It was on this very dark & stormy night, 70 years ago, that Lady Miller took her sewing sheers from her purse and stabbed her secret lover in the heart 26 times. One for each and every lie he told her throughout their scandalous love affair. She then marched into her husband’s office covered in her lover’s blood. SHOCKED, her husband Edward cried out from behind the day's Wall Street Journal. “Martha! What happened?” She replied, “I’m sorry Edward, I don’t love you, I never loved you. I only loved your money.” She then took a wine glass from the nearby bar, smashed it against the wall and proceeded to force the freshly broken stem across her throat. Edward jumped to save her only to hold his dying wife in his arms for the last time. In tears, he could only wonder why, why would she do such a thing?
It was these past events that led to this mansion’s hated hauntings. Many will say it’s her lover, furious at her deed in taking his young life. Others strongly believe it’s Martha herself, pacing the halls in fear of what hell awaits her if she should try to move on. I myself believe that it’s Lord Miller who lurks forever in the darkened rooms. Soon after her death, he too died but from a broken heart.
So Scobby Do Gooders, it is now up to you to solve these mysterious hauntings that leave new owners running in fear just months after moving in. Find out why Lady Miller’s perfume is picked up late at night in the master bedroom. Why does the office, in which the suicide took place, always drop to freezing levels just before midnight? And why do the sounds of passionate breathing echo down the halls each and every night….
An opportunity like this is every ghost hunter’s dream. The more dramatic the haunting or history is, the more EMF-carrying ghost hunters want to pack up their gear and move in. But the question is, do we already know too much? We see this quite often on ghost hunting shows, where ghost hunters go in knowing their target and then focus their attention on what we call the HAUNTED HOT SPOTS. But is this the correct way to proceed into the world of paranormal research?
It has always been questioned whether knowing information about a haunted location is more helpful when conducting an investigation. Some would say that knowing too much affects your judgment, which could produce false encounters or even evidence. Whereas knowing too little keeps the investigator on a not-so-narrow path and won’t be so quick to judge. To be objective or unbiased towards any type of reported activity is to really go in with un-suggestive material.
The human mind has proven its capability of amazing things. Our will is greater than our physical strength. But yet, we are only as mentally capable of what we already know. Someone who may be well diverse in an abundant of facts, knowledge, and beliefs can easily find themselves lost in making the simplest decisions due to the different facts, contradictions and personal beliefs collected through the years. We can produce information and process a world of complex data. This is where phycology can easily take over our perception when confronted by our beliefs and knowledge. Knowing too much just builds the psychological belief that if you build it, they will come. This means that if you believe or know it’s there, you will encounter it. Here where the simplest explainable things can easily become powers of the paranormal persuasion.
In the case of NOT knowing, in which a team goes in cold. This is a practice my team of investigators are accustomed to. If they cover all their bases and find interesting reported activity in areas where they had no clue were activity was reported, don’t you think this builds the credibility needed in this line of work? What sets me off is folks are too eager to know what’s going on rather than to step into the unknown blindfolded. This only proves to me so many are in it for the rush of the hunt and NOT the true science needed to prove these encounters.
Some will argue that knowing everything prior to the investigation will allow the team to focus their attention to the active areas. But who’s to say while you’re focused on the bedroom, the ghost isn’t hanging out in the hall.
So here is a challenge I’m offering my fellow ghost hunters out there. Let’s take two teams to the same haunted location. Now this should NOT be a site where it’s public knowledge of it being haunted. The best scenario would be a client’s home if possible. One team will know everything about the site, such as history and even activity, and the other team will know nothing. Now, let’s see which team picks up the most activity. Were they all personal encounters or are they picking up real recorded evidence?
Is knowing too much affecting our perception or is knowing too little keeping us from finding the truth?