Skip to content
DRAFT ARCHIVE · every story is an AI draft not yet checked by a personHow they are made →
October 30, 1996 (probable)·Caller's story·3 min·at 45:40 in the broadcast

A figure at the foot of the bed on the night the caller's grandfather died

A caller who gives their name as [name withheld], from Canton, Ohio, says that at the age of five they woke in the night and found family members gathered and upset. They then saw a greenish-white shape at the foot of their bed that they came to think looked like their grandfather. The caller says they learned the next morning that their grandfather had died in an emergency room that night. The host closes the call by saying the grandfather [quote withheld] and describing such stories as a type that comes up again and again.

Story statusAI draft, not yet checked
Start and end pointsNot yet checked · confidence 0.95
How it was toldFirsthand · Live call
0:00 / 3:15
Play
0:05 · The caller gives their name as [name withheld], calling from Canton, Ohio.0:20 · The caller says they were five years old at the time and remember it distinctly, and that they lived with their grandparents.0:22 · The caller woke in the middle of the night for no reason they could identify, feeling as awake as on a normal morning, and walked through the house.0:53 · The caller found family members gathered together, all looking sad. When they asked what was wrong, no one would tell them.1:02 · The caller got a drink of water and went back to bed.1:05 · Looking up, the caller saw something at the foot of their bed that they describe as greenish-white.1:17 · Frightened, the caller put the covers over their head and lay trembling.1:25 · As they calmed down, they realized the shape looked like their grandfather.1:32 · The caller peeked out after a couple of minutes and saw nothing there, then went back to sleep.1:40 · The next morning the caller learned their grandfather had begun having chest pains that night.1:59 · The grandfather was taken to an emergency room, let another patient go first, and collapsed and died as he walked in.
clip start● reported events: click one to jump thereclip end

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 1996.mp3”, starting at 45:40). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.

The story as told

[name withheld], calling from Canton, Ohio, says they were five years old and living with both of their grandparents when this happened. [name withheld] says they woke in the middle of the night for a reason they could not identify, feeling as awake as on a normal morning. [name withheld] walked through the house and found a number of family members gathered together and looking sad. When they asked what was wrong, no one told them. [name withheld] says they got a drink of water and went back to bed, then looked up and saw something at the foot of their bed that [quote withheld] [name withheld] says they were frightened, pulled the covers over their head, and lay trembling. As they calmed down, they realized the shape looked like their grandfather. When they peeked out again after a couple of minutes, they say, nothing was there, and they went back to sleep. The next morning, they say, they learned that their grandfather had begun having chest pains that night and had been taken to an emergency room. The grandfather had let another patient be seen first because that person seemed more ill, and he collapsed and died as he walked in. Asked by the host whether their grandfather had been in the house, the caller says their grandfather lived with them. The host tells the caller the grandfather [quote withheld] and closes the call after describing such stories as common.

Reported events, in order

  1. 0:05

    The caller gives their name as [name withheld], calling from Canton, Ohio.

  2. 0:20

    The caller says they were five years old at the time and remember it distinctly, and that they lived with their grandparents.

  3. 0:22

    The caller woke in the middle of the night for no reason they could identify, feeling as awake as on a normal morning, and walked through the house.

  4. 0:53

    The caller found family members gathered together, all looking sad. When they asked what was wrong, no one would tell them.

  5. 1:02

    The caller got a drink of water and went back to bed.

  6. 1:05

    Looking up, the caller saw something at the foot of their bed that they describe as greenish-white.

  7. 1:17

    Frightened, the caller put the covers over their head and lay trembling.

  8. 1:25

    As they calmed down, they realized the shape looked like their grandfather.

  9. 1:32

    The caller peeked out after a couple of minutes and saw nothing there, then went back to sleep.

  10. 1:40

    The next morning the caller learned their grandfather had begun having chest pains that night.

  11. 1:59

    The grandfather was taken to an emergency room, let another patient go first, and collapsed and died as he walked in.

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· 1:05

    The caller says they looked up from bed and saw something at the foot of their bed.

  • observation· 1:15

    The caller describes the thing they saw at the foot of the bed as greenish-white.

  • interpretation· 1:25

    The caller says that as they calmed down, they realized the shape looked like their grandfather.

  • observation· 1:32

    The caller says that when they looked again after a couple of minutes, there was nothing there.

  • hearsay· 1:47

    The caller says they learned the next morning that their grandfather had had chest pains that night, gone to an emergency room, and collapsed and died while walking in.

  • observation· 1:56

    The caller says both of their grandparents lived with them and the family at the time.

  • host statement· 2:29

    The host states that the grandfather's figure appeared to the caller at the time of his death.

  • host statement· 3:02

    The host generalizes: family members who die suddenly are said to visit people who had no idea they were in danger.

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.

Believability
A rough guide to how credible the story is as told
62

This is a clear, consistent firsthand story with a modest amount of concrete detail, but nothing that can be checked, and one ordinary explanation (a child's nighttime perception) fits easily. The caller's own restraint and their admission of being tired raise the calibration component. The total is 62 of 100.

