Border Patrol trainees and a robed group around a bonfire near the Rio Grande
A live caller to Ghost to Ghost 2013, addressed by the host as “[name withheld]” and said to be calling from Texas, says that about twenty-five years earlier they and a partner, both brand-new Border Patrol agents, came upon fifteen to twenty people in brown full-length robes. The group was circling a large bonfire on a hill near the river at about two in the morning. Two of the robed people ran toward the agents, who reversed away without lights and did not slow down until they reached the highway. The caller says they and their partner told no one for about twenty years. The caller says that years later a student of theirs described coming across the same scene. The caller says they still do not know who the group was or what they were doing.
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 2013.mp3”, starting at 26:43). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
The caller, whom the host introduces as “[name withheld]” and places in Texas, says they are glad to finally get through. The caller mentions having heard the host interview “Mel Waters” about “Mel’s hole,” and then tells their story. The caller says that twenty-five years ago they were a brand-new Border Patrol agent. There were more trainees than journeymen, so two trainees were paired and told to go do the job. On the shift about four people were working, two upriver, and the caller and their partner downriver. The caller says they had very little experience between them. The caller later corrects the host: very little experience, not very little training, because they had just come from the academy. They drove down the river around midnight, looking for anything that did not look right. They saw a bonfire on a hill they used to call “the party house.” They drove toward it, wondering whether smugglers or others were there. They used the vehicle’s switch to turn off all lights so brake or backup lights would not show. They drove down a long dirt road toward the river and came around a corner. The caller says they saw about fifteen or twenty people standing in a huge circle around a giant bonfire. All wore brown full-length robes, with their hands up in the air [quote withheld] The scene reminded the caller of the film [quote withheld] with Peter Fonda and Warren Oates, which they had seen several years before. The caller says two of the people turned toward them and ran at them. The caller describes this as not aggressive but [quote withheld] Asked by the host to confirm the location, the caller says it was on the US side of the border, and gives the time as about two o’clock in the morning. The caller says they looked at their partner, threw the vehicle into reverse, and hit the gas. The caller said they did not see any immigration violation happening. They reversed without lights, made a ninety-degree turn, and did not slow down until they reached the highway. Back on the highway, they tried to decide whom to report it to. Their nearest backup was twenty or thirty minutes away, and one sheriff’s deputy was far out of town. They could not come to a conclusion. Asked by the host whether any law was broken, the caller answers [quote withheld] The caller says they decided to tell nobody and to pretend it never happened. They kept quiet for about twenty years. The caller says that about three or four years ago they were invited to tell the story on “the other show,” but a schedule change meant they had to work that night and never told it. A couple of weeks later, they mentioned in a class they were teaching that they had almost been on the radio, and they told the class the story. A student then said that about a couple of years earlier, driving around down by the river, they had come across [quote withheld] Asked what the student did, the caller says “Exact same thing.” The caller concludes that whoever these people are, they are still out there doing their ritual. The caller says they have no idea who they are or what they are doing.
Reported events, in order
- 0:36
The caller says that twenty-five years earlier they were a brand-new Border Patrol agent. Two trainees were paired because there were more trainees than journeymen, and a usual shift had about four people working.
- 0:53
The caller says they and their partner were assigned downriver, with very little experience between them. They drove down the river around midnight, looking for anything that did not look right.
- 1:49
They saw a bonfire on a hill they called “the party house” and drove toward it, wondering whether smugglers or others were there.
- 2:11
They used a vehicle switch that turns off all lights, including brake and backup lights, and drove down a long dirt road toward the river.
- 2:31
Coming around a corner, the caller reports, they saw about fifteen or twenty people standing in a huge circle around a giant bonfire.
- 2:39
The caller reports that all of them wore brown full-length robes with their hands up in the air, which they describe as like a religious ceremony ritual.
- 2:52
The caller says the scene reminded them of the film [quote withheld] with Peter Fonda and Warren Oates, which they had seen several years earlier.
- 3:03
The caller reports that two of the group turned toward the vehicle and ran at them. The caller describes this as not aggressive but as though the agents had no business at their ritual.
- 3:16
Asked by the host, the caller confirms the location was on the US side of the border and gives the time as about two o’clock in the morning.
- 3:45
The caller says they looked at their partner, threw the vehicle into reverse, and hit the gas. They remarked that they saw no immigration violation happening. They reversed without lights, made a ninety-degree turn, and did not slow down until they reached the highway.
- 4:07
On the highway, they tried to decide whom to report it to. Their nearest backup was twenty or thirty minutes away, and one deputy was far out of town. They say they could not come to a conclusion.
- 4:46
The caller answers the host that no law was broken as far as they could see. They say they decided to tell nobody and pretend it never happened.
- 5:07
The caller says they kept quiet for about twenty years.
- 5:11
The caller says that about three or four years earlier they were invited to tell the story on “the other show,” but a schedule change meant they had to work that night and never told it.
- 5:37
A couple of weeks later the caller mentioned it while teaching a class. A student said that about a couple of years earlier, driving around down by the river, they had come across the exact same situation.
- 6:15
Asked what the student did, the caller says “Exact same thing,” and concludes that whoever these people are, they are still out there doing their ritual.
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· 2:31
About fifteen or twenty people were standing in a huge circle around a giant bonfire on a hill near the river.
- observation· 2:39
The people were all wearing brown full-length robes with their hands raised, which the caller likened to a religious ceremony or ritual.
- observation· 3:03
Two members of the group turned toward the vehicle and ran at the agents.
- interpretation· 3:03
The caller described the running as not aggressive but as though the agents had no business at the group’s ritual.
- interpretation· 6:06
The caller says they have no idea who the group was or what they were doing.
- hearsay· 5:49
A student told the caller that about a couple of years earlier they had been driving down by the river and come across the exact same situation.
