about later occupants, so some of the story cannot be assessed.
- Several lines have unclear words in the automatic transcript, and one passage ([quote withheld]) is unintelligible.
- The call ends before the story is finished.
- 0:17
- 0:28
- 0:42
What the model inferred (not said on air): The component ratings (source proximity 16, specificity 9, consistency 14, alternative explanations 7, calibration 11; raw total 57) are the editor's judgment from the transcript. The cap at 40 follows the scoring guide's rule for fragments.
The story rests on the caller's word. The only details that could be checked are a place name and the caller's name, and neither was checked. The other witnesses the caller mentions do not appear on air. This puts it in the 11 to 25 range of the scoring guide.
Evidence for and against
- Some details that could be checked are given: the caller's stated name and neighborhood, and the town of the house.
- Other witnesses are claimed to exist (the roommate and later occupants), but none is named or speaks on air.
- No documents, recording, photograph, mark, or object is claimed or examined.
- Later occupants' reports are introduced but never given, because the call ends first.
- No second witness speaks on air.
- Whether the “bunch of friends” in the room saw anything is not stated.
- The labels showing who is speaking are automatic, and the caller is cut off before finishing.
- 0:05
- 0:52
What the model inferred (not said on air): The placement follows the scoring guide's description: [quote withheld] No outside check was done.
A single unclear sighting in a home at night, followed by an empty hallway, is mildly eerie but carries no threat, contact, or lasting dread.
Evidence for and against
- A figure that looks like a member of the household is seen in a private home at night and then is gone.
- The house is described as [quote withheld] with “strange poltergeist-type episodes.”
- No threat, contact, harm, or escalation is reported.
- The caller frames the story as [quote withheld] that is, low-key.
- The cut-off ending leaves the tone of the later material unknown.
- 0:20
- 0:42
What the model inferred (not said on air): The placement against the scoring guide (30 is mildly eerie) is the editor's judgment about the story, not a claim about the events.
A familiar haunted-house setup with one unusual detail (the missing roommate's likeness and the aborted prank), which puts it near the middle of the scale. The comparison with the rest of the archive carries little weight because there are few stories so far.
Evidence for and against
- An unusual detail: the figure is taken to be the caller's own roommate, who is not in the house, and the caller follows the roommate intending to play a prank.
- The figure is followed to a bathroom at the end of a hall and then to the roommate's room, both empty.
- A figure walking past a doorway in a house said to be haunted is a stock setup.
- Poltergeist-type stories attributed to a previous or current occupant are familiar.
- The story breaks off before the part about later occupants, so how distinctive it is can only be partly seen.
- 0:28
- 0:42
What the model inferred (not said on air): The content score is the editor's judgment. The comparison with the rest of the archive is computed automatically and is provisional.
Scoring confidence 0.35 · analysis confidence 0.50 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller's firsthand story, brief and cut off before it was finished; No documents, recording, photograph, or physical trace claimed or examined; Claimed secondhand reports from the roommate and from later occupants, none of whom speak on air. The originality score blends the model's score (40) 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.
- A brief mistake in identifying another real person (one of the friends or another occupant) passing the doorway. · The caller says they were sitting in a large room with a number of friends before seeing the figure. Another person in the house moving past the doorway could account for a brief sighting.
- What the caller had heard about the house led them to misread a quick, unclear glimpse in a doorway. This is offered as an idea about the event, not a claim about the caller. · The roommate had already told the caller the house was haunted and had told “strange poltergeist-type episodes” stories, and the caller was expecting the roommate home.
What stands out
The caller treats the sighting as an everyday, down-to-earth story for first-time listeners. The figure looks like the caller's own roommate, whom the caller then chases through the house, intending to play a prank. The story breaks off just as the part about later occupants begins, so it never reaches the usual closing beat.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.