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

The South Shields Poltergeist

rynner2

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 7, 2001
Messages
54,631
Very long article...

The sinister images caught on camera that could prove poltergeists DO exist...
By Danny Penman
Last updated at 11:41 PM on 21st May 2008

Marc and Marianne got undressed and quickly slipped under the duvet. Although the heating had been on for many hours, it was unusually cold in their normally snug bedroom.

In spite of the cold, they tried to drift off to sleep after a hard day looking after their boisterous three-year-old son, Robert.

Seconds later, Marianne was hit on the head by their son's toy dog. She sat bolt upright in bed.

The cuddly toy was clearly aimed at her, but who - or what - could have thrown it?

Moments later another stuffed dog hit her on the head. Soon the air was thick with flying toys.

All seemed to appear in mid-flight, apparently from nowhere, and were hurled with great force at the petrified couple.

Marc and Marianne hugged the duvet closer to try to protect themselves from the flying toys.

An invisible hand grabbed the far corner of the duvet and pulled in the opposite direction.

Soon they were involved in a tug-of-war with some supernatural force.

Just as quickly as it had started, the tugging stopped. But it was replaced by something even more sinister.

'Marianne, my body feels like it's burning,' said Marc, panic-stricken. 'What's happening to me?'

All across his back, scratches had started to appear. In the space of a few minutes, 13 separate scratches appeared across Marc's back.


Burning intensely, they felt as though a powerful beast was slowly drawing its claws across his body. But just as quickly as the scratches appeared, they vanished.

Over the following few months, Marc and Marianne's family suffered numerous assaults by a violent ghost that came to be known as the 'South Shields Poltergeist'. Cuddly toys came alive and toilets flushed with blood.

In the mark of what was a very 21st-century haunting, ghostly text messages inexplicably appeared on mobile phones.

It seems the 'ghost' was completely au fait with modern technology.

'I was too scared to go to sleep and too frightened to stay awake,' says Marianne. 'I felt that we just couldn't escape from it. No matter what we did, we couldn't get away.'

The full story of the South Shields Poltergeist is told in a new book by two paranormal researchers who spent the summer of 2006 studying the haunting.

So disturbing are the events that the couple want to move away from the area, and don't want their full identities revealed.

Such encounters may sound truly absurd. But, according to the Society For Psychical Research, there are 260 cases of poltergeists reported every year in the UK alone.

It's almost impossible accurately to gauge how many hauntings there are, as far more go unreported.

Hauntings by extremely violent poltergeists - such as that suffered by Marc and Marianne - are, thankfully, extremely rare and probably happen once a decade at most.

Hard-bitten sceptics, of course, scoff at any claims of haunting and say that poltergeist stories are simply the result of hoaxing and trickery.

But the South Shields Poltergeist seems by no means to be unique.

Earlier this year, it was revealed that Easington District Council in County Durham had paid an exorcist to drive away a poltergeist from a family home which was owned by the local housing association.

.................

One of the first signs of the poltergeist infestation was a series of disturbing messages left on their son's doodle board.

'Die bitch', 'RIP' and 'Go bitch now to your mam' had been scrawled on the message board. They were followed by the appearance of Satanic-looking symbols.

The family is adamant that the messages were not hoaxes left by them. Their origin remains a mystery.

Messages from the poltergeist soon became even more sinister. Chilling text messages began appearing on Marianne's phone.

One warned her: 'Going to die today, going to get you.' Another read: 'I can get you when you awake and I'll come for you when you asleep, bitch.'

All appeared to be from the poltergeist, and arrived seemingly from nowhere. None could be traced to a mobile phone, computer or landline. Once again, there appeared to be no rational explanation.

'When I was outside the house, it would continuously call my mobile from our home phone even though I knew for certain that no one was in the house,' says Marianne.

'It sent me death threats by text. No matter what I did, I couldn't get away from it.'

The family was forced to turn to professional help. Mike Hallowell and Darren Ritson are seasoned paranormal researchers who have investigated a range of seemingly inexplicable phenomena such as poltergeists and psychic mediums.

'We were initially very sceptical,' admits Darren. But they were soon convinced the haunting was genuine.

The house was quickly kitted out with motion-activated video cameras and sophisticated sensors.

If the poltergeist should appear, the investigators were determined to capture it on film. They did not have long to wait.

One evening, Mike was working at the house and saw a dark shape appear on the landing outside the couple's son's room. Marianne saw it, too, and screamed.