- interpretation· 4:56
The caller says they and their partner decided not to tell anyone and kept quiet about it for about twenty years.
- host statement· 6:55
The host suggested the encounter was probably not ghosts and probably not a group it would be wise to upset.
- host statement· 6:57
The host added that the group was probably not one a person would want to upset, armed or not.
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 from a participant. It holds together and is carefully hedged, but it has few specifics that can be checked and fits easily with entirely ordinary events. The parts are source proximity 22/25, specificity 11/20, internal consistency 16/20, alternative explanations 6/20, and calibration of claims 12/15.
Evidence for and against
- The caller speaks as a direct participant in the encounter.
- The caller’s answers to the host’s questions fit the story consistently, including the location ([quote withheld]) and the time ([quote withheld]).
- The caller separates what they saw from what they concluded. They describe the runners as [quote withheld] and answer that no law was broken with [quote withheld]
- No date, unit, station, street, or full names are given. The events are placed only as “twenty-five years ago.”
- The only supporting witness is claimed, not heard. The caller’s partner never speaks.
- The reported events fit equally well with an ordinary private gathering or a criminal gathering interrupted at night.
- The host gives the caller’s name as “[name withheld],” and it comes up once as “[name withheld].” “Roswell” in the greeting is unexplained.
- The labels showing who is speaking shift within the caller’s turn, so a few lines are hard to attribute.
- 0:36
- 3:03
- 4:50
What the model inferred (not said on air): The part scores are my judgment. Specificity was marked down because no names, dates, or records are supplied. Alternative explanations were marked low because a wholly ordinary reading of the scene fits comfortably.
There is no documentation, recording, or physical trace, and no second witness speaks on air. The story falls in the 11 to 25 range because a second witness is claimed, a later sighting by a third party is reported, and some details that could be checked (Texas, the Rio Grande, Border Patrol) are named but not checked.
Evidence for and against
- A second witness is claimed to have been present: [quote withheld]
- A further, separate sighting by a student is reported.
- Broad features that could be checked are named: the Border Patrol, the Rio Grande, and the US side of the border.
- Nothing was documented. The caller says they and their partner [quote withheld]
- The partner does not speak on air, and neither does the student.
- No names, dates, unit designations, or site names that could be checked are given.
- It is not stated whether any report was ever filed, formally or informally.
- The student’s story is given only through the caller’s paraphrase.
- 0:53
- 4:56
What the model inferred (not said on air): The placement in the 11 to 25 range reflects the scoring guide’s “other witnesses claimed” clause, not any material that was examined. The hard cap of 50 is not approached.
The scene of robed figures circling a fire at two in the morning, followed by two of them running at the observers, is truly unsettling, and the ending is unresolved, with the group said to be still active. No injury, physical contact, or sustained escalation is reported, which keeps the score mid-range.
Evidence for and against
- Fifteen to twenty robed people with raised hands stand around a giant bonfire at about two in the morning.
- Two of the group run at the agents, who flee without lights.
- The caller says the group is “still out there” doing the ritual, and the student’s reported sighting suggests it happens again.
- The caller describes the running as [quote withheld] and no harm or contact is reported.
- The host’s closing remarks frame it as probably not ghosts and simply as an unfamiliar group, which softens the tone.
- The count of people is approximate (“15 or 20”), and nothing is reported about what the ritual involved.
- 2:39
- 6:06
What the model inferred (not said on air): The score reflects the story as heard. It is not a judgment about whether anything threatening was actually present.
This score is provisional. The core scene, robed figures around a bonfire at night, seen by patrolling officers who flee, is an unusual combination for this archive and does not rely on the standard ghost motifs. The [quote withheld] setup is familiar, though. The published value will be recalculated against the archive.
Evidence for and against
- The central content is an observed ritual group, not a ghost, voice, or object.
- The caller tells it from their job (patrol procedure, whom to report to) rather than as a ghost story.
- A later repeat of the scene, reported by a student, adds an unusual chain of retelling.
- The [quote withheld] setup is a familiar cultural trope, and the caller links it to a film themselves.
- No distinctive strange event beyond the group’s appearance and behavior is reported.
- The comparison with the rest of the archive cannot be computed here. This is the model estimate only.
- 2:52
What the model inferred (not said on air): Originality is estimated from the mix of motifs and the absence of standard archive motifs. It is explicitly provisional.
Scoring confidence 0.70 · analysis confidence 0.75 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller’s own firsthand story in a live telephone call; A claimed second witness (the caller’s partner) who does not speak on air; A claimed secondhand report from an unnamed student who does not speak on air; No physical evidence, document, recording, or photograph mentioned or examined. 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 private gathering or ceremony by a group that did not welcome intruders. The observers were on rural land at about two in the morning and may simply have interrupted people who then ran at them. · The caller describes robes, raised hands, and a bonfire as a “religious ceremony ritual,” says the runners were “not ... aggressive,” and notes that no law appeared to be broken.
- A criminal or smuggling-related gathering (the reason the agents drove toward the fire), with lookouts reacting to an approaching vehicle. · The caller says they wondered [quote withheld] and that they were patrolling the river looking for anything that did not look right.
- A misperception at a distance in the dark: figures and gestures around a fire, seen at night from a moving vehicle. · The encounter took place at about two o’clock in the morning, on a dirt road, from a vehicle with all lights switched off. The caller gives a rough count of “15 or 20.”
What stands out
The story has no reported ghost, sound, or strange physical event. The strange element is a group of robed people doing what the caller took to be a ritual. The caller does not know who they were or why they were there. A third party also reportedly came across the same scene later. The caller’s focus on reporting procedure, such as whom to notify and whether any law was broken, is also unusual among the ghost stories in this archive.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.