• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Enfield Poltergeist

I was having a bit of a chicken and egg thing going on with Janet's appearance in later life.

To be honest, and without wanting to be unkind, I thought she looked like a junkie.

While it is tempting to believe that the traumatic events of the 'haunting' could be responsible for her haggard looks and possible metal distress in later life, it is equally possible that she was already a disturbed young woman prior to the events.

I also don't want to criticise those who investigated the case, I've never seen a full transcript of the conversations from the beginning, and it was all a long time ago, but 'when did you die?', 'how did you die?' and 'how many of you are there?' etc are very leading questions to be asking a 'mystery voice'. One of the most amazing aspects of the case is that the voice was shown conclusively to be coming from the throat of the girl and yet it is still considered paranormal, seemingly on the basis of a few anecdotal 'well I couldn't do that voice for any length of time' comments from a few people who seem to be completely unaware of how, for example, ventriloquism works.

I've also always found the 'levitation' photographs pretty laughable, to me they just look like a series of stills of someone jumping out of bed etc.

In spite of all of which I have always found it a really intriguing story and it is one of those well documented and far from easily explained cases that got me interested in all this business many years ago. The many eye witnesses help make it, and seeing them maintaining their version of events to this day makes it hard to dismiss out of hand.

I do agree that the jump cuts and fake visual and audio interferance effects etc were very annoying - but it seems that's just the way it is these days, every genre of television making has its shortcuts to dramatic effect that are followed slavishly, and in anything to do with the paranormal you get static and juddering into focus and whisperings in the background : i think you are supposed to not notice it and just soak up the 'atmosphere' it creates, but I find it very irritating.
 
_Lizard23_ said:
I also don't want to criticise those who investigated the case, I've never seen a full transcript of the conversations from the beginning, and it was all a long time ago, but 'when did you die?', 'how did you die?' and 'how many of you are there?' etc are very leading questions to be asking a 'mystery voice'.
Click to expand...

I think they did ask it if it was dead first :)

_Lizard23_ said:
One of the most amazing aspects of the case is that the voice was shown conclusively to be coming from the throat of the girl and yet it is still considered paranormal, seemingly on the basis of a few anecdotal 'well I couldn't do that voice for any length of time' comments from a few people who seem to be completely unaware of how, for example, ventriloquism works.
Click to expand...

There was in fact an expert called in who carried out a laryngograph and concluded that the voice was coming from Janet's 'false vocal chords' and while not impossible to talk for long periods of time in this way, the Professor thought it would be very difficult for anyone to do so for any length of time without resulting in inflamation(and loss of voice)

Interestingly in his book GLP states that for the above reason he and MG can not make any paranormal claims for 'the voice' in itself.
 
criticalthinker said:
There was in fact an expert called in who carried out a laryngograph and concluded that the voice was coming from Janet's 'false vocal chords' and while not impossible to talk for long periods of time in this way, the Professor thought it would be very difficult for anyone to do so for any length of time without resulting in inflamation(and loss of voice)

Interestingly in his book GLP states that for the above reason he and MG can not make any paranormal claims for 'the voice' in itself.
Click to expand...

She did have the best part of a year to practice.

Still we seem to be forgetting the brother here. And the fact that their parents marriage had just broken up possibly leading to a young girl wanting some attention.
 
liveinabin1 said:
She did have the best part of a year to practice.
Click to expand...

but not even the people who investigated the case are claiming that the voice was of paranormal origins - they accepted that it was coming from Janet. What they questioned was where the words came from and why Janet was able to impersonate an old man for so long. If you have heard the tapes of 'Bill' you may or may not think that Janet was 100% responsible
 
_Lizard23_ said:
I was having a bit of a chicken and egg thing going on with Janet's appearance in later life.
To be honest, and without wanting to be unkind, I thought she looked like a junkie.
Click to expand...

Ooooh I'm not alone on this. When we first saw her she was lit unsympathetically looking into a camera, badly made up for TV, and then she said "I don't know why they picked on me?" Yet the voice over, the shot, the lighting, the make up before she spoke....we were already thinking "I know why they picked you."

Paranormal voice coming from a 12 year old girl with an over bite who's mother has just been rejected by the her father.....has to be a paranormal voice then! The concept of a "cry for help" yet to really work it's way through to the common thought process!

Dead "Bill" was never talked about by the neighbours to the family that now dwelt in the house where he passed away and in no way was this ever absorbed during the early years of the children. (koff) Bill's son, who was interviewed, never actually heard the voice then? Can't remember did he identify his own father's voice?

Four kids in the photo but only two appeared in the doc? Why?

