Red eyes in the woods across from a rural Louisiana house
A caller to Ghost to Ghost 1994 gives their location on air as Omaha, Nebraska. The caller says the events took place years earlier in an unnamed Louisiana town. They describe coming home at about age seventeen on a foggy July night. The family dogs barked at the door, charged into a wooded lot across the road, and fled back. The caller followed with a flashlight and walked a few feet into the woods. Their sister screamed from the house and told them to run. Turning back at her instruction, the caller reports seeing two red glowing eyes at the spot where they had just stood. A sheriff was called and reportedly found nothing.
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 3:16:25). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller tells the host they were about seventeen and living in the country in Louisiana with their mother, stepfather, and sister. Theirs was the only house at the end of a cul-de-sac, about 200 yards back from the main road. The caller sets the scene as a hot, foggy July night. They arrived home one night and found their mother and sister in the living room. The caller says the dog started barking, and their two Labrador retrievers barked at the front door. The caller opened it, thinking it might be a deer or a wild dog. The dogs ran across the yard, across the cul-de-sac, and into the wooded lot opposite ([quote withheld]). They returned to the house after ten to twenty seconds. The caller took a flashlight and walked over. The mother and sister would not go along, and the dogs followed the caller to the end of the yard but [quote withheld] The caller crossed and went five or ten feet into the woods. At that point the sister screamed from the house and told them to run, and they ran back. Once inside, the caller says, she told them to turn slowly and look out at the woods. They saw two red glowing eyes at the spot where they had been standing, five to ten feet away. The caller says they felt more terror than ever in their life. They called the sheriff, who came out, searched, and found nothing. The caller adds that for the rest of their time in that Louisiana town there were [quote withheld] in those woods on any given night, and that they moved out as soon as they could. Asked by the host, the caller says they do not know whether it was a ghost.
Reported events, in order
- 0:12
The caller says that at about age seventeen they lived in Louisiana, out in the country, with their mother, stepfather, and sister.
- 0:45
The caller describes the property: the house sat about 200 yards back from the main road at the end of a cul-de-sac, the only house there.
- 0:56
Arriving home one night, the caller found their mother and sister in the living room. The dog started barking, and their two Labrador retrievers were barking at the front door.
- 1:01
The caller opened the front door, thinking it might be a deer or another wild dog.
- 1:08
The dogs ran across the yard and the cul-de-sac into the wooded lot opposite, stayed there roughly ten to twenty seconds, then ran back to the house.
- 1:26
The caller took a flashlight and walked across the yard. Their mother and sister would not go along.
- 1:39
The dogs followed the caller to the end of the yard but would not cross the street with them.
- 1:46
The caller crossed the street and went about five to ten feet into the woods.
- 1:53
The caller's sister screamed from the house and shouted at them to run. They ran back without seeing anything themself at that moment.
- 2:12
Told by the sister to turn slowly and look, the caller saw two red glowing eyes in the woods exactly where they had been standing, five to ten feet away.
- 2:17
They went inside and called the sheriff, who came out and searched. According to the caller, nothing was found.
- 2:32
The caller reports that for the rest of their time in that Louisiana town there were [quote withheld] in those woods on any given night.
- 2:44
The caller moved out as soon as they could. They close by saying they cannot explain the eyes and do not know whether it was a ghost.
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· 2:12
Two red glowing eyes appeared in the woods at the exact spot where the caller had been standing moments earlier.
- observation· 1:08
Two Labrador retrievers barked at the front door, then ran across the yard and the cul-de-sac into the wooded lot opposite and came back ten to twenty seconds later.
- observation· 1:39
The dogs followed the caller to the end of the yard but refused to cross the street.
- observation· 1:54
The caller's sister screamed from the house and told them to run. The caller ran back without seeing what she reacted to.
- observation· 2:17
They telephoned the sheriff, who came out and searched but reportedly found nothing.
- observation· 2:40
The caller reports that for the rest of their time in that Louisiana town there were [quote withheld] in those woods at night.
- interpretation· 2:53
The caller declines to name a cause, calling it only one of the creepiest things they have seen.
- host statement· 2:56
The host tells the caller the story “definitely qualifies” as a ghost story.
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 firsthand story that is reasonably well ordered and limited in its claims, with some concrete detail. But nothing in it can be checked, and an ordinary explanation (animal eyeshine) fits the core observation with little strain. Components: source proximity 20/25, specificity 12/20, internal consistency 15/20, alternative explanations 6/20, calibration of claims 11/15.
Evidence for and against
- Firsthand story of an event the caller says they experienced themself: [quote withheld]
- Concrete layout and sequence: house 200 yards from the main road at the end of a cul-de-sac, two Labrador retrievers, dogs in the woods “10-20 seconds,” five to ten feet into the woods.
