Any votes for the least believable story ever featured on UM? By least believable, I mean a story, theory, or alibi that was depicted by actors on UM that was just plain not credible.

I vote for the Gordon Collins-has-amnesia story. Most know that Gordon Collins was the man who was out boating with friends in Mexico, the boat was lost, and then there were numerous appearances throughout Baja. The speculation that he suffered amnesia after the boat "accident" is, in my opinion, very difficult to believe. First, he and 3 other friends decide to venture out into the Pacific and pass a returning fishing boat with a fisherman who pleads with them not to go out because there is a storm coming. They go out anyway. Not believalbe. The next day or so, the hotel where Gordon and his friends are staying sends a steward out in a boat to look for them and he happens upon the wreckage. Unbelievable on 2 counts. First, I want to know the name of the Mexican hotel which sends staff out on boats to look for guests who don't return the previous evening. Second, the hotel steward just happens to come upon the wreckage and 2 or 3 of the bodies? Also, wouldn't there be numerous fishing/pleasure craft crusing in the same waters that would likely spot something. Finally, Gordon is spotted on numerous occasions by locals, presumably in an amnesia-state, but despite a Coast Guard and relative led search, they keep just missing him. Plus, how many people suffer from long-term amnesia that enable them to remember their name, but not any other details of their past? Not many. How many people can avoid detection in a foreign country where they do not speak the language and have not money? Fewer still, I imagine. The Gordon Collins story reeks of unbelievability.

It's stories like this one that make me wonder how often UM was duped.

The two DJ's who faked the phone-in call from a murderer- what's scary though, is how believable and sincere they sounded at the time. This case also makes me wonder how many other times UM was duped!

the 'message in a bottle' sketch

The story of the boy who finds a lucky rock in the woods. ( I think it happened in New England, but not sure ). It makes him and his family feel good, and then they have really good luck. LOL, It must have been a slow week for UM, to air that one !

Any votes for the least believable story ever featured on UM? By least believable, I mean a story, theory, or alibi that was depicted by actors on UM that was just plain not credible.

My vote would go to another amnesia victim. She was a little on the chubby side (not a slam, just the truth) and she struck me as the type of young woman that might be a little lonely and in need of some attention. The whole segment stunk to high heaven. I don't remember her name at all.

Kim, the Gold-Leaf Skin Sweater!:mad:

The story of the boy who finds a lucky rock in the woods. ( I think it happened in New England, but not sure ). It makes him and his family feel good, and then they have really good luck. LOL, It must have been a slow week for UM, to air that one !

:eek:

Slow week indeed! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Any votes for the least believable story ever featured on UM? By least believable, I mean a story, theory, or alibi that was depicted by actors on UM that was just plain not credible.

I vote for the Gordon Collins-has-amnesia story. Most know that Gordon Collins was the man who was out boating with friends in Mexico, the boat was lost, and then there were numerous appearances throughout Baja. The speculation that he suffered amnesia after the boat "accident" is, in my opinion, very difficult to believe. First, he and 3 other friends decide to venture out into the Pacific and pass a returning fishing boat with a fisherman who pleads with them not to go out because there is a storm coming. They go out anyway. Not believalbe. The next day or so, the hotel where Gordon and his friends are staying sends a steward out in a boat to look for them and he happens upon the wreckage. Unbelievable on 2 counts. First, I want to know the name of the Mexican hotel which sends staff out on boats to look for guests who don't return the previous evening. Second, the hotel steward just happens to come upon the wreckage and 2 or 3 of the bodies? Also, wouldn't there be numerous fishing/pleasure craft crusing in the same waters that would likely spot something. Finally, Gordon is spotted on numerous occasions by locals, presumably in an amnesia-state, but despite a Coast Guard and relative led search, they keep just missing him. Plus, how many people suffer from long-term amnesia that enable them to remember their name, but not any other details of their past? Not many. How many people can avoid detection in a foreign country where they do not speak the language and have not money? Fewer still, I imagine. The Gordon Collins story reeks of unbelievability.

It's stories like this one that make me wonder how often UM was duped.
So are you saying you dont beileve there was ever a Gordon Collins or you beileve he is dead. They did interview his parents so obviously this guy did exsist. That part of the case I found really odd was that they said two of the bodies were never found. Yet they only think Gordon is up and running around ? Isnt the family of the other person involved in the search too?

What about the one where the kid finds a message in a bottle that traveled across the world?

Heidi Wyrick. No question about it.

What about the one where the guy (who was wanted for some crime, I don't remember what) supposedly fell overboard and drowned? I never bought it. I totally think that he's still alive and on the lam... :)

The story of the boy who finds a lucky rock in the woods. ( I think it happened in New England, but not sure ). It makes him and his family feel good, and then they have really good luck. LOL, It must have been a slow week for UM, to air that one !


Yeah, I agree. A very slow week at U.M. :rolleyes: :lol:

By the way, I believe the story took place near Seattle, Washington.

The weird thing about that case with the "magic rock" that you all are mentioning is it was really one of the earliest cases they ever profiled and the episode it was profiled in is probably one of the best they ever did period - look here:

November 23, 1988

Cases involving the suspected murders of two priests, one in New Mexico and one in Montana; (the double priest homicide, I forget the victims names but the erected a cross in the middle of the desert in memory of them. This segment I believe usually airs during the same episode as Angelo Desdari for some reason) the good fortune experienced by the family of a Washington State youth, who found a peculiarly marked rock in the forest; the disappearance of a Los Angeles man after he used an automatic bank-teller machine (Matthew Chase); the death of a 17-year-old Ohio youth, who disappeared after attending a Halloween party. (Kurt Sova)

So it DEFINITLEY WAS NOT "A very slow week at U.M" - In fact collectively it was one of the best episodes ever!



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The weird thing about that case with the "magic rock" that you all are mentioning is it was really one of the earliest cases they ever profiled and the episode it was profiled in is probably one of the best they ever did period - look here:


The Lancaster postal extortion story was a part of that episode originally, not Matthew Chase.

The priests were Father Renaldo Rivera and Father John Carrigan.

Yeah, Father John Kerrigan was a priest in Ronan, Montana... that's about an hour from where I grew up. I was really little when he disappeared, but I remember my parents talking about it. I don't think they have ever found his body. VERY creepy.

Definitely one of the top 5 would be the lady who had cancer and claimed while in her bed one day a tiny ufo flew in her open window and circled her and flew away and she was magically cured! :rolleyes:

Youre way too cynical Crystaldawn!.....if you accept the possibility that UFO's could exist, then you have to atleast consider the chance that she's telling the truth...its no less likely than any other UFO story after all...and how do you explain the sudden disappearance of a cancer that by all accounts was certain to kill her..

i mean, come on, why would anyone invent such a ridiculous story....

i mean, come on, why would anyone invent such a ridiculous story....