'The entity walked slowly from the bathroom, across the landing into the bedroom,' says Mike.

'As it passed the door to Robert's room, it paused and stared icily at me. Its face, devoid of all features such as eyes, nose or mouth, was cold and menacing. It felt like it was burrowing into my soul.

'It was large - maybe two metres in height - and midnight black. It was a three-dimensional silhouette that just radiated sheer evil.'

Mike was so stunned by what he saw that he didn't manage to switch the camera on in time.

'It was gutting,' says Mike. 'We all saw it, but we didn't get the proof we needed.'

A few days later they were given a second chance when the poltergeist once again attacked Marc.

Just as before, Marc felt the entity approach him and start drawing its talons down his back.

'You could actually watch the scratches forming,' says Mike. 'First an elongated red patch, then sharply defined scratches within it.

Cuts started to appear on the right-hand side of his back. They immediately bled. Then Marc's skin started to change colour. It went dark, almost as if it was sunburnt. I've seen film and stills of poltergeist scratches appearing before, but nothing like this.'

The investigators frantically checked their video cameras and, this time, they'd caught the attack on tape.

Although the quality was poor, they could see the scratches appearing on Marc's back.


Many people will argue that the poltergeist was a hoax or a collective delusion.

Some, on the other hand, will insist that the video footage shot by Mike proves beyond reasonable doubt that there was a poltergeist in the house.

True, the poltergeist was witnessed by dozens of people - and its chilling antics were captured on film.

On one occasion a group of six paranormal investigators witnessed an attack on Marc.

They also saw levitating crockery, ornaments moving of their own accord from room to room, and ghostly sounds emanating from a baby monitor.

Several of these incidents were captured on camera.

Some experts, however, remain unconvinced. Professor Chris French, a parapsychologist at Goldsmiths College, University of London, says: 'Since recorded history began, these kinds of things have been reported.

'On the basis of the quality of the evidence that's available, I would bet against them being the result of ghosts and poltergeists. But I could be wrong.'

Perhaps the last word should go to Marianne. Eager to sell her home and move on with life, she is still shocked by the intensity of the haunting.

'We were absolutely terrified,' she says. 'I don't think I'll ever be the same again. If I hear a noise that I cannot explain, or something goes missing, then it always makes us wonder whether it has come back again.

'But right now, we are just glad that it seems to have left us alone.'

The South Shields Poltergeist by Michael J. Hallowell and Darren W. Ritson, is published by The History Press at £16.99. To order a copy for £15.30 (p&p free), call 0845 606 4206.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1021070/The-sinister-images-caught-camera-prove-poltergeists-DO-exist-.html
 
If the investigators were professionals, why were they using inferior equipment?

The investigators frantically checked their video cameras and, this time, they'd caught the attack on tape.

Although the quality was poor, they could see the scratches appearing on Marc's back.
 
Always poor quality. Why?

Fascinating account though. I do believe that if these experts eventually do catch clear, good quality evidence on tape, that most other 'experts' will knock them down, because as we all know, it's amazing what special effects movies can have these days?

If that's the case, is there any point capturing any paranormal activity on camera, if no one is ever going to believe it's pure, untampered with evidence?

RS
 
'As it passed the door to Robert's room, it paused and stared icily at me. Its face, devoid of all features such as eyes.....
Right....
OK kids, if you scratch yourself, it takes a while for the skin to puff up and the blood, if any, to come out.
There's been numerous cases of 'poltergeists' that turn out to be caused by someone in the house - usually it's a teenager but it can be an adult. People like getting attention.
And this one's managed to get an account to send text messages and to make phone calls... yes, it is amazing that disembodied spirits manage to keep up with technology.
 
"As it passed the door to Robert's room, it paused and stared icily at me. Its face, devoid of all features such as eyes, nose or mouth, was cold and menacing."


So a blob turned towards the narrator? How did they know it was looking at them, let alone "icily"?
 
realspooky said:
Always poor quality. Why?

If that's the case, is there any point capturing any paranormal activity on camera, if no one is ever going to believe it's pure, untampered with evidence?

RS

Poor quality what?? Is there a Video?! Were is the footage? Is there a link I'm missing? Do we not get to see it?! Do we have to pay for it, in some sort of Ghostumentory!

Help, I want to see it...
 
