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

Uncanny (BBC Programme / Podcast)

Uncanny is bang back on form with these two latest episodes. The London Underground was a strong case, especially given the amount of detail he recalled, such as her dress and then of course the corroboration from other employees. I really hope more sightings of this little girl emerge and I'm not buying that it was the stale air.

As for the reincarnation, I really want to believe but can you prove that at a very young age he wasn't given access to a war cmic or left in front of a TV that showed a recreation of a WW1 dogfight? The German ace the Red Baron was very well known and popular character back in the 20th Century. In fact, I will do a little digging as there may have been a TV drama or cmic in which the doomed Red Baron says "I don't want to die" in German (perhaps subtitled).

Sadly the French chateau beast has, I feel, been explained as either a rutting goat or a filthy wild boar that then stealthily left the scene,. Shame but sometimes you can't ignore the parallels.
 
The Underground story sounded like the one I quoted on'ere a while ago from a railway Facebook page.
Seemed the little girl was often seen to appear for the last train and staff knew better than to delay dispatch to look for her mother.
This witness mentioned Covent Garden rather than Russell Square.

It's this post -

#259
 
guitarh said:
Great find escargot! I wonder why the different locations in the stories? Both stories are told from first person perspective...?
Click to expand...
Yes, both witnesses seem reliable, for example giving their names. Each found that the little girl was seen by others, in fact by nearly everybody who worked there. The Covent Garden staff believed the haunting originated from a particular fatal incident.

I'm also wondering why the locations are different in the two accounts although it only happened at the last train.
Perhaps it's about the last train rather than an actual station.
 
escargot said:
The Underground story sounded like the one I quoted on'ere a while ago from a railway Facebook page.
Seemed the little girl was often seen to appear for the last train and staff knew better than to delay dispatch to look for her mother.
This witness mentioned Covent Garden rather than Russell Square.

It's this post -

#259
Click to expand...
Agreed, well remembered.

I wonder if it was simply a lapse of memory and that they had meant Russell Square? Especially given how similar tube stations are at platform level, that staff would work at different locations, they are both on the Piccadilly Line and only two stations apart.
 
Paul_Exeter said:
Agreed, well remembered.

I wonder if it was simply a lapse of memory and that they had meant Russell Square? Especially given how similar tube stations are at platform level, that staff would work at different locations, they are both on the Piccadilly Line and only two stations apart.
Click to expand...
Edit to the above: Covent garden tube station has its own well known ghost:

https://ghostwalkbrighton.co.uk/phantom-of-the-underground/

I feel this makes it more likely the witness was confused about/misremembered the location of the ghost girl.
 
I have just listened to the 'live at Hay' episode of Uncanny, and really enjoyed it (despite having said recently that I think the live audience episodes are weaker). All 3 of the cases (including the audience member's radio-fiddling spook) were worthy of more detailed investigation.

The revelation that the pub ghost was known to the girl's parents but they didn't tell her because they didn't want to scare her struck a chord with me. I once had a spooky one-off experience when I was around 8 (hearing heavy footsteps and also the sounds of opening and closing doors downstairs very late one night when everyone was in bed). I remember telling my parents (and possibly my older brother too) about it the following morning and no one seemed even curious about it. Thinking about it many years later, it occurred to me that they were playing it down because maybe they were not wanting to alarm me. Both my parents are dead now, but neither of them ever raised the subject with me in later years. I recently recounted the event to my brother, and he doesn't remember me telling him about it at the time.

Re : the Russell Square story, one major omission seemed to me to be: did Mark and his colleagues all describe the same apparition? Mark himself provided a very detailed and specific description (a beige cardigan with animals on it etc) - but did the others see any of the details to clinch the idea that it was indeed the same girl, not just 'a little girl'. At one point, Danny even says "we presume it was the same little girl". Surely presuming isn't necessary if any of the other witnesses could be contacted?

And on the same story, Mark's behaviour struck me as slightly odd. Surely a girl of that age seemingly alone in the underground so late at night would have been a bit more alarming? Would you not keep hold of her hand while trying to find her mum? Or at least tell her to stay sitting on a bench while you looked for mummy? And I would have thought it might have made sense to ask her her name so you could say to other passengers "has anyone lost a little girl called ....." . Was Mark suffering some sort of Oz Factor effects, therefore not acting in the way he might have done otherwise?

