I Spoke To The Woman Who Filmed A Haunted Puppet Moving In Her Basement

Jayne Harris believes that she has caught on camera the moment an allegedly haunted puppet moves on its own. The previous owner of the puppet claimed the spirit attached to it tried to harm him which is why Harris has been observing the puppet for the last three months in her usually-disused basement with a camcorder. After observing the footage in the news reports I read about this there were several questions that came to my mind. Could it be fraud via the use of wires or magnets? Could it just be falling over as things often do? Why was it only making headlines now, months after being filmed?

Rather than speculate about the motives of those involved I decided to try and contact Harris directly with my questions. Harris kindly agreed to me sharing our conversation here.

Me: As you probably know most people think that has been staged and I wondered if you might answer a few questions about it?

Jayne: Of course. I’m aware that no evidence will ever be enough to convince some people, however in sharing my footage I’m not trying to convince anyone. Believers believe, skeptics don’t. I know how long I had the goosebumps on the morning on 13th July when I reviewed the footage! Of course I’d be happy to talk about it.

Me: I am a paranormal researcher but don’t believe in the paranormal. I consider myself to have an open mind but always try to rule out possible causes for things like this. I think the most obvious cause here is fraud which I know you’ve denied. Was there anybody else that had access to the puppet? Oh gosh, that sounded wrong. What I meant was how certain can you be that nobody else tampered with it?

Jayne: I’ll explain something. I have been studying the field of Spirit Attachment for 17 years. In that time I’ve captured orbs (which I discount as I personally do not believe them to be connected to anything paranormal), shadows… the usual. However, at no point have I found anything (other than the 2 occasions in 2004 when I witnessed an apparition) to completely wipe doubt from my mind. Although not for want of trying. This footage was taken using a standard (pretty old!) Sony camcorder set to night vision. We leave the camera running as part of our investigations for up to 3 hours each night while we have a specific object under study. We use controlled conditions as suggested by ASSAP of which I’m a member. Our study area is on the basement as that is the only place in our home where we can keep conditions controlled.

I frequently set up trigger object experiments too with the use of motion detection. Even I wasn’t present at the time of the recording. We set up at 11.30pm and the tape runs using long play until roughly 3am. The Daily Mail unfortunately cropped the footage to exclude the time long and date. It was taken at 2.05am. As you can imagine reviewing up to 3 hours of night vision footage is quite a task. Usually I’m listening out for sounds, or watching for shadows/something around the object. What I did not expect was to see the object itself moving. Although I have always believed in some way that spirits not only exist but can manipulate physical objects.

Me: So do you believe this is a ghost moving the puppet?

Jayne: I believe in both residual and intelligent hauntings. I believe energy can be absorbed by objects as it can by buildings. The case of the puppet I believe is not residual. After seeing the footage and speaking at length with its previous owner I believe there is a spirit around it/associated to it/haunting it (choice of words varies from person to person!) I believe ghosts are residual energy being replayed. Unaware of the living. I believe spirits are something different and in this case unless someone can prove to me categorically that I’m wrong, I believe we have a spirit making themselves known.

Me: What do you think about the suggestion that perhaps it just moved due to gravity – like, it wasn’t quite balanced right and just toppled over on itself? I just wonder how much context plays a part here. If you see what I mean.

Jayne: As for gravity, personally I discount it. Gravity could make something fall but it couldn’t lift, pause and then slowly lower before dropping. I watched that footage over 30 times on the day I first saw it and tried every possible explanation. I even examined the cabinet incase a mouse had got in! I have tried to recreate it since bit can’t. We’ve created vibrations in the rooms above by walking heavily, moving furniture etc. Believe me I don’t share my evidence lightly. I have to be sure. I know I leave myself open to criticism but who doesn’t. My view is that those with an interest in and some knowledge of the paranormal will feel it worth seeing.

Me: I’m just watching it now, was the cross originally on the puppet?

Jayne: Yes its the wooden operating cross that controls the puppet. It connects the strings to the puppet via metal loops

Me: is there a copy of the video that hasn’t been edited by the press?

Jayne: I originally uploaded it to youtube (which is how the journalist found it) that shows the footage. As part of our research we have various psychic mediums study any objects we investigate (although of course the opinion of psychics can be open to interpretation). It all helps us build a picture. In this line of work a good 90% of objects we study are found to have no notable activity or signs of anything paranormal.

