PLEASE NOTE: Articles on this blog are being archived or moved to the new website at 'Life & Death in the Sunshine State'.

After five years at this address, the Boggo Blog is moving house to Life & Death in the Sunshine State. This is not so much a tree-change or a sea-change, but more of an e-change. It will allow me to do a lot of spring cleaning of the deadwood and make a fresh start. Rolling reports on the ever-changing redevelopment plans for Boggo Road since 2010 have resulted in a lot of now-obsolete information and dead links on this site page. Other articles are no longer relevant or (frankly) all that interesting.

Some articles will be reworked, updated, and transferred to the new home, and others will go into the archives. This website will remain in place but each story will have links redirecting readers to the new home.This move will take place over the next few weeks.

It will also allow a slight change of focus. There will still be reliable updates on the new era for Boggo, and tales of the death penalty, colonial prisons, graveyards, and unusual bits of Queensland history. There will also be continued monitoring of shenanigans in the 'paranormal industry'. The occasional new stuff will be in section featuring other historical subject matter (music, sci-fi, football).

The Boggo Blog has somehow amassed over a million views over the years, which isn't bad for a niche blog, and has twice been nominated in the 'Best Australian Blog' awards. There have been over 200 articles and hundreds of comments, many of which will be sadly lost (to the archives) during the move.However, with changes coming to Boggo this seems like a good time for renewal.

Thanks for the readership over the years, and hopefully I can build on the base I already have while creating new and better material.

Chris Dawson
1 May 2015.

↧

Article 0

May 21, 2015, 9:55 am

≫ Next: Hanged & Dissected... For Picking a Man's Brains

≪ Previous: Time For an E-change

↧

Hanged & Dissected... For Picking a Man's Brains

July 2, 2015, 6:04 pm

≫ Next: Fatal Shark Attacks in Ross Creek, Townsville

≪ Previous: Article 0

The hard, early years of the Moreton Bay Penal Settlement were dotted with tales of murder, disease and suicide. This remote northern outpost had been established in 1824 as a place of secondary punishment for those convicts who had reoffended since landing on Australian shores. The men were put to work at gunpoint in construction and agriculture. The labour was back-breaking, the food inadequate, and escape into the surrounding Aboriginal country was perilous and most likely fatal. Their lot was made worse by being forced to work with hand-held tools. Picks, shovels, saws, hoes and axes... sharp, heavy and - as it turned out on a number of occasions - ideal murder weapons.

The Commissariat Store, Brisbane, sketched by U. White (Brisbane Sketchbook)

The Commissariat Store
(U. White, Brisbane Sketchbook)

Early one September morning in 1828 a convict gang was working on the foundations for the new Commissariat Store near the riverside wharf. Among them were John Brunger (also named as Brogan), who was in a particularly foul mood. He had been a brickmaker in Kent before committing a theft that saw him transported for life to New South Wales in back in 1820. Brunger was not a great example of the effectiveness of 'deterrence' in sentencing as he was subsequently sent to Moreton Bay two times, once in 1825 and again in 1827 after stealing clothing, a bottle of brandy, and then absconding from his master in Parramatta, a crime for which he received three years at the penal settlement.

Working alongside him that morning was William Perfoot (aka Parfitt), a former Exeter farmhand who had once been reprieved from the gallows after stealing pork, mutton and a coat, and who had been sent directly to Moreton Bay in 1826 as a 'notoriously bad character'after another larceny conviction. Despite this, his new keepers found him to be 'quiet, well-behaved and not given to quarrelling'. That said, he was nearly killed in 1827 when a fellow convict smashed him in the head with a hoe.

Brunger must have been struggling with the trench-digging that morning because he demanded that Perfoot (who had a 'crippled thumb') give him his lighter pick. Perfoot refused. Several more demands for the pick were rebuffed before Brunger tried to snatch it from Perfoot, and the ensuing scuffle had to be broken up by the overseer. The men returned to their work, but a few hours later Brunger suddenly ran up to Perfoot and drove a pick straight into his head. He then casually tossed the pick away, picked up a shovel, and started working again as if nothing had happened, saying, 'That’s the way to serve the buggar'. Another convict grabbed his arms and cried out 'Murder, murder, hold him, hold him!'

Brunger was immediately arrested as the insensible Perfoot was wheeled off to the hospital in a barrow. When Brunger was asked why he did it, he replied, 'If I haven’t killed him, I’ll kill him the first time I have an opportunity. I struck him twice with the pick on the head and said, ‘That’s for jacketing of me.’' (Jacketing was a slang term explained in 1801 as ‘removing a man by underhand and vile means from any birth or situation he enjoys, commonly with a view to supplant him’.)

Perfoot died in the convict hospital after what must have been an unbelievably painful six days, and so Brunger was shipped down to Sydney to face trial for murder - a capital charge. He was tried several months later, in the the same session as three other Moreton Bay convicts, and he heartily joined them in disrupting the event. He was found guilty and was originally scheduled to be hanged on 16 April, but as he left his cell for the gallows that morning he was temporarily respited because, due to administrational errors, his death warrant had not arrived. This disappointed the crowds that had gathered on Hangman’s Hill to watch him die:

'The multitude assembled on the rocks, at the rear of the gaol, dispersed with an air of disappointed curiousity when they perceived the executioner ascend the scaffold alone, and remove the rope which had been pendent the whole of the morning.' (Sydney Gazette, 18 April 1829)

Brunger was hanged two days later in a yard at the George Street Gaol, alongside Thomas Matthews and Thomas Allen, two of the other Moreton men with whom he had been tried. He spoke from the scaffold and quite incredulously declared his own innocence:

'I die innocently before you all, and now about to suffer. I declare my innocence. Had I been allowed to have my witnesses up from Moreton Bay, I should have been cleared. I now solemnly declare my innocence, but I am willing to suffer.' (Australian, 21 April 1829)

After a 'few convulsive quiverings and death terminated his mortal career', the body of Brunger was left for the 'accustomed time' (one hour) and removed to the surgeons for anatomical dissection. There would be no burial. This was all part of the capital punishment procedure at that time, specifically designed to deter people from committing murder.

The Commissariat Store was completed without further input from Brunger or Perfoot, and it still stands today as one of the very few physical reminders left in Brisbane of those convict days.

Commissariat Store, William Street, Brisbane.

A total of 12 Moreton Bay convicts were hanged, ten of them in Sydney and the other two at the convict barracks at the Moreton Bay settlement. Their stories can be read in the book Dirty Dozen: Hanging & the Moreton Bay Convicts.

NB - An exhibition titled 'Murder at the Commissariat Store' was recently installed at the Commissariat Store itself! Don't miss it.

↧

Fatal Shark Attacks in Ross Creek, Townsville

July 2, 2015, 6:11 pm

≫ Next: Dissecting & Anatomising Moreton Bay Convicts

≪ Previous: Hanged & Dissected... For Picking a Man's Brains

What is the most dangerous city-side swimming spot in Queensland? If you’re talking about shark attacks, the answer is clear. I have written before about fatal shark attacks in the Brisbane River, but the three (possibly four) deaths in that waterway don’t compare to the statistics for the much-smaller Ross Creek in Townsville, north Queensland.

Ross Creek is an inlet that runs through the heart of Townsville and has been a hub of human activity since the earliest days. While the Brisbane River is over 300km long, Ross Creek is a mere 4km. Despite this, more than 50 people had drowned in the creek by 1950. It is also the habitat of large crocodiles, and during 1907-37 at least eight people were killed there by sharks.

While the freshwater of the Brisbane River can only support Bull Sharks, the brackish waters of the Creek can potentially support more species of sharks (and crocodiles). And sharks in estuarine waters such asRoss Creek have been known to establish themselves and remain there for lengthy periods.

Ross Creek, Townsville (undated), the scene of several fatal shark attacks. (State Library of Qld)

Ross Creek, Townsville (undated) (State Library of Qld)

The events outlined below are of fatal attacks only and do not include the many non-fatal incidents, or the dozens of cases of animals such as dogs being killed in the creek by sharks.