For attention of course.

To back Crystaldawn up, I am open to the possibility that UFO's exist, but I still doubt the woman's story.

However... there was a similar story with a sick child that was in its crib when the mother saw this bright light shoot out of the baby's room, and when she checked on the baby, he was magically cured. I believe THAT story. Can I explain why I believe one over the other? No. It's just a gut feeling, probably similar to the one Crystaldawn has about the magical UFO.

i believe that ufos and intellegent life outside earth exists and probably is more likely to exist then not.

but whether or not jimbob fukcpants had an encounter during a fishing trip, i dunno

for attention???????!!!! the woman had just recovered not only from a life threatening illness but one that her doctors said was CERTAIN to kill her in months!!! so how does she celebrate? by inventing a UFO visitation!!

that sounds pretty wacky to me CD...or did i mean WackER?

Uhh... there is actually a physical condition in which people feign illnesses in order to get attention. it's called Munchausen Syndrome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munchausen_syndrome). I linked to an article about it on Wikipedia.

I'm not saying that's what this woman had, but the disorder DOES exist and people DO fake illnesses and/or recoveries to get attention. I don't think CD's theory is wacky at all.

I don't think CD's theory is wacky at all.

Thanks cricci! Yes I am very familiar with that disorder.

Another very plausible theory in my mind is that the lady dreamed about the tiny ufo in her room. She had obviously was going through a stressful time being told she had minimal time left to live. She could have been exhausted and laid down for a nap and dreamed that happened. We've all had dreams that seemed so real. As for her unexplained cure of cancer, I would say that is closer to a miracle than a "ufo healing". You're always hearing stories of people whose cancer goes into remission and doctors are baffled by it.

Another very plausible theory in my mind is that the lady dreamed about the tiny ufo in her room. We've all had dreams that seemed so real.


So, you mean that my dream about Joaquin Phoenix wasn't real? Dang it! I hate it when that happens! ;)

1. Gold Foil Chick is a load of crap.

I am surprised nobody has mentioned the lady who swore her brother, a Marine killed in Vietnam, was alive and hanging around her town. She claims she saw him in the park one day and felt it was not safe to approach him. She'd been hopeful he was alive all that time and when she sees the man she is sure is him out in public, she runs away? I think she just wanted very badly to believe her brother was still alive. The only shred of credibility might be the phone call to the father asking about a baby-sitter, but still why didn't the man just pick up the phone and identify himself, not have another person call and ask who his old baby-sitter was. I'd like to believe that lady's brother is still alive, but certain elements just seem too out of place.

I am surprised nobody has mentioned the lady who swore her brother, a Marine killed in Vietnam, was alive and hanging around her town. She claims she saw him in the park one day and felt it was not safe to approach him. She'd been hopeful he was alive all that time and when she sees the man she is sure is him out in public, she runs away? I think she just wanted very badly to believe her brother was still alive. The only shred of credibility might be the phone call to the father asking about a baby-sitter, but still why didn't the man just pick up the phone and identify himself, not have another person call and ask who his old baby-sitter was. I'd like to believe that lady's brother is still alive, but certain elements just seem too out of place.

I think that's the best nomination. I thought of it when this thread debuted, but I didn't remember enough specifics to describe it. That's one person on UM who I genuinely felt sorry for, because she either is off her rocker in total, or her thought process is so screwed up regarding her brother's case that she loses all sense of reality in that regard. Even her facial expressions and tone of voice were generally flimsy.

The older couple (the Wakcers) that claimed that someone was harrassing them for years with rocks on porch, breaking in their home, tying up the wife, banging on windows, leaving notes to them. I always thought this was the husband with perhaps the wife in cahoots for purposes of attention seeking behavior. Who harrasses an old couple - it just didn't make any sense.

The older couple (the Wakcers) that claimed that someone was harrassing them for years with rocks on porch, breaking in their home, tying up the wife, banging on windows, leaving notes to them. I always thought this was the husband with perhaps the wife in cahoots for purposes of attention seeking behavior. Who harrasses an old couple - it just didn't make any sense.

I've never seen this particular case, but in just reading about it here, I agree with you. I think these were two lonely old souls that wanted some attention and drama in their lives.

I wonder if the Wackers (gotta love that name) were caught as perpetrating the phony harrassment, what would happen to them? Would they be charged with filing a false police report? If not, what would they have been charged with? I personally don't think that anyone would waste their every waking hour trying to frighten the old couple.

Good God I had forgotten about this one.

It gets my vote also


Kim, the Gold-Leaf Skin Sweater!:mad:

In my opinion, the bunkerbed ghost segment (the haunted house in Horicon, Wisconsin).

What about the one where the kid finds a message in a bottle that traveled across the world?

I'll say, does anyone believe this bottle travelled around the world as the story goes? I think not, I'll introduce another posibility, the mother and son made the story up!

Kim, the Gold-Leaf Skin Sweater!:mad:

Actually, I think her name was Katie. But I agree, it was a bunch of crap!

"The older couple (the Wackers) that claimed that someone was harrassing them for years with rocks on porch, breaking in their home, tying up the wife, banging on windows, leaving notes to them."

The next time you watch that segment, when the Wackers are being interviewed, watch Mrs. Wacker's facial expressions. I swear, she looks like she's holding back a laugh. She looks like she's going to bust out laughing at any second.

Actually, I think her name was Katie. But I agree, it was a bunch of crap!

You know I actually contemplated putting her on volume 7 purely for entertainment value since that segment was so ridiculous. :)

Definitely the gold foil lady. I mean, when you start seriously displaying a person who claims that she sweats gold foil, you've basically hit rock bottom. I could look past a lucky rock or a family claiming bunk beds haunted their house, or even UFOs healing the sick (lots of people claim they've seen UFOs anyways). But when you seriously examine gold foil sweat and jewels appearing out of eyes, you have a problem. I remember the professor in this was basically chuckling throughout the interview - he probably couldn't believe UM was seriously considering this.

In my opinion, the bunkerbed ghost segment (the haunted house in Horicon, Wisconsin).


I agree with this one. It just doesn't add up. Not enough witnesses. They banned their kids from being interviewed, they hid their faces. I mentioned this in another post.