The notion of hallucinogenic fungal spores sounds credible and scary, but if these explain people's reports of seeing things in specific places, I have to ask why in some cases the supposed hallucinations are of the same (or similar) things/people? Do some fungal spores induce hallucinations of Grey Ladies? While others induce hooded monk-like figures? Or little girls with teddy bears?

Maybe Danny will raise some of these issues in follow-ups (as seems to be his style).
 
Last edited:
CharmerKamelion said:
I have just listened to the 'live at Hay' episode of Uncanny, and really enjoyed it (despite having said recently that I think the live audience episodes are weaker). All 3 of the cases (including the audience member's radio-fiddling spook) were worthy of more detailed investigation.

The revelation that the pub ghost was known to the girl's parents but they didn't tell her because they didn't want to scare her struck a chord with me. I once had a spooky one-off experience when I was around 8 (hearing heavy footsteps and also the sounds of opening and closing doors downstairs in the middle of the night). I remember telling my parents (and possibly my older brother too) about it the following morning and no one seemed even curious about it. Thinking about it many years later, it occurred to me that they were playing it down because maybe they were not wanting to alarm me. Both my parents are dead now, but neither of them ever raised the subject with me in later years. I recently recounted the event to my brother, and he doesn't remember me telling me about it at the time.

Re : the Russell Square story, one major omission seemed to me to be: did Mark and his colleagues all describe the same apparition? Mark himself provided a very detailed and specific description (a beige cardigan with animals on it etc) - but did the others see any of the details to clinch the idea that it was indeed the same girl, not just 'a little girl'. At one point, Danny even says "we presume it was the same little girl". Surely presuming isn't necessary if any of the other witnesses could be contacted?

And on the same story, Mark's behaviour struck me as slightly odd. Surely a girl of that age seemingly alone in the underground so late at night would have been a bit more alarming? Would you not keep hold of her hand while trying to find her mum? Or at least tell her to stay sitting on a bench while you looked for mummy? And I would have thought it might have made sense to ask her her name so you could say to other passengers "has anyone lost a little girl called ....." . Was Mark suffering some sort of Oz Factor effects, therefore not acting in the way he might have done otherwise?

The notion of hallucinogenic fungal spores sounds credible and scary, but if these explain people's reports of seeing things in specific places, I have to ask why in some cases the supposed hallucinations are of the same (or similar) things/people? Do some fungal spores induce hallucinations of Grey Ladies? Hooded monk-like figures? Little girls with teddy bears?

Maybe Danny will raise some of these issues in follow-ups (as seems to be his style).
Click to expand...
Some interesting thoughts there. I find myself on both sides of the fence as regards his reaction to the little girl. He does stop the train from leaving and keep her in his line of sight and I do feel that nowadays men are mindful to be careful of physical contact with girls and women in public spaces lear allegations of inappropriate behaviour are made. He also tried to finds the parent/s on the train itself. But I also see the argument that he should have asked her name and immediately led her to a brightly lit, central safer place away from the tracks.

I get the sense he was a little annoyed at the careless parent/s and having to hold the train. I've worked in customer-facing roles and you do become rather cheesed off with the public after a few years, people can do and say pretty dumb things and be overly demanding. I would like to know more about the 'seeing off the last train' procedure, as it seems unique to that time of day (i.e. the station staff are able to hold the train). I imagine this is to ensure all the drunks etc get on the train and they can safely lock up the station for the night. In which case, he would have been eager to get finished and thus frustrated that's some careless parent had lost their child and was making him late.

I agree re: hallucinogenic spores, why always ghosts and not pink elephants or LSD-type effects?
 
Tell you who we need: Sean Tudor, aka Hermes. This is an Iron Road ghost! :nods:
Not joking. The little girl might be a manifestation of the Goddess archetype.

Another theory mentioned by one of Danny's highly expert :chuckle: sceptics concerned the Underground being dark, cold, damp etc which might encourage hallucinations or summat.
However, the incident we hear about took place on the platform which would have been brightly lit. We're not talking about conditions on the tracks.

Has anyone rewatched the excellent Ghosts on the Underground documentary? I can't recall mention of an incident like this one but it's been a while since I last saw it.
 
