Posts Tagged ‘animals’

Date:  Nov. 28, 2015

Location:  Private Residence

Investigators:  Holly, Shae, Cristine, K-9 investigator Glimmer

Case Status:  Closed

Location Status: inconclusive

Investigation with Glimmer

Holly, Shae, and Christine arrived at the location at approximately 8pm.  As per an earlier discussion between the team and the clients, the clients were not present when the team and Glimmer arrived.  The clients provided the team with an entry key.

Beginning with the main floor, Glimmer was taken on a slow but thorough walk-through of the entire home to help her familiarize herself with the location.  Christine filmed the process and Shae took readings with the Mel Meter.  On the main floor, appliances were found to be within normal ranges; an extension cord with several electronics plugged into it did exhibit a momentary high reading, but then it settled to within normal ranges.  Glimmer did not exhibit any unusual behaviors on the main floor.

The team headed upstairs.  Glimmer immediately went towards the child’s room. She sniffed at various toys and she touched some of them, but overall, she did not exhibit any unusual behaviors.  There were no unusual responses from her in any other room on the second floor, nor were there any unusual responses in the basement.

The team had been investigating for approximately 90 minutes when the clients returned home.  At their arrival, the investigation was wrapped, as Glimmer became excited and would not focus on her job.  This is a normal aspect of her character that we have learned to accept. However, we are continuing to work on reducing the intensity of it.


No audio or video was captured to validate the claims being made by the clients. However, the team agrees that because of the documented deaths in the area itself, it is entirely possible that there may be various energies moving across the land and through the townhouse complexes at random times.  This was explained to the clients; they were relieved to learn there is nothing harmful in their home.


Because we did not capture any viable data to validate the possible presence of any energies, we have deemed this case as closed. However, we have reassured the clients that they can contact us if they start having trouble again.

We would like to extend our thanks to our clients for their hospitality to us, and for allowing us to bring Glimmer into their home.


Since our first investigation at this private residence, our clients have been experiencing an increase in activity that now occurs on the main floor, as well as in their child’s room.  This Saturday (Nov. 28), Christine, Shae, and Holly are returning to the location – this time, with Glimmer – to conduct a second investigation.  Our hope is that not only will Glimmer be able to pick up on the source of the activity, she will also be able to draw it out and (hopefully) interact with it.

We expect to spend several hours at the location.  To help minimize the potential for noise contamination, as well as to help Glimmer focus on doing her job, our clients have agreed to vacate the premises for the duration of the investigation.

Results will be posted after the investigation is complete and we have shared our findings with our clients.

Date: Oct. 10, 2015

Location:  Temple area, northeast Calgary

Claims:  physical contact with small child; feelings of uneasiness and wariness; physical markings on adults; feeling nervous, watched, cold, tired, drained; child’s bed being moved

Investigators:  Holly, Christine, Shae, Paul

Case Status: Open


The land that was developed into the four districts of Temple, Pineridge, Rundle, and Whitehorn was annexed to the city of Calgary back in 1961. It was called “The Properties” until development began in 1977. The Temple district is very small – only 2.6 km2 – but its population of just under 11,000 residents (according to the 2012 Census) makes it a small town.

The Temple district has its share of negative energy flying around the area. Grow-op houses, murders, suicides, and gang activity have created a mark that persists to the present day. Most of the crime that has occurred in the area is relegated to petty thefts, a few vehicle thefts, and some vandalism. However, in more recent years, more serious events have occurred:

In April of 2001, a woman was shot to death by a friend of her estranged husband. The man was arrested in 2010 at a traffic stop and ended up being charged with second-degree murder. The charge was later upgraded to first-degree murder.

In November of 2012, a woman was found stabbed to death in her bedroom. Her husband was found hanging in the living room. Investigators were left wondering about the deaths, as they found no evidence of domestic violence.

In March of 2013, a woman was found dead near an apartment building. According to reports, the couple were in their vehicle and started fighting. The woman tried to leave the vehicle while it was in motion, and got caught in the seatbelt. She was dragged for some distance before her husband stopped. The injured woman managed to escape, and her husband chased her. There was a fight between the couple, and when police arrived, the husband fled the area, leaving his injured wife to die where she was found. The husband was charged with first-degree murder.

In July of this year – 2015 – a man was shot to death in what police believe to have been a targeted attack.

The Preliminary Interview

The investigators arrived at the home at approximately 8:15pm and began the preliminary interview and baseline sweep. Particular attention was given to the upstairs bedroom belonging to the clients’ 4-year-old son, since that is where the clients claim virtually all of the activity occurs.  No unusual readings were obtained on the Mel Meter and there are no digital appliances (clocks, etc.) in the room.

The home is one of many throughout the city that is owned and operated by Calgary Housing Authority. The clients have lived in the home for approximately 18 months, but they did not become aware of unusual events taking place until last Christmas (2014). At that time, they began observing that their son was acting strangely: He would be playing in his bedroom, and suddenly, he would come bolting out for no apparent reason, afraid and upset. On other occasions, they would hear him engaged in deep, coherent conversations with someone they could not see or hear.

The child is a high-functioning autistic boy. What we have learned about high-functioning autistic children is that this behavior is not unusual. However, the clients have told us that this is not the case with their son; that it is out of character for him to be engaging in conversation in this way. At this time, we have no opinion, as we have not had an opportunity to observe him at play.

The female client claimed to have been scratched on the back of an arm only a couple of days earlier. The investigators asked to see the marks, which were still clearly visible. Photos were taken as part of the documentation process. The male client claimed to have been marked on his chest with an imprint of a heart. The female client had taken a photo of the mark immediately after its discovery, and she showed the photo to the investigators. The investigators then asked to see the client’s chest, and when the client lifted his shirt, it was observed that the mark had disappeared.