A/N: Here is the original video

Me: I’ve just watched the video again and I notice that just before the cross falls there’s a “tink” noise, do you recognise that noise? Like. literally before the cross falls into the glass?

Jayne: There is yes. We think it may be the other side of the operating cross touching the back of the cabinet before the fall. Or possibly one of the puppets porcelain feet/hands.

Me: have you been able to recreate the noise?

Jayne: We got a similar sound on a couple of occasions more so when the back of the cross caught the back of the cabinet

Me: Do you have that on tape? The recreations?

Jayne: We don’t film our attempts to recreate activity or replicate environments no. It’s part of what we do day to day.

Me: what the control conditions are that you use?

Jayne: by controlled, I mean that we look to minimise external interference when conducting experiments, and if we gather any data i.e. the video footage, we try to recreate the exact same environment for future experiments to see if we get the same responses or results. In all in the name of accurate data collection (notoriously difficult in the paranormal field!) We use the basement as it in unused for any other purpose, so no one goes there unless they are checking for results. We measure the temperature of the area at the beginning of each session, set up camera in the exact same position (using makers on the floor, shelves etc) and do as much as we can to ensure everything remains untouched.

Me: Oh, you said it was controls suggested by ASSAP?

Jayne: Controlled conditions also means not relying on witness testimonies too heavily as these are obviously open to interpretation and not measurable.

Me: do you not think the videos are open to interpretation too?

Jayne: Oh of course, as is anything, but it’s far closer to evidence than me simply telling you I saw the puppet move don’t you think.

Me: Sure, but I think it still requires a reliance on your word that this is what we’re seeing in the video. I think a lot of people will wonder why the lights weren’t on, why you didn’t also film from other angles, or why you didn’t film the replications.

Jayne: yes of course, as do most things. Unless someone experiences something for themselves, they will never believe

Me: Even experiencing things for yourself is open to interpretation and biases though? And you didn’t experience this for yourself…?

Jayne: Exactly, no one will ever have cast iron guaranteed proof of the afterlife, thats a fact. At the end of the day I’m not looking to convince anyone, I know what I captured and in sharing it with others I am sharing what I consider to be my best capture to date. People can take it however they see fit. I respect and appreciate the thoughts and opinions of any who approaches it in a mature way.

Jayne: I think when you are approached by the media, you have to accept that there will be those out there who think you’ve agree to an article because you have an ulterior motive. I suppose that happens a lot. [A/N: yes, it does]. I’m not looking convince anyone as I say, but I know there are genuine paranormal enthusiasts out there who will be as excited as I am by this.

Edit (14.08.2015): I have summarised my thoughts on this in a reply to a comment left below. Click here to go directly to my response.

About Hayley Stevens 434 Articles
Hayley is a ghost geek and started to blog in 2007. She uses scientific scepticism to investigate weird stuff and writes about it here while also speaking publicly about how to hunt ghosts as a skeptic.

34 Comments on I Spoke To The Woman Who Filmed A Haunted Puppet Moving In Her Basement

  1. Interesting but does seem to be a natural occurrence. It would have been nice to see a digital thermometer hygrometer in the cabinet to check environmental changes during the filming.

  2. Nice interview, clearly she is lying and this is all a stunt to promote her business.
    And only a fool would for one second consider this terrible footage to be proof of anything other than a manipulative women, a gimmicked puppet, and self promotion.

    Anyway well done Hayley, you asked good questions, and I think she struggled to answer with any kind of authority or knowledge on the subject

    • Firstly ghosts do not exist. So clearly not a ghost.
      She also runs a paranormal tours/ghost hunting BUSINESS.
      She has had her footage published all over the media, and in turn making her a fortune.

      The way she speaks is of someone purely trying to manipulate.

      She is IN MY OPINION clearly lying, and trying to manipulate, clearly she has succeeded somewhat with you.

      Am I rude? Yes, because this woman is lying and I see no reason to give her the benefit of the doubt. Do I really need to go to her website, and pick the whole thing apart and expose her entire business just to prove I am right yet again?

      There is no such things as ghosts, and we need to stop placating to people like this, and giving them all the power.

      We do we as skeptics have to be nice to people who are either lying to us, or so deluded they ignore the truth.

      Where has being nice truly got you Hayley?
      More failed ventures than I can think of.
      You have pissed off more of the skeptical community than me, and damn that is saying something, and for what a few hundred hits on your website, and dumb lectures to stuck up skeptics who wouldn’t learn something new if their life depended on it.

