Cyclist reports seeing their dead riding partner on the road at night
Art Bell reads a fax from a hospital emergency room worker. The writer says they were bicycling home at night, listening to the show, close to the one-year mark of a riding buddy's death on the same street. The writer reports hearing a tire sound behind them although there were no cars, and then seeing their dead friend [name withheld] beside them. The writer sped home. The letter ends with the writer saying they cannot tell whether they were having a ’60s flashback.
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 1995.mp3”, starting at 2:49:10). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The letter writer says they work at a hospital emergency room and describe themselves as a level-headed person who did not believe in ghosts. The writer says they had just gotten off work, had a couple of stiff drinks to settle down, and were riding their bicycle home at night while listening to Art Bell. The writer notes it had been about a year since they had ridden home at night alone, and almost one year to the hour since their old riding buddy, [name withheld], was killed while riding alone on the same street. According to the writer, on that earlier night they had called in ill and stayed home. [name withheld] was run over by a drunk driver, was not found for an hour or more, and died on the way to the hospital. The writer says [name withheld]'s bloodstains still mark the curb where his head struck. On this night, the writer says, they became aware of a feeling of something like the sound of a car tire behind them, though there were no cars on the street. The writer says the sound kept getting louder, loud enough that they could hear it through the radio, so they finally took off their headphones and stopped. The writer reports looking down the street and seeing [name withheld] standing next to them. The writer says they got on their bike as fast as they could and sped home, and that [name withheld] stayed with them until they reached the crossroads where [name withheld] died. The writer says, [quote withheld] and closes by saying they cannot tell whether they were having a ’60s flashback.
Reported events, in order
- 0:03
The writer says they got off work at a hospital emergency room, had a couple of stiff drinks, and were bicycling home at night listening to Art Bell.
- 0:37
The writer notes it had been about a year since they rode home at night alone, and almost one year to the hour since their riding buddy [name withheld] was killed on the same street.
- 0:57
The writer says that on that earlier night they had called in ill and stayed home. [name withheld] was run over by a drunk driver, was not found for an hour, and died on the way to the hospital.
- 1:06
The writer says [name withheld]'s bloodstains still mark the curb where his head struck.
- 1:19
Riding home, the writer reports a feeling of a sound like a car tire behind them, though there were no cars on the street.
- 1:27
The writer says the sound grew louder, loud enough to hear through the radio, so they took off their headphones and stopped.
- 1:43
The writer reports looking down the street and seeing [name withheld] standing next to them.
- 1:54
The writer says they sped home and [name withheld] stayed with them until they reached the crossroads where [name withheld] died.
- 2:05
The writer says they swear they saw [name withheld] [quote withheld] and cannot tell if they were having a ’60s flashback.
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· 1:19
The writer says they heard what sounded like a car tire behind them although there were no cars on the street.
- observation· 1:27
The writer says the sound became loud enough to hear through the radio, so they took off their headphones and stopped.
- observation· 1:43
The writer reports seeing their dead friend [name withheld] standing next to them on the street.
- observation· 1:54
The writer says [name withheld] stayed with them until they reached the crossroads where [name withheld] died.
- observation· 2:05
The writer says they swear they saw [name withheld] [quote withheld]
- interpretation· 2:09
The writer says they cannot tell whether they were having a ’60s flashback.
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.
A clear firsthand story with events in a clear order and a few concrete details, but nothing that can be checked, and the writer points to a possible ordinary explanation.
Evidence for and against
- A firsthand story read word for word on air.
- Concrete events and details: hospital ER job, riding home, a named friend, [name withheld], a drunk driver, and bloodstains on the curb.
- The writer separates what they perceived from what they are unsure about.
- No date, no street name, and no location that can be checked.
- The writer mentions a couple of stiff drinks and raises a “flashback” possibility.
- The timing near the anniversary of a death makes suggestion and expectation an easy explanation.
- Some words are marked low-confidence in the transcript.
- The letter is brief and not backed up by anyone else.
- 0:57
- 1:06
- 2:09
What the model inferred (not said on air): Weight was given to specificity and consistency for a firsthand story that hangs together. Points came off because the writer admits a possible ordinary explanation and nothing is given that can be checked.
Only the writer's word is present. A few named specifics exist, but none can be verified or checked from the transcript.
Evidence for and against
- A named friend, “[name withheld],” and a claimed physical detail (bloodstains on the curb) that could in principle be checked.
- The writer says their workplace is a hospital emergency room.
- No location, date, or document is given or examined.
- No second witness speaks on air.
- Art reads the letter but describes no physical evidence.
- It is not stated whether the street or incident could be identified.
- 1:06
- 2:05
What the model inferred (not said on air): Claimed but unexamined specifics put this in the low range. No documentation or on-air second witness raises it.
A dead friend reportedly appearing beside a lone cyclist on a dark road and following them home is quietly unsettling, without threat or violence.
Evidence for and against
- A lone bicycle ride at night on a road where the friend died.
- A tire sound with no source that keeps growing until the writer takes off their headphones.
- The figure reportedly stays with the writer until the crossroads.
- The friend is not described as hostile or threatening.
- The writer's “flashback” remark softens the tone.
- The look of the figure is described only as [quote withheld]
- 1:54
- 2:05
What the model inferred (not said on air): Scored on mood and on the intrusion into an isolated nighttime setting, not on any reported harm.
A dead person appearing near the anniversary of the death is a familiar setup. But the bicyclist, the tire sound with no source, and the friend following the writer to the crossroads make a distinctive combination.
Evidence for and against
- A bicycle commute and a “riding buddy,” not a haunted home.
- A sound described as a car tire behind the rider.
- The figure reportedly goes with the writer to the place of death.
- A dead person appearing on the anniversary of the death is a recurring theme.
- Originality is provisional pending a comparison with the rest of the archive.
- 1:19
- 0:37
What the model inferred (not said on air): Judged as a familiar setup plus a small number of distinctive details.
Scoring confidence 0.70 · analysis confidence 0.75 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The writer's word in a letter read on air; No document, photograph, or recording examined; No on-air second witness. The originality score blends the model's score (50) 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.
- Tiredness after a shift, plus the drinks the writer mentions, along with the expectation that comes with an anniversary, could have shaped how they heard sounds and saw a figure. · The writer says they had [quote withheld] to settle down and had just gotten off work, and raises the possibility of a “flashback” themselves.
- The tire sound may have been noise or bleed-through from the headphones or radio, not a sound from outside. · The writer says the sound grew loud enough that they [quote withheld] which suggests the device played a part.
What stands out
The story centers on a bicyclist who hears a tire sound behind them that has no source and then reports their dead riding companion appearing beside them on the same road, close to the anniversary of the friend's death.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.