EVP saying “go home” recorded in a Niagara-on-the-Lake graveyard
A caller who gives their name as [name withheld], from Niagara Falls, Canada, tells Art Bell that they, their boyfriend, and a friend went ghost hunting with digital recorders in a graveyard in Niagara-on-the-Lake. The caller says that as they were about to leave, the friend remarked about someone coming home with them. On playback in the car, they heard a voice say “go home” clearly on the recording. The caller says none of them spoke those words. The story ends there, with the host commenting on EVP rather than the caller reporting any further event.
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 2007.mp3”, starting at 1:06:05). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller gives their name as [name withheld] and says they are calling from Niagara Falls, Canada. The caller says they, their boyfriend, and a friend decided to go ghost hunting and brought digital recorders to a graveyard in Niagara-on-the-Lake. The caller says they were there about an hour and were just about to leave when their boyfriend suggested they ask a couple more questions first. According to the caller, after they asked a couple more questions, the friend said something like [quote withheld] [name withheld] says they told the friend not to joke about that. They then got into the car and, while driving back, began listening to what they had recorded. [name withheld] says that when they reached the part where the friend made that remark, they could hear a voice say “go home” on the recording [quote withheld] The caller says they do not know who it was and that it was not any of them. The host asks whether they kept going home, and the caller’s next turn is a very short fragment (“that's”). The host then gives his own remarks about EVP working. He tells listeners to take a recorder to a graveyard if they have the nerve and to report what is said. [name withheld] gives no date for the outing, no description of the graveyard beyond its location, no other results from the recording session, and no explanation for the voice.
Reported events, in order
- 0:17
[name withheld] says they, their boyfriend, and a friend went ghost hunting with digital recorders in a graveyard in Niagara-on-the-Lake.
- 0:37
The caller says they were there for about an hour.
- 0:42
As they were about to leave, their boyfriend suggested asking a couple more questions, which they did.
- 0:43
The friend remarks about somebody coming home with them. [name withheld] says they told the friend not to joke about that.
- 0:58
They get into the car and start driving back, listening to the recording.
- 1:13
At the point on the recording where the friend speaks, they hear “go home” clearly, according to [name withheld].
- 1:16
[name withheld] says they do not know who said it and that it was not any of them.
- 1:22
The host asks whether they kept going home. The caller’s next turn is a one-word fragment.
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 went ghost hunting with digital recorders in a graveyard in Niagara-on-the-Lake with their boyfriend and a friend.
- observation· 0:37
They were in the graveyard for about an hour and were about to leave when they asked a couple more questions.
- observation· 0:43
The friend said something about somebody coming home with them, which the caller objected to.
- observation· 1:13
On playback in the car, they heard a voice say “go home” clearly on the recording.
- interpretation· 1:16
The voice was not any of the three of them, and they do not know who it was.
- host statement· 2:00
The host says that EVP works and is not a joke.
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 account by someone who was present, with a clear sequence and a named location. But it is brief and undated, and an ordinary explanation (one of the group speaking, or unclear audio) fits easily. Components: source closeness 17 (firsthand but brief), specificity 12, consistency 16, alternative explanations 5, calibration 11.
Evidence for and against
- The caller places themselves at the event as a direct participant.
- The setting and equipment are concrete: a graveyard in Niagara-on-the-Lake, digital recorders, about an hour on site.
- The caller separates what was heard from who produced it. The caller says the voice was not any of them and that they do not know who it was.
- No date, time of day, or description of the graveyard or of the recording itself is given.
- The reported phrase on the tape mirrors the friend’s remark just before it, which is consistent with an ordinary explanation.
- The only basis for ruling out the group as the source is the caller’s own statement. No analysis or independent check is described.
- The caller’s turn is cut short (“that's”) with an unclear speaker label, so a follow-up answer about what happened afterward may be missing.
- Part of the middle passage is garbled ([quote withheld]).
- 0:17
- 1:16
- 1:13
What the model inferred (not said on air): The judgments about how easily ordinary explanations fit, and about the brevity of the story, are my inference from the transcript. The caller’s presence at the scene and their own description of the voice as unidentified come from the transcript.
The caller refers to a recording said to contain the voice. But the recording is not played on air, described in any technical detail, or offered for examination. So it falls in the range for physical evidence that is claimed but not examined.
Evidence for and against
- A digital recording is claimed to exist and to contain the words “go home.”
- The caller names the location and who was in the group, details that could in principle be checked.
- The recording is not played, examined, or described by the host.
- No other witness speaks on air. The boyfriend and friend are only reported.
- No date or other checkable record of the outing is given.
- It is unclear whether the recording still exists or was ever shared with anyone.
- The garbled passage in the middle of the call could be hiding a description of the recording that the transcript did not capture.
- 1:13
- 0:17
What the model inferred (not said on air): Placing it in the 26 to 40 range is my application of the scoring guide to a claimed but unexamined recording. Nothing in the transcript indicates that the host or any third party checked the recording.
The idea of a voice on tape answering a joking remark about taking something home is moderately unsettling. But there is no threat, no physical contact, no escalation, and no vivid horror. The story ends with the group simply driving home.
Evidence for and against
- The reported tape voice follows directly on the friend’s remark about somebody coming home with them.
- The caller says they told the friend not to joke about that, which suggests the group itself found the idea unpleasant.
- No harm, pursuit, or continued activity is reported after the playback.
- The story is conversational and brief, and the host’s remarks frame it as a how-to anecdote about EVP.
- The caller’s cut-off reply leaves open whether anything else happened afterward.
- 0:43
- 1:13
What the model inferred (not said on air): The creepiness rating is a judgment about the story as a listener hears it, not about whether the events happened.
Graveyard EVP hunts with recorders are a familiar setup. But the single phrase is said to answer the friend’s remark just before it, which is a distinctive detail. The score is the provisional model value, and the comparison with the rest of the archive carries little weight at pilot scale.
Evidence for and against
- The tape content is presented as a fitting reply (“go home”) to a spoken line about coming home with them.
- The group setting, cemetery, and digital recorders are standard elements.
- The core event, a short EVP phrase captured in a graveyard, is a stock item in this kind of archive.
- No strange event beyond the single pair of words is described.
- No comparison with the rest of the archive is available in this request, so the published originality value is provisional.
- 1:13
- 0:43
What the model inferred (not said on air): Originality is a comparison against common ghost-story motifs. It is my judgment, not a statement by the caller.
Scoring confidence 0.60 · analysis confidence 0.70 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller’s firsthand story.; A claimed digital recording said to contain a voice, not played, examined, or described.. The originality score blends the model's score (55) 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.
- One of the three people present spoke the words on the recording, or their speech overlapped at that point. The caller’s statement that it was none of them is their own judgment, not a check of the audio. · The caller says they stopped and [quote withheld] before leaving and then played back the recording. The caller gives no analysis of the file, only a denial that any of them was saying it.
- Unclear audio on a recording played back in a moving car was heard as speech, with the words matching what the friend had just said ([quote withheld]). · The phrase heard on tape, “go home,” echoes the friend’s earlier remark about somebody coming home with them. The caller identifies the same point on the recording as where the voice appears.
- Expectation from a deliberate ghost hunt influenced which sounds were treated as an understandable voice. · The caller describes the outing as a planned ghost hunt with recorders brought for that purpose, and the host speaks as if recordings are expected to produce results.
What stands out
The voice is not a random, isolated word. The phrase “go home” is said to have appeared on the tape at the exact point where the friend had just joked about somebody coming home with them, and the caller presents it as a reply. Otherwise the setting and equipment (a ghost hunt in a graveyard with recorders) are conventional.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.