      Ever wondered why I have avoided doing the SitP talks, going on TV and so on. Its a waste of time and achieves nothing.

      I complimented your interview, but be clear here, I take no prisoners, I tell it how it is, and damn history shows that 99.9999% of the time I am right.

      Now please dont go on a rant, write an article about me, the world already hates me, and you will only get negative opinions for doing so, so read this, then delete it, I dont really care.

      But also consider that sometimes when someone gives you a compliment, just take it, and dont attack the very person who helped you become a skeptic in the first place, as well as someone who has achieved a million times more than you doing things his way.

      Nice dont work.

    • Because you don’t learn from your mistakes and you don’t address the flaws.
      Remember the words of George Santayana.

      One thing with me is, I always learn from my mistakes, and I eliminate my flaws.
      How do you think I have survived this long, taking on the biggest names in the industry, and always winning!

      And yes you are not mean! And that is your biggest failing, you let people get to you, how many times have you been attacked or insulted, and then you go on a big epic rant, all woe is me, playing the victim and so on.

      Like it or not, you choose to be in the skeptical arena, whereby you will upset people, you want to expose frauds and reveal the truth. But you forget you are dealing with criminals, you forget that people supposedly on your side morally will do whatever they can to take you down.

      When you have been attacked, I have always offered you my help, and pretty much every time you reject it. And that’s ok, I don’t take offence at that. But you seem to think the things I say to you are coming from a bad place instead of a good place.

      I am probably one of the few skeptics out here with any kind of name value that actually wants to see you succeed and stick it to the old guard on the way. But damn you are so stubborn. And when I point out your flaws, you just blindly accept it. Tell me to fuck off. Point out my mistakes, talk yourself up.

      You forget I remember you as the naive believer on the badpsychics forum who believed in Most Haunted, and was being horrible to me for daring to say it was faked.

      Instead of pushing away people like me, people like me who are truly in the minority when it comes to genuine true altruism, someone who could help you so much, you should be accepting the help and learning and growing.

      Right now you are stale, and have been for years. And being nice is a big problem.

      Kick some ass, cause a commotion.

      Never settle for being just another blank face in the skeptical world. Step out and do something.

      Anyway I get the feeling I am banging my head against a brick wall here.

      Anyway nice interview, wish you would have been a bit more “Donnis” in your approach and called her out directly for what she was clearly trying to do, but then again that is not your style, gotta keep the woos happy afterall.

  3. I assume by night vision she means the near-infrared illuminated video that every ghost hunting show uses. I wonder why they can’t just turn on a light so we could see it in color? Are ghosts scared of visible spectrum light, but phantom retinas, like our own, can’t see near infrared? I think I see something like a mouse, with some eye shine, moving at the bottom of the case by the cross. I know she said she checked the case, but mice can get in and out of enclosed spaces that don’t have very big entrances – I couldn’t find any gaps that seem large enough in the light fixture for a mouse to get in, but get in it did: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuspKAAG2OU

    • You see the light twice and I thought it odd. I did wonder if it was the metal hoops on the puppet, but a mouse could be another possibility. Nice video, btw. Poor little thing.

    • Yes, something is definitely moving at the bottom of the wooden cross. Whether it is part of the doll or as you speculate – a mouse is unclear. Seems odd she even volunteers the possibility herself that a mouse might have gotten into her ‘sealed on all sides’ cabinet. Surely any decent controls would eliminate any possibility of rodents, insects, moisture, draughts etc. No?

    • A lot of older Sony camcorders have a specific night vision setting- ‘NightShot/SuperNightShot’ Various models were much more sensitive to low light or IR light than other camcorders. I can’t recall if this was due to the sensor, or a physical IR filter being moved off in that mode, they were much moved by night-time wildlife fans.

      Having also had experience of rodents, they can get through the tiniest holes and jump into and out of things and jump high! I spent quite a few days puzzling why things were being moved overnight on a table, then one evening when cooking, a whole avocado went missing when I left the kitchen for a few minutes. Found the skin and stone wedged at the back of the cooker.

  4. Was the video slow motion or real time? If real time the movement of the cross seemed more like stop motion than either falling under gravity or being moved by something. And those glints you pointed out are very suspicious…

  5. Hi All

    I’ve watched the video a good few times. The fact that the wooden cross stop-starts as it falls in no big deal. This kind of action is not uncommon. It all about the physics of balancing forces. The cause of the movement my be due to changes in the environment resulting in expansion or contraction of materials which create imbalanced forces.