I don't know what the standards are at the Daily Mail, but with the papers I work for, if you end an article with the phone number where you can get a copy of the book at a discount price, it's called an advertisement, and not news.
 
markbellis said:
I don't know what the standards are at the Daily Mail, but with the papers I work for, if you end an article with the phone number where you can get a copy of the book at a discount price, it's called an advertisement, and not news.
I've noticed many newspapers will promote books (I'm thinking Times, Guardian, Telegraph, and probably more... oh, let's not forget the Beeb as well!)

A new book can be (or is treated as) News as well as a marketing opportunity.

So which rags do you work for? ;)
 
rynner said:
So which rags do you work for? ;)

Just Canadian ones - I've done freelance work for the Toronto Star and the Ottawa Sun- it's OK to put the publisher's name and price if you're doing it in the book review section - not the news - but putting a phone number for a discount price is clearly going over the line - I'd start wondering if the Daily Mail's publishers have a financial interest in the sale of the book - googling the phone numbers turns up other books mentioned in the Mail.
 
markbellis said:
I'd start wondering if the Daily Mail's publishers have a financial interest in the sale of the book...
They must do things differently in Canada. Here, practically all the papers have an online shop where you can buy books (and other stuff), and they're not doing that out of charity - of course they have a financial interest!

When a book is new out, a paper might well produce an article and/or review about it.
What's the problem?

You can also buy the book at Amazon, Waterstones and other places - no doubt they have a financial interest too... ;)
 
rynner said:
Some experts, however, remain unconvinced. Professor Chris French, a parapsychologist at Goldsmiths College, University of London, says: 'Since recorded history began, these kinds of things have been reported.

'On the basis of the quality of the evidence that's available, I would bet against them being the result of ghosts and poltergeists. But I could be wrong.'
[/size]

What kind of expert opinion is this anyway? The article says Some experts, however, remain unconvinced then goes on to quote an 'expert' who says he would 'bet' against it being paranormal but could be wrong???

Bloody useless quote, isn't it?
 
rynner said:
When a book is new out, a paper might well produce an article and/or review about it.
What's the problem?
.....


You can also buy the book at Amazon, Waterstones and other places - no doubt they have a financial interest too... ;)

The difference is that they are book sellers, but the Daily Mail's a newspaper - presenting a book they have a interest in the sales of in a news story is a conflict of interest, particularly in a story that is very promotional of that book - in North America, only the worst sort of tabloid would do this.
 
markbellis said:
...the Daily Mail's a newspaper - presenting a book they have a interest in the sales of in a news story is a conflict of interest, particularly in a story that is very promotional of that book - in North America, only the worst sort of tabloid would do this.
A conflict of whose interests? I'm interested in Polts (and other Fortean stuff) so I'm happy to see news of a new book. And no-one's forcing me to buy it from the Mail, as I can get it elsewhere.

As I said earlier, practically all the papers over here do this. Usually it's novels, travel, cookery, history books, etc - this particular one happens to be on a Fortean subject.

Anyway, I'm glad to hear that North American papers have such high moral standards that they don't need to pander to commercial interests! ;)
 
We seem to be getting sidetracked here, can we get back to the subject at hand?
 
Ronson8 said:
We seem to be getting sidetracked here, can we get back to the subject at hand?
OK, but I can't resist one parting shot: that tabloid The Times has been serialising Cherie Blair's memoirs. And gesswot you can buy it through their website! :D
http://tinyurl.com/67frq7
 
Anecdotal accounts often contain apparently contradictory statements, even kosher ones. As we're not in a court of law adversarial strategies don't apply. The couple may be full of shi...guile, or they may have a spook, grammatical criticism doesn't tell us either way. It's South Shields, not Lincolns Inn.
 
As one of the authors of The South Shields Poltergeist, I thought I'd take a few minutes to answer some of the questions posted above. Hope this helps, folks.

“If the investigators were professionals, why were they using inferior equipment?”

We weren't. I was called out at midnight to help the family, who were hysterical, and grabbed my stills camera which (luckily) had a video clip facility before dashing over there. Unfortunately the polt neglected to give me written notice of its appearance and the bugger caught me off-guard. The equipment wasn't poor quality – it just wasn't the perfect tool for the job. However, I can tell you that the quality of the footage isn't that poor, just slightly grainy due to the poor lighting. Still, you can see clearly the scratches appearing.

“OK kids, if you scratch yourself, it takes a while for the skin to puff up and the blood, if any, to come out”.

Very true, but on more than one occasion we had the experient under observation for bloody ages before the cuts appeared, and multiple eye-witnesses will confirm that he never at any time rove himself to bits or did anything to precipitate the scratches.