I enjoyed the Bunk Beds one- i certainly would not class it as totally unbelievable plus it was filmed in such a menacing way that it kept you glued to the screen, certainly for me having just seen the latest Crystaldawn compilation it has to be the Magic Rock- what a bunch of goofs they were, somebody had marked it up and they thought it was space aliens, they have some good fortune that was really just coincidence and their working hard and the mall owners showing their gratitude for that and it is all down to a rock? thank god the guy who examined it bought some credibility to the segment when he said there was nothing unusual about it or the markings, I wonder if their great luck continued?

Actually I take it back- the rock made me laugh but the one I mentioned some time back from the Ghosts box set about the ugly fat guy saying he was practically raped by an evil beautiful ghost had me in stitches:crazy:

One of the "Lost Loves" segments featured a woman who was trying to find a former teacher of hers who had been especially kind to her. The woman said she suffered some medical condition that affected her memory and she didn't recognize the teacher when they met face to face several years after she had been in her class. I know the "Lost Love" segments aren't popular with everyone but I have to admit, I usually find them interesting and I've even boo hooed over a couple that were especially moving. For some reason, though, this segment just seemed a little fishy to me. As I remember it, the teacher came from a fairly wealthy/prominent family. Would they be that hard to track down? And wouldn't someone at the school have some idea where the teacher was?

Actually I take it back- the rock made me laugh but the one I mentioned some time back from the Ghosts box set about the ugly fat guy saying he was practically raped by an evil beautiful ghost had me in stitches:crazy:

I dont know if youre talking about the Mann's house where a ghost named Isabella used to haunt :) when i saw the faces of each member of the family i couldnt help but think they were just lying, enjoying the attention. And yes, that scene where the tiny little woman was (apparently possesed by the ghost) wrestling her 300 pounds husband was extremely funny.

another nominee: what about the boy who could make rain indoors?

another nominee: what about the boy who could make rain indoors?

Oh, now don't be dissin' on my boyfriend Don Decker... :lol: :lol:

The tiny UFO story made me and my husband laugh hysterically, but of course the award for most unbelievable story goes to the Carp Case, or the Canadian UFO case featuring the videotape from the mysterious Guardian. The "investigator" in the case, Bob Oeschler, was later widely discredited as being in cahoots with the main witness, Diane Labenek, and some Canadian ufologists later said Oeschler even told them he was in it just to make a buck.

When I found that out it made me really wonder about lots of other UM episodes, especially because both Oeschler and Labenek seemed so credible. Also, apparently at least one person in the episode (Graham Lightfoot, another investigator) later wrote to UM raising concerns about Oeschler but to my knowledge UM never did an update and after all they included the episode in the UFO box set and the commentary too.

Still a huge fan though!

The tiny UFO story made me and my husband laugh hysterically, but of course the award for most unbelievable story goes to the Carp Case, or the Canadian UFO case featuring the videotape from the mysterious Guardian. The "investigator" in the case, Bob Oeschler, was later widely discredited as being in cahoots with the main witness, Diane Labenek, and some Canadian ufologists later said Oeschler even told them he was in it just to make a buck.

When I found that out it made me really wonder about lots of other UM episodes, especially because both Oeschler and Labenek seemed so credible. Also, apparently at least one person in the episode (Graham Lightfoot, another investigator) later wrote to UM raising concerns about Oeschler but to my knowledge UM never did an update and after all they included the episode in the UFO box set and the commentary too.

Still a huge fan though!

Yes I've noticed too that UM didn't seem to update the Guardian case. Bob Oeschler was also involved in the Gulf Breeze segment on UM and they did do a follow up on it when things came to light that made it look like a scam so go figure.

Welcome to the board btw...:wave:

Welcome to the board btw...:wave:

Thanks!
I love this show---thought I was the only one. Should have known better, I guess!

The "investigator" in the case, Bob Oeschler, was later widely discredited as being in cahoots with the main witness, Diane Labenek, and some Canadian ufologists later said Oeschler even told them he was in it just to make a buck.

Bob Oeschler is the biggest nerd, I can't help but laugh at him. I think it's funni watching these so-called UFO experts go on-and-on how they exist and then a few years later it's proven to be a hoax. You'll see him and his mate doing the same thing in the Gulf Breeze case too. He definately belongs in that biggest UM wanker thread. :lol:

Here is a summary of the Carp Case from 1995, it is funny how sometimes the most credible sounding witnesses turn out to be full of it like those DJ creeps


http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/mufonontario/archive/carp.html

The "gold foil comes outta her skin" episode. Come on....I see bottles of that crap at Michaels and WalMart in the craft section. What was UM thinking??? Its not like there is a shortage of mysteries out there.

What about the one where the kid finds a message in a bottle that traveled across the world?

i personally liked that segment alot. i think the most insignificant segment was the story about horses in nevada. they apparently kept dying. it was ok, but not appropriate for this show. personally i hate the legend and lost treasure segments (not like this one had nayting to do with lost treasure), but there are some exceptions, like the one on the nazca lines in peru(?). i think that was pretty cool.

"Hey everyone.....I guess Im kinda a newbie. I was on the board for a long time under the name crushedvelvet but havent been on for a long while and have forgotten password so had to re-register. Im really excited to read all the new stuff posted on here. Nice to be back!"

Hey crushedvelvet/sunshinydays! :wave: Welcome back. Apparently sigs aren't widely read around here since I don't see your return acknowledged even though you posted more than 12 hours ago.

We asked about you many times recently when one of your posts would show up in a old thread that was bumped. I guess we can get over that. :)

The "gold foil comes outta her skin" episode. Come on....I see bottles of that crap at Michaels and WalMart in the craft section. What was UM thinking??? Its not like there is a shortage of mysteries out there.

Yes, welcome back crushedvelvet/sunshinydays. I think I was still lurking on the boards the last time you posted, but I always enjoyed reading your stuff. And with this being post #501 for me, I think my lurking days are long gone. :lol:

That one about the rock and the family having good luck always seemed totally stupid, but then again I've never seen this gold foil lady segment. I seem to remember that the one about the house in Florida that was haunted, featuring a group of people who were clearly weirdos (the son and his wife still lived in their parents house in another room) and who clearly had just made stuff up (I think there was ultimately a photograph that "proved" paranormal activity that was pretty obviously a shot of a telephone that had just been hurled across the room by somebody). I dunno, 99% of the ghost ones are stupid to me.

But my vote for the "most unbelievable" segment would most definitely have to go to the one about the family who discovered their residential development had been built over a former slave burial ground. Shortly after finding this out, of course, their house began to be haunted. What made this one so shocking to me was that, unintentionally or not, this had to be the most implicitlyracist thing I'd seen in awhile. Whereas the ghosts of white people in other segments throw phones across the room or watch over young children to make sure they're safe, the ghosts of these former slaves appear and what's the first thing they do? Steal a white woman's shoes! And then they kill the pretty young white girl who was digging in the yard!