Paul_Exeter said:
He also tried to finds the parent/s on the train itself. But I also see the argument that he should have asked her name and immediately led her to a brightly lit, central safer place away from the tracks.
Click to expand...

Mark was a station dispatcher. Dispatching is not just about sending the train off. It involves seeing the passengers safely on their way.

Dispatchers routinely deal with passengers about to be separated from their belongings. Normally luggage or buggies are left behind, not often children, though I've seen that done. There are policies for dealing with it all, not least to prevent a panicking passenger from trying to prise carriage doors open.

Mark assumed the mother had stepped onto the train a moment before. There was nowhere else she'd have gone.
The child was safe while the train was not moving and the dispatcher and the CCTV could see her. (Though of course, we know that only Mark could see her.)

Mark knew to look for a distraught woman who'd just realised her child hadn't followed her onto the train. Maybe she had luggage or a smaller child to carry.
It should have taken 30 seconds.

Again, I've seen that done. The parent meets the dispatcher at the carriage door.
All is then well and off the train goes.

(Very occasionally a child is actually left behind. This can happen where the train and platform are crowded.
The term 'distraught mother' doesn't touch it: I once saw a woman who'd managed to misplace a young child at London Euston being escorted screaming from her train at the next stop, Milton Keynes, half an hour away.

The child had been found right away by Euston staff and was safe. The mother was indeed so distraught that she had to be dissuaded from jumping onto the track and running back to London.

A cup of tea, a biscuit, a kind word and a free ticket to Euston. All in a day's work. :) )
 
MorningAngel said:
I’ve just looked and both stations are on the same line, maybe she tries both places.
Click to expand...
Could it be (if one accepts the idea of a mother/daughter murder/suicide) that the child had been told she was being taken from one of the stations to the other and so, as you suggest, tries both places?

Also, in that case, where IS her mother?

I think we know. In Hell, Karen. In Hell, that's where. :omr:
 
The picture mentioned.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0fw8zdq/p0fw8ypn
IMG_1326.jpeg
 
Having just returned from a trip to London which involved a lot of travel on the Tube to various stations - I was sitting on one and listening to the screaming of the train along the tracks (honestly, it's like souls in hell), and wondering if the acoustics may have something to do with sightings and apparitions too. It's an otherworldly location, disconnected from Life Above, with random patches of total darkness, all artificially illuminated and the dreadful screaming, screeching sounds from the trains - if ghosts on the Underground didn't exist, we'd have to invent them.
 
Ep.12 The Ghost that Followed Us Home, was exceptionally creepy and taps into a particular fear of mine.

It was also of particular interest, as Hawley is only a couple of miles down the road from me and I've probably driven past the particular house many times.

Over the years, I've visited a huge number of allegedly haunted locations, both here and abroad. The most recent was The Bear Hotel in Devizes (see Hotel Ghost thread). What is fascinating and fun in a 16th century inn away from home, would be downright unnerving if it followed me back to my 3-bedroom Barratts' semi.

This Uncanny episode, if taken at face value, would also appear to debunk the Stone Tape Theory, as the ghost of the young girl latched onto this English couple rather than being merely a sort of recording embedded in the walls of a building.

Vey strong episode to finish this series!
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
Ep.12 The Ghost that Followed Us Home, was exceptionally creepy and taps into a particular fear of mine.

It was also of particular interest, as Hawley is only a couple of miles down the road from me and I've probably driven past the particular house many times.

Over the years, I've visited a huge number of allegedly haunted locations, both here and abroad. The most recent was The Bear Hotel in Devizes (see Hotel Ghost thread). What is fascinating and fun in a 16th century inn away from home, would be downright unnerving if it followed me back to my 3-bedroom Barratts' semi.

This Uncanny episode, if taken at face value, would also appear to debunk the Stone Tape Theory, as the ghost of the young girl latched onto this English couple rather than being merely a sort of recording embedded in the walls of a building.

Vey strong episode to finish this series!
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say it debunks it. I’m very much of the belief that there’s all sorts of reasons for ‘ghosts’. One size doesn’t fit all.
 
blessmycottonsocks said:
It was also of particular interest, as Hawley is only a couple of miles down the road from me and I've probably driven past the particular house many times.
Click to expand...
I actually thought it was the town of Horley they were referring to, thanks for putting me right. Embarrassing to go ghost hunting and find yourself in the wrong town.
 
