Ouija board at parents' restaurant and blue flashes from a mirror
A caller introduced by Art Bell as [quote withheld] describes using a Ouija board at their parents' restaurant as a teenager. They say the presence on the board claimed to be female and “from hell.” The caller says that one night they and two friends saw three blue flashes come out of a mirror, and they fled. They repeatedly hedge their story. They add a later claim about doors slamming, which they say they only heard about.
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 1:34:28). Is this you, or someone you know? Ask for a correction or removal.
The story as told
Art Bell introduces [quote withheld] and invites the caller to speak. The caller's opening is heavily garbled. It seems to refer to an earlier conversation and to a Ouija board experience tied to their parents' restaurant, with a garbled mention of an age around 17 or 18. They say [quote withheld] According to the caller, the presence on the board [quote withheld] The caller qualifies this at once: [quote withheld] and [quote withheld] The caller says they [quote withheld] The caller reports that one night they and two friends were present when [quote withheld] The caller describes the flashes as electrical and not ordinary lights. They say they got scared, ran out, drove around for about two hours, and returned because they had left everything on and [quote withheld] On returning, they say, the outside light turned on by itself. They note there was no motion sensor then, and they date the night to [quote withheld] They drove off again, came back, and turned everything off. They then pass on a later claim that they mark as hearsay. Maybe two years earlier, restaurant staff were [quote withheld] The caller says “I can't confirm” this and [quote withheld] The caller says they moved away long ago and ends, [quote withheld] Art asks whether it was the same house. The transcript has no answer.
Reported events, in order
- 0:26
The caller describes a Ouija board experience connected to their parents' restaurant, with a garbled reference to being about 17 or 18.
- 0:43
They say [quote withheld]
- 0:52
They say the presence on the board claimed to be a female and said it was from hell.
- 0:57
They say they cannot confirm any of it and do not know if it was real.
- 1:08
They say they spoke with the thing many times.
- 1:17
They say they and two friends were present on the night in question.
- 1:20
They report three bright blue flashes coming out of the mirror.
- 1:40
They say they got scared and ran out.
- 1:48
They drove around for about two hours and returned because everything had been left on and they were not supposed to be there.
- 1:56
They say the outside light turned on by itself, with no motion sensor at the time, around 1987 or 1988.
- 2:10
They drove off again, came back, and turned everything off.
- 2:21
They pass on a report that about two years earlier, staff were freaked out by repeated doors slamming. They say they cannot confirm it.
- 2:39
They say they moved away a long time ago and end their story.
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· 0:52
The presence on the Ouija board claimed to be female and said it was from hell.
- interpretation· 0:57
They say they cannot confirm the story and do not know whether it was real.
- observation· 1:08
They used the Ouija board and communicated with the presence many times.
- observation· 1:33
Three bright blue flashes came out of the mirror while the caller and two friends were present.
- observation· 1:40
After the flashes they were frightened and ran out of the building.
- observation· 1:56
When they returned, the outside light turned on by itself, and there was no motion sensor at the time.
- hearsay· 2:21
Restaurant staff were reportedly frightened by doors slamming repeatedly about two years before the call. They say plainly that they only heard this secondhand.
- host statement· 1:01
Art Bell states that the Ouija board told the caller it was from hell.
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.
Component judgment (transcript content plus inference): source proximity about 18 (firsthand but brief and partly garbled); specificity about 11 (a few concrete anchors: restaurant, 1987 or 1988, mirror, two friends); internal consistency about 15 (a coherent sequence, with a minor self-correction on the year); alternative explanations about 5 (the lights and mirror flashes have ready ordinary explanations); calibration about 6 (the caller repeatedly hedges and flags hearsay). The total is about 55.
Evidence for and against
- A firsthand story of events they say they were present for.
- Concrete anchors: their parents' restaurant, a mirror, two friends present, and an approximate year of 1987 or 1988.
- They volunteer uncertainty rather than escalating: [quote withheld]
- The opening lines are heavily garbled, including the age reference.
