Bleeding man on a San Diego corner who vanished when officers turned back
A caller identified as [name withheld], a San Diego police officer of twelve years, describes something that happened about twelve years earlier. [name withheld] was just out of the academy and working with a veteran field training officer in the city's southeast area. The caller says that at about 3 a.m. they saw a man bleeding heavily from the head and face at a residential street corner. When they turned the patrol car around seconds later, the man was gone, and they found no blood or other trace. The caller says no report was written and that they told no one at the time.
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 1998.mp3”, starting at 1:05:19). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
[name withheld], a caller who says they are a San Diego police officer with twelve years' service, tells Art Bell about something that happened [quote withheld] [name withheld] was just out of the academy and assigned to a field training officer in the southeast area of San Diego, which the caller describes as high-activity, with [quote withheld] The caller's training officer, the caller says, had been on the job almost thirty years. While driving down one of the boulevards at [quote withheld] they approached an intersection in a residential area and saw a male standing on the corner. As they passed, the caller says, the man [quote withheld] and [quote withheld] Both officers looked at each other and asked whether the other had seen it. The caller, who was driving, turned the car around and drove back, and they both got out. They could not find him. “He was gone,” the caller says, within what the caller estimates was three to five seconds. They checked up and down the street and found “no blood trails” and nothing indicating he had been there. Back in the car, they sat quietly and asked each other again, and both confirmed they had seen the man. They [quote withheld] When Bell asks, the caller says they wrote no report, and that the story did not [quote withheld] The caller says they wondered whether the man was a recent murder victim who was “restless or something.” The caller says the experience convinced them [quote withheld]
Reported events, in order
- 0:31
The caller says this happened about twelve years earlier, when they were just out of the academy and assigned to a veteran field training officer in the southeast area of San Diego.
- 1:04
The caller says they were driving down one of the boulevards at about 3 in the morning and approached an intersection in a residential area.
- 1:09
The caller reports seeing a male standing on the corner as they approached.
- 1:17
As they passed, the caller says, the man appeared to be bleeding profusely from the head and face and looked as if he had just been stabbed several times.
- 1:28
Both officers asked each other whether they had seen it. The caller turned the car around, and they both got out and could not find the man.
- 1:37
The caller estimates the man was gone within three to five seconds, the time it took to brake, turn around, and drive back.
- 1:48
The caller says they checked up and down the street and found no blood trails and nothing indicating the man had been there.
- 1:57
They sat quietly in the car and asked each other again. Both confirmed they had seen the man.
- 2:07
The caller says they decided not to tell anybody, and that no report was written.
- 2:18
The caller says they wondered whether it had been a recent murder victim who was “restless or something.”
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· 1:17
A male was standing on a residential street corner at about 3 a.m., appearing to bleed profusely from the head and face, as if recently stabbed several times.
- observation· 1:28
When the officers turned the car around and got out within seconds, the man could not be found.
- observation· 1:48
No blood trails or other traces were found on the street.
- observation· 2:07
Both officers confirmed to each other that they had seen the man.
- interpretation· 2:18
The caller's explanation: it may have been a recent murder victim who was “restless.”
- interpretation· 2:38
The experience convinced the caller that there is something beyond what we normally notice.
- host statement· 3:02
The host says there is something unexplained “out there.”
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, consistent firsthand story with concrete though partial detail (city area, time of night, sequence, absence of traces), told by a direct witness. Nobody else backs it up beyond a claimed second officer, and an ordinary possibility (a real injured man who moved off) is only partly addressed.
Evidence for and against
- Direct first-person witness: [quote withheld]
- Concrete sequence and timing: [quote withheld]
- The caller describes a physical search: [quote withheld]
- Consistent answers to the host's questions about how long ago it happened and whether a report was filed.
- No street name, no date, and no name for the other officer, so few details can be checked.
- The second witness does not speak. The second officer's sighting is only relayed by the caller.
- By the caller's own account, no report, photograph, or record exists: [quote withheld]
- In places it is unclear whether the labels showing who is speaking are correctly split between one caller and the host.
- The exact year and street are not given.
- 1:17
- 1:37
- 2:07
What the model inferred (not said on air): Judgment by part: closeness to events high (20 to 25 range); specifics moderate; consistency high; other explanations partly unaddressed; calibration reasonable (the caller says “appeared to be” and “maybe”).
Nothing that can be checked independently is presented: no name for the second officer, no street, no date, and the caller says no report was ever written. A second witness is claimed but does not speak on air.
Evidence for and against
- A claimed second witness: [quote withheld]
- No documentation: [quote withheld]
- No physical evidence is claimed to exist. On the contrary, none was found: [quote withheld]
- Whether any report exists that the caller chose not to disclose is not stated and cannot be verified.
- 2:27
- 2:07
What the model inferred (not said on air): Range 11 to 25: details that could be checked are largely absent, and the second witness is claimed, not heard. That means the caller's word alone plus a claimed witness.
A bleeding, apparently stabbed man standing on a quiet residential corner at 3 a.m., then vanishing without any blood or trace, is truly unsettling. The encounter is brief, though, with no threat to the caller, and it ends in a quiet, unresolved conversation.
Evidence for and against
- Vivid description of injury: [quote withheld]
- An impossible disappearance within seconds: “He was gone.”
- No physical trace: [quote withheld]
- No contact, pursuit, sound, or threat toward the officers is reported.
- The telling is matter-of-fact and brief, with no escalation and no lingering strangeness.
- The story does not say whether anything more happened later.
- 1:17
- 1:36
What the model inferred (not said on air): A judgment about the story's effect, not about whether it is true: violent imagery plus a vanishing plus no trace at all, but short and with no threat.
A vanishing figure by the road is a familiar ghost-story frame. But the mix of two patrol officers, a figure bleeding heavily as if freshly stabbed, and no blood at all after an almost immediate search is a distinctive set of details.
Evidence for and against
- Police officers as witnesses, and the violent look of the figure: [quote withheld]
- A deliberate search that finds nothing: [quote withheld]
- A figure that disappears when approached is a stock element of the genre.
- No unusual mechanism, object, or interaction beyond the sighting and disappearance.
- Novelty compared with the rest of the archive cannot be judged from this part of the broadcast alone. The score is provisional.
- 1:28
- 1:48
What the model inferred (not said on air): The model score falls between “stock elements only” (20) and [quote withheld] (50), leaning slightly above the latter because of the blood and no-blood contrast.
Scoring confidence 0.72 · analysis confidence 0.85 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller's firsthand story (live telephone call); Claimed second witness (an unnamed field training officer) who does not speak on air; No documentation: the caller says no report was written and nothing was told to anyone.
Ordinary explanations to consider
These are possibilities only. None is a finding about what happened.
- A truly injured person, possibly a recent assault victim, left the corner or was taken away during the few seconds the patrol car was turning around. · The caller says the man [quote withheld] and estimates the gap at [quote withheld] However, the reported absence of any blood trail weighs against a bleeding person walking any distance.
- Misreading a person or object at the corner from a moving car at night, which was later not found again. · The sighting is described as brief and from a passing car at about 3 a.m., and the caller's own wording is qualified: the man [quote withheld]
What stands out
The witnesses are two uniformed police officers on patrol. The figure is a bleeding, apparently stabbed man who leaves no blood trail even though the officers searched the street on foot seconds later. A violent-looking figure with no physical trace at all is an unusual pairing.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.