It was totally clear to me that these people had had a young woman in their family die tragically young, and wanted someone to blame for it, and who better than the old stand-by, "Negroes," even though I'm quite certain that this family had moved to their "nice suburban neighborhood" specifically to avoid "urban" people. I couldn't believe UM facilitated this tripe.

I think UM should have stuck to its name - UNSOLVED Mysteries. This implies that the mystery can be solved. Ghost stories and UFO sightings will NEVER be solved (unless a hoax is proven).

I love UFO stuff, but I don't think its place is on a show like UM. Leave UFO stuff to sci-fi channel specials and leave ghost stories to the movies.

It is my opinion that ghost sightings are a product of EM radiation in the environment (this actually has scientific proof behind it). Some famous UFO sightings probably have the same cause.

As for the message in a bottle segment, someone said that the mother and son made it up. How is this possible when another kid from across the country says he had sent the bottle out 10 years earlier? It is still possibly a hoax, but both families would have had to have been in on it.

I think UM should have stuck to its name - UNSOLVED Mysteries. This implies that the mystery can be solved. Ghost stories and UFO sightings will NEVER be solved (unless a hoax is proven).

I love UFO stuff, but I don't think its place is on a show like UM. Leave UFO stuff to sci-fi channel specials and leave ghost stories to the movies.

It is my opinion that ghost sightings are a product of EM radiation in the environment (this actually has scientific proof behind it). Some famous UFO sightings probably have the same cause.

As for the message in a bottle segment, someone said that the mother and son made it up. How is this possible when another kid from across the country says he had sent the bottle out 10 years earlier? It is still possibly a hoax, but both families would have had to have been in on it.

See, based partially on that logic, I would have excluded the "Wanted" segments. You could look at this one of two ways: 1) The case is solved, it's just a matter of tracking down the criminal. Not an "Unsolved Mystery." If you want to argue that the where the person ran off to is still undetermined, and thus "unsolved," I'd say the problem is it's not really a "mystery." There's no mystery as to why an accused or convicted person makes a brake for it!

Did Crushed Velevet disappear on us again?

I think UM should have stuck to its name - UNSOLVED Mysteries. This implies that the mystery can be solved. Ghost stories and UFO sightings will NEVER be solved (unless a hoax is proven).


If you want to be real technical about it, isn't UNSOLVED Mysteries a bit of an oxymoron anyway? The word "mystery" is, by definition, something which is unsolved so putting the adjective "unsolved" before it is really unneccessary. Of course if anyone were to actually point to this as being something that bugged them then I would just nod silently and quickly back away from them, knowing that they were waaayyyy to fixated on unimportant ****.

The story I found least believable, well at least the one I can actually remember watching when i was all of about 12 or so and thinking, "Psshh...shyeah right!" was the one where the woman is convinced her brother, reportedly KIA in Viet Nam, kept popping up at places like rest stops and gas stations and on the freeway. I remember her being so convinced its him, yet not going up and talking to him and I can remember being glad her daughter was calling her out on that bullshark.

Recently I saw this one that was laughably bad about this "death chair" in England. The thing that made it so bad...so comically terrible...was this one actor who could NOT pull off an English accent, yet he completely overdid all his lines and mannerisms.

I certainly do not think it is a stupid segment, they did find bones there and whatever the hell was happening there the whole family was obviously badly affected by it whether it was Ghosts, the house being on a leyline or whatever- as far as production and storytelling goes I think it was one of the best ever and the way it was shot was as creepy as hell, their families life was turned upside down and then they lost their daughter under strange circumstances, as I remember they actually lost a lot of money by feeling they had to move away so it seems unlikely it would be a hoax or trying to move to a better neighbourhood or being racist





But my vote for the "most unbelievable" segment would most definitely have to go to the one about the family who discovered their residential development had been built over a former slave burial ground. Shortly after finding this out, of course, their house began to be haunted. What made this one so shocking to me was that, unintentionally or not, this had to be the most implicitlyracist thing I'd seen in awhile. Whereas the ghosts of white people in other segments throw phones across the room or watch over young children to make sure they're safe, the ghosts of these former slaves appear and what's the first thing they do? Steal a white woman's shoes! And then they kill the pretty young white girl who was digging in the yard!

It was totally clear to me that these people had had a young woman in their family die tragically young, and wanted someone to blame for it, and who better than the old stand-by, "Negroes," even though I'm quite certain that this family had moved to their "nice suburban neighborhood" specifically to avoid "urban" people. I couldn't believe UM facilitated this tripe.

The UFO and Ghost segments were hugely popular, they were usually told in the manner of presenting what had happened and letting you decide as opposed to the other stuff like murders and robberies where people were encouraged to phone or write to solve them, it was good you could have a show with a UFO sighting then a Ghost story then a Murder & finish off with a Lost Treasure all in one show rather than having four of the same thing and surely the best mysteries are those that will probably never be solved


I think UM should have stuck to its name - UNSOLVED Mysteries. This implies that the mystery can be solved. Ghost stories and UFO sightings will NEVER be solved (unless a hoax is proven).

I love UFO stuff, but I don't think its place is on a show like UM. Leave UFO stuff to sci-fi channel specials and leave ghost stories to the movies.

It is my opinion that ghost sightings are a product of EM radiation in the environment (this actually has scientific proof behind it). Some famous UFO sightings probably have the same cause.

As for the message in a bottle segment, someone said that the mother and son made it up. How is this possible when another kid from across the country says he had sent the bottle out 10 years earlier? It is still possibly a hoax, but both families would have had to have been in on it.

Did Crushed Velvet disappear on us again?

I was the first one to acknowledge her. That might have done it.

The story about the guy who was hunting for rocks in the woods and then...all of the sudden......Boom!.....Bigfoot comes crashing down from a hill onto the trail. Im just not buying the guys story. Come to think of it, I have a hard time believing most Bigfoot sightings so Im biased.

Christopher

the girl who "claimed" her house was broken into and trashed.

Is that the one where she said she was burgled and assaulted and nobody really believes her? never seen that one hopefully if CrystalDawn does a ninth volume that will be on it


the girl who "claimed" her house was broken into and trashed.

that was on LRW last night, right? Sarah something-or-other ... i remarked to my girlfriend right before I fell asleep that she had probably just had some wild party and the house got trashed ... best way to get out of that pickle? sudden amnesia brought on by a home invasion!