- The caller separates what they saw from what they conclude and withholds an interpretation: [quote withheld]
- No names, town, year, or date are given, so nothing specific can be checked.
- An ordinary explanation (eyeshine of an animal caught in the flashlight beam) fits the central detail easily and is not addressed.
- The second witness is asserted, not heard, and the host's own comment about the eyes is not evidence.
- A long stretch of the story is marked low-confidence in the automatic transcript.
- The labels showing who is speaking are merged in places, so who said “Omaha Nebraska” is inferred from context.
- It is not stated whether the sister actually saw the eyes or only reacted to something else.
- 2:12
- 1:46
- 2:53
What the model inferred (not said on air): The middle-of-the-road score reflects the scoring guide's instruction to be conservative without verification. The components are my application of the guide to the quoted content, not statements from the broadcast.
There is nothing beyond the caller's word, plus a claimed silent witness and a claimed official search. That puts it at the low end of the 11 to 25 range for “other witnesses claimed.” It stays far below 50 because no outside check was done.
Evidence for and against
- The caller's own testimony on air is all of the evidence.
- A second person (the caller's sister) is claimed to have been present and to have reacted to the eyes, but she does not speak on air.
- A third party (the sheriff) is said to have searched the woods afterward.
- No physical evidence is claimed: no photograph, recording, track, mark, or document.
- The reported sheriff's search found nothing, and the only account of it is the caller's.
- No names, dates, or locations that could be looked up are provided.
- Whether the mother saw or heard anything is not stated.
- Whether the sister saw the eyes herself is implied by her instruction but never said outright.
- 1:34
- 2:17
What the model inferred (not said on air): The distinction between [quote withheld] and [quote withheld] is mine, following the scoring guide's ground rules.
The image of red eyes in dark woods at the caller's own footprints, preceded by fleeing dogs and a scream, is genuinely unsettling. It is held below the “frightening” range because there is no threat, pursuit, or contact, and the sequence is brief.
Evidence for and against
- Two glowing red eyes appear at night in woods at the exact spot the caller had just occupied: [quote withheld]
- The dogs flee the woods and then refuse to cross the street, and the sister screams before the eyes are even pointed out.
- The caller reports recurring “unearthly screams” in the same woods afterward and says they moved out as soon as they could.
- Nothing threatens or touches anyone. The encounter is at a distance and ends with the family safely inside.
- No physical harm, no pursuit, no contact, and the closing passages are conversational.
- The recurring screams are described in only a few words, so their character is unclear.
- 2:10
- 2:40
- 1:39
What the model inferred (not said on air): This is a judgment about the story as heard, not about whether anything happened.
A familiar frame (red eyes in the woods at night, animals reacting) with one modestly distinctive detail: the eyes at the caller's own recent standing place, after the dogs had already run from that ground. This is a provisional score from the model. Comparison with the rest of the archive adds little at this archive size.
Evidence for and against
- The eyes are said to appear precisely at the spot the caller had just left, at close range, after the dogs had already fled the same ground.
- The story is tied to an ongoing pattern the caller says continued in the same woods afterward.
- Glowing red eyes in dark woods are a familiar ghost-story motif.
- Reacting animals and a family member's warning scream are stock elements.
- No comparison data from the rest of the archive is available for this story, so the published originality may differ.
- 2:12
- 1:21
What the model inferred (not said on air): A provisional estimate. The published value depends on how rare the motifs are and how similar the story is to others in the archive, which I cannot compute here.
Scoring confidence 0.55 · analysis confidence 0.70 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller's firsthand story (a single caller, on air).; A claimed second witness (the caller's sister) who does not speak on air.; A claimed action by a third party (a sheriff's search), reported only by the caller, with no documentation.; No photograph, recording, document, or physical trace offered.. 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.
- Reflected eyeshine from a nocturnal animal (deer, raccoon, opossum, or a feral or pet dog) catching the flashlight beam, which can appear as two small glowing points at close range. · The caller's own first guess about what the dogs were barking at ([quote withheld]), plus the fact that the caller was carrying a flashlight into dark woods at night.
- The dogs were reacting to the scent or presence of a wild animal in the lot, and their later reluctance to leave the yard was ordinary dog behavior rather than a sign of anything strange. · The caller describes dogs that charged into the wooded lot, returned, and then refused to cross the street with them.
- Night calls of local wildlife (for example foxes or owls), which people who do not recognize them often describe as screams. · The later report of “unearthly screams” heard at night in rural Louisiana woods.
What stands out
The eyes are reported at the exact ground the caller had just left, after the family dogs had run into that same lot and then refused to cross the road with them. That is a small, specific detail rather than a generic sighting. The caller also claims a continuing pattern of screams at night in the same woods after the first event, and declines to call it a ghost at all.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.