A photograph, a lamp, and a grinning reflection on a dark TV screen
A caller from New Orleans tells Art Bell a story they connect to Marie Laveau. The caller found and hung a photograph of a woman who played Marie Laveau. They then report seeing a mad, grinning face reflected on their dark TV screen on two nights. Moving the picture made it stop. The host suggests a distorted reflection.
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 1997.mp3”, starting at 3:25:37). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller, who says they are in New Orleans, tells Art Bell that their story has to do with Marie Laveau and calls it a “real spooky story” that “actually happened.” The caller says they had friends in a play at UNO, and one of the pictures they had was of the girl who played Marie Laveau. They had dug the pictures up a couple of months earlier. After a break the caller recaps that they were looking for important papers and rummaging through boxes when they found a picture of the girl who acted in a movie about Marie Laveau. The caller says the picture was beautiful, they asked her if they could have it, and she said yes. They put it on their wall next to a poster and behind a lamp, where it could be seen when walking into the room. That night they went to bed. The caller says they woke the next morning with the lamp still on and saw a reflection on a dark TV screen, about six inches by six inches. They describe it as [quote withheld] It was not the caller, and it came from the wall where they had placed the picture. The caller says they got up and it disappeared. When they turned the lamp off, there was no reflection. The caller reports the same thing the next night: with the lamp on and the TV off, the reflection of a mad-looking person with a devious-looking face came back. Eventually, the caller says, they moved the picture to another spot and the thing went away. The caller says it was “just a reflection.” Art Bell suggests it could have been a distorted reflection of her in the television, or a reflection that looked like a creature one would not want to meet in the middle of the night. He says he thought the story was going elsewhere.
Reported events, in order
- 0:04
The caller says they are in New Orleans and that their story has to do with Marie Laveau.
- 0:33
The caller says they had friends in a play at UNO and that one picture was of the girl who played Marie Laveau. They had dug the pictures up a couple of months earlier.
- 1:23
After a break, the caller recaps that they found a picture of the girl who acted in a movie about Marie Laveau, asked for it, and put it on their wall next to a poster and behind a lamp.
- 2:08
The caller says they went to bed that night and woke the next morning with the lamp still on. They saw a reflection about six inches by six inches on a dark TV screen.
- 2:34
The caller describes the reflection as a mad character with a devious-looking smile, not themselves, coming from the wall where the picture was placed.
- 3:08
The caller says they got up and it disappeared. When they turned the lamp off, there was no reflection.
- 3:17
The caller reports the same thing the next night: with the lamp on and the TV off, the reflection came back.
- 3:39
The caller says they moved the picture to another spot and the thing went away.
- 3:43
Art Bell suggests it could have been a distorted reflection in the television, or a reflection that looked like a creature one would not want to meet.
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· 2:41
The caller reports seeing a mad character with a devious-looking smile reflected on a dark TV screen, and says it was not the caller.
- observation· 3:21
The caller reports that the reflection returned on a second night when the lamp was on and the TV was off.
- observation· 3:39
The caller reports that moving the picture to another spot stopped the events.
- interpretation· 0:20
The caller connects the story to Marie Laveau.
- interpretation· 3:03
The caller describes what they saw as a reflection.
- host statement· 3:43
Art Bell suggests the caller may have been seeing a distorted reflection of the woman in the television.
- host statement· 3:54
Art Bell suggests the reflection could resemble a creature one would not want to meet in the middle of the night.
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 with a concrete sequence and a clear description of the room. But the caller calls the image a reflection, and an ordinary optical explanation fits easily. No one backs it up, and nothing can be checked.
Evidence for and against
- Firsthand story of a specific room arrangement and a repeated visual experience.
- Concrete details: dark TV screen, lamp, poster, picture, approximately six inches by six inches.
- The caller gives a consistent sequence across two nights.
- The caller says the image was “just a reflection,” which suggests an ordinary optical cause.
- No date or full names are given for the event.
- No second witness or documentation is offered.
- The labels showing who is speaking are inconsistent, so some lines may be assigned to the wrong speaker.
- The name of the actress and the exact location are unclear. The transcript also gives “Marie Laveau” once as “Marie Lebeau.”
- 0:25
- 2:41
- 3:39
What the model inferred (not said on air): I treat this as a brief but consistent firsthand story. The easy optical explanation and the lack of backing keep the score near the middle rather than high.
The story rests entirely on the caller’s word. No photograph, TV screen, or other physical evidence is examined in the transcript, and no second witness speaks on air.
Evidence for and against
- The caller gives some specifics: New Orleans, UNO, a photograph, a lamp, a poster, a dark TV screen.
- The caller describes a repeated two-night sequence.
- No physical evidence is produced or examined.
- No second witness speaks on air.
- No dates, records, or documents that can be checked are supplied.
- No date or full names are given.
- No physical evidence is described as kept or examined.
- 2:41
- 3:03
What the model inferred (not said on air): The score reflects that nothing exists beyond the caller’s own word. The few details that could be checked are not enough to raise it into the next range.
A grinning, devious face that keeps returning on a dark TV screen in a bedroom is unsettling. But there is no threat, physical contact, or escalation.
Evidence for and against
- A “devious looking smile” appears on a dark screen.
- It happens in a bedroom at night and repeats on a second night.
- The caller calls it “just a reflection.”
- The image disappears when they move the picture and does not follow them.
- The story is brief, and the caller describes it as a reflection, which may reduce the scare.
- 2:41
- 3:21
What the model inferred (not said on air): I score this as moderately unsettling because of the repeated, unexplained face in a private bedroom. It is not higher because there is no threat, contact, or escalation.
The story uses the familiar motif of a face in a reflection. The Marie Laveau photograph and the lamp, poster, and TV arrangement give it a specific frame.
Evidence for and against
- Specific setting: a photograph of an actress who played Marie Laveau.
- Detailed setup: picture, poster, lamp, dark TV screen.
- Faces seen in mirrors, windows, or dark screens come up often in ghost stories.
- Nothing unusual beyond a still, reflected face.
- The originality score is provisional. It cannot be compared with the rest of the archive from this single part of the broadcast.
- 0:20
- 2:25
What the model inferred (not said on air): I treat the Marie Laveau photograph and the lamp, poster, and TV arrangement as the distinctive details within a familiar reflection motif.
Scoring confidence 0.70 · analysis confidence 0.75 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller’s firsthand story; Claimed photograph, not examined; Claimed television screen, not examined. 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.
- An optical reflection, with the mind seeing a face in it: the face was a distorted reflection produced by the arrangement of the photograph, poster, lamp, and dark TV screen. · The caller says the image appeared only when the lamp was on and the picture was arranged with a poster behind it. The caller says it disappeared when they turned the lamp off or moved the picture.
- The image was a distorted reflection of the photograph itself in the television screen. · Art Bell suggests it could have been [quote withheld]
What stands out
The caller describes the face as a reflection produced by the arrangement of a photograph, a poster, and a lamp, not as a ghost standing on its own. The caller still calls the story spooky and links it to Marie Laveau.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.