    As for the woman lying; Jon your arrogance is beyond belief. As one that only deals with scientific FACT you cannot know categorically that she was lying. That’s a very bold and stupid remark to make. I am a freelance body language expert and author and reading between the lines of her replies I would carefully suggest that, in my opinion, the is excited about the attention and that she is trying not to embellish the story too much but I don’t think she’s lying. I may however be wrong. And that admission, Jon, is what being a skeptic is truly about. Keeping an open mind. Your sir, have a mind that is tightly closed, your conceited attitude is one mistake you have yet to learn from.

    Hayley, you’re doing a great job 🙂


    • As someone with a background in physics, I’m not sure I agree – that does not look like either motion under gravity or something being pushed. And I don’t really understand what you mean about ‘the physics of balanced forces’ – it’s not a term I recognise from my physics degree. Clearly the forces aren’t balanced, or it wouldn’t move.

  6. Jon, dear boy, no one has pissed off more of the skeptical community , or any other community for that matter, than you. Your crown is secure! 😉

  7. Nice interview and some nice replies however I do not agree with corporatemindreader in one thing here and that is that we should still have a open mind. I would like to ask for how long people should have a open mind to these things? When clearly year after year there is no evidence or progress that something paranormal exist and in the end it turns out that people like this are seeking fame or fortune? Some of these people even face jail in the end for stealing from their clients or doing something worse.

    I am not claiming I have a “closed mind” but I understand the position of Jon Donnis here. The longer you are interested in the paranormal the more you see that its just smoke, mirrors, money and nothing more.

    However this is only my opinion.

  8. No I do not think what you wrote Hayley. I know people who are doing quite the opposite. I only commented on the fact that I would like to know how long a person should be open minded here and that I understand the position of Jon Donnis here. That is all. Thanks for the reply. I wish you a nice day.

  9. Hayley, from conversing with Jayne on this footage, did she indicate that there was any additional data that goes with this event?

    We will always debate the reliability of ‘evidence’ such as this. We all know how easy it is to doctor footage, pictures and audio with a bundle of relatively cheap apps. However, we shouldn’t approach all situations on the negative assuming that those out there are looking to deceive us from the outset. That equally doesn’t mean we go in blinded and accept everything at face value either. Many I have met have been convinced by events or interactions they’ve encountered to be paranormal activity. And they were right! Right because the normal explanation that those like us find was at the time beyond them to discover or consider. As with proving, we must equally disprove with the facts available to us. Thus whatever facts we gain should deliver to us a conclusion, be it paranormal or normal.

    Jayne believes, and that word believes is important, that this is the result of a intelligent haunting or spirit. Conclusions derived by her research over approx 17 years I think? However it’s my opinion (sorry Jayne) that this is indeed a leap of faith, and that word faith is of equal importance here.

    Let’s suggest another possibility, that of telepathic interaction at a distance void of time. She set the puppet up in accordance with a tale of it moving that she had accepted. She had accepted it because she chose to prove it. This element is a guess on the what’s available, the opposite could exist here, she was trying to disprove it. However given her background, approach and conclusion. I think she believed it would move and looked to prove this very fact. Thus if this is not fraud, and that’s yet to be proven either, then there’s a possibility that yes, the puppet moved by its own accord. However the reason it moved was literally be caused it was setup in an experiment to do so. Perhaps coupled by the individuals faith and belief it would occur, thus generating a telepathic field that enabled the events to occur. Granted that I use the term telepathic here quite a bit a many will state that I mean telekinesis, which is kind of right too.

    The metaphysical or philosophical question then becomes, how could we recreate this experiment knowing the source of the movement could equally be ourselves?

    Incidentally this could be considered similar to the observer effect, but without being present.

    Right, that’s my bit, probably left a load of gaps, so feel free to comment, argue, debate, but let’s keep it civil and on the subject.

    Many Thanks

    • Many I have met have been convinced by events or interactions they’ve encountered to be paranormal activity. And they were right! Right because the normal explanation that those like us find was at the time beyond them to discover or consider.

      Just because an explanation is not available at the time something happens does not mean it is paranormal in nature until an explanation becomes obvious or is found. Just because something does not have an explanation does not mean it is unexplainable and labelling it as paranormal suggests that it is.

      As with proving, we must equally disprove with the facts available to us. Thus whatever facts we gain should deliver to us a conclusion, be it paranormal or normal.

