The Enfield Poltergeist: Extracted Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
This closed thread contains all of the excised material from the open, ongoing Enfield Poltergeist thread. Stu.
Local film-fan checks out the real location.

Thank you very much for posting this. Nice to see that everything is still there, although the house itself appears to be much better maintained these days. The school gates were different and undergoing reconstruction at the time, or shortly after, the events concerned if memory serves me correctly. Nice to see that the older part of the cemetery is still somewhat unkempt though. The actual site where I talked to the girls - they had an Ouija Board set upon a grave - was much closer to the church.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
It's a fascinating case.

Clearly though, and nonetheless interesting because of, Janet managed to create such an incredible and overwhelming deceit. Many involved have been very willing to admit that Janet was the direct source of much of the activity but still claim there were things she wasn't involved in. Her ability to deceive really is quite incredible. In regards the voice- obviously, people knew it was her creating and producing the voice yet still claimed something paranormal was occurring!

It's a fascinating case indeed. Clearly Janet was a very disturbed young lady but her talent for effective deception was unsurpassed. I just hope she's well now.
You know not what you say. Who art thou to pass judgement upon Janet?
 

sherbetbizarre

Special Branch
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
2,613
Points
184
When you say the girls, you mean Janet and her sister?
 

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
8,277
Points
294
You know not what you say. Who art thou to pass judgement upon Janet?
He's not passing judgement he is expressing an opinion regarding a well established case that is of interest to followers of Fortean phenomenoa. It is a popualr view that Janet for whatever reason created some aspects of the hauntings herself.
 

Swifty

doesn't negotiate with terriers
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
27,730
Reaction score
37,664
Points
284
Local film-fan checks out the real location.

Thanks as well, I love these location videos .... and check out the Evil Dead 2 poster on the wall in his flat at about 20 seconds into the video. You can get re-prints of that Graham Humphreys art poster but originals will set you back a few hundred quid. :cool:
 

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
He's not passing judgement he is expressing an opinion regarding a well established case that is of interest to followers of Fortean phenomenoa. It is a popualr view that Janet for whatever reason created some aspects of the hauntings herself.
The wholehearted acceptance of others popular views, and to propagate them, is tantamount to proclaiming judgement.
 

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
8,277
Points
294
The wholehearted acceptance of others popular views, and to propagate them, is tantamount to proclaiming judgement.

No it isn't. Judgement is arrived at from an authoritative standpoint not just from reading some popular views and regurgitating them.

I'm sure CJ is just one of many of us who have an opinion derived from the publishings of people who have investigated the case. I don't think CJ would call himself an expert on poltergiests, I'm certainly not either.

He will however have gained some knoweldge and is allowed to express his opinion on a semi-public internet forum.
 

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
No it isn't. Judgement is arrived at from an authoritative standpoint not just from reading some popular views and regurgitating them.

I'm sure CJ is just one of many of us who have an opinion derived from the publishings of people who have investigated the case. I don't think CJ would call himself an expert on poltergiests, I'm certainly not either.

He will however have gained some knoweldge and is allowed to express his opinion on a semi-public internet forum.
And what authoritative standpoint would that be, exactly?
 

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
8,277
Points
294
When you pass judgment on someone you are able to do so as you have assumed a superior or more authoritative postition when doing so. It's usually felt to be a critical statement on someone or something.

A bit like what you are doing to CJ when he expressed an opinion on Janet. Why? Well because you express your authority on this subject by mentioning, but not giving a full explaination of your involvment in the case.

By this you are suggesting that you know more than the rest of us about what actually happened. However to protect something or somebody you don't actually go into any details which is pretty conveniant really.

Therefore you can tell CJ that he doesn't know what he's talking about on the subject of Janet from a percieved superior position.
 
Last edited:

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
When you pass judgment on someone you are able to do so as you have assumed a superior or more authoritative postition when doing so. It's usually felt to be a critical statement on someone or something.