Season 2 of "Uncanny" has finished on a high with a couple of very good episodes. The last case (of 'Nicole') is very intriguing indeed. With my skeptic boots on sure, you could say it is all just a series of seemingly freaky coincidences (as the skeptic contributor said, "lots of little girls wear pink" ... especially the ones who hover a few inches off the floor and seem to be there one moment and gone the next). I would have liked to have heard a fuller description of the hovering apparition, especially an idea maybe of what facial expression it was wearing. Very often the witnesses on this show give pretty sketchy descriptions. "Little girl, dark hair, pink cardie" in this case. More words, please!

The big question from me is : can the family be prevailed upon to set up some indoor security cameras? Let's see if we can go for something near to definite proof here!

Nice that the family (or at least the mum) seems to be comfortable with Nicole's continuing presence in the family home. Certainly she doesn't seem to present any kind of threat or menace (notwithstanding the startling instances of screams being heard earlier on while she was still in France).

Really looking forward to the promised case update episode, the next season and the hour long TV episodes. Summer can't go quickly enough (did I really just type that??).
 
Last edited:
Fantastic final episode and I am hoping this will feature in the forthcoming TV shows or at the very least a dedicated update episode. Great work Danny...!

The photo of the footprints is definitely one of the better anamolous images to have graced this board. If it were me I would leave out a shallow pan of sand to see if more footprints manifest
 
Last edited:
Paul_Exeter said:
Fantastic final episode and I am hoping this will feature in the forthcoming TV shows or at the very least a dedicated update episode. Great work Danny...!

The photo of the footprints is definitely one of the better anamolous images to have graced this board. If it were me I would leave out a shallow pan of sand to see if more footprints manifest
Click to expand...
Or scatter something like talcum powder all on the floors overnight, maybe?
 
Paul_Exeter said:
As for the reincarnation, I really want to believe but can you prove that at a very young age he wasn't given access to a war cmic or left in front of a TV that showed a recreation of a WW1 dogfight? The German ace the Red Baron was very well known and popular character back in the 20th Century.
Click to expand...
Two famous cases of supposed reincarnations of wartime airmen have been discussed on'ere.

One was James Leininger, who as a small child described flying and being shot down in a World War II fighter plane called a Corsair.

The other was a British man, Carl Edon, who believed himself to have lived as a WWII German airman who was killed in a crash in 1942.

There are videos on Youtube about both and t'magazine covered the second.
 
Have been mulling over hose 'Uncanny' footprints, I swear I can see the imprint of the toenails on the closest foot, which would mean there foot was pressed up against the underside of the fabric and I noticed Danny said something familiar. So this is not consistent with a footprint in the dust where you would see the underside of the foot. Given how recently this happened, did the builders not take some phone images of the multiple footprints around the kitchen? Given they were left in charge of the property I have to say it is the very first thing I would do.

Also the print on the left isn't a human foot in my opinion, it is far too truncated, but might be a hand print with the fingers clenched
 
Last edited:
escargot said:
Two famous cases of supposed reincarnations of wartime airmen have been discussed on'ere.

One was James Leininger, who as a small child described flying and being shot down in a World War II fighter plane called a Corsair.

The other was a British man, Carl Edon, who believed himself to have lived as a WWII German airman who was killed in a crash in 1942.

There are videos on Youtube about both and t'magazine covered the second.
Click to expand...
Yes, I've read the James Leininger book (Soul Survivor) but I still have reservations. Parents all want their offspring to be special and unique, nobody wants to accept that they have just produced yet another inconsequential carbon-based lifeform (Einstein etc being the obvious exceptions). There was no information that boy relayed that couldn't have been picked up from extended family, comics, the tv etc. It is not that I don't believe but I do feel we have to set the evidence bar quite high.
 
Paul_Exeter said:
There was no information that boy relayed that couldn't have been picked up from extended family, comics, the tv etc.
Click to expand...
This is the catch for me.

Either the information is already out there, say with a child's apparently impossible knowledge of a language or details of soldiers' armour, and so could be somehow picked up; or it's not available anywhere, in which case there's nothing to check the child's accounts against.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top