William Williams

In February 1907 a group of eight or nine youths were taking a Sunday morning swim in Ross Creek when a nearby fisherman saw a shark fin about 60cm long emerge near them. He called the alarm and the boys struck for shore, but when they got there they found that one of their friends, 17-year-old William Williams, was missing. One of them had seen splashing were Williams had been, and the water there was ‘crimsoned with blood’. Williams had gone without a sound.

The police dragged the river for days afterwards with no result. The shark was reckoned to be up to 4 metres long, and attempts were made to catch it by baiting a line with a young goat. Five days later a member of the public spotted two legs in the river. A post-mortem showed that the shark had bitten clean through the abdomen and spine. Some lower internal organs were still present. It was left to the boy’s obviously distraught mother to identify these remains.

In the weeks following this tragedy a number of dogs were killed by sharks in the river, including one retriever that was bitten in half. The remaining part of its body was attached to a hook and used as bait, but the shark took that half too without getting hooked. Such attacks were happening on an almost daily basis and it was thought that the same shark – being of ‘enormous proportions’ – was responsible.

A shark hunting expert called Jim Walker came to town to try and catch the creature but he had no success.

Victoria Bridge over Ross Creek, 1887. (State Library of Qld)

Samuel Tristing

Five years passed before the next tragedy. It was New Year’s Day 1912 and a young man called Samuel Tristing was swimming with his friend in Ross Creek near the railways cleaning sheds when he was seized by a shark. He called out desperately but before anything could be done he was taken away. Tristings body was found by the police two hours later, disembowelled, flesh torn from the thighs, and both arms missing.

A few weeks later a big shark attacked and killed a horse in the river, and a hunting party set out to capture the fish. After a two hour battle they landed a shark reported to be about 4 metres long.

Jack Hoey

In January 1919 Jack Hoey, the father of six children under the age of 12, was crab fishing with a friend in Ross Creek. When they finished he went in the creek near the railway bridge for a swim, and he was wading out, with the water just up to his arms, when almost immediately a big shark gripped his leg and wrenched the limb off between the knee and thigh. Hoey’s companion dragged him from the water and an ambulance rushed him to the hospital. He had obviously lost a massive amount of blood and he held on through the night in a critical condition before dying in the morning. Hoey was 38 years old.

Ross Creek, Townsville,1932. This was the scene of several fatal shark attacks. (State Library of Qld)

Ross Creek, 1932 (State Library of Qld)

Robert Milroy

Even more horrific scenes followed in January 1922. Some unemployed men were in the habit of camping near the railway yards by the creek. Among them was Robert Milroy, aged 54, who entered the creek with three other men one Sunday afternoon with the intention of crossing to the other side for some prawning. Milroy was attacked and pulled under by a 3.5-metre shark, and very soon another four or five sharks were fighting over his body in the bloodied waters.

The police dragged the river for his body but found nothing. A fisherman helping with a net actually pulled in a 4-metre shark that then managed to escape. Milroy’s right leg was found some days later, stripped of flesh apart from the foot.

A few months later J Rennie, a recent arrival to Townsville, fell off the Victoria Bridge one night. He probably drowned, but when his body was found on the bank of the Ross Creek several days later it had no head and the flesh had been stripped from the legs.

Edward Hobbs

The next victim of the river sharks was 42-year-old Edward Hobbs. Walking along a concrete wharf by Ross Creek one afternoon in September 1929, Hobbs slipped and fell into the water below. The tide was low and he fell some way before landing flat. It was a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, because almost as soon as he hit the water a shark attacked him, ripping the flesh off both his legs below the knees. A second bite practically took his right leg off. Hobbs cried out and two men on the opposite bank immediately rowed to his assistance in a boat and drove the shark away, but he died just a few minutes after they got him back to the ferry landing.

Unidentified Male

Just three months after the death of Hobbs, a naked body was found floating in the Ross Creek near the Victoria Bridge. Nobody knew who it was, but it seemed to be a man about 50 years old, 6 feet tall, and with a ginger moustache. His right arm was missing and only the bone of his left arm remained. The flesh on his right leg had been ripped away, and his chest and abdomen had been ‘torn away’. A post-mortem revealed that he had died of shock and shark bite, and had been in the water for about 48 hours. He was never identified.

Shark caught in Ross Creek, c.1900.
(CityLibraries Townsville Local History Collection)

Arthur Tomida

The next fatality was 19-year-old Arthur Tomida, who died while prawning with his father in Ross Creek in March 1931. Their net had become snagged so the two men waded out into the chest-deep water, where Arthur attempted to free the net with his foot. Suddenly a large shark gripped the back of his leg, tearing most of the flesh from his thigh. He cried out and his father rushed to his aid, pulling him back to the bank about 3 metres away. Unfortunately a main artery had been torn away and Arthur bled to death within minutes, in his father’s arms.

William Tennant

Six years passed before the river sharks claimed their next victim. William Tennant was 33 years old and well-known as a member of the North Queensland representative rugby league team. After having a few drinks, he swam across the Ross Creek one Saturday night in May 1937 to ‘take a short cut’ to the city, and had almost reached the other side when he was attacked by a shark. He cried out for hep and a ferryman hurriedly rowed over to the scene, but there was a swirl and Tennant was carried about 20 metres out into the water.

By the time the ferryman reached him, Tennant was ‘bleeding profusely from fearful injuries’. His left arm was gone, and his left leg had been stripped of muscle and flesh. He was rushed to hospital but was dead upon arrival, the cause of death later given to be cardiac failure, haemorrhage, and shark bite.

A 3-metre shark that had been seen near ferry pontoon that day was thought to be responsible for the attack, and baits were set the next day to catch it. This did not seem to succeed, although a 4-metre shark was caught one week later in Ross Creek (see photo below).

(Townsville Daily Bulletin, 22 May 1937)

It should also be noted that at least five people were killed by sharks off the coast at Townsville during this time, making a total of 13 fatal shark attacks in the direct vicinity of the city during those 30 years. And then...

There has not been a fatal attack in the Ross Creek since. Shark attack deaths continued to occur off the coast, but none in the inlet. I'm not sure why this is the case. Is it down to more sensible use of the creek, or increased river traffic, the periodic pollution (as with the Sugar Shed Fire of 1963), or just good luck? If anyone has any ideas on this, I'd like to hear them.

For now, reading through the horrible events that did take place in the creek all those years ago, we should just be thankful they have stopped.

↧

Dissecting & Anatomising Moreton Bay Convicts

July 2, 2015, 6:14 pm

≫ Next: Is Toowoomba the Most Haunted City in Australia?

≪ Previous: Fatal Shark Attacks in Ross Creek, Townsville

‘The sentence of the Court was that they should be taken to the place from whence they came, and on Wednesday morning to the place of execution, and there be hanged by the neck until they were dead, their bodies afterwards to be given over to the Surgeons, to be dissected and anatomised.’ (Sydney Gazette, 9 August 1836)

In a recent post I wrote of a Moreton Bay convict being hanged in 1828 and his body - as stipulated by law - being dissected and anatomised afterwards.

William Hogarth's 'The Reward of Cruelty' (1751) showing a fanciful version
of the dissection of a hanged criminal. (Wellcome Images)

This law was an offshoot of the ‘Bloody Code’, the extensive capital punishment regime of 18th-century England. A vast range of crimes were punishable by death, but this led to the inequity of murderers and petty criminals receiving the exact same punishment. In 1752 legislation was passed to make the consequences of murder even worse. Legislators claimed that the crime was ‘contrary to the known humanity and natural genius of the British nation’, and their Act for the Better Preventing the Horrid Crimes of Murder 1752 (commonly known as the ‘Murder Act’) had the stated aim of adding ‘some further terror and peculiar mark of infamy’ to the death sentence for murderers. This was done in order to ‘impress a just horror in the mind of the offender, and on the, minds of such as shall be present, of the heinous crime of murder’.

This ‘peculiar mark of infamy’ included a range of post-death punishments, such as handing over murderers’ corpses to surgeons for public dissection and anatomisation. Bodies of the dead had an emotional power, and this was exploited by the law to ensure conformity. At the time, this was the only source of such specimens for the medical profession, which was going through a key period in the development of modern medical knowledge. Much was being learned as anatomists carefully explored and described these corpses.

18th-century anatomy class, England.

