Investigator reports tripod pulled by nothing and shadow silhouette on a stairway wall
A caller who gives no name and describes themselves as an investigator tells Art Bell about two incidents at a site they were investigating. First, the caller felt something pull the extended leg of their tripod and found the team member they suspected standing about fifteen feet away. On a later visit, while videotaping at the top of a stairway, they saw a shadow silhouette of a male figure on the wall behind them. It was still there after they turned around and found no one present.
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 2001-1.mp3”, starting at 1:34:47). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller, who describes themselves as taking part in investigations, says that while working at a location they felt someone pull on the extended leg of the tripod behind them. They say they assumed it was one of the members, [name withheld], “fooling around” and teasing them. They grabbed the tripod and gave it a hard jerk to pull it away from the hand, and it pulled loose. They say they then turned around to look at [name withheld]. [name withheld] was there about fifteen feet back, and there was no one else around him. From this the caller says [quote withheld] They say they returned on a later investigation shortly after that and decided the place would be good for videotaping, to see if they could get infrared ghost lights. They set up the camera at the top of the stairway, focusing down along the stairs, in a place with only a little ambient light. While focusing and watching the camera screen, the caller says, they noticed out of the corner of their eye a silhouette, a shadow silhouette, come up behind them, shining on a glossy enamel wall off to the right of the stairway. They say they didn't think much of it and suspected it was probably [name withheld] or one of the other men coming up behind them. They turned around to look and say no one was near them at all, but the shadow, a perfect silhouette of a male figure, was still there. The host comments that this is typical of what happens when people go looking for such things.
Reported events, in order
- -1:-1:-1
The caller feels someone pull on the extended leg of the tripod behind them during an investigation.
- 0:13
The caller assumes it is the team member [name withheld] teasing them, grabs the tripod, and jerks it away from the hand. It pulls loose.
- 0:20
The caller turns around. [name withheld] is about 15 feet back, and no one else is near him.
- 0:28
The caller concludes that whatever grabbed the tripod was invisible.
- 0:28
The caller returns on a later investigation to videotape the place and look for infrared ghost lights.
- 0:41
The caller sets up the camera at the top of the stairway, focusing down along the stairs in dim light.
- 0:50
While watching the camera screen, the caller sees out of the corner of their eye a shadow silhouette come up behind them on the glossy wall to the right of the stairway.
- 1:14
The caller suspects it is [name withheld] or one of the other men coming up behind them.
- 1:19
The caller turns around, and no one is near them.
- 1:23
The shadow remains on the wall as a perfect silhouette of a male figure.
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:-1:-1
The caller felt something pull on the extended leg of their tripod from behind them.
- interpretation· -1:-1:-1
The caller first assumed the pull was the team member [name withheld] teasing them.
- observation· 0:23
After turning, the caller saw [name withheld] about 15 feet away and no one else around him.
- interpretation· 0:28
The caller concluded that whatever grabbed the tripod was something invisible.
- observation· 0:50
While focusing their camera down the stairway, the caller saw a shadow silhouette come up behind them on the wall.
- interpretation· 1:14
The caller suspected the silhouette was [name withheld] or one of the other men approaching behind them.
- observation· 1:23
After turning around, the caller found no one near them, but the shadow silhouette of a male figure was still on the wall.
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 concrete physical details and a consistent two-part sequence. No location, date, or place is given, and ordinary explanations fit fairly easily.
Evidence for and against
- The caller reports the events directly rather than relaying them from someone else.
- Specific measurements and settings are given, such as [name withheld] standing about 15 feet back and the camera set up at the top of the stairway.
- The caller separates their first assumptions ([name withheld], then [name withheld]) from what they say they then observed.
- No location, date, or building is named, so nothing can be checked.
- A person present in the building and a light source casting a shadow are ordinary possibilities that are not ruled out.
- The story is brief, and the transcript is heavily fragmented.
- Whether anyone else was in the building at the time is not stated.
- Whether the camera recorded any of the second incident is not stated.
- 0:23
- 0:59
- 1:14
What the model inferred (not said on air): Component scoring: firsthand witness (high), moderate specificity, no contradictions found, ordinary explanations not addressed (lower), and some calibration because the caller flags their own assumptions.
The story rests entirely on the caller’s own word. No place, date, or record is given, and no physical evidence is claimed to have been captured or examined.
Evidence for and against
- The caller’s firsthand story is the whole of the material.
- A camera was in use during the second incident.
- No location, date, or building is named, so nothing can be checked independently.
- It is not stated that the camera recorded the shadow or anything strange.
- No second witness is said to have seen either event.
- Whether footage exists and what it shows is not stated.
- The names given ([name withheld], [name withheld]) are first names only, with no other identifying detail.
- 0:41
- 0:28
What the model inferred (not said on air): Assigned to the 0 to 10 band (the caller’s word only) because there is no specific that can be checked, no claimed object, and no second witness on air.
Something unseen pulling equipment, and a human-shaped shadow that remains after the person supposed to cast it is found absent, are both unsettling. There is no threat, harm, or escalation.
Evidence for and against
- Something unseen is said to have physically pulled the tripod.
- A shadow described as a [quote withheld] is said to remain after the caller turns and finds no one.
- The second incident happens alone at the top of a dimly lit stairway.
- No harm, threat, or hostile element is reported.
- The caller treats both incidents as findings from an investigation rather than as frightening experiences.
- The caller does not describe their emotional reaction to either event.
- 0:50
- 1:23
What the model inferred (not said on air): Rated above the mildly eerie anchor because of the physical pull and the lasting human-shaped shadow, but below the genuinely unsettling anchor because nothing threatening or sustained is described.
A shadow figure on a wall is a familiar motif. The invisible pull on a tripod during an investigation gives it a somewhat distinctive frame.
Evidence for and against
- The combination of equipment being physically pulled and a shadow silhouette remaining after the supposed source is absent is a moderately distinctive pairing.
- Shadow silhouettes and unseen physical contact are stock ghost-story elements.
- The setting (dim stairway, glossy wall) is a conventional backdrop.
- How novel this is compared with the rest of the archive cannot be judged here. This is a provisional judgment of the content.
- -1:-1:-1
- 0:50
What the model inferred (not said on air): This is a provisional model score placed at the [quote withheld] level (around 50).
Scoring confidence 0.60 · analysis confidence 0.65 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller’s firsthand story; No object or recording described as examined. The originality score blends the model's score (48) 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.
- Another person in the building, not [name withheld], pulled or brushed the tripod leg. · The caller says they assumed one of the members was “fooling around” with them, so people were present in the building.
- The shadow on the wall was cast by an object, the caller’s own gear, or another light source rather than by a person. · The caller describes only [quote withheld] and a glossy enamel wall that would show shadows well.
- The tripod leg slipped or was caught on something rather than being pulled by a hand. · The caller describes the leg as an “extended” leg of the tripod and says it “pulled loose.”
What stands out
Both reported incidents turn on a physical effect with no visible cause: a tripod pulled, and a cast shadow that persists after the person supposedly casting it is shown to be absent. They are reported by someone who describes themselves as conducting investigations rather than as a resident.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.