Wife describes two weeks of episodes and a moving kitchen cabinet door
In a Ghost to Ghost AM call, the caller comes back on the line with their wife. She says she was a skeptic until the events in their home. She reports about two weeks of separate little episodes among household members. Then, she says, a kitchen cabinet door was opening and closing while she sat with her mother-in-law. She says they concluded they were living with a ghost. She says she refused to stay another night and stayed with relatives until they could move.
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 59:32). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
In this part of the broadcast, the caller comes back on the line and says their wife is sitting with them. The caller says she was [quote withheld] and [quote withheld] Their wife then speaks on air. She swears [quote withheld] says she never believed in anything like it before, and calls it bizarre. She says she was the one who said [quote withheld] She says she refused to go back and stayed with relatives until they could move, refusing to spend another night there. She says the events happened [quote withheld] and that household members had been having “little episodes separately.” One night, she says, she and her mother-in-law were sitting there. She says, “what's going on?” and a cabinet door was opening and closing in the kitchen. That led them to talk about their experiences and conclude, [quote withheld] The host says he can imagine people dismissing small things. The caller replies that [quote withheld] A line then says, [quote withheld] and that [quote withheld] The host thanks them for the confirmation. He says he would like to experience a ghost but would probably leave quickly. The caller's earlier story is not in this part of the broadcast.
Reported events, in order
- 0:09
The caller comes back on the line with their wife sitting beside them. The caller says she was a skeptic until this happened and did not believe in poltergeist.
- 0:23
The caller's wife comes on air and swears the story is true. She says she never believed in anything like it before and calls it bizarre.
- 0:35
The caller's wife says she was the one who said they were out of there. She says she refused to go back and stayed with relatives until they could move.
- 0:48
The caller says the events had been happening for about two weeks before anyone in the household mentioned them to each other.
- 0:52
The caller says household members had been having little episodes separately.
- 0:55
The caller's wife says she and her mother-in-law were sitting there one night, and she asked what was going on.
- 0:58
The caller says a cabinet door was opening and closing in the kitchen.
- 1:02
The caller says that after they talked it over, they came to think they were living there with a ghost.
- 1:12
The caller says people do not want to believe it.
- 1:18
A line attributed to the caller says you start putting it all together, everyone sees it, and too much started happening.
- 1:22
The host thanks the wife for the confirmation and thanks them both.
- 1:33
The host says he thinks he would have left. Later he says he would like to experience a ghost but that it would scare him.
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· 0:52
According to the caller, household members had been having separate small episodes for about two weeks before anyone mentioned them to each other.
- observation· 0:58
The caller's wife says that while she and her mother-in-law were sitting there one night, a cabinet door was opening and closing in the kitchen.
- interpretation· 1:02
The caller's wife says that after comparing experiences, she and her mother-in-law concluded they were living with a ghost.
- observation· 1:18
A line attributed to the caller says that after they put things together, more events started happening. No further details are given in this part of the broadcast.
- host statement· 1:37
The host says he would like to experience something he would definitely call a ghost.
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.
Scored as a brief, first-person confirmation of an earlier story. The story hangs together, and the cabinet-door detail is concrete. But it lacks dates, a place, names, and detail about the earlier episodes, and ordinary causes are not considered. The component scores add up to 46: source proximity 15, specificity 7, internal consistency 15, alternative explanations 4, calibration 5.
Evidence for and against
- The caller gives a direct, specific observation: [quote withheld]
- The caller's wife gives a time frame: [quote withheld]
- The caller's wife says multiple household members had separate experiences: [quote withheld]
- No location, date, names, or checkable details are given in this part of the broadcast.
- The caller's earlier story, which this call confirms, is not included.
- The other claimed witnesses, including the mother-in-law, do not speak on air.
- Simple, ordinary explanations for a moving cabinet door are not addressed.
- The labels showing who is speaking are uncertain in the transcript.
- The earlier story this call confirms is missing, so the full sequence of events cannot be judged.
- Possible transcription errors in lowercase and smoothed lines.
- 0:58
- 0:48
- 0:52
What the model inferred (not said on air): The low score for alternative explanations reflects my judgment that a loose or unlatched cabinet door is a simple possible cause, and the caller's wife does not discuss it. The score is not based on tone of voice.
This rests mainly on what the caller's wife says, plus other claimed witnesses who do not speak on air. No checkable specifics or physical evidence are given, so the score falls near the bottom of the scoring guide.
Evidence for and against
- The caller's wife speaks on air as a firsthand witness to the cabinet-door incident.
- The caller's wife claims there were other witnesses: [quote withheld]
- The caller's wife claims she and her mother-in-law were together for the cabinet-door incident.
- No names, location, dates, records, or documentation are given.
- The mother-in-law and the other claimed household witnesses do not speak on air.
- The caller speaks on air but gives no independent detail about the events in this part of the broadcast.
- It is unclear whether the caller's earlier story, which is not included, had checkable specifics.
- The exact number and identity of the claimed household witnesses are not given.
- 0:55
- 0:52
What the model inferred (not said on air): The transcript alone cannot verify the story. Under the scoring guide, claimed witnesses do not count as independent backing from someone else.
Mildly unsettling rather than frightening. The setting is a family home, and the family's reaction is strong. But this part of the broadcast includes no ill will, contact, injury, or lasting frightening sights or sounds.
Evidence for and against
- A cabinet door in the family's kitchen is reported moving by itself.
- The caller's wife says she refused to spend another night there and stayed with relatives until they moved.
- The story describes two weeks of separate episodes before the family compared notes.
- No threatening presence, attack, or physical contact is described.
- The story is brief and ends with the family moving out.
- Only one concrete event is described in this part of the broadcast: a cabinet door opening and closing.
- The full earlier story may have included more disturbing material that is not present here.
- What the “little episodes” were is not stated.
- 0:35
- 0:58
What the model inferred (not said on air): The score reflects only what happens in the story, not the caller's tone or the host's reactions.
A provisional model score for a familiar household poltergeist story with few distinctive details. A comparison with the rest of the archive is not available from the transcript alone.
Evidence for and against
- A kitchen cabinet door moving is a familiar household poltergeist detail.
- The story is told as confirmation of another caller's story, which is a somewhat unusual way to present it.
- The story uses stock household poltergeist elements: a moving door or cabinet, multiple family witnesses, and a skeptic turned believer.
- No distinctive or rare event appears in this part of the broadcast.
- The earlier, missing part of the call may have included more distinctive details.
- 0:58
- 0:09
What the model inferred (not said on air): The score reflects the story's content and how common its elements are, not its truth or entertainment value.
Scoring confidence 0.45 · analysis confidence 0.60 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: Firsthand story from the caller's wife, speaking on air; The caller also speaks on air but gives no event detail in this part of the broadcast; Claimed additional witnesses (the mother-in-law and other household members) do not speak on air; No physical evidence, documentation, photograph, or recording is described. 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.
- The cabinet door may have moved because of an ordinary mechanical cause or a draft. · A loose hinge, a warped cabinet, or a draft could make an unlatched cabinet door swing open and closed.
- Suggestion, or the family reinterpreting events together after talking them over, may have shaped their conclusion that they were living with a ghost. · Separate, unclear household events may have been reinterpreted as a haunting after the family compared notes and talked about them.
What stands out
This part of the broadcast confirms an earlier story rather than telling a new one. The wife of a previous caller speaks on air to support a story that is not included here. The only concrete event described here is a kitchen cabinet door moving.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.