In Britain, this law often led to gallow-side situations in which the surgeon’s assistants would physically struggle with the family or friends of hanged murderers for possession of the corpse. There were no such scenes at the executions of colonial convicts, who were hanged under the watch of armed soldiers, and their bodies were able to be removed without drama.

There was no ‘college’ or ‘Surgeon’s Company’ in Sydney but the law was followed, with the usual venue being the Military Hospital. In Britain, strong-stomached members of the public had access to the dissections of hanged murderers, but that does not seem to have been the case in Australia. In fact it was reported in one newspaper that dissections were sometimes not carried out all:

‘While our Judges dwell with a becoming solemnity on the awful crime of murder, in passing the sentence of hanging and dissection, the public know very well that the latter part of the sentence to be a solemn farce. They know, that the Surgeons mean Dr Bowman, the Inspector of Hospitals, and his two or three assistants, and that these gentlemen have had the dissection of so many bodies in their day, that they are tired of the art, their skill in anatomy being complete… and of course incapable of further improvement. But supposing this not to be the case, still, three corpses on one morning… was certainly apportioning too hard duty on the Surgeons of Sydney…’ (Sydney Monitor, 2 March 1833)

Military hospital, Sydney c.1821. (SLNSW V1/ca1821/5)

Burial of any remains after dissection was forbidden (again, part of the law), and if the newspaper report below is anything to go by, the hospital staff didn't go to much effort in disposing of them:

(Sydney Gazette, 12 October 1831)

The only two men hanged under these laws at the Moreton Bay settlement (John Bulbridge and Charles Fagan in 1830) were executed for armed robbery and would therefore not have been dissected. The Moreton convicts hanged in Sydney included William Johnson (1828), John Brunger, Thomas Matthews, Thomas Allen, Patrick Sullivan (all 1829), Stephen Smith, John Hawes, Henry Muggleton (all 1830), and Patrick McGuire (1832), and they were all dissected. Charles McManus, hanged in 1831 for attempted murder, was spared their fate.

By the 1830s the excesses of the 'Murder Act' were being scaled back. The original list of over 200 capital crimes had been greatly reduced, and elements of capital punishment itself were being reviewed. The introduction of the 'Anatomy Act' in 1832 allowed for the anatomical dissection of unclaimed corpses, especially those people who died in prison or workhouses, and also corpses donated by their next of kin in exchange for free burial.No longer were surgeons reliant on the cadavers of murderers for specimens.

Dissection of hanged prisoners ceased in 1837 when a new law stipulated that the bodies of such prisoners now belonged to the Crown, and that they be buried within prison grounds, receiving full funeral rites if they so wished. These changes were part of an ongoing and rapid shift to the age of modern execution, and two decades later public hangings would be stopped altogether. It was a clear admission that the hoped-for ‘deterrent effect’ of the ‘Murder Act’ had failed to impact on murder rates.

Dissection of the corpse was not the only possible punishment meted out to executed prisoners under the ‘Murder Act’, as ‘hanging in chains’ was also an option. This entailed securely hanging the body in a public place for as long as a few years. This was also known as ‘gibbetting’ and I will cover that practice in another article here.

The stories of the executed Moreton Bay men can be found in the book Dirty Dozen: Hanging & the Moreton Bay Convicts.

↧

Is Toowoomba the Most Haunted City in Australia?

July 2, 2015, 6:16 pm

≫ Next: The Swagman & the Logan River Shark

≪ Previous: Dissecting & Anatomising Moreton Bay Convicts

A recent headline on the Daily Mail website described Toowoombaas ‘Australia's most haunted town’. Given that we have another source (falsely) proclaiming Brisbane to be the ‘second most haunted city in the world’, logic suggests that Toowoomba must be now bethe most haunted city in the world!

Reading the related article, however, we soon realise that that logic has very little to do with any of this. What we find is a lazy media outlet using amateur ‘pop paranormalism’ as page-filling clickbait.

‘A growing number of residents in the regional Queensland town of Toowoomba are documenting a series of spine-tingling encounters with ghosts. The other-worldly activity is so frequent, a team of ghost hunters has set up shop in the not-so-sleepy town.’

So they say in the article. I’d guess that the allegedly ‘growing’ frequency of ‘other-wordly activity’ came after the ghost hunters set up shop. Members of the featured group - ‘Toowoomba Ghost Chasers’ - claim to have conducted hundreds of paranormal ‘investigations’ and found that the regional city (population 110,000) is ‘full of ghosts’.

Why would this be? As one member explained, Toowoomba's history ‘makes it a haven for spirits… It's one of the oldest towns in Queensland, and it has a violent past - it's like the wild west… Maybe there's a lingering presence from that bloody history.'

This statement doesn’t add up at all. Within Australia, Toowoomba would be a minor league player when it comes to violent history. And that’s in a country that - while having seen its share of spilt blood - has been relatively quiet in the global context.

Main street of Toowoomba, allegedly the 'most haunted city in Australia'.

Toowoomba (Wikipedia)

The article has a number ‘spooky’ photos, which are bad even by the usual standards of grainy ‘what am I supposed to be looking at here?’ ghost photography. A bit of a shadow here, some unconvincing pareidolia (seeing patterns in random visual data) there… The story attracted nearly 200 comments and the vast majority of them were skeptical or outright mocking, especially of the poor quality of the images and the illogical interpretations of them. These included ‘Caroline’ from North Tamborine, Queensland, who wrote that ‘I absolutely believe in ghosts, but all of these photos are a stretch to say the least. The top photo is more than likely just pareidolia - seeing faces in things. There's a lot of shadows in all of the photos.’

‘One-Law-For-All’ from Manchester, UK, wrote, ‘None of the pictures are even slightly convincing...’, while ‘Diddlydee’ from Dunham-on-the-Hill, UK, added ‘These pics are even more awful than the usual ghost tripe you print. You could quite literally print any old picture, circle any vague shape or shadow and say it's a ghost.’

To be fair, I’d guess that most ‘paranormal investigators’ would also be unconvinced by these photos.


This photo from 2012 is claimed to be of a 'ghost hovering near a grave'. What it looks more like is shadows on a headstone creating a pareidoliaeffect.

'Lady in Red' ghost photo from Toowoomba, Queensland.

The 'Lady in Red' photo. The red area is quite prominent considering how grainy this photo is, suggesting it would have been especially clear to the naked eye. Unfortunately, without a less blurry image allowing identification of surrounding background objects such as the dark area next to the reddish area this looks like another case of grainy pareidolia.

Alleged 'ghost photo' from a cave near Toowoomba, Queensland.

'Ghost chasers believe the face of a supernatural spirit can be seen in this picture'.
Hmm. This one is particularly unconvincing.

'Toowoomba Ghost Chasers believe this picture... captured some sort of paranormal activity in the night'.
That's an interpretation somehow even vaguer than the photo itself.

Alleged 'ghost photo' in cemetery, Toowoomba, Queensland.

'A ghost sighting near a grave'. No, it's not just you. I can't see anything either, except maybe...

...Kermit the Frog.

These guys sure ‘believe’ a lot, when phrases like or 'might be' or 'looks a bit like' would be more appropriate. There are more, equally unconvincing ghost photos in the article, such as this one:

'Some experts believe a 'little girl in blue dress with her arm around a little boy in
black pants and jacket' can be seen in this picture.'

Which ‘experts’, exactly? A major problem with ghost hunting is that there are no regulations, no standards, no guiding scientific or ethical framework, and so anybody can describe themselves as an expert. Buy a thermometer, do two ghost hunts, and you’re an emeritus professor in this game.

There was also a video in the article that was claimed to show ‘the horrifying moment a spirit eerily floated across a backyard’, and a ‘shadowy shape emerge seemingly from nowhere and then move around before disappearing’. One of the ghost hunters said that they hadn’t ‘seen anything like it in a long time', and helpfully concluded that 'It has to be something. There is no other explanation that we can come up with.'

While it is quite an interesting video, the attitude of ‘there is no other explanation we can come up with' says a lot. Scientific investigators of allegedly paranormal activity (for example, Richard Wiseman and Benjamin Radford) apply imagination and intelligence to come up with natural explanations for recordings like this. Back in 2008 Radford examined a very similar video to the one in the Toowoomba article and found that the most logical explanation was that it was a small insect on or near the camera lens (see ‘The Kansas Gym Ghost’).