A bit like you are doing to CJ when he expressed an opinion on Janet. Why? Well because you express your authority on this subject by mentioning, but not giving a full explaination of your involvment in the case.

By this you are suggesting that you know more than the rest of us about what actually happened. However to protect something or somebody you don't actually go into any details which is pretty conveniant really.

Therefore you can tell CJ that he doesn't know what he's talking about on the subject of Janet from a percieved superior position.
I'm not being critical of CJ alone. In fact I'm critical of all who have accepted those assumptions. And that is exactly what they are - Assumptions. Those assumptions have been allowed to fester for such a long time as to become almost part of the mainstream acceptance of such. A sort of lynch-mob/witch-hunt mentality has occurred. No wonder that Janet wants nothing more to do with it.
Of course, I do assert that I have more knowledge than a lot of others about this issue, because indeed, I do.
So you could say that I am in a superior position. From what position do you think I should come from?
Are you suggesting that I should skirt around the issue? You must accept that there are genuine sensitivities surrounding this case and, of course, I am mindful of such. Your assertion that this is rather convenient for me is not a just perspective to take. In fact, I say that you are Bang-Out-Of-Order.
 

oldrover

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
3,986
Reaction score
1,425
Points
169
I've been a contributor to this thread for years. My position has always been that it was a hoax. Also that it was extremely badly handled by the adults involved, who should have known better and behaved more appropriately to the children involved. I think there was a significant authority gap between Grosse, Playfair and the family. And that it was exploited, intentionally or not. Either way I'm convinced they were acting in their own interests for their own motives. I also believe that if it happened today, it would never have allowed to have escalated to the extent that it did.

I've followed this case for years, because it interests me from a social perspective as much as anything else. And I've come to my conclusions based on what I've seen and read. None of which I find convincing. I too think Janet was the initial author of it all. But as she was a young child at the time, that doesn't mean I'm being critical of her. Quite the opposite, I'm critical of the adults who in my opinion let her down. As I believe they created the environment for Janet's behaviour to be rewarded and encouraged.

As I say, I base my opinion on all the information I've been able to gather. If you have anything new to add, I'd be happy to hear it.
 

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
I've been a contributor to this thread for years. My position has always been that it was a hoax. Also that it was extremely badly handled by the adults involved, who should have known better and behaved more appropriately to the children involved. I think there was a significant authority gap between Grosse, Playfair and the family. And that it was exploited, intentionally or not. Either way I'm convinced they were acting in their own interests for their own motives. I also believe that if it happened today, it would never have allowed to have escalated to the extent that it did.

I've followed this case for years, because it interests me from a social perspective as much as anything else. And I've come to my conclusions based on what I've seen and read. None of which I find convincing. I too think Janet was the initial author of it all. But as she was a young child at the time, that doesn't mean I'm being critical of her. Quite the opposite, I'm critical of the adults who in my opinion let her down. As I believe they created the environment for Janet's behaviour to be rewarded and encouraged.

As I say, I base my opinion on all the information I've been able to gather. If you have anything new to add, I'd be happy to hear it.
Oldrover, your balanced perspective on this issue is a welcome relief. Your observations regarding the power-plays between MG - GLP and the family are astute. Certainly, the fact that the 'ghost-chasers' (G.C) were there for such a long time, helped to prolong the matter and the issue of exploitation is, in my opinion, a real consideration to take on board. Of the two 'G.C', I would say that MG was the more 'professional', although GLP asserts his own professionalism on these matters. MG did everything by the book. GLP, I believe, came on the scene with another agenda in mind.
And did very well out of it.
 

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
8,277
Points
294
I'm not being critical of CJ alone. In fact I'm critical of all who have accepted those assumptions. And that is exactly what they are - Assumptions. Those assumptions have been allowed to fester for such a long time as to become almost part of the mainstream acceptance of such. A sort of lynch-mob/witch-hunt mentality has occurred. No wonder that Janet wants nothing more to do with it.
Of course, I do assert that I have more knowledge than a lot of others about this issue, because indeed, I do.
So you could say that I am in a superior position. From what position do you think I should come from?
Are you suggesting that I should skirt around the issue? You must accept that there are genuine sensitivities surrounding this case and, of course, I am mindful of such. Your assertion that this is rather convenient for me is not a just perspective to take. In fact, I say that you are Bang-Out-Of-Order.