The Mirror reporter, young firebrand out to make a name, handed a story like this in August (slow news month)...if 30 years later he said "Made it up" you'd question his journalistic merits since then wouldn't you? Wouldn't you?

Never interviewed the photographer after they showed his photo's that didn't show paranormal activity? Didn't he have a opinion?

The programme IMO had the taste of an doc idea that someone did a bit of research into, but hey... what a gift to have a contributor die during the making off...Grosse (for all his assumptions) should have had better epitaph than this Sunday supplement article type programme.

The programme IMO was like a lemon fresh KFC towlet...wipe your hands with it...now discard,

The case itself I feel is a different story.

I'd like to know more about the ceramic/ metal fireplace that flew, sorry ripped itself from a wall and floated over a double bed.

Before the furor something obviously was happening, as we know these types of spirits focus on atypical people and Janet (before the attention) was a prime suspect (pre-pubescent female in emotional turmoil).

I liked the neighbours testimony cause he has nothing to gain. Ooooh me face on the telly? Maybe.

The mother was distraught enough to phone the papers. A bad idea but I understand why she followed that action....

They mentioned that there was intense activity the night before Janet's first period, is this important? Thinking back to other Polt cases...it isn't, that I can recall, ever been reported. Has it?

Sensationalist doc continues to inflate myth!

I stand by my opinion.

Q. Why does this kind of spirit, if it exists, favour woman? (Particularly pre-pubscent ones?)

mooks out
 
I didn't see the documentary (living in the US these days - it might make it over), however the more I hear, the more it sounds like it started with some 'genuine' phenomena, but then degenerated into sensationalism fed by a young girls' need for attention.

Is there a systematicereview of well-documented polt cases in the literature that relate to females at puberty? From what I have read, it always seemed one of the more well studied areas and one with substantial evidence. As always these things are difficult to study, but the evidence of case reports seemed quite compelling toward the existence of some link with young females.

I do think that the evolution into a story invoving a conventional 'ghost' (i.e. a dead person's 'spirit') is more a case of human interpretation on both parts. IMHO, the idea that a living person is able to somehow unleash psychokinetic energy always seemed more plausible to me than the notion of some earthly-bound life after death. The case of Janet seems to fit the model well, but has sadly been overshadowed by more dubious after-events once it got publicity.

Having said all of this, in the interviews I have seen with Grosse, I have no doubt that he was convincd of the authenticity of the voice.
 
I missed the doc when it was first aired but due to the wonders of Virgin media, got to watch it "on demand".

I felt that really one hour wasn't nearly enough time to devote to the subject and that within the hour, they left too many things unopened.

It was obviously a very troubled family before the events started and judging by the fact the family doesn't seem to talk much these days (and the two boys seemed to be completely cut out of everything), I'm guessing they still are.

I want to go away and read more about the experiments and see more footage but the conclusion I came to, was that some events were unexplained and some were obviously the girls messing around. And some could go either way. I felt the earlier events were more genuine and the later more fake. E.g

One clip I saw was from the bbc reporter who was recording things. She and someone else were downstairs and they heard a noise upstairs. They ran upstairs to find a chair was over turned and the girls asleep. Apparantly this was supernatural. IMHO - the girls did it.

However, when the police officer went round on the first night, and one of their neighbours was there as well, they swore blind that the noises and furniture moving was definitely not the work of the girls. Somehow, I believed this more.

Either way, I do feel there was some 'supernatural' activity in the house but not as much as the evidence would suggest.
 
Littlegreylady said:
It was obviously a very troubled family before the events started and judging by the fact the family doesn't seem to talk much these days (and the two boys seemed to be completely cut out of everything), I'm guessing they still are.
Click to expand...

One of the boys died of cancer at a young age. Not sure where the other one is.
 
sherbetbizarre said:
Littlegreylady said:
It was obviously a very troubled family before the events started and judging by the fact the family doesn't seem to talk much these days (and the two boys seemed to be completely cut out of everything), I'm guessing they still are.
Click to expand...

One of the boys died of cancer at a young age. Not sure where the other one is.
Click to expand...