Coming up with that case on the Internet took me less than a minute. It provides a feasible explanation. It seems incongruous that people who have closely examined this video for weeks or months would not have considered this.

Another video of ghostly activity at Disneyland has similarly been explained quite rationally as an ‘artefact of old equipment’. ‘It’s a ghost’ should always, always, be the very last resort. Unfortunately, for too many people dabbling in the paranormal, it is usually the first resort.

There again, media outlets are not interested in ghost hunters who never find a ghost, are they?

The article then covers Toowoomba’s supposedly famed 'lady in the red dress'* ghost, which is claimed to be ‘the ghost of Elizabeth Perkins, a resident who died in 1944’ after being struck by a train. Someone has got their dates wrong here, because Mrs Perkins was killed in 1929.

One of the ghost hunters said that he investigated this by heading to the train station and calling out the names of people he believed had died nearby ‘and therefore could be haunting the area’. He recorded changes in 'electromagnetic energy' with an electromagnetic field (EMF) detector. When he read Perkins’ name out, the meter ‘lit up’ and so he asked if it was Elizabeth Perkins, and claimed that ‘there were footsteps and she definitely walked past’.

This is so full of irrational assumptions that it is worthless. Aside from the fact that it takes an initial leap of logic (and faith) to link allegedly paranormal phenomena with a post-death consciousness, and that it can even be linked to named individuals, the science here is completely false. EMF detectors record electromagnetic fields. I know these fields are invisible to the human eye, but that doesn’t make them magical. As Benjamin Radford has written:

‘Many ghost hunters consider themselves scientific if they use high-tech scientific equipment such as Geiger counters, EMF detectors, ion detectors, infrared cameras, sensitive microphones, and so on. Yet for any piece of equipment to be useful, it must have some proven connection to ghosts. For example, if ghosts were known to emit electromagnetic fields, then a device that measures such fields would be useful. If ghosts were known to cause temperature drops, then a sensitive thermometer would be useful. If ghosts were known to emit ions, then a device that measures such ions would be useful.

The problem is that there is no body of research showing that anything these devices measure has anything to do with ghosts. Until someone can reliably demonstrate that ghosts have certain measurable characteristics, devices that measure those characteristics are irrelevant…EMF detectors, ion counters, and other gear have no use in ghost investigations.’ (Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 34.6, December 2010)

So the spike in readings doesn’t really mean anything. Here’s a simple test that I challenge anyone to do. Repeat the experiment of calling out the names on the ‘deceased’ list at the same pace and check the results. Do it several times. If the meter spikes at the mention of the same name each time, only then would it begin to look like an interesting result.

So is all this really the best ‘evidence’ that people who claim to have been on hundreds of investigations in ‘Australia’s most haunted town’ can provide? I’ve nothing against Toowoomba Ghost Chasers, but this kind of material makes them look like the type of group who, when faced with the question ‘is this a ghost/yowie/UFO?’, will always answer ‘Yes it is!’ Matters are not helped by them branching out into the unrelated field of cryptozoology. As a skeptic, I'd suggest that they be a lot more critical with the evidence they present. In the field of paranormal investigations, the more you debunk, the more credibility you build.

In the end, much blame must lie with the reporter, who failed to get a counterview or to ask any critical questions himself. The result is a prime example of the kind of anti-scientific C-grade newspaper filler that helps to sustain the ‘paranormal industry’ in its current form.

Given the very unconvincing visual evidence presented in the article, along with the low-level belief threshold of the ghost hunters involved, I'd say that the people of Toowoomba should take these freaky ghost stories with a very large grain of salt.

* See my 'Woman in Black: Solving the Mystery of a Vanishing Ghost' article to read about a much more dubious ghost story involving a mysterious female figure.

↧

The Swagman & the Logan River Shark

July 2, 2015, 6:49 pm

≫ Next: The Seven Devils of George Street

≪ Previous: Is Toowoomba the Most Haunted City in Australia?

'On the Wallaby', Cairns, c.1907.
(State Library Qld)

The rivers of Queensland have seen their share of fatal shark attacks, as noted in these stories about Townsville and Brisbane. The less-frequented waterways of the Sunshine State also have their talesto tell. The Logan River, running about 45km south of Brisbane, is home to Bull Sharks (and the very occasional crocodile) and it too has been the scene of a shark-related tragedy.

In March 1903, two poverty-stricken young men named William Bartlett and Perival Horton were walking from Logan to Beenleigh in search of work. During the morning they arrived at the Logan River ferry crossing, about 3km from Beenleigh, but they did not have the required penny to pay ferryman Albert Sommers and so they asked him for a free ride. He refused and advised them to walk the 13km to the nearest bridge. They instead waited at the ferry stop until the afternoonand by chance met Schultz, the owner of the ferry. They asked if he could at least transport their swag across but when he just turned and walked away without answering the two men decided to swim across, even though the tide was up and the river at full width.

Loganholme ferry, Logan River, 1929. This was the scene of a shark attack. (Riverboats, Ferries and Roads)

Loganholme ferry, Logan River, 1929. (Riverboats, Ferries and Roads)

They asked Sommers if there were any sharks about. He told them that none had been seen so they placed half their swag and some clothing on the keel of an upturned boat and pushed it to the other side. They made a return trip for the remainder of their belongings, and about 10 metres from the Beenleigh side Bartlett called out that he had cramps in his leg, but told Horton to carry on and get the swag to shore. Horton did so, but when he turned around he saw that his friend appeared exhausted and so he dived back in and brought him to the bank.

Once on dry land they noticed that what Bartlett had imagined to be cramps was in fact a shark bite, and he had severe wounds on his right leg below the knee. Horton bandaged the leg as best he could with some shirts and hurried to Beenleigh to get help and returned with a cart. Bartlett, by now in a serious condition, was rushed to Beenleigh and attended by a nurse with boric acid (an antiseptic) before being placed on a train and taken to Brisbane. He arrived there at 7.10pm, about 5 hours after the attack had taken place, and was conveyed by ambulance to the General Hospital.

Suffering from shock and a massive loss of blood, Bartlett lingered in a serious and feeble condition at the hospital for two days before he eventually died, officially of 'a lacerated wound and heart failure'. He was 24 years old, an electrician by trade from Birmingham, England, and he was deadbecause of the lack of a penny in his pocket.

'The unfortunate swagman, William Bartlett, who was attacked by ashark when swimming the Logan River in company with his mate, died in the Brisbane Hospital from his terrible injuries. The feelings of the ferryman who refused these unfortunate, penniless men a lift over in the punt, thus compelling them to swim the river, can be better imagined than described. But perhaps he is only an employee and acted under instructions.' (The Worker, 21 March 1903)

The men had not seen the shark that bit Bartlett, but a 3-metre bull shark was seen in the vicinity about one hour after the attack.

Bull Shark. (Wikipedia)

This was a common type of shark-related death, in which a chunk of flesh is torn from the body with a single bite and the victim later dies of their injuries. Bull Sharks are known for 'bump-and-bite' attacks, in which they will give their target an investigative bump before returning to take a bite.

There has not been a known shark-related fatality in the Logan River since.

↧

The Seven Devils of George Street

July 2, 2015, 6:51 pm

≫ Next: History Gets the Finger at the Old Printing Office

≪ Previous: The Swagman & the Logan River Shark

'Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.' (Mark 16:9)

Anyone familiar with Brisbane's George Street will probably have noticed the bizarre carved relief of a devil's head over the main entrance of the old Government Printing Office. If you are not familiar with it, stop and take a look the next time you are around there.

Then, if you step back a bit, look up to the top of the building and you will see two hooven gargoyles with the same face, perched on the parapet looking out over the street. The trees make viewing a bit tricky, but you might also be able to see four other carved devil faces on the pilasterson the wall below the gargoyles (see photo below).

This means that back in 1911-12, the Queensland Government erected a government building with seven sandstone devils on the front. Why would they have done this? The answer is not as sinister as some might think. Simply enough, the devil is a historical symbol of the printing industry.

As far as I know, these are the only 'printer's devils' in Australia, although I would be happy to be corrected on this matter.