“So a blob turned towards the narrator? How did they know it was looking at them, let alone "icily"? “


Well, no a blob didn't turn towards the narrator. If you read the book: “It was large – maybe two metres in height – and midnight black. It was a three-dimensional silhouette”.
Not a blob, then. As for how I knew it was looking at me even though it was devoid of eyes, I can only tell you that it was my perception at the time. Let me put it this way: If someone wearing a mask and goggles suddenly turned their head in your direction and paused, even though you may not be able to see their eyes you'd be pretty safe in assuming that he/she was looking at you. I made the same assumption. I can only relate my perception at the time, and that's it. Mind you, it was a cunning bastard. Maybe it was only pretending to look at me...


“Is there a Video?!”

Not yet.

“Where is the footage?”


Currently with our agent.

“Do we not get to see it?!”

“You will indeedy. Negotiations are ongoing with a major documentary producer to get the footage onto your TV screens ASAP.

“Do we have to pay for it, in some sort of Ghostumentory!”

Brilliant idea. How much would you like us to charge? Relax, I'm only jesting...at the moment it looks like the footage will be going out on one of the major terrestrial channels or on their satellite mirrors. The only payment as far as I know will be your monthly divvy to Sky, Virgin, or whatever - and of course your TV License fee, which I know you all pay diligently.

“I'd start wondering if the Daily Mail's publishers have a financial interest in the sale of the book - googling the phone numbers turns up other books mentioned in the Mail”.

To be honest I couldn't tell you. If there is such an arrangement we don't know anything about it, and it certainly doesn't bother us. We have no moral objections to a newspaper advertising the product its talking about at the bottom of the page (ours or any others). As far as I can see it just makes it easier for a customer to buy the product – which they'd simply get off Amazon or whatever anyway. Newspapers are there to generate a profit – shocking but true...

Some final observations: First, I wish the “cuts” footage was better, but its adequate. As evidence it doesn't stand alone. There are aspects of it that I know will give cynics a lever to say that it doesn't “prove” anything because of A, B, C, etc. and in some respects I'd have to agree with them. Whether people see it as “proof” is up to them. It just is what it is. What Darren and I have consistently said is that it is the collective evidence that makes this such a strong case; footage+eyewitness testimony+audio recordings, etc. etc. If the South Shields Poltergeist was faked, then it must rank as one of the best in history and hats off to whoever pulled it off.

There is other footage of infinitely better quality, including the “bottle balance” footage, which has been shown to three audiences. These were a lecture at the Society for Psychical Research which we delivered last December, a charity event with Richard Felix to raise money for a hospice in February and a lecture at the Ghost Club last Saturday afternoon. In June it will be shown at a LAPIS meeting, and in August at that Mecca of all parafests, The Weird Weekend. Make of it what you will, but it happened.

We know we're going to get our critics and we're ready for them. Providing criticisms are thoughtful and moderate in tone we'll answer them robustly. We've already retorted to juvenile ad hominem attacks and can't go on for ever doing that, so in future, nasty pasties and sarky-sides will probably just get ignored, I'm afraid.

Some of the audio recordings have already been subjected to analysis with startling results, by the way, which will hopefully be detailed on the forthcoming documentary.

Well, must dash...
 
Well, I've ordered the book. If Wraithscape would be kind enough to give us a head's up when it's going to be on television, I'd be most grateful.

Is this the subject of Mike Hallowell's talk at this year's Weird Weekend? Or will it be touched upon?
 
WraithScape said:
As one of the authors of The South Shields Poltergeist, I thought I'd take a few minutes to answer some of the questions posted above. Hope this helps, folks.

.............

Well, must dash...
Yes, very helpful. Thanks for taking the trouble to respond. With only a newspaper report on a book to go on, there's not much else we here can add, until we see the book or the documentary itself.

Personally, I regard Polts as one of the best-documented aspects of the paranormal, and the more we learn about them the better.
 