Again this is a reason for it to be the work to two emotionally disturbed girls. Mum and Dad have split up, brother dies. It's a lot for two young girls to cope with. I think it started as attention seeking (I mean that in the kindest of ways; children are still forgotten when a relative dies. My young nephew recently started wetting the bed at the age of 10. He was taken to the doctors and put through loads of tests to see it there was anything physically wrong with him. It was months down the line when my mother in law mentioned that his mum and dad were currently going though a messy divorce and his Grandad (who he was very close to) had just died.)
 
yes but considering the divorce rate currently, and the social stats for teenage violence, drugs, abuse, fatherless children, failed public policies. Should'nt reported poltergeist activity be on the increase. Or have young teenagers found a new way to vent their spleen (Guns, Knives etc) Maybe it's getting out of the jurisdiction of forteana with this...sorry :oops:
 
gazzo10 said:
yes but considering the divorce rate currently, and the social stats for teenage violence, drugs, abuse, fatherless children, failed public policies. Should'nt reported poltergeist activity be on the increase. Or have young teenagers found a new way to vent their spleen (Guns, Knives etc) Maybe it's getting out of the jurisdiction of forteana with this...sorry :oops:
Click to expand...

No, you have a point. I can't remember the most recent poltergeist case to hit the headlines. Or even an "And finally" on the News.
 
remember reading somewhere from a sceptic (Proudly I'm a sceptic also) that we must look more carefully at the psycology of the participants of such cases(Will try find the thread if anyone interested), but sorry I disagree, think we should focus on the events ( the floating children,ripped out fireplace, moving objects in front of viable witness's, the traumatic effects on the mother), As a sceptic, these are things that are more difficult to dismiss, rather than accusing people of suffering delusions or whatever. But as much as I am a sceptic, and the fact that I quite like Proff French, I found his whole approach to this case very unscientific. If something abnormal to science occurs, as far as I'm concerned you investigate the hell out of it. Forget relying on what has been said in the past by previous academics, how the hell do you dismiss a cataloge of material incidents witnessesd by police officials, jounalists, bakers going to work, neighbours concerned about the kids? If they are deluded or have seen something wrong, then why have not thousands of other reported othe such delusions?
 
Lets assume for one moment that the whole case is indeed a hoax perpetuated by two young, perhaps emotionally unstable girls. What I find extraordinary is how long they would have had to maintain the hoax, especailly with ever increasing numbers of observers and investigators.

The longer the hoax goes on for, the greater the chance that you will slip up in some way and be caught out, also, the more elaborate the hoax becomes, again, the greater the chance of you being caught out.

As far as I know, while alternative non paranormal explanations can be applied to much of what was observed, there is no one event recorded that can definitively explained as being hoaxed - they were never caught out and exposed. Extraordinary considering the duration of the "haunting" and the fact so many events supposedly occurred in the presence of experienced investigators, journalists and even the police.
 
Well. I have finally got round to talking to my mum and finding out the truth of my half-remembered story.

Turns out.... she worked on Green Street!! It was for a firm right at the end. She would get the bus to and from work which is where she met Janet's mum.

Okay, maybe not met, just eavesdopped. But I have to big up the connection as much as possible LOL. One day she was at the bus stop and overheard a large lady talking about events in her house. She was saying that the whole family were worried sick and that no one was sleeping properly because of what was going on.

I asked mum again about whether she believed the lady or not. Mum said she felt she was genuine. Apart from the obvious worry apparent from the woman, she said, in the nicest possible way, the woman didn't appear to be intelligent enough to make up such a story. For example - all the way through the conversation, she referred to the thing as a Poker dice. Mum believed that anyone going to make up a story, would at least know the term poltergeist.

When mum went to work the next day, she asked one of the girls in the office about the lady she had overheard. The girl, "lil", lived on Green Street and knew "everything about everyone". She and her friends knew all about the events and all believed there was something going on.

The only thing my mum wasn't sure about the time period - she worked at the firm for a long time and can't remember when this event took place. She worked at the firm from 1977 to 1979 so it could have been anytime. It probably wasn't at the beginning of the events, as mum said she was talking about things going on for a while.

Anyway, thought it was interesting to have a bit more background to the story.
 
Littlegreylady said:
Well. I have finally got round to talking to my mum and finding out the truth of my half-remembered story.

Turns out.... she worked on Green Street!! It was for a firm right at the end. She would get the bus to and from work which is where she met Janet's mum.

Okay, maybe not met, just eavesdopped. But I have to big up the connection as much as possible LOL. One day she was at the bus stop and overheard a large lady talking about events in her house. She was saying that the whole family were worried sick and that no one was sleeping properly because of what was going on.

I asked mum again about whether she believed the lady or not. Mum said she felt she was genuine. Apart from the obvious worry apparent from the woman, she said, in the nicest possible way, the woman didn't appear to be intelligent enough to make up such a story. For example - all the way through the conversation, she referred to the thing as a Poker dice. Mum believed that anyone going to make up a story, would at least know the term poltergeist.