I tend to agree, though imagine if you started with what you thought would be a little lie that turned into going on to national TV to tell the story. I don't know... if she had friends willing to party with her, would she bother with that kind of attention-getting move?

I think the girl is lying, mind you --- I just doubt that the reason was to cover some run-of-the-mill party. The UM segment says that "no fingerprints" were left by the perpetrators, which I assume means they dusted the place for prints looking for those ones not belonging to anyone in the house. If she had had a party, there would have been lots of said fingerprints, right?

The Sarah Powell case is one of those cases that I'm still not sure on. I can see both sides, but wasn't she too young to throw a party? She was 13 or 14 at the time of the assault, right?

The Sarah Powell case is one of those cases that I'm still not sure on. I can see both sides, but wasn't she too young to throw a party? She was 13 or 14 at the time of the assault, right?

She was, but I'm not sure that makes her too young to throw a party.

Nevertheless, I don't think that is what happened here. I think that this is a unique manifestation of the kind of mental stress often found in teenagers. For whatever reason, the girl had a psychotic breakdown, and trashed her own house. She did something to tie her own self up, and then was subsequently able to convince herself of the "home invasion" story she would later tell police. Or something. I 'm no psychologist, so it's hard to parse this exactly, but I do think it's a combination of legitimate psychological break down coupled with an imagination that helped to conceal the reality of that breakdown from Sarah after the episode was over.

The only thing that troubles me is that she was found tied up; if she did it herself, it suggests that she was aware of the fact that she would need a story to explain what was found, and of course that suggests the kind of rational planning that one doesn't normally associate with psychotic episodes. However, the human brain is a mysterious and wonderful thing, capable of an incredible variety of behaviors, etc., that we have only begun to really see.

The story about the guy who was hunting for rocks in the woods and then...all of the sudden......Boom!.....Bigfoot comes crashing down from a hill onto the trail. Im just not buying the guys story. Come to think of it, I have a hard time believing most Bigfoot sightings so Im biased.

Christopher

ha, speaking of this case, when i saw it, and the way he talked he obviously was very feminine, and I don't want to say gay and offend people, but he kind of reminded me of the type of person who would see a mouse and freak out and overexaggerate, so his "sighting" I think has to be taken with a grain of salt. It was probably a squirrel and the dude freaked.

Thanks cricci! Yes I am very familiar with that disorder.

Another very plausible theory in my mind is that the lady dreamed about the tiny ufo in her room. She had obviously was going through a stressful time being told she had minimal time left to live. She could have been exhausted and laid down for a nap and dreamed that happened. We've all had dreams that seemed so real. As for her unexplained cure of cancer, I would say that is closer to a miracle than a "ufo healing". You're always hearing stories of people whose cancer goes into remission and doctors are baffled by it.

That's what I think happened. Read Daniel Mark Epstein's Sister Aimee about Aimee Semple McPherson - he has a very convincing explanation of how supposedly "miraculous" healings, "faith" healings and so on might really happen, from a medical, non-supernatural viewpoint. Remissions happen all the time. This was just her mind's way of telling her it was going on.

The only thing that troubles me is that she was found tied up; if she did it herself, it suggests that she was aware of the fact that she would need a story to explain what was found, and of course that suggests the kind of rational planning that one doesn't normally associate with psychotic episodes. However, the human brain is a mysterious and wonderful thing, capable of an incredible variety of behaviors, etc., that we have only begun to really see.

Not that incredible. And if you lose the word/concept 'psychotic', you have even more possibilities. However, I am thinking along Tawana Brawley lines and will have to see a lot more proof that that girl did it all herself and didn't have at least one other person in on it as Tawana did.

But my vote for the "most unbelievable" segment would most definitely have to go to the one about the family who discovered their residential development had been built over a former slave burial ground....

Sorry, that one was real, if somewhat embellished a la Amityville Horror. As far as racism that's in the eye of the beholder.

Find a video of the actual event and I'll wager huge cash before it's shown that Sarah Powell is telling the truth. How could it have been a party, before 9:30 AM? That's when she woke up and made the phone call. There's no evidence the family wasn't in the home that morning or the night before. The segment said Sarah stayed home from school while sick.

I think it's just another example of something extremely unusual, so authorities are skeptical because they have no background in anything similar. Like the sleepwalking events.

She told the same story under hypnosis.

Sorry, that one was real, if somewhat embellished a la Amityville Horror. As far as racism that's in the eye of the beholder.

I take it you believe in ghosts. I do not, and on that basis, I think that anyone who conjures up an unprovable "spirit" of a black person so that s/he can accuse said spirit of "murdering" their daughter isn't all that far from good ole boys in the South who tried to pin oh-so-typical teen pregnancies on phantom "rapes" committed by the all-purpose "big, bad Negro."

At least that family can't be tempted to lynch the ghost...

She told the same story under hypnosis.

Which, at best , only proves that she believed it happened, but not that it happened. The police are quite right in being suspicious of an apparent home invasion in which there was no sign of forced entry, no physical evidence left to indicate any foreign person had been in the house, and during which nothing was evidently stolen. Sarah's story is that there were not one but several people who came in without breaking in (at least 4 --- two guys and two girls), tied her up, ransacked the place without apparent motive, took nothing, and left, leaving not a trace that anyone other than Sarah had been in the home that morning. And I think, moreover, that the timeline you site works against Sarah's story, not in favor of it --- all of this had to occur between when her mother left for work and when she called the post office at 9:00AM. How much time was that exactly? I doubt it was more than 2 hours. That's enough time I suppose, but only just.

This one screams Occam's Razor to me: the simplest way to account for all the facts is that this girl wigged out, staged an elaborate scene, and was in an agitated enough mental state at this moment that she has convinced herself of the invented story. Admittedly, it's weird to think that someone could/would do this to herself, but but it's even stranger to imagine why 4 people --- two of whom were evidently standing around chatting for much of the time (the girls) --- would come into a home, trash the place, and take nothing. There was no indication that these people were anybody who you might expect would be the subject of such a crime (not government officials, mob members, etc.), and furthermore, if Sarah's story were to be believed, you would almost have to explain it as a professional job in which the target was mistakenly identified: in other words, somebody wanted a house ransacked and paid someone to do it, but those somebodies got the wrong house. Only what kind of professional ransackers would bring four people to do a job that should require no more than two? It makes it that much harder to escape, and that much more likely to arouse suspiscion, if you have to get 4 people into a place where they ought not be.

I'd need to see some proof that outside people were involved before I would believe otherwise.