Why is there a 'Printer's Devil' over the main entrance of the Printing Office, George Street, Brisbane?.

Printer's Devil over main entrance, old Printing Office, George Street, Brisbane. (Public Works)

Gargoyles on the parapet over George Street, Brisbane. Four small devil faces can be seen below these.

The gargoyles on the parapet watch over George Street. Four small devil faces can also be seen near the bottom of this photo. (Brismania)

The gargoyles on the Printing Office in Brisbane hold shields inscribed with 'GP'

The gargoyles hold shields inscribed with 'GP' (Government Printery). (Brismania)

Why the 'Printers Devil'?

There are several different theories, some more plausible than others, as to where this concept came from.

A 'printer's devil' was a nickname given to printer's apprentices, who performed such tasks as mixing ink and fetching type. These apprentices invariably stained themselves with black ink and - as black was associated with the 'black arts' - the nickname 'devil' took hold.

Diego de la Cruz: Virgin of Mercy (c. 1485). Titivillus appears to the right of the image

Diego de la Cruz: Virgin of Mercy (c. 1485), Burgos, Abbey of Santa María la Real de Las Huelgas. Titivillus appears to the right of the image.

There was also said to be a 'fanciful' belief among printers that print shops were haunted by a special devil who got up to such mischief as inverting type, removing entire lines of completed type, or misspelling words. Historically this figure was Titivillus, a mythical demon that worked on behalf of Satan to introduce errors into the works of scribes. References to Titivillus date back 800 years. It has been suggested that the apprentice became a substitute scapegoat for printery mishaps, leading to the 'devil' nickname.

Another rather implausible account of the origins of the name has John Fust - a business partner of Johannes Gutenberg - selling several of Gutenberg's bibles to King Louis XI of France, claiming that the bibles werehand-copied manuscripts. As the individual letters were identical in appearance, Fust was soon accused of witchcraft and imprisoned. Although he was later freed, many still believed Fust was in league with Satan.

A further association with the devil in printing is the name of the hellbox, which was a box that worn and broken lead type was thrown into, and which the printer's devil (apprentice) then took to the furnace for melting and recasting.

Yet another link was 'Deville', the assistant of the the first English printer and book publisher, William Caxton. This was said to have evolved to 'devil' over time and used to describe other printers' apprentices.

All in all there are a number of possible explanations for the concept of the printer's devil, but the link between the ancient Titvullus stories and the ink-stained apprentices seems the most plausible.

There is, however, one other story I came across during research for this article. It comes from an uncomplimentary review of a Brisbane 'Ghost Tour' that stops outside the Printing Office, where the customers are told this story of the devils:

'They are thought to ward off evil spirits, however these ones invite them… Printing presses, much to the displeasure of the church, used to print copies of the Bible. This made the book more accessible to commoners and limited the church’s ability to manipulate its contents. The church therefore condemned printers, citing them in league with the devil. However instead of backing down, the printers took on Lucifer as their patron saint.'

Those are the words of the reviewer, of course. If the content of this review is correct, then the tour guide has got it wrong and a correction is required. The advent of the printing press did present challenges (and opportunities) for organised religion, but Satan is not the patron saint of printers (see insteadJohn Bosco, and Augustine of Hippo). I'd assume that Satan is not the patron saint of anything. Satan isn't even a saint. (The review also relates another tour story about the Printing Office that also seems to be untrue, and that is covered here).

The Printing Office: A very brief history

The new Colonial Government (created by the separation of Queensland from New South Wales in 1859) needed a printing office to print official materials such as Hansard, postage stamps, Government Gazettes, Acts of Parliament, departmental reports, survey maps, electoral rolls, and banknotes.

Government Printing Office, Brisbane, 1912. (John Oxley Library)

A three-storey brick building facing William Street was constructed during 1872-74 (and is still there today as the Public Service Club), and extended with a three-storey brick building erected along Stephens Lane (1884-87). The complex was further extended in 1910-12 with the erection of the three-storey brick building on George Street. The importance of the printing office to a functioning democracy was reflected by its proximity to Parliament, and the high quality of the buildings themselves. It is inconceivable that modern state governments would build such quality structures, never mind adorning them with finely-sculpted statues and reliefs.

The gargoyles were lifted into position in October 1911:

‘The Printers'Devils.’
Two huge stone figures with sardonic grins on their hard faces were swung into position on the top of the third story of the additions to the Government Printing Office yesterday. From their giddy height they look down on to the traffic below. On the shields which they clasp in their hands is inscribed: ‘G.P.’ - Government Printer. These symbolise that mythical individual supposed to form part of aprinting establishment - the printer's devil. The Government Printer is to have a double supply - hence two figures have been carved out and placed in position. Yesterday they were the subject of much curiosity, and speculation. The only thing wanting to complete the symbol is a plentiful supply of printers' ink to the faces, and a couple of aprons of the colour of coal! (Brisbane Courier, 25 October 1911)

Printing Office under construction, George Street, Brisbane, 1910. (John Oxley Library)

Printing Office under construction, 1910. (John Oxley Library)

The Printing Office staff started holding annual balls in 1940, and the decorations for the first event had a 'printer's devil' theme.

The George Street Printing Office closed in 1983 and after some demolitions and modifications to parts of the wider site it was heritage listed in 1992.

The Eighth Devil

In addition to the seven outside the printery, there was at least one more devil inside the building, as shown in this photo of one of the offices in 1921:

Stonework devil in office, George St., Brisbane, 1912. (John Oxley Library)

'A large desk, overflowing with papers, stands in the middle of the room. A safe is positioned against a wall to the side of the desk. On top of the safe is a stonework devil, identical in style to the two gargoyle statues that are perched over the entrance to the building.' (John Oxley Library)

Stonework devil in printing office, George St., Brisbane. (John Oxley Library)

A close-up of the devil on the safe reveals it to be wearing some kind of hat (a crown?) with a Maltese Cross (Queensland government symbol) on the top. Perhaps this was a bit of public service office humour.

I wonder where this rather splendid ornament is now?

↧

History Gets the Finger at the Old Printing Office

July 2, 2015, 6:56 pm

≫ Next: Why Ghost-Hunting Should be Banned - Part 1

≪ Previous: The Seven Devils of George Street

During research for a recent article about the sandstone devils on the walls of the old printing office on George Street, Brisbane, I came across a couple of online reviews of a ghost tour that apparently stops outside that building. The guide (reportedly in a 'prophetic, Lord of the Rings-esque voice') then relays a rather graphic story of blood and horror, as you might expect to hear on such a tour. However, a problem emerged when I looked for further details about this incident...

There are no actual historical records of the gruesome events described in this tour stop.

The Old Printing Office, George Street, Brisbane, has been the scene of dubious historical stories.

Old Printing Office, George Street, Brisbane. (Brismania)

What is the story?

The basic tour story goes something like this (in the words of the reviewer):

'And in one particular incident here, an apprentice printer (it’s believed) attempted to fix the gut-wrenching noises of a printer against the wishes of his seniors. He stopped the machine, went inside and after a few minutes it started again, as did his harrowing screams. Legend has it, it took three days to clean out the machine and all that was left was his wedding ring finger, ring still intact. Lily [the guide] tells us the printer still exists in Brisbane’s archives, and unlike other printers - which contain black ink stains - this one is still stained blood red.'

The tour story was also mentioned by another reviewer, who wrote that the customers were told about'...a gruesome workplace accident involving a printing apprentice (spoiler - all that was left was a flayed skull and a finger, still wearing its wedding ring).'

That's all certainly quite spectacular, and is just the kind of tragic event that would have attracted a lot of media coverage when it happened. Or so you might think. Turns out, there is no mention of this accident anywhere else, and it's not like newspapers would have ignored it. A string of 'lesser' incidents at the Printing Office all made the news, such as when William Martin had the top of four fingers cut off in 1895. There was coverage of when Charles Hampson died of heart disease in the printing office in 1911, as there was when James Lytton had his hand crushed in a machine there in 1926. There was also mention of the nightwatchman who collapsed and died on the William Street side of the office in 1931.

