Broken sink handle and a matching handle found in a Hawaii hallway
A caller (first name not given) tells Art Bell a second, short anecdote. While working security in an apartment complex in Hawaii, they broke a sink handle on their first night on post. Later that same night they found a matching handle lying in the middle of a hallway floor and fitted it to the sink. They report no figure, sound, or named source, only that they [quote withheld] in the building beforehand. The host ends the call by saying he is not sure what to make of it and calling it [quote withheld]
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 2004.mp3”, starting at 2:27:12). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
In the second anecdote of the call, the caller (no name given) says they worked security in an apartment complex in Hawaii. They mention having had many experiences at Honolulu airport and having co-workers while working out there. They say that on their first night on this post they broke the handle off a sink and that it [quote withheld] Later that same night, walking the same building, they say they [quote withheld] While walking a hallway they looked down and saw, “smack dab” in the middle of the floor, a handle [quote withheld] The caller says that because of this they did not have to file an incident report or write anything up, and that they simply put the found handle on the sink. The next line of the transcript is unclear, reading [quote withheld] Art Bell responds that he [quote withheld] says [quote withheld] and adds [quote withheld] The caller does not state a cause for the event. No date, building name, colleague name, or documentation is given.
Reported events, in order
- 0:00
The caller says they have one more short experience to tell, mentioning a lot of experiences at Honolulu airport and time working in Hawaii.
- 0:12
They say they worked security in an apartment complex in Hawaii.
- 0:17
They say that on their first night on that post they broke the sink handle, which came apart into pieces in their hand.
- 0:29
Later that night, walking the same building, they say they already felt “something weird” there.
- 0:42
They say they saw a handle lying in the middle of a hallway floor, just like the one that fits the sink they had broken.
- 0:50
Because of this, they say they did not have to make an incident report or write anything up.
- 0:53
They say they put the found handle on the sink. An unclear line mentioning “Reverend” follows.
- 0:56
The host closes the story ([quote withheld]), says he is not sure what to make of it, and calls it [quote withheld]
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· 0:17
The caller says that on their first night on post at an apartment complex where they worked security, they broke the handle off a sink and it came apart in pieces in their hand.
- observation· 0:29
The caller says they felt “something weird” in the building that night before the find.
- observation· 0:42
The caller says they saw a handle lying in the middle of a hallway floor that was [quote withheld]
- observation· 0:53
The caller says they fitted the found handle to the sink. They report a line addressed to “Reverend” that is not clearly attributed or transcribed.
- host statement· 1:02
The host offers his own view of the event as “Providence”; the caller does not state a cause.
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 brief but coherent firsthand story. The caller was a direct witness and the sequence is consistent. But there are few specifics (no date, name, or building), an ordinary explanation for a matching part turning up in a large building fits easily, and the caller does not stretch their claims or acknowledge doubt.
Evidence for and against
- A firsthand story of a concrete, ordered sequence: breaking the handle on the first night on post, then finding a matching one later that night.
- Physical detail in the story: [quote withheld] and [quote withheld]
- No contradiction; the caller's details stay consistent through the host's brief questions.
- No name, date, address, or other detail that can be checked is given beyond “Hawaii” and “an apartment complex.”
- An ordinary explanation (a spare or discarded handle of a common pattern in the same building) fits the reported find with little strain.
- The caller gives no cause and no attempt to rule out an ordinary source for the handle.
- The closing line ([quote withheld]) is garbled, and who said it or where it came from cannot be identified, so part of the reported sequence is unclear.
- The story is extremely short, which limits how far consistency or calibration can be judged.
- 0:17
- 0:42
What the model inferred (not said on air): Component judgment (my scoring, not what the caller said): source proximity about 17/25 (firsthand but very brief and partial); specificity about 5/20 (no date, name, or address; only a two-step sequence); internal consistency about 13/20 (coherent, no contradictions); alternative explanations about 5/20 (a common handle in the same building explains the find well); calibration about 5/15 (no stated cause, no doubt acknowledged). The sum is 45. This is close to the scoring guide's reference point of about 40 for a typical brief firsthand story with an easy ordinary explanation.
There is nothing beyond the caller's own word: no examined document, no on-air second witness, and no records that can be checked. The lack of a named location and the missing date keep it in the lowest evidence range.
Evidence for and against
- The caller took part directly in both the breakage and the find.
- They name Hawaii as the location of the work, but no specific building, date, or person.
- No documentation, photograph, recording, log entry, or incident report is offered; the caller notes they did not write anything up.
- No second witness is named or heard on air.
- It is not stated whether any record of the damaged fixture or the found handle ever existed.
- 0:50
What the model inferred (not said on air): Under the scoring guide this is the usual “teller's assertion only” case (0 to 10). Hawaii is a kind of place that could be checked, but it is not a specific that can be checked, so there is no increase.
This is a mild strange event with a single hint of unease and no threat, escalation, or ominous ending. It reads as an uncanny coincidence rather than a frightening story.
Evidence for and against
- A guard on a night shift reports already feeling “something weird” in the building before the find.
- An object matching the one they had just broken appears in an otherwise empty hallway.
- No threat, harm, presence, voice, or lasting dread is reported.
- The story ends comfortably: they fit the handle and go on with their shift.
- The host's response treats it as mildly odd rather than frightening.
- “Something weird” is not explained further, so how much unease they felt is unclear.
- 0:29
What the model inferred (not said on air): I placed it near the “mildly eerie” level (30) but lowered it because nothing menacing or unresolved is described. This is an editorial judgment about the story's atmosphere.
The story avoids stock ghost motifs and centers on a specific, unusual object coincidence: a matching replacement appearing after a breakage. That lifts it above generic haunting material, though the setting is familiar.
Evidence for and against
- The main device is unusual: an object that exactly copies the thing the caller had just broken appears in the hallway hours later.
- It is not a figure, voice, or cold-spot story; the strange event is an object swap rather than a ghost.
- The frame is a familiar workplace night-shift story of unease with an unexplained object.
- The setting (security job, night rounds, hallway) is a stock ghost-story frame.
- The story is very short, so there is little material for judging how distinctive it is.
- 0:42
What the model inferred (not said on air): This is a provisional model score. The comparison with the rest of the archive counts for almost nothing at pilot scale, so the score reflects only how distinctive the content is.
Scoring confidence 0.45 · analysis confidence 0.55 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller's firsthand story only; No names, dates, documents, photographs, or recordings offered; No second witness speaks on air. The originality score blends the model's score (65) 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 spare or discarded sink handle of the same common type may simply have been lying in the building's hallway, unrelated to the handle the caller broke. · The caller was a security guard walking the halls of a large apartment complex at night.
- The two events may be unconnected coincidence. Handles of that pattern are common in one building, so a matching part on the floor would not need an unusual cause. · The broken handle [quote withheld] in the caller's hand, on a fixture in the building.
- Some of the sequence (including who or what is reported to have said “Thank you, Reverend”) may be wrong in the automatic transcript, so the reported chain of events may differ from what was actually said. · The transcript of this part is short, and the closing line is garbled.
What stands out
Rather than a figure, voice, or cold spot, the strange event is an object swap. A handle matching the one the caller had just broken is said to appear on a hallway floor hours later, sparing them an incident report. The setting is an ordinary security night-shift round, and the caller states no cause.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.