- No detail could be checked independently. The restaurant is unnamed.
- The reported events (flashes from a mirror, a light switching on) have simple, ordinary explanations.
- The labels showing who is speaking are unstable. Some of the caller's lines seem to be labeled as the host.
- The caller's answer to the host's closing question about the “same house” is not in the transcript.
- 1:20
- 0:59
- 2:01
What the model inferred (not said on air): The component weights are my editorial judgment. The transcript supplies the firsthand framing, the few concrete details, and the explicit hedging, but nothing that could be checked independently.
The story rests on the caller's word, plus two friends who are claimed as witnesses but never speak, and a secondhand report about staff. No photograph, recording, document, or other physical evidence is offered, and nothing is examined on air.
Evidence for and against
- Two friends are said to have been present, which puts the claim in the “other witnesses claimed” range.
- An approximate date and a described place are given, though the restaurant is not named.
- No witness speaks on air, and no witnesses are named.
- No physical evidence is claimed to exist.
- The doors-slamming part is plainly hearsay: [quote withheld]
- Whether the two friends were actually present cannot be judged from the transcript.
- The story does not say whether the restaurant could still be identified.
- 1:17
- 2:29
What the model inferred (not said on air): The score falls in the 11–25 range because claimed witnesses and a rough date exist but nothing is checked. No physical evidence is claimed.
The story combines a presence on the board that claims to be “from hell,” blue flashes coming out of a mirror, and a frightened flight from the building. That is genuinely unsettling. The brevity, the caller's own hedging, and the absence of any reported threat or physical contact soften it.
Evidence for and against
- The presence is said to have claimed it was from hell.
- Flashes reportedly came out of a mirror while three young people were present.
- They reportedly ran out of the building in fear.
- No harm, contact, or pursuit is reported.
- The caller plays down their certainty throughout.
- The later doors-slamming part is delivered as unverified hearsay.
- A garbled line reads [quote withheld] Its meaning is unclear, and the score does not rely on it.
- 0:52
- 1:40
What the model inferred (not said on air): My rating reflects the imagery and the intrusion into a place the young people were not supposed to be, not any judgment of whether it happened.
A Ouija board with a presence that calls itself hellish is a stock frame. But the specific detail of three blue flashes coming from a mirror in a family restaurant, followed by an outside light switching on, gives the story a moderately distinctive combination.
Evidence for and against
- Blue flashes are said to come from a mirror rather than a lamp or the air.
- The setting is a family restaurant rather than the usual home.
- Ouija boards and board presences that announce themselves as evil are common ghost-story elements.
- Doors slamming and lights switching on are stock motifs.
- How new this story is compared with the rest of the archive cannot be judged from this one story. The model score is provisional.
- 1:33
- 0:26
What the model inferred (not said on air): A familiar frame with a distinctive detail, so the score is mid-range rather than high or low.
Scoring confidence 0.45 · analysis confidence 0.55 · checked against outside sources: no · evidence available: The caller's firsthand story; Claimed witnesses (two friends) who do not speak on air; A secondhand report of restaurant staff's experience. 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.
- The blue flashes from the mirror could be reflections of outside light (for example, vehicle headlights) or an electrical or lighting glitch in the building. The caller describes them in electrical terms. · They say [quote withheld] and [quote withheld] They also mention having been driving.
- The outside light switching on could be a faulty, timed, or otherwise automatically triggered fixture rather than anything strange. · They note [quote withheld] which suggests the light was of a kind that could switch on by itself.
- The movements of the planchette on the Ouija board could come from the participants' own unconscious hand movements rather than an outside presence. · They describe repeated board sessions in which [quote withheld] No method of use or control is described.
What stands out
The reported strange effects are tied to a family restaurant rather than a home. The caller repeatedly undercuts their own story ([quote withheld]), including the later report about doors slamming, which they say is secondhand.
Related stories
Matched by shared recurring details, categories, and wording.