There were numerous accidents at other printing presses around Brisbane and Ipswich reported in newspapers. A 17-year-old named James Robertson died at the Watson & Ferguson printery in 1893, after being pulled into the machinery. He was taken three times around the shaft and lost an arm, and suffered several broken ribs and two broken thighs. He also lived long enough to make it to hospital. The notion that printing machinery could reduce a human body to no more than a single finger (as claimed in the tour story) is preposterous.

The following is another example of a lesser accident being reported:

'Sensational Accident. At a Printing Office. Caretaker Falls into Flywheel.
On Friday, William Booth, the caretaker of Messrs. W.H. Wendt and Co., printers and stationers, Elizabeth street, when starting tho gas engine, slipped and fell between the spokes of the flywheel. He was quickly extricated by the other employees, but not before his head was severely cut and crushed. When the ambulance was sent for it was thought that Booth was dead. He was, however, after first aid had been rendered, quickly conveyed to the General Hospital, and after treatment was enabled to proceed to his home. Mr. Booth, who is about 55 years of age, is considered to have had a miraculousescape from being killed.' (The Telegraph, 20 May 1905)

Even the story of a printing worker suffering nothing more than a bruised hand made the news in 1926. There are several more examples of these accidents in newspapers, which makes the total absence of news about the death described during the ghost tour very, very strange.

In fact, I'm prepared to state my belief that this apprentice-mincing accident never happened at all.

So why does the story even exist?

It is difficult to understand where story this came from. Despite the convenient absence of basic details such as names and dates, some quite specific details are provided, like the finger with the wedding ring(surprising given the very young age of apprentices), and even the patently ridiculous material about the old printing machine that is mysteriously stained an unwashable 'blood red'. (What is being implied here? That this machine was soaked in blood with a somehow supernatural ability to resist removal?) Surely these details must have come from somewhere.

As the guides are not historians, these tours are strictly scripted. Somebody had to sit down and write that script. I have written tour outlines myself and actual facts are always the starting point to build up a story from. And you always double-check the facts. If you are selling History to people, you have an ethical obligation to at least try make it factual.

Given that the events in this story probably never happened, how did they make it into a tour script? Is it from a Oral History source? If so, the story was based on unresearched hearsay that should have been checked somewhere along the way. It is not good enough to simply prefix these claims with 'legend has it' or 'it is believed', without explaining to paying customers that what you just told them probably did not happen in real life.

The only other alternative explanation is that it was a convenient untruth used to spice up a tour. This seems to have happened before, and articles by various authors rebutting Ghost Tours materialinclude claims of an imaginary morgue in a cemetery, non-existent roads in Toowong Cemetery, and the South Brisbane Cemetery 'Woman in Black'. This tour review in the Courier-Mail also questioned the accuracy of information being presented to customers. So far there have been no counter-arguments to these rebuttals.

This case does point to a problem with History tours, in that unlike the printed word their content usually escapes the corrective scrutiny of historians. This particular Printing Office tale is not the kind of data mistake that even real historians can sometimesmake, such as getting a date or a name wrong. This is an entire start-to-finish story that would quickly be torn to shreds if it appeared in print.

If there is any historical evidence somewhere to back this story up, I would welcome the chance to see it, and I will retract this article. If not, then I think that as far as this story goes, the scriptwriter really needs to pull his finger out.

↧

Why Ghost-Hunting Should be Banned - Part 1

July 2, 2015, 7:00 pm

≫ Next: Why Ghost Hunting Should be Banned - Part 2

≪ Previous: History Gets the Finger at the Old Printing Office

Dana Scully would want Boggo Road Ghost Hunts banned too.

Agent Scully would agree with me.

(Part 2 of 'Why Ghost-Hunting Should be Banned')

It looks like we have finally seen the back of 'ghost hunts' at Boggo Road. And good riddance to them. The old prison has now joined Brisbane municipal cemeteries as a place where ghost hunts are officially banned, and listening to the complaints coming from ghost-hunt quarters, it's all my fault. I sincerely hope it is.

I would actually go further and suggest that ghost hunting should be banned outright. Not all forms of 'paranormal investigation', but more specifically commercial ghost-hunting with fake ghost-o-meters. The kind where customers are charged money (usually quite a lot) for a self-proclaimed 'paranormal investigator' to take them around an allegedly 'haunted' place with electronic gadgets that are claimed to help them detect ghosts.

If you are part of a group that enjoys paranormal investigations out of personal interest and don't charge people to join you, that's a different thing. If you are using ghostometers I would dispute the science behind your methods, but it's your time and your money.

Also, if your investigations focus more on the 'psychic' approach instead of using gadgets, that's something else again. The mediumship field is clearly open to all manner of fakes and charlatans, but my concern here is with selling the use of gadgets.

I should also make it clear that this is not about the existence or otherwise of ghosts. I am a sceptic, which means I have an open mind and draw my conclusions based on the best evidence, according to how I understand it. I don't know the meaning of life nor the nature of the universe. As Hamlet says, 'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.' I don't believe in ghosts at all, but I majored in sociocultural anthropology at the University of Queensland and understand that many small-scale cultures have a supernatural element that is treated within those cultures with genuine respect. On the other hand, the current 'Kentucky Fried Ghosts' fad in western culture is a complete and superficial sham.

I have had my own evolving relationship with this kind of ghost hunting. Several years ago I 'tolerated' it and - as a committee member on historical societies - tentatively supported specific proposals for 'paranormal investigations' as heritage fundraisers. However, my doubts emerged during planning, initially regarding the 'respect for the dead' issue and then later with the scientific integrity of the whole enterprise.

I came, I saw, I changed my mind. And if that's good enough for primeministers of this country, then it's good enough for me.

Anyway, here is the first of two basic reasons I would like to see commercial ghost-hunting banned.

GHOSTOMETERS ARE FAKE & YOU SHOULD NOT PAY TO USE THEM

Thanks to the advent of ghost-chasing Reality TV shows, the electromagnetic field (EMF) detector has become the gadget of choice for many new ghost-hunting enthusiasts.EMF detectors do actually have a place in an actualscientific examination of the natural background environment of a place where paranormal-style activity has been alleged to occur. As academic researchers Tony Lawrence and Vic Tandy explained in this excellent paper:

'The ways in which normal earthly events might conspire to convey an impression that a house is haunted... are numerous. Thus, all of the following may well be the more mundane cause of an ostensible haunt; water hammer in pipes and radiators (noises), electrical faults (fires, phone calls, video problems), structural faults (draughts, cold spots, damp spots, noises), seismic activity (object movement/destruction, noises), electromagnetic anomalies (hallucinations), and exotic organic phenomena (rats scratching, beetles ticking). The exclusion of these counter-explanations, when potentially relevant, must be the first priority of the spontaneous cases investigator.' ('The Ghost in the Machine',Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, Vol.62, No. 851, April 1998)

Unfortunately, instead of taking an academic or scientific approach, it now seems to be common practice for ghost hunters to attribute unusual spikes in EMF readingsto a supernatural presence. Commercial ghost hunts - which sell a 2-4hour thrill-seeking experience as opposed to serious investigations - also seem to use EMF detectors as ghostometers. One Brisbane business advertised their guides as using 'scientific paranormal investigative techniques to detect activity' (my emphasis). A guide on this hunt was filmed in a marketing video passing an EMF detector over a cemetery headstone and announcing he had probably just detected a ghost.

Electromagnetic field detectors are being passed off as ghost hunting devices.

The K-II Meter. Pretty lights = dead people.

A variation on the EMF detector is the 'K-II Meter', the uselessness of which was amply demonstrated in experiments conducted by the Randi Educational Foundation.

These gadgets are real enough, but the use of them is completely misplaced and based on an assumption that ghosts emit an 'energy' that can be detected and measured (to be fair, not all ghost hunters believe this). This implies a scientific understanding of what a 'ghost' is comprised of. Of course the mere existence of ghosts has not been proven in any way, so it follows that any theory as to what they are 'made of' is as scientifically baseless as saying 'Venusians have yellow blood'.