Evidence for and against
For
  • Firsthand story: the caller is the direct witness ([quote withheld]).
  • Concrete sequence and sensory detail: waking without cause, finding the family gathered, the drink of water, the greenish-white color, hiding under the covers, and checking again.
  • The caller separates what they saw ([quote withheld]) from what they concluded ([quote withheld]) and offers an ordinary reading of the sighting.
  • The story holds up when the host asks follow-up questions about the time of night and whether the grandfather lived in the house.
Against
  • The event is a brief childhood perception with no date, address, or other detail that can be checked ([quote withheld]).
  • An ordinary reading fits easily: a small child waking at night in a dark room, as the caller notes ([quote withheld]).
  • There is a short gap or unclear passage where the caller's sentence is broken across lines.
Uncertain or missing
  • The labels showing who is speaking shift between callers within what appears to be a single call, so the attribution of one line is uncertain.
  • No date or location beyond “Canton, Ohio” is given, so nothing can be checked.
Passages cited
  • 0:18
  • 0:20
  • 1:05
  • 1:38

What the model inferred (not said on air): The weighting of the components is mine. The transcript supplies the quoted content and the fact that no check is possible in this part of the broadcast.

Evidence strength
Support in the story that others could check
12

The story rests on the caller's word, with a few identifying details (city, first name, a described death) that were not checked. This falls at the lower end of the range of 11 to 25.

Evidence for and against
For
  • Some details that could in principle be checked are given but were not checked: a named city (Canton, Ohio), a first name ([name withheld]), and a described death in an emergency room.
Against
  • No document, recording, photograph, or record is offered or examined.
  • The claimed witnesses (family members in the house) do not speak on air and are not said to have seen the figure.
  • No date, surname, address, or hospital is given, so even the death cannot be checked.
Uncertain or missing
  • No outside check was done. The hard cap of 50 applies and is not approached.
Passages cited
  • 0:05
  • 2:23

What the model inferred (not said on air): Placement in the range follows the scoring guide. The transcript itself contains no physical evidence.

Creepiness
How unsettling the story is, for entertainment
48

The intrusion into a child's bedroom and the death the same night are truly unsettling. But the encounter is brief, not threatening, and told without escalation, which places it in the middle of the scale.

Evidence for and against
For
  • The sighting is in a child's bedroom at night, at the foot of the bed.
  • The caller describes fear and hiding under the covers, trembling.
  • It is tied to an unexpected death the same night, including the grandfather collapsing and dying.
Against
  • The figure does nothing. It does not move, speak, threaten, or touch anyone.
  • The host's framing is comforting rather than frightening ([quote withheld]).
  • The ending is a death in the family, not an ongoing haunting.
Uncertain or missing
  • The description “greenish-white” is not developed, so the figure's appearance is only partly clear.
Passages cited
  • 1:17
  • 1:24
  • 2:23

What the model inferred (not said on air): Creepiness is a judgment about the effect on a listener, not about whether the story is true.

Originality
How different it is from familiar recurring details
51

A familiar frame, a dead relative seen at the foot of a child's bed on the night of death, with a couple of small distinctive details. The provisional score is 32. The published value compares it with the rest of the archive and is provisional at this archive size.

Evidence for and against
For
  • One distinctive element: the description “greenish-white” rather than a white or dark figure.
  • A distinctive detail in the story of the death: the grandfather letting a more seriously ill patient be seen first before collapsing.
Against
  • The core structure is a stock one, which the caller acknowledges ([quote withheld]).
  • The host says the same: such stories are [quote withheld]
Uncertain or missing
  • Compared with the rest of the archive, the story's novelty cannot be judged from a single part of a broadcast.
Passages cited
  • 1:13
  • 2:52

What the model inferred (not said on air): Originality is a comparative judgment by the editor. The comparison with the rest of the archive cannot be made here.

Scoring confidence 0.62 · analysis confidence 0.72 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller's firsthand story (a childhood memory, no documents); No photograph, recording, or document offered or examined; No second witness of the figure speaks on air. The caller's family members are described but do not speak; No date, address, hospital name, or record given for the death. The originality score blends the model's score (32) 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 five-year-old waking in a dark room may half-see an indistinct shape at the foot of the bed, perhaps from images seen while falling asleep or from the mind finding a familiar shape in an unclear one. The child then matches it to a familiar person. The caller says [quote withheld] · The caller offers an ordinary reading of the event.
  • The caller's story of adults sitting together looking sad could be a partial childhood memory of a household responding to a medical emergency overnight. The caller does not link it to the figure. · The caller describes finding family members gathered and visibly upset but being told nothing.
  • The match in timing between a brief bedroom sighting and a relative's death that same night may be coincidence. Nothing in the transcript allows the two to be linked beyond the order in which the caller tells them. · No date, address, hospital, or document is given for the death.

What stands out

The story is a stock crisis-ghost story, but it is told from the view of a five-year-old who first met the household's distress before the sighting. It includes the specific detail of the grandfather letting another emergency-room patient be seen ahead of him. The caller also offers an ordinary explanation for their own experience: [quote withheld]

Related stories

Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.