      Although I understand what you’re trying to say the burden of proof is always with the claimant. Jayne is the one who has to prove that this is somehow paranormal in nature and she cannot do this. You or I could claim “this is faked” and the burden of proof would then lay with us to provide evidence of fakery. Jon Donnis states “this is not a ghost, ghosts are not real” and that is not something he can prove because you cannot prove a negative. However, such a statement is based on a lack of evidence for the opposite argument – that they do exist.

      You are right to say that Jayne is making a leap of faith and a leap of logic. As with all Trigger Object-related methods there is nothing actually proven when an object moves. All that we know is that an object moved and then come along humans and through their own biases decide why that was (as we have already seen happening with believers declaring it paranormal forces and non-believers suggesting gravity or trickery.)

      As for your telepathy ideas, again, that’s just wild speculation. It’s just a puppet that happened to move. Had it happened outside of the context that the puppet is allegedly haunted we wouldn’t even be having this discussion because the incident would not have been noteworthy.

  10. Okay let’s dance !

    Just because an explanation isn’t available doesn’t mean that the explanation is paranormal! Well true and not true. It’s a question of perception, which is where the belief/faith attributes return. To the individual something may seem very paranormal, but to the next their knowledge may allow them to quickly formulate a conclusion based on normality. Thus paranormal conclusions are more likely built from lack of understanding of the greater subject field. Like Jaynes jump to conclude an intelligent spirit at work rather than say a residual energy.

    I was no more labelling it paranormal than you were by including it in a blog with the title ‘Hayley is a Ghost’ which by definition suggest the topic is of a paranormal nature. Perception plays a part when someone finds your blog, it’s not until further analysis of the data that true conclusions can be made.

    Okay valid point, Jayne brought this footage to the public eye and labelled it as evidence. It’s her position to provide the proof to back up her argument. That I get and to an extent agree with, but surely those of us with a passion for this field should look into these pieces of evidence too? Although there’s a fair few that’s for sure!

    As for telepathy this is not wild speculation! It’s theory taken from many streams of experiment, research and investigation. Which dates back to the end of the 1800’s and continues today. Granted my theory on how the object moves via telepathy is possibly a little new, but not impossible. Equally probable as a ghost if not more likely in my opinion.

    Of course it may just be a puppet that happened to move or possibly something else caused the move, perhaps a passing truck. Maybe it is faked, perhaps it’s a spirit. Maybe it’s a combination of multiple scenarios that resulted in the footage.

    My point is that it’s presented as evidence and we must analyse it properly.

    • Just because an explanation isn’t available doesn’t mean that the explanation is paranormal! Well true and not true. It’s a question of perception, which is where the belief/faith attributes return.

      I didn’t say ‘Just because an explanation isn’t available doesn’t mean that the explanation is paranormal’, I said ‘Just because an explanation is not available at the time something happens does not mean it is paranormal in nature until an explanation becomes obvious’ because you said

      ‘Many I have met have been convinced by events or interactions they’ve encountered to be paranormal activity. And they were right! Right because the normal explanation that those like us find was at the time beyond them to discover’

      This is wrong. Something isn’t paranormal just because someone can’t find an explanation for it. You can call it odd, you can call it something you can’t explain, but to call is paranormal just because you cannot explain it personally is a leap of logic.

      but surely those of us with a passion for this field should look into these pieces of evidence too?

      No. If your aim is to prove ghosts exist then knock yourself out and explore these pieces of “evidence” to your hearts content. “By the way, this is not evidence of anything.) I’ve addressed all of this and more in a posts called Ghost Hunters Vs. Paranormal Investigators and How Evidence Is Rated And How People Get It Wrong.

      As for telepathy this is not wild speculation!

      I know telepathy has been researched a lot but in this instance it is just baseless speculation that adds nothing to the case. It could have been a leprechaun that moved the puppet. It could have been invisible spiders. It could have been a million things but it doesn’t mean it was any of them.

      My point is that it’s presented as evidence and we must analyse it properly.

      You can’t analyse something when there is a lack of data and it isn’t replicable. You should perhaps research more into scientific scepticism so that you have an understanding of how evidence actually works.

  11. I think you’ve missed the first point in its entirety to be honest! Although my apologies if I’m wrong. I was attempting (probably not greatly within this medium) to highlight the point that perception plays a large part of the individuals understanding of the world around them and indeed plays a distinctive role within the field of the paranormal. Ergo if the data, information or knowledge isn’t available at the time, then it has been perception and lack of understanding that has placed the possible explanation into the realms of the paranormal. Historically speaking this has had other conclusions of supernatural origins, most obvious being that of the Gods.