EDIT: I was re-reading some of your earlier posts, Awsi Dooger, and you and I basically think a lot alike: I think probability is extremely important in evaluating what may have happened in a given situation. I'm not in mathematics/stats, like you, but I am a big baseball fan, and some of the revolutionary stuff that's been done with statistical analysis in baseball over the past 5-10 years has made a believer out of me. I'm surprised we don't agree on this one... it just seems to me, absent any physical evidence (or really even circumstantial evidence --- nothing taken after all of that?) to support her story, the burden of proof still rests with those who want to claim someone got into her house that day.

Which, at best , only proves that she believed it happened, but not that it happened. The police are quite right in being suspicious of an apparent home invasion in which there was no sign of forced entry, no physical evidence left to indicate any foreign person had been in the house, and during which nothing was evidently stolen. Sarah's story is that there were not one but several people who came in without breaking in (at least 4 --- two guys and two girls), tied her up, ransacked the place without apparent motive, took nothing, and left, leaving not a trace that anyone other than Sarah had been in the home that morning. And I think, moreover, that the timeline you site works against Sarah's story, not in favor of it --- all of this had to occur between when her mother left for work and when she called the post office at 9:00AM. How much time was that exactly? I doubt it was more than 2 hours. That's enough time I suppose, but only just.

This one screams Occam's Razor to me: the simplest way to account for all the facts is that this girl wigged out, staged an elaborate scene, and was in an agitated enough mental state at this moment that she has convinced herself of the invented story. Admittedly, it's weird to think that someone could/would do this to herself, but but it's even stranger to imagine why 4 people --- two of whom were evidently standing around chatting for much of the time (the girls) --- would come into a home, trash the place, and take nothing. There was no indication that these people were anybody who you might expect would be the subject of such a crime (not government officials, mob members, etc.), and furthermore, if Sarah's story were to be believed, you would almost have to explain it as a professional job in which the target was mistakenly identified: in other words, somebody wanted a house ransacked and paid someone to do it, but those somebodies got the wrong house. Only what kind of professional ransackers would bring four people to do a job that should require no more than two? It makes it that much harder to escape, and that much more likely to arouse suspiscion, if you have to get 4 people into a place where they ought not be.

I'd need to see some proof that outside people were involved before I would believe otherwise.

There was plenty of physical evidence, i.e. a tied up girl. There was no evidence from the police officer who released her that she was tied up flimsily, that it looked like she had done it herself.

I'm the biggest believer in Ockham's Razor on this board and in this case I see the most simple explanation as being exactly what Sarah detailed. A group of people briefly appeared and trashed the place, unknown motive. If Sarah stayed home unexpectedly they would have no reason to believe anyone would be there. The lack of fingerprints is garbage. I'm always laughing when police are spooked by that. If they wore masks they wore gloves. Wow, how complicated. They could easily have worn covers on their feet also. And an hour or so is plenty of time to do something like that. Hell, it can be accomplished in scant minutes. Time necessity is one of the most blundered assessments of crime analysis. Go into a room and start swinging your arms at items, or opening drawers. It takes seconds and you can completely change the way a room appears. Obviously with four people it requires proportionally less time.

Your version requires at least equal contradiction. I would argue much more. She wigs out, to use your term, but somehow is lucid and strategic and devious enough to plan something that has basis in truth, that she called the same number via redial that she called earlier when the attack was beginning. She obviously got the items like duct tape beforehand and cut and arranged them so she could tie herself up. Remember, she has to get it exactly right on the first try. No evidence she ever did this before. Then the wig out continues to such extreme she doesn't recognize her own mother or other family members for an extended period, or even know how to write her own name. Plus the numerous seizures, and seizures in which she apparently moves into the same type positioning as her status when she was tied up.

Also, of course, Sarah does all this including the strategic tie up job but somehow never realizes if she is going to claim a group of burglars then maybe she should flush something valuable like a ring(s) down the toilet to make it look good.

But she does eventually remember little things, like the bigger guy with a small specific tattoo and the smaller guy helping her by putting the phone back on the hook before leaving. That type stuff always has a ring of truth to me, so to speak, things you wouldn't come up with if inventing a story. Likewise the little dog licking her on the cheek to wake her up.

Ockham's Razor is often conveniently misapplied. That's my ongoing beef. The simplest explanation is not always the fewest number of people. That's true of the Jeffrey MacDonald case also. In this case a girl is apparently in perfect shape at 7 or 7:30 AM, then by 9:30 AM her life is completely changed, particularly mentally. I'll argue the simple explanation is not that she wigged out for no apparent reason, but that another person or group of people entered her realm suddenly and caused it. Like MacDonald, Sarah apparently had no history of anything remotely similar, before or after.

If I were a defense attorney I would destroy the "no physical evidence" argument in one five minute video. Just find a large room, empty of people, and start filming. Then have maybe 8 or 10 people come in, in groups of two. Have them break into groups of two or three. Two people are fist fighting, slugging each other mercilessly. Two are making out, of whatever. Two are dropping things all over the place. Two are using computers and other electronic devices they brought with them. Others are clanking pans and making unbearable noise. Then after 4:45 it all stops suddenly and they start filing out. The items on the floor are picked up, along with any torn clothes, etc. And when the door shuts the camera keeps rolling. Not a hint anyone was ever there or anything disturbed. And the authorities want to tell me they can piece together exactly what happened and how many people were there at a given point in time? Glorified BS.

EDIT: I was re-reading some of your earlier posts, Awsi Dooger, and you and I basically think a lot alike: I think probability is extremely important in evaluating what may have happened in a given situation. I'm not in mathematics/stats, like you, but I am a big baseball fan, and some of the revolutionary stuff that's been done with statistical analysis in baseball over the past 5-10 years has made a believer out of me. I'm surprised we don't agree on this one... it just seems to me, absent any physical evidence (or really even circumstantial evidence --- nothing taken after all of that?) to support her story, the burden of proof still rests with those who want to claim someone got into her house that day.

Yes, we think alike. Your posts impress me a lot. I mentioned that to someone else on this board via PM last night. I just noticed your edit and thought I would quote it separate from the lengthy post I just made.

This case is genuinely weird and I can see your points. I'm probably less confident of the truth than my initial post in this thread indicated. But my instinct immediately sided with Sarah's story the first time I saw this segment years ago and I'm staying put.

For one thing, I don't know what no evidence means. Seems to me that doesn't give enough credit to the perpetrators. Naturally they are trying to conceal, and probably planned and practiced ahead of time. Why should there be fingerprints or any clear evidence of a break-in? The lack of anything taken is problematic, the one thing I can't explain. But if they targeted a specific house it could have been after a specific item(s), something they didn't find and gave up when they sensed more risk than promise it could be found.