Well that response felt very familiar...

I'm really sorry Stuart but until you actually provide some evidence of your claims then I am going to challenge what you say. Same with the secret SPR vault stuff, (I actually know about that but I can't say anything otherwise several small animals will die - I'm totally serious, No really I am).

If you can't then it's all just internet guff. We like evidence, that's why we are here.

People turn up to this place often seeking guidance regarding something they have experienced. I think we usually do a damn fine job in being critical, objective and supportive of what might have happened rather than giving people advice based on theories we've come up.

Stuart you may be completely convinced by your own ideas and experiences but we are not. Work with us on this.
 

Frideswide

Fortea Morgana :) PeteByrdie certificated Princess
Staff member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
11,789
Reaction score
13,170
Points
284
Location
An Eochair
Is that put up or shut up? only much much more polite of course? Because if it is then I'm in agreement. :grouphug:
 

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
Well that response felt very familiar...

I'm really sorry Stuart but until you actually provide some evidence of your claims then I am going to challenge what you say. Same with the secret SPR vault stuff, (I actually know about that but I can't say anything otherwise several small animals will die - I'm totally serious, No really I am).

If you can't then it's all just internet guff. We like evidence, that's why we are here.

People turn up to this place often seeking guidance regarding something they have experienced. I think we usually do a damn fine job in being critical, objective and supportive of what might have happened rather than giving people advice based on theories we've come up.

Stuart you may be completely convinced by your own ideas and experiences but we are not. Work with us on this.
I never came to this 'place' seeking guidance; but if I did, then I thank you for offering it. On this occasion though, no.
Of course you wont be convinced by anything, until you have heard more evidence. Even then, it is doubtful. Which is your prerogative. And goes for everyone, including myself. You can say that we are all seekers of truth. The impatience you show over these matters, is really noticeable. It seems that what you are really saying is: COME ON - OUT WITH IT! I notice that you do a lot of standing up for other commentators, as though somehow you've taken it upon yourself as father/protector. Whats the matter? Are not others able to voice their objections? Or are you trying to get a bandwagon rolling. That's pretty difficult when you have only one wheel on it. I don't believe I've said anything offensive to anyone here. Really, you shouldn't be so 'touchy.' If I decide to say more upon issues that I have begun, then I will do so in my own time and not at the braying of the hounds.
In the meantime, here's a track you might enjoy: Several Species of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together in a Cave and Grooving With a Pict - Pink Floyd - (Ummagumma EMI 1969)
 

sherbetbizarre

Special Branch
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
2,613
Points
184
The actual site where I talked to the girls - they had an Ouija Board set upon a grave - was much closer to the church.

...Approx: August 17th 1977
Did you know them, or interview them as a journalist or ghosthunter?

And I assume they found Bill's actual grave? :eek:
 

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
Did you know them, or interview them as a journalist or ghosthunter?

And I assume they found Bill's actual grave? :eek:
I had acquaintanced them upon a couple of occasions, but did not know them 'well.'
Enough to say hello.
I took no notice of the name upon the grave; in fact I'm not even sure if it had a headstone. It was definitely a grave though.
 
Last edited:

sherbetbizarre

Special Branch
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
2,613
Points
184
Do you know if they got through to their intended target?
 

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
Do you know if they got through to their intended target?
Yes and no.
Yes, because the voice of 'Bill' spoke to me outside of the cemetery, and beckoned me in.
No, because I questioned them over the voice, yet they hadn't heard it.
 