    Whereas I apologise for my misquoting you, which is important to note. Let’s understand the importance of an individual’s perception, built on their belief and faith no matter what that may be.

    Incidentally something is paranormal if someone can’t find an explanation for it; ‘beyond the range of normal experience or scientific explanation’ literally defines paranormal. However this is based on the individuals perception or observation of the events, that individual may then conclude the events as according to the above to be paranormal. The next individual may not draw the same conclusions, due to a greater understanding of let’s say physics, physiology or perhaps psychology. The problem is that in my opinion something can be paranormal to individuals, but in reality with a wealth of knowledge it’s actually normal, just possibly a normal yet discovered!

    I highlighted the next element as evidence, because that’s what Jayne referred to it as. My aim is not to prove ghosts are real, I would allow the data to do that. In this particular case there is insufficient data at this point to draw this or any conclusion. All we have is a clip of the original footage. My point in that instance was to highlight that we should look at all of these pieces that are presented to us, as they enable us to seek out all possibilities. Regardless of the said items being real or fake, we can learn from them.

    Granted attributing the cause to telepathy was a slight jump, but I wasn’t concluding, just suggesting an alternative hypothesis on this than ghosts. If we are refining our debate simply to this case defined on what we have then it will remain inconclusive until further data is available in my opinion.

    I have kept my arguments attributed to discussion on the paranormal and this particular case. I’m well aware there is a lack of empirical evidence and data related to this, from our perspective. A full understanding of the circumstances, controlled environment, control measures, experiments, etc. is required before conclusion can be properly written.

    Thank you for the advise to research scientific scepticism in order to understand more about evidence, I will endeavour to look into it. Although I have read a bit in materialism and the more dated approaches to scientific study which are now being questioned within the scientific community. Interesting times indeed.

    Thank you for your time and quick responses I look forward to future discussions Hayley, this has been most interesting.

    • I’m not being closed minded. I for one would love to see your evidence and, if it was good evidence, I’d be willing to change my mind. That is being open minded.

      I would suggest you don’t label those you disagree with closed minded just because they don’t agree with you. That’s closed minded.

  12. As a long-time reader of Fortean Times, I very much appreciate the way that publication (and Fort before them) has made me look at the “paranormal”. Forteans are often seen as cranks and there are certainly a lot of cranks in the field, but the main core of writers/researchers, people like Bob Rickard, Peter Brookesmith, Clark and Roberts, Karl Shuker etc have offered a way to view the subject(s) rationally without jumping to conclusions. It is frustrating, for instance, that more experts scientifically examine poltergeists or ghosts simply because “they don’t exist” rather than going into the field to see what other people are reporting. Certainly there are a lot of hoaxers and misidentifications (I think most reliable UFO researchers, at least put the numbers of these percentage-wise in the high 90’s) but there is still often a small core of unexplained events even if articles in FT and elsewhere like the “Flying Saucery” columns still seem to regularly and convincingly explain more and more. Psychology, belief and myth certainly loom large in Fortean studies but that still doesn’t mean that occasionally there is some objective, if not known, mechanism at work. I’ve heard Forteana described as “equal opportunity skepticism”- the ground between the arrogance of skepticism that refuses the reality of anything out of ordinary because it “doesn’t exist” without investigating, and the “believe everything” credulity of New Age and uncritical “paranormal” literature that pervades the mainstream and New Age bookshops. I think a closed mind is as unhelpful as a too open mind in science (though not being an expert in anything I don’t have an opinion on the video and expert above. Maybe she is faking it- I can’t see any evidence either way from the article. I can’t see how it could be a natural phenomenon, but that doesn’t mean much either…)

  13. “I always learn from my mistakes, and I eliminate my flaws”?

    Spelling correction: *don’t*.

    Here’s another new lesson you should have picked up by your age: it’s a bad idea to be pointlessly jealous and bitter about Hayley’s comparatively successful career.

    Because now, Jon? It’s the only thing you’re known for – and that’s one big flaw to have out there.

2 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. More Interesting Articles on the Paranormal | paranormalhuntress
  2. Watch This Haunted, Murderous Puppet (Allegedly) Move Around On Its Own – Uproxx | InnerCirclePress.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Advertisment ad adsense adlogger