BTW, I'm not a baseball fan, not even close. But baseball fans are admirably advanced in applying statistical analysis to that sport. I've been trying to do the same to football and basketball and golf, primarily for betting purposes but also general interest. Lately some people have been coming around, here in Las Vegas and also on message boards.

You raise some interesting points; admittedly the lack of finger prints proves nothing, nor does the lack of shoe prints (though I think that is slightly more suggestive). But the ultimate question here is one you leave unanswered as if it isn't a problem --- why would four people break into this home, go through a bunch of stuff but take nothing, and leave? What is the statistical likelihood of that happening? Four people who illegally enter someone's home, evidently don't find what they are looking for, but also don't help themselves to anything in the house that could be of value? Surely they would have taken something for their trouble? How often does something like that happen?

I also don't know that she would have needed to "get it exactly right on the first try," with respect to tying herself up. If she had accidentally cut a piece of tape too long or too short, I'm sure there would have been a place for her to hide it where no one would find it, even after one of the police's famous "thorough searches."

Neither scenario is entirely satisfactory, but I guess it comes down to which you think is more likely: that a group of strangers broke into a house, ransacked the place without any known motive, didn't find what they were looking for, and left, or that a lonely teenager suffered a mental breakdown that was accompanied by the staging of a rather elaborate scene. I suppose a middle road here is that the girl is involved --- perhaps invited a friend over after intentionally ditching school --- and that friend betrayed her in some way, but I don't know that the facts of what was done after Sarah was attacked really fit with a friend bringing some uninvited and unwelcomed characters over to the house.

Anyway, I think the attention-grabbing teenager is more likely than the apparently motiveless (or perhaps mistaken) and ultimately inconsequential (i.e., nothing removed from the home) ransacking of a suburban home by a group of individuals.

EDIT: Just saw your second post. Football is an interesting sport, because it seems to me statistical information is harder to apply, mostly because a good set of statistics are not really kept/have not been invented. For example, except for tackels themselves (which has as much to do with one's position, and the quality of the defense one plays with, as it does with any individual talent on the part of the player), there really aren't many defensive stats that I'm aware of that make attempts to measure, for example, what a shut-down corner does. Now, I know that's been changing somewhat --- I will occasionally here stats for "times thrown at" with respect to corners, for example --- but football needs to develop a better set of stats, in my opinion. Of course, it could be that football may simply not be as amenable to that sort of analysis, but I know www.footballoutsiders.com is at least trying (and though I am a big Philadelphia Eagles fan and I love football, I must admit I don't have time for everything, so the nuances of football stats are not something I've pursued much).

One last point: this story is up on you tube currently, so I was able to watch it today (don't get Lifetime RW, sad to say, although I never thought I'd say that). According to Sarah's story, the first place she sees the people trying to get in is at her bedroom window --- which, if one belives the way UM portrays the lay out of the home, was on the second floor. And yet, from the UM segment (again, I am assuming they are showing her home, or at least a reasonable facsimile thereof), I don't see any way how one person could be standing outside a second floor window. Moreover, the way the story is presented, somewhere on the second floor appears to be their eventual point of entry. The way the story is narrated, at least two of them must have gotten in from this initial point, because one appears out of nowhere to grab Sarah, and at no point is he shown leaving her until the others are in the house. In other words, he did not go downstairs to unlock the door, leaving Sarah alone. Either they all came in from a second story window, or one other person did, and went downstairs to let the others in.

EDIT: Looking at it one more time, I see there is a small porch above the front patio. Thhat would really only access to one window of the type shown in the segment, but it opens a door. Also, I can't see the back of the house, so, there could be other possibilities. It's just another question: a second floor entry point seems somewhat unusual to me.
This assumes UM has accurately represented both the house and the incident as recalled by Sarah, but, assuming that is so --- I'd like to hear an explanation of how not one but two people got in on the second floor. And even if they didn't get in that way, how is it that even one of them working at her bedroom window, trying to get in? Where was he standing for leverage?

Oh dear: Last point on the Sarah Powell case. I don't know why I didn't do this earlier, but a Google search of her name brings up this link first:

http://www.near-death.com/angels.html

She also claims that while she was out, having been knocked unconscious by the burglars, she had a near-death experience and met her guardian angel. His name is George. he helped in her recovery. Could be true, I guess; could be an effect of post-traumatic stress disorder, with which she was diagnosed, and the million dollar question remains: what precisely was the traumatic stress that caused the disorder?

Thanks for that link it was hilarious



Oh dear: Last point on the Sarah Powell case. I don't know why I didn't do this earlier, but a Google search of her name brings up this link first:

http://www.near-death.com/angels.html

She also claims that while she was out, having been knocked unconscious by the burglars, she had a near-death experience and met her guardian angel. His name is George. he helped in her recovery. Could be true, I guess; could be an effect of post-traumatic stress disorder, with which she was diagnosed, and the million dollar question remains: what precisely was the traumatic stress that caused the disorder?

EDIT: Just saw your second post. Football is an interesting sport, because it seems to me statistical information is harder to apply, mostly because a good set of statistics are not really kept/have not been invented. For example, except for tackels themselves (which has as much to do with one's position, and the quality of the defense one plays with, as it does with any individual talent on the part of the player), there really aren't many defensive stats that I'm aware of that make attempts to measure, for example, what a shut-down corner does. Now, I know that's been changing somewhat --- I will occasionally here stats for "times thrown at" with respect to corners, for example --- but football needs to develop a better set of stats, in my opinion. Of course, it could be that football may simply not be as amenable to that sort of analysis, but I know www.footballoutsiders.com is at least trying (and though I am a big Philadelphia Eagles fan and I love football, I must admit I don't have time for everything, so the nuances of football stats are not something I've pursued much).

I'll take this part first. I'm a lot more knowledgeable and competent about football stats than true crime or just about anything else. Individual stats are basically meaningless, when it comes to cornerbacks or defensive tackles or other positions. That's what differentiates football from baseball and other sports. It's very basic, a true team sport while baseball is more of an individual sport weaved into a team concept. I greatly prefer true team sports like football or basketball where physical matchups decide the outcome, or pure individual sports like golf or tennis where mental stress is on such blatant display down the stretch, and things like the type of course or the playing surface can dramatically impact players in relation to each other.