When mum went to work the next day, she asked one of the girls in the office about the lady she had overheard. The girl, "lil", lived on Green Street and knew "everything about everyone". She and her friends knew all about the events and all believed there was something going on.

The only thing my mum wasn't sure about the time period - she worked at the firm for a long time and can't remember when this event took place. She worked at the firm from 1977 to 1979 so it could have been anytime. It probably wasn't at the beginning of the events, as mum said she was talking about things going on for a while.

Anyway, thought it was interesting to have a bit more background to the story.
Click to expand...

Very interesting, thankyou for sharing that with us but I think a more important piece of Forteana has emerged from this. The obvious time freeze your mum went through at her work. You say she worked at this company for a "long time" but then go on to tell us the years she was there, which were 77 to 79. So, I would like to know more about what happened to turn those two years into a long time.

;) I'm only messing. It really is an interesting story and thanks again for going to the trouble of getting the first hand story and thoughts for us,
 
Did'nt someone somewhere state that the enfield poltergeist had earlier been 'Proven' to be a 'Fake'? can They tell me which book or article or wherever this was written? or proved?
 
Lots of people consider that this case was proved to be a fake, just as MG and GLP considered they had proved it was real (and they have their supporters).

I don't think after so much time anything will ever be proved either way
 
This case was covered on 'strange but true' in 1995.

Maurice gross was convinced but graham morris wasn't.

The girls, given their age were prone to createing some incidents themselves, but they coundn't have fooled everybody all the time. As far as I know it would be impossible to prove the every incident was fake.

The voice recordings seem a bit too unreal to me, but if they came from an 11 yr old girl then she must have had some unknown assistance.

Does anybody know of any good websites on this case?
 
I've just finished reading the book "This house is haunted", and it was a great read. Now I was hoping to see the documentary aired by channel 4 but as I live in Spain there was no was no way for me to watch it on television. Does anyone know any website that might be hosting the video? Apparently YouTube had it for a while but it's been taken down.

Any links greatly appreciated.
 
Hi.

This was on cable recently with a lot of video and audio footage.

I found it quite remarkable and very convincing.

Lots of desperate psychoanalising the witnesses to keep the sceptics happy.

The- when people get together they start believing each others story. This was as over the two journalists' story.

Then the passer by seeing the floating girl was* merely filling in the gaps.*

This guy just seemed to be saying it against the overwhelming amount of independent activity.
 
I have watched the Interview With A Poltergeist Documentary and found most of it fascinating. I know there are some people who think the two girls were faking most of the phenomena. What does anyone else think?

Maurice Grosse said in the documentary that no-one could create a voice like the gruff one of the poltergeist without damaging their vocal cords. But one researcher seemed convinced it was just the younger sister, Janet creating the voice. I've got Guy Lyon Playfair's book This House Is Haunted, and he quotes practically everything the ghost said - but why are only a few of the recordings available on websites? Zurich Mansion has 12 recordings - around 8 of them feature the voice and are also quite short, the others are of items being thrown around.

Although the voice gave the name of "Bill", who had died in the house around 15 years before, it also gave other names, such as Joe and Fred...
 
I've seen the documentary, I've also read Guy Lyon Playfair's book. I'm quite uncertain about the voice, I really believed the documentary at first, but I've since spoken to people about the case and their comments have made me change my views in some areas. The Zurich Mansion website has around eight recordings of the voice and many of these appear in the documentary, but out of all the countless other things the voice said according to Guy Playfair, none of these have been heard anywhere.

Maurice Grosse insisted in the documentary that no-one could make the sound of the voice without damaging their vocal cords. But one journalist in the programme was certain Janet was faking the voice. And although the voice often claimed to be "Bill", it also gave the names of "Joe" and "Fred" on some occasions.
 
I get the feeling - from reading the casework - that there was defiinitely something going on in the house but this was "complicated" by the girls acting up and faking some things. On the face of it, it's classic poltergeist material, especially with the pubescent female "trigger", but was a shock in it being in an ordinary council house.
 
It wasn't exactly a shock to myself but in the eyes of the general public - a dramatic series of paranormal events happening in a mundane council house in an unremarkable area. Folks expect such goings-on in old houses and so on.
 
Stormkhan said:
It wasn't exactly a shock to myself but in the eyes of the general public - a dramatic series of paranormal events happening in a mundane council house in an unremarkable area. Folks expect such goings-on in old houses and so on.
Click to expand...

I wonder how true that is. After all, wasn't Ghostwatch broadcast from a council estate? Still, your perception of what "folks" expect is interesting.
_
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top