Thanks for this. At the moment we're negotiating with a major TV company to make a documentary, and I'll certainly keep you posted as to what's happening. Darren and I have a meeting with a producer on Tuesday, so fingers crossed. They seem extremely enthusiastic about it.
It is difficult when you're only reading an article. Some bloggers have ripped into the case saying "no evidence", "Why didn't you do this or that..." when we did. They seem to be judging the case by what they've read in the article, and not on the book itself which gives a far more comprehensive picture, obviously.
Yes, we're at the Weird Weekend and will be showing the footage there and giving a talk on the case. We'll also be giving people our phone number so they can order copies of British newspapers at a discount price (postage and packing free), and in future editions we aim to remove the text completely and fill it with adverts for the red tops. If purchasers take out a year's subscription they'll get an exorcism free of charge and a "My House Has A Certified Poltergeist" certificate (not available in Canada). :) Only joking...
One of the criticisms I've read is that the book is a little too populist and in places overly dramatic. There might be some truth in this, on reflection, but its difficult to find a happy medium (sorry, but the old ones are the best) when you're trying to interest both serious researchers and the average Joe in the street. We did the best we could.
BTW, all rumours that Jon Downes and the South Shields Poltergeist are one and the same are vicious lies - and I have to say that because the CFZ, God bless 'em, are publishing my next book in a week or two. No poltergeists - but there IS a giant lobster, a monster rabbit and a mermaid who lives in a pub in Newcastle. Its, true, honest....

8)
 
BTW, I'm also giving a talk at the Weird Weekend on my last book, Invizikids, which covered the topic of "imaginary" childhood friends, so if you see that scheduled don't think that its replkaced the talk on the poltergeist.
 
Just another run of the mill poltergeist case out of the millions there must have been worldwide, science can't explain it so it must either be a hoax or some form of mind power for goodness sake, these cases are the best investigated paranormal subject there is, yet no one wants to admit that it just may be discarnate entities, causing this.

Must say that much of the messages that come through from them seem to be childish attempts to scare the living daylights out of people very similar to ouji boards
 
Sorry. "Run of the mill poltergeist case" just makes me giggle a bit. :lol:

No offence meant.

The thing is, I know what you mean. There are lots of reports of poltergeists, but they're always dismissed as hoaxes. Which always strikes me as a bit odd. I mean, all of them??

It's rather like the whole Rendlesham affair. If someone trained by the military to recognise all kinds of aircraft by their silhouette tells me that they saw something they didn't recognise, or that it definitely wasn't a lighthouse - well, I tend to believe them. They're the experts. I'm in no position to argue. Same with reports like this - if someone tells me they saw scratches appear on someone's back, then I tend to assume that a responsible reporter checked the most obvious causes for the scratches, and therefore, cannot explain them. As I wasn't present, I can't argue.

It may be a simplisitic approach, but unless I see something for myself, I am entitled to believe or disbelieve any reports as I see fit, depending on my own perception of the account and the witness.
 
Hmmm...maybe people don't want to accept that they're discarnate entities because they genuinely don't believe they're discarnate entities. I don't - but whatever we may think at any given juncture we should always be prepared to hear something which might change our mind. I learned a long time ago "never to say never".

BTW, I'd have to take issue with the idea that the entity at South Shields was just another bog-standard poltergeist....I hope not; if that was bog-standard, I'd hate to meet meet a top-notch one!
 
Maybe some are discarnate entities, others are some elemental forces, some actual ghosts, some uncontrolled telekinesis. Thing is, until we know for certain what any of them are, they could all be different things.

I'd just hang-fire on calling any of them 'hoaxes' unless there was evidence. Because, in the main, why would anyone want to put themselves through that kind of public humiliation? The press automatically assume you're lying, so coming out about it can only make you look a fool. Unfortunately. So what's to gain by hoaxing it?

Well, unless you bought a house you can't afford, where a multiple homicide occured, and perhaps you can't afford the mortgage, and someone wants to write a book and make a film about it.... ;)

Some do seem more powerful than others. More long-lived. More malevolent. Others just mischevious. Personally, I'm quite interested in any accounts and I don't try to find a 'one explanation fits all' theory. In fact, I wouldn't try and explain any of them. Not really. I may theorise, but nothing definite. I just don't think they're necessarily all the same thing.
 
I think I get stuck at the point where the class "poltergeist" is defined.

It's similar to having an illness called raised temperature. It's valid as far as it goes and allows for treatment of symptoms. But it's a dead end, it doesn't take you any further.

Kath
 
You must be psychic! I'm currently working on a book about a multiple homicide which took place in a house - paranormal overtones of course - but fortunately its not the one where I live!
 
Yep, Kath. That's pretty much what I think. It's like trying to find one description for the word 'ghost'. There's just too many examples.

Hmmm... WraithScape......It doesn't start with Am and end in ville, does it? ;)
 
Back
Top