The clients told the investigators that most of the activity is occurring in their son’s bedroom. They said they have heard the child holding coherent conversations with no one, and that there have been several instances where the boy has been playing and then he suddenly bolts out of his room, afraid and upset. They added that they don’t go into the son’s room at all if they don’t have to, as they feel watched and very uneasy in the space.

The clients shared with the investigators two incidents involving their 3-year-old nephew, who stays with them during the day while their son is at school. In the first incident, the nephew was put down for a nap. The clients heard laughter, and when they went upstairs to check on the child, they found him laughing and looking down at the floor at a storybook. The book had been shredded and the pieces were scattered all over the floor. In the second incident, the child was again put down for a nap. Shortly afterwards, the clients heard a very loud bang in the room. When they went to investigate, they found the child in the middle of a three-section ball pit with his pillow, blanket, and sippy-cup in hand. They believe the bang they heard was a result of the child being picked up and tossed to where they found him.

The Investigation

The investigators split into two teams. While one team investigated the child’s bedroom, the other team, along with the clients, waited outside. Both teams were provided with walkie-talkies to allow for communication without risking noise contamination from inside the home.

Team #1: Christine and Paul

Christine and Paul were the first team to investigate. Christine filmed while Paul conducted the evp session. During their time in the child’s bedroom, both investigators experienced feelings of uneasiness and feelings of being watched. Only a few minutes into their investigation, Christine’s camera suddenly blacked out. The black-out persisted for several seconds before proper function was restored. No explanation was found for this event. Approximately half-way through their investigation, Holly communicated to the team via walkie-talkie that there was a party taking place outside; after that communication, the walkie-talkies began to malfunction, despite having new batteries installed only a few hours before driving to the location. It sounded as though someone was attempting to communicate through the devices, and when contact between Holly, Christine, and Paul was finally restored, they each said the attempts were not from them.  Christine and Paul spent approximately 20 minutes working the child’s bedroom. During their investigation time, both Christine and Paul said their initial sensations persisted for the duration of their investigation.

Team #2: Holly and Shae

Holly and Shae entered the child’s bedroom and immediately observed that the air felt thick and heavy. Shae went to the steps of the bunk bed and sat down; Holly went to the other bed at the other end of the room, sat down, and prepared to film the session. The Mel Meter was placed in the center section that connects the tent to the ball pit. Throughout most of the evp session, neither Holly nor Shae spoke. However, during their investigation, there were at least two incidents in which Holly noted to Shae that his face appeared to be changing. She stated that she was seeing something overshadowing Shae. She described a young man in his early 20’s, with a stocky build, short blonde hair combed down over his forehead, dark eyes, and a small mustache. She added that the young man had Down’s Syndrome. Shae did not respond to the observation, but he did state that he kept getting a feeling of sadness. Interference with the camera’s focus then began to occur, seemingly in conjunction with the questions asked during the evp session.

Approximately 5 minutes after these observations were made, Holly experienced a sudden numbness in her back and immediately related the information to Shae. Again, Shae did not respond to the observation, but a few seconds later, when Holly relayed that the numbness had dissipated but the image of the young man had returned, Shae said the room felt “flat” – like there was no one there. At that point, Shae and Holly moved to the master bedroom to try conducting an evp session there. After only a minute or two, they ended their investigation, as Shae was not sensing anything there.

Post-investigation Notes

Four days after the investigation was completed, the client called Holly to inform her about an incident that took place the week before the investigation. The client was upset that she had forgotten to tell us what follows below; she added that she could not for the life of her understand how she could have forgotten something that was so important.

The client told Holly that the week before the team arrived to conduct the investigation, her nephew was playing in her son’s room, and he had jammed a key into one of the electrical outlets. The child received an electrical shock but was not seriously hurt. The fire department, paramedics, and the manager in charge of their housing unit were called immediately to extract the key – which had begun to melt inside the outlet – and to ensure there was no threat of a fire occurring in the walls. Then, the client told Holly that her husband had called her just a few minutes earlier (before she called Holly) to tell her about an incident that had just occurred. Her husband had put their nephew down for a nap several minutes earlier. He was doing some housework on the main floor when he heard the child laughing and clapping. When he went upstairs to check on the child, he found the child’s bed in the middle of the room, with the child sitting on the edge of it, looking straight at the outlet in which the key had been jammed the week before, laughing and clapping as if someone was there entertaining him. The husband was, in his words, “freaked out”, and he called his wife right away.


Review and analysis of the data gathered during the preliminary interview and investigation yielded some unusual light anomalies and one B-class vocal anomaly.  The client debunked the issue of the moving bed, stating that the bed is on wheels and can be easily moved by the child when he is playing on it.  The investigators concurred with the client that there was nothing paranormal about the moving bed. However, based on their personal experiences in the home, and taking into account the unusual light and vocal anomalies captured, the investigators unanimously agree that there is something in the home that requires further investigation. Thus, we are deeming this case as being “open”.  Shae feels very strongly that whatever is there has a strong attraction to children, and that it wants nothing to do with adults. Paul, Christine, and Holly agreed with Shae, and to that end, Paul proposed a return investigation with the team’s canine investigator, Glimmer.  Paul’s perspective is that most children like dogs, and therefore, Glimmer’s presence might help facilitate contact with whatever is in the home.  The clients agreed with Paul’s perspective and consented to a return investigation with the dog.

The return investigation is being planned for some time in November.  At our request, the clients have agreed to vacate their home for the duration of the investigation so that Glimmer can focus on doing her job.  Stay tuned….