Sierra Vista, AZ
Property type: Private Residence
Investigation Date: 02-28-2009
Property Description and History:
This property consists of a small two bedroom home of approximately 1200 square feet with a separate garage. We estimate the home to be around 50-60 years old. The residents, a couple, their small child, and the family dog have lived in the home since June of 2008. This property has had many owners through out the years.
Claims of Activity:
Claims include shadow figures, a face in the window, screaming, scratches and bruises on the residents, closed doors swinging open, and a full-body apparation of a woman in her 20’s wearing early 1900’s period dress. The child has been seen interacting with something unseen, sometimes laughing, other times acting scared. The dog also has been seen acting oddly at times, growling with no apparent reason.
Our group left Phoenix in the late afternoon on Saturday, February 28. We arrived at our client’s home around 8 pm. The residents took us on a walk-through of the home and where the claims were happening. After setting up cameras in the living room, kitchen and both bedrooms we proceeded to conduct our baseline readings. During the investigation, some personal experiences did occur including hair being pulled, the feeling of walking through cobwebs, and what appeared to be a response to a statement three times. While investigating a bedroom during an audio session, one of the investigators stated, “If you don’t want me hear, then just knock or bang on something”. Following the statement, a loud bang that sound as if it came from the closet was heard. The statement was repeated two more times with the same results. The team attempted to debunk by trying to recreate the same sound which could only be accomplished by shaking lattice forcefully on the outside of the house. This created a banging sound that was heard as if it came from the closet area. The team listened during several wind gusts, but the sound was not heard again. Our investigation team did find that shadows, after light testing, could have been mistaken for figures or faces in the window. After several hours of investigating, we packed up the equipment, gave our thanks and goodbyes.
After reviewing the data collected during the investigation, we were able to debunk some but not all of the claims. The video, audio, and photographic evidence collected suggested nothing beyond reasonable explanation. The findings are considered to be inconclusive and requires further investigation of the location.