In fact, with statements like 'ghosts emit an energy', you could replace the word 'ghost'with 'invisible time-traveller from the future', or 'leprechaun', and they would be just as scientifically valid.Yet this is the stuff that current ghost-hunting is built upon. I recently wrote about the'Haunting Australia' TV show, in which one ghost hunter claimed that ghosts 'have an amount of mass' that might be detected if they walked through his contraption, which looked something like a disco-light ball with a smoke machine. As you might expect, nothing was detected.

Other common gadgets include audio recorders for capturing 'electronic voice phenomena' (EVP). Ghost hunters have played these recordings for me in person (and there are plenty of examples on YouTube and TV), but in almost every case it is either explained to me first what the indistinct noise is about to say, or there are subtitles on related videos. The 'seed' is planted in your mind, distorting the listening experience. In reality they are usually undecipherable noise - just try listening to one without someone else telling you what it says first.

The article'Electronic Voice Phenomena: Voices of the Dead?' goes into better detail. EVP are also very easy to fake, and there seems to be industrial amounts of fraud going on judging by what is available online.

The big question is, it is ethical to to advertise these useless gadgets as being capable of 'detecting ghosts' and then charging customers money (sometimes well over $100 per head) to use them? Especially without a disclaimer explaining that these things don't actually work for the advertised purpose? In my opinion, it is hugely unethical.

Think of it this way. If I told you that my microwave oven was a leprechaun trap and I offered to let you stand under a tree with it for three hours in the dark, and that the tree was a known haunt of leprechauns, would you pay me $130 for the privilege? Because when the ghost-hunt marketing is stripped back, that is effectively what you are paying for.

The issue becomes more serious if the commercial ghost-hunt operator knows the gadgets do not do what they are advertised to, it looks like outright fraud. Of course, it is difficult for an outsider to know what the operators might really think about their products.

So, on the basis of selling the use of fake products alone, I think ghost hunting should be banned, especially in any government-owned site. There is, however, another valid reason to restrict them, and that is covered right here in Part 2 of 'Why Ghost-Hunting Should be Banned'.

Is there a better way?

Yes there is, and it already exists. It involves exploring potential 'natural' causes for alleged paranormal anomalies, and I will cover that soon in another article here.

READ PART 2 OF 'WHY GHOST HUNTING SHOULD BE BANNED'

↧

Why Ghost Hunting Should be Banned - Part 2

July 2, 2015, 7:52 pm

≫ Next: Hobart Paranormalists Harass a Pensioner

≪ Previous: Why Ghost-Hunting Should be Banned - Part 1

R.E.S.P.E.C.T.

Memorial for John Pat and Black Deaths in Custody, Fremantle Prison.

Respecting the dead: The memorial for John Pat in front of the prison walls of the decommissioned Fremantle Prison. It was erected in September 1994 "in memory of all Aboriginal people who have died in custody in Australia". The poet Jack Davis contributed a poem which is inscribed on the right hand side of the memorial. (Creative Spirits)

In the first part of this article on why commercial ghost hunting should be banned, I gave a basic outline of how unethical it is charge customers to use gadgets such as electromagnetic field detectors in the guise of detecting paranormal activity. Bogus ghost-o-meters. You are basically flogging a fake product.

It is important to note that I was writing there about commercial ghost hunts only. In this concluding piece I will address what is probably a more important aspect of this business:- respecting the dead and their surviving loved ones. And this one applies to all ghost hunting, commercial or otherwise.

When it comes to the issue of respect, the line between appropriate and inappropriate venues for ghost hunts can be a fine one. Would you, for example, approve a ghost hunt at a place where someone you knew closely committed suicide? How about a house where a local family was recently killed in a fire? Or the murder site of Daniel Morcombe or any other child? What about Gallipoli? The Lady Cilento Children's Hospital?

If you have any sense of decency, the answers would be 'No'. Sometimes, however, it is not that clear cut. As ghost hunts tend to link alleged paranormal activity with the 'ghosts' (however you define that) of specific people, the basic rule of thumb should be to ask yourself if the place has a special meaning to the loved ones of the deceased, and is it possible that your activities will upset them?

Who Are You?

To begin with, I have an issue with 'identifying' ghosts. The process involves a sequence of related assumptions, each one requiring an irrational leap of logic in itself, and so the result gets increasingly unreliable with each step.

Difficult-to-explain localised phenomena can be attributed to something called 'ghosts'.

Ghosts represent a post-death human consciousness.

That post-death human consciousness can be associated with specific dead people.

Person x died in this location, therefore I can identify this ghost as being person x.

So the process of identifying a ghost as a specific person is in itself immensely illogical. But leaving that issue aside, is it even ethical to do so?

If the alleged ghost is of a person who died a long time ago (say, over 100 years), it is not so much of an issue. But what if it was more recent, and relatives and friends of the dead would prefer to believe that their loved ones are resting in peace, and not some tortured soul forever wandering an old prison or cemetery? What if they don't want thrill-seekers wandering around 'hunting' the spirits of their loved ones?

The recent example of ghost hunts at Boggo Road has provided us with a good case study.

The Boggo Case

The surviving heritage-listed prison buildings opened in 1903 and closed in 1989. A number of deaths happened in there during that time, although executions were not carried in those buildings. Causes of death included natural causes, suicides, and - just off to one side of the eastern wall - a murder.

The prison became a historical site in the mid-1990s. Ghost tours commenced there in 1999, but ghost hunts were rare. At least one happened prior to 2001 (I found an investigation report where the person wrote subjectively of 'sensing a dark energy' near the top of D Wing), but ghost hunts were not offered on a commercial basis before 2006, when the place closed for redevelopment works. At least, they never happened with the knowledge of museum management.

Cover of Indigenous Deaths Report, 1989-1996. Story on Ghost Hunts.

During the closure of the prison site, the ghost tour business began advertising 'ghost hunts' at Boggo Road, although they did not have access to the site. Some might call this 'misleading'. Then, when part of Boggo reopened on a short-term basis in 2012, the state government prohibited ghost hunts on the grounds that they were disrespectful and not relevant to historical interpretation. I was personally informed of this in a meeting with very senior public servants, and again in writing several weeks later.

It is easy to see why the hunts were banned. Boggo Road, like most prisons, saw its fair share of death. Some as recently as the 1980s. These included Aboriginal men killing themselves in their cells. Some of these cases were examined as part of the 1987 'Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody'. The Commission decided that the material it had gathered should be made 'as publicly accessible as possible', but:

'...was aware that most of the material was less than 30 years old. It acknowledged that privacy and Aboriginal cultural sensitivities would need to be considered (eg it decided that the details of individual cases should not be released on the ground that they were too distressing to the deceased's family and friends).'

Some of the Boggo deaths are still less than 30 years ago. Unfortunately, this was not a concern when the Boggo ghost hunt ban was overturned in 2014 by the Newman government. There was a public backlash and a petition (see the Courier-Mail's 'Stop this sick Boggo Road sideshow and leave those who died in that prison in peace') but the politician's decision stood. The hunts were only banned again after another change of government in early 2015. With the changes planned for Boggo Road to become an arts, heritage and dining hub, it seems unlikely they will ever return.

I have written before about these Boggo ghost hunts, and I quoted a number of people who had contacted me. This statement came from a family member of someone who was murdered at the prison in the 1960s:

‘For years my family have been tormented with nonsense in the media and on the internet about my grandfather’s death. This was a traumatic event that affects all of us to this day. My own father wasn’t much more than a boy when Bernard was killed, and the sadness and struggle the family endured shaped the adults they became, and the children that they went on to have. The loss has been compounded in the years since by an awful man perpetuating stupid stories and rubbish about Bernard. He conducts tours and interviews focusing on my grandfather's supposed ghost... This man has even contacted me, as have a few ‘internet crazies’. It has all been very upsetting... They are also hurtful and distressing. And it makes me so angry that people are trying to make money by exploiting my family history. This man, Bernard Ralph, is still a very large part of some people’s lives.’

The relative of a person who committed suicide in the prison back in the 1940s was equally upset. A former prisoner from the 1960s also wrote to me:

‘It is sad that people do not realise how offensive it is to trivialise the deaths of people in Custody. You may recall that I remembered a person who died in F wing while I was at No.2 (Suicide) I also was in the cell that Jimmy B------- died in (Pneumonia). Both men were Aboriginal. Mervyn T------- (Suicide) was Caucasian. He was quite seriously mentally compromised. Yet he was in mainstream Gaol. Have the people who are running round at night in the Gaol no sense of decency or sensitivity. That place drove people insane. It will bring them no joy to do this. Despite the crimes that Jimmy and T------ committed they were my friends and I feel a sense of outrage over what is taking place.’