Naughty_Felid

No longer interesting
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
6,769
Reaction score
8,277
Points
294
I never came to this 'place' seeking guidance; but if I did, then I thank you for offering it. On this occasion though, no.
Of course you wont be convinced by anything, until you have heard more evidence. Even then, it is doubtful. Which is your prerogative. And goes for everyone, including myself. You can say that we are all seekers of truth. The impatience you show over these matters, is really noticeable. It seems that what you are really saying is: COME ON - OUT WITH IT! I notice that you do a lot of standing up for other commentators, as though somehow you've taken it upon yourself as father/protector. Whats the matter? Are not others able to voice their objections? Or are you trying to get a bandwagon rolling. That's pretty difficult when you have only one wheel on it. I don't believe I've said anything offensive to anyone here. Really, you shouldn't be so 'touchy.' If I decide to say more upon issues that I have begun, then I will do so in my own time and not at the braying of the hounds.
In the meantime, here's a track you might enjoy: Several Species of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together in a Cave and Grooving With a Pict - Pink Floyd - (Ummagumma EMI 1969)
So you turn up here making a big song and dance about you're involvement in one of the the biggest Poltergeist cases this country has ever seen with nothing to back you up and not expect any of us to question you?

How do you not get that?

Also I don't take on any role on this forum. I just have a laugh and challenge Bullsh*t when I see it.


No I actually know about the SPR stuff, I was being flippant, and I know what they have. I've had access to their material for years. I can't talk about it but you are completely wrong about the "vault" - you are so wrong. Where did you get this from?
 
Last edited:

Frideswide

Fortea Morgana :) PeteByrdie certificated Princess
Staff member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
11,789
Reaction score
13,170
Points
284
Location
An Eochair
The impatience you show over these matters, is really noticeable. It seems that what you are really saying is: COME ON - OUT WITH IT! I notice that you do a lot of standing up for other commentators, as though somehow you've taken it upon yourself as father/protector. Whats the matter? Are not others able to voice their objections? Or are you trying to get a bandwagon rolling. That's pretty difficult when you have only one wheel on it. I don't believe I've said anything offensive to anyone here. Really, you shouldn't be so 'touchy.' If I decide to say more upon issues that I have begun, then I will do so in my own time and not at the braying of the hounds.
play the ball not the player.
 

Stuart Certain

Devoted Cultist
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
173
Reaction score
60
Points
29
So you turn up here making a big song and dance about you're involvement in one of the the biggest Poltergeist cases this country has ever seen with nothing to back you up and not expect any of us to question you?

How do you not get that?

Also I don't take on any role on this forum. I just have a laugh and challenge Bullsh*t when I see it.


No I actually know about the SPR stuff, I was being flippant, and I know what they have. I've had access to their material for years. I can't talk about it but you are completely wrong about the "vault" - you are so wrong. Where did you get this from?
Whats this? New kid on the block stealing my thunder?
I never made a 'big song and dance' about anything. I am simply answering a few questions. Hadn't you noticed?
Have you actually been following the thread? I never stated that I couldn't be questioned. In fact, I am being questioned; again: hadn't you noticed?

'Also I don't take on any role on this forum. I just have a laugh'

Well; there we have it.

'No I actually know about the SPR stuff, I was being flippant, and I know what they have. I've had access to their material for years. I can't talk about it'

A prime example of - 'the pot calling the kettle black' - if ever there was one.

'you are completely wrong about the "vault" - you are so wrong.'

Have you not heard of 'artistic licence?' I only spoke of a vault in order to emphasise a point I was making.
I wouldn't know if the SPR had a vault or not. I've never been inside their premises, at least not physically, anyway.
However, you claim you have. Therefore I must assume that you are a member of the SPR. Unless you went there as a plumber or something?
 

sherbetbizarre

Special Branch
Joined
Sep 4, 2004
Messages
4,011
Reaction score
2,613
Points
184
Yes and no.
Yes, because the voice of 'Bill' spoke to me outside of the cemetery, and beckoned me in.
No, because I questioned them over the voice, yet they hadn't heard it.
And did it sound like the voice which came from Janet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top