Your Eagles are a great example. They don't run the ball enough and until they do I'll throw them out every year. Andy Reid is remarkably ignorant. A swing pass is not a substitute for a running play and never will be. A running play is drive blocking, huge men going forward with physical contact. A wimpy flair pass is pure finesse. In warfare you can win on the retreat, but only via vastly superior star wars weaponry compared to your opponent. Same thing applies to football. In college some of the premier programs have huge talents gaps over their annual opponents so they can get away with throwing the ball a high percentage of the time. Here's the related stat: in college football 74% of games are won by the team with highest number of rushing attempts. In the NFL that explodes to 82%. So you can see what Andy Reid is bucking every game. And that stat is hardly a residue of running the ball plenty in the 4th quarter. That's a pure fallacy. Chart games and it becomes strikingly clear. Rushing attempts are vital to victory. If a game is tied at halftime but one team has 18 rushing attempts and the other something like 10, you'd be shocked how often that 18 team prevails.

Reid better run the ball with McNabb back at QB. He did run it more with Garcia late last season and that allowed Philadelphia to be much more competitive than they would have been otherwise. Your offensive linemen are impressive. As a Dolphin fan I'd kill to have Andrews. It's pathetic that Reid wastes their run blocking ability.

The mainstream media does an absolutely incompetent job in detailing the best football stats. Points per pass attempt is a great gage. It sounds like a passing stats but actually it evaluates overall efficiency. They never even mention yards per pass attempt differential (offensive yards per pass attempt minus defensive yards per pass attempt), which is the so-called Killer Stat and dictates success more than any other. Pittsburgh led the league in both rushing attempts and YPPA differential in 2005, even as a #6 seed. So their playoff run was hardly surprising. Every sharp guy I know in Las Vegas had the Steelers targeted that year. In 2006, the Colts had superior YPPA differential, much better situation than any of their recent seasons. Their pass defense had improved dramatically. The Colts had at least a half yard edge in YPPA differential over all of their playoff opponents. Against Baltimore it was a farce, an edge of something like a yard and a half. Incredible that the Ravens were favored in that game by 4 points. I was touting the Colts on many sites as the likely Super Bowl winner and getting ripped for it.

ESPN and other outlets prefer to focus on mush, like subjective evaluation. When they detour to stats it's to crap like the overall QB rating.

Run the ball often, pass the ball well. That's the blueprint for successful football and always will be. Short passes violate both aspects, since it substitutes a wimpy pass play for a run, and diminishes your yards per pass attempt average since those swing passes are so short. Until the Eagles got Terrell Owens, they were a Super Bowl reject since their yards per pass attempt was way too low, about 6.5. You need 7+. Once they got TO, and subsequently, they have thrown the ball admirably down the field but the number of rushing attempts declined ridiculously every year from 2002 through 2005. In 2005 I doubt they would have had 300 rushing attempts for the season if McNabb hadn't been injured. It was pure pantyhose football and the Philadelphia media is inept if it doesn't hammer Reid on that issue.

Oh dear: Last point on the Sarah Powell case. I don't know why I didn't do this earlier, but a Google search of her name brings up this link first:

http://www.near-death.com/angels.html

She also claims that while she was out, having been knocked unconscious by the burglars, she had a near-death experience and met her guardian angel. His name is George. he helped in her recovery. Could be true, I guess; could be an effect of post-traumatic stress disorder, with which she was diagnosed, and the million dollar question remains: what precisely was the traumatic stress that caused the disorder?

I read that link many months ago. I don't think it knocks down Sarah's story at all. It mentions that a psychologist was coming to her home regularly to help her regain her memory. There's another unlikely parlay, a 14-year-old putting up with that when she is perfectly fine and faking it, and the psychologist being repeatedly fooled. I throw out the attention-grabbing teenager theory completely, as I said in the other thread. She believes what she says. It's either a breakdown accompanied by her mind inventing this tale, or actual intruders and trauma including partial suffocation and a blow to the head.

As per the house, I think the UM segment shows all of them exiting through the bedroom window so presumably that's Sarah's version of how they would have entered the house also. We only see the front of the house and not the back or the sides. No telling what the layout was like or where that bedroom window faced. It could have been the side or back of the house, not the front. If the physical aspect of entering through that room was impossible or seemingly unlikely, I'm confident the UM segment would have highlighted that. Instead, they ignore it completely. I think they have the two guys standing there trying to break into the window when Sarah first hears and sees them.

Plus, as I mentioned in the other thread, I wouldn't get carried away with the specifics of Sarah's visions from the segment. They aren't direct memories but things that slowly came to her via the seizures. Could have been a blend of actual events and things her mind threw in there while the memories were being retrieved, like a dream.

Also, one last thing. The UM segment says nothing was taken. That means nothing the family was able to identify or remember. It doesn't necessarily mean nothing was taken period. I'm not saying this is likely, but it could have been something subtle and otherwise unforgettable to family members, but very significant to the intruders.

Beverly noe, ida pruitt and Chad Noe. They SUPPOSEDLY dropped my sister, neice and wedy's sister in law lia-renee off in a wal-mart parking lot. WHO in their right mind would drop off an invalid and small child like that? NO ONE....

Heidi Wyrick...That name's familiar but i cant remember exactly who she is. Was she that little girl who saw ghosts at her new house?

The least believable story is that nobody has found Kristy and Bobby Baskin.

Heidi Wyrick...That name's familiar but i cant remember exactly who she is. Was she that little girl who saw ghosts at her new house?

Yeah, at least she claims she did. I read, I believe on this forum, that her claims were debunked on Penn and Teller's show Bull Sh**!, although I can't say for sure because I never saw the program. She was from Georgia as I recall. I saw a clever advertisement for that show, btw. To give you an idea of what letters fill in the two asterisks above, Penn and Teller use themselves as letters, as one of them was standing still, and the other had his arms streched out. :lol:

according to Wikipedia, Heidi Wyrick was the basis for Haley Joel Osment's lead role in "The Sixth Sense", although Wikipedia is known to have some factual errors in it since anyone can edit it, and I haven't been able to find anything on the net to back it up. I remember taking one of my nephews to see it when it first opened. Heidi's claims might be bunk, but at least it provided for a half-way decent movie.

according to Wikipedia, Heidi Wyrick was the basis for Haley Joel Osment's lead role in "The Sixth Sense", although Wikipedia is known to have some factual errors in it since anyone can edit it, and I haven't been able to find anything on the net to back it up. I remember taking one of my nephews to see it when it first opened. Heidi's claims might be bunk, but at least it provided for a half-way decent movie.


Really? That's interesting. But you are correct that Wikipedia has lots of errors in it...

Thanks for the graduation wishes, from both you and Bob Bean. :)