Then a former officer had this to say:

‘None of the ----- who run this shit ever stepped foot in the place, they don’t know what it was like. They don’t know what death is. And now they’re making a fucking mockery of it.’

There were many similar statements from other people with various backgrounds (see here), so this was not just me who thought the Boggo ghost hunts were offensive, there were plenty of others.

I'd argue that ghost hunting should not occur when it is likely to offend the loved ones of the deceased. This applies especially to commercial ghost hunts, where the intent is merely making quick money. It applies even more especially in cases where those loved ones have asked you not to do it.

It is also not a valid argument to suggest that ghost hunts should be allowed in place x because they are allowed at place y somewhere else in Australia. Wrong is wrong wherever it happens. Commercial ghost hunts are an unethical rip-off and have no place in a rational society. They certainly have no place at Boggo Road, where a meaningful marker of remembrance to those who died there (such as the marker at Fremantle Prison) would be much more appropriate than using their death beds for shoddy ghost hunts and haunted houses in the name of cheap profit.

↧

Hobart Paranormalists Harass a Pensioner

July 5, 2015, 5:57 pm

≫ Next: 'They Don't Know What Death Is': Ghost Hunting at a Suicide Scene

≪ Previous: Why Ghost Hunting Should be Banned - Part 2

Stone cottage, Hobart.

Regular readers of this blog will know that from time to time I highlight some of the dodgy goings-on in the paranormal industry. There a few reasons for this. Sometimes paranormalists do bad History, sometimes they do bad Science, and sometimes they engage in malicious behaviour. This article is about the latter.

There are good people involved in the paranormal industry, but a lack of regulations and oversight means that anybody can set up shop, including people who have not yet developed a basic sense of empathy and maturity.

I recently learned of some pretty poorconduct by a ghost tour operator down in Tasmania. The story here involves a pensioner who lived in an old heritage-listed cottage in Hobart for at least 40 years, possibly more. She raised her family there and it's the kind of home a person becomes emotionally attached to.

Problems started a few years back when a local ghost tour began stopping outside her home as part of the tour and telling the customers that it was haunted. It is the kind of building that could easily be passed off as being haunted simply because it is so old and has 'the look'. But the homeowner did not want these people congregating outside her cottage telling stupid stories about it, especially as she had lived there for decades without having a single 'spooky' experience. Her home was clearly not 'haunted'.

She asked the ghost tour people to please stop coming to her home. Unbelievably, they refused. They would not respect the wishes of an old lady who just wanted to be left alone, and they kept coming back. Her rather hilarious response was to place a large illuminated smiley face outside the cottage for tour nights, a tacky decoration that was described to me as being the 'kind of thing you might see in a Chinese restaurant'.

Apparently the ghost tour people did not like this disruption to the 'atmosphere' of their tour and so they wrote to the Tasmanian heritage department, claiming that the smiley face was against heritage guidelines, or something. Of course this complaint was knocked back.

I am left wondering just what is wrong with these people. I have seen this same grubby attitude displayed before, with a ghost tour operator ignoring the heartfelt pleas of people to stop telling ridiculous ghost stories about a murdered family member.

It is bad enough that the stories they tell aren't even true, but to actively dismiss at the feelings of people who just want to be left alone in their home, or who want to feel that a loved one is resting in peace, is beyond the pale.

I don't know exactly who these Tasmanian ghost tour clowns are, but they have displayed a real lack of empathy and maturity in this case. I would welcome any feedback on who these people are and further details on their operations.

I wrote some brief notes for this post a few weeks back. Unfortunately the lady in question has since passed away. She showed patience and humour in the face of harrassment, and I hope she rests in peace.

↧

'They Don't Know What Death Is': Ghost Hunting at a Suicide Scene

July 6, 2015, 11:57 pm

≫ Next: The Sad Case of the Belanglo Forest Ghost Tours

≪ Previous: Hobart Paranormalists Harass a Pensioner

WARNING: The following article contains details relating to the death of an Aboriginal man in custody at Boggo Road prison in the 1980s.

Brisbane's Boggo Road Gaol has been home to a number of cheap and tawdry events in recent times, including ghost hunts, ghost tours and even parties with a 'haunted house'. I've explained the problems with ghost hunt 'science'before, and more specifically the incredibly disrespectful aspect of these 'hunts'. In short, people have died in terrible circumstances in the Boggo Road cellblocks, and well within living memory. Those people have living relatives and friends whose dearest wish is for the dead to be left alone to rest in peace.

Unfortunately, there are some in the paranormal industry who refuse to let a bit of common decency stand between themselves and a dollar, and so they dismiss the concerns of the deceased person's loved ones. This is the case at Boggo Road Gaol, and this is why the Queensland Government had to step in and ban 'ghost hunts' there.

One of the most powerful statements against the immaturity of the paranormal industry came from an ex-officer, long since retired, who carries with him the vivid memories of being a 'first responder' to suicide and murder scenes inside the old prison. He, and several other officers, have described to me in detail the experience of coming across a dead body inside a cell, the sight and smell of it, and how it stays with you.

'They don't know what death is', he told me when he heard about 'ghost hunts', 'And now they're making a fucking mockery of it'.

I don't personally class any one type of death in custody as being worse than another, but the insensitivity of commercial ghost hunts at Boggo is particularly highlighted by Indigenous deaths in custody, which have been the subject of major reports in the past.

One of these was the'Royal Commission Into Aboriginal Deaths In Custody', which took place during 1987-91 and investigated the deaths of 99 Aboriginal prisoners during previous years. These included cases at Boggo Road.

The report went into great depth on the background stories of the individuals concerned, looking at the life circumstances that led to their eventual incarceration and death. Most of the material is now available online at this website. In some cases the names of some deceased persons are not included, in accordance with Indigenous customs.

The following text is an extract from the report on an unnamed man who died inside the F Wing of Boggo Road in December 1980. It is taken from the Royal Commission Into Aboriginal Deaths In Custody website and describes his final night and the circumstances in which he was found the next day. As I warned before, it does contain some explicit details.

None of the ----- who run this shit ever stepped foot in the place, they don’t know what it was like. They don’t know what death is. And now they’re making a fucking mockery of it.’ - See more at: http://boggoroad.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/why-ghost-hunting-should-be-banned-part_3.html#sthash.oqgNbcuo.dpuf

‘None of the ----- who run this shit ever stepped foot in the place, they don’t know what it was like. They don’t know what death is. And now they’re making a fucking mockery of it.’ - See more at: http://boggoroad.blogspot.com.au/2015/07/why-ghost-hunting-should-be-banned-part_3.html#sthash.oqgNbcuo.dpuf

The Man Who Died in Brisbane Prison on 4 December 1980: Events That Occurred in Custody

...While he was on remand the deceased received visits from three of his sisters and a brother and mail from his mother. During the visits by family members the deceased did not discuss the charges against him or at any stage profess his innocence. He did not complain of any harassment or ill-treatment from police, prison officers or other prisoners, or request any medication or assistance. Similarly, at no stage did he give any indication that he might attempt to kill himself.

At 4.30 pm on 4 December 1980, Prison Officer Jack Krikorian escorted the deceased and five other prisoners from 7 Yard to F Wing. He then placed the six prisoners in their respective cells and locked them up. When he locked the deceased in cell 4 Krikorian noticed nothing unusual about his manner. According to Krikorian the deceased did not appear to be depressed. He was then left alone in his cell.

At about 10.00 pm that evening, a prisoner, Christopher William Hudson, who was in cell 2, which adjoined that of the deceased, heard gurgling sounds coming from the deceased's cell. There is no evidence that Hudson attempted to draw anyone's attention to what he heard.

At 6.05 am on 5 December 1980, Prison Officer John Robert Adam, who was performing duty in F Wing, began to release the prisoners from their cells and noticed that the deceased did not come out of his cell.

Adam went to the cell and found that the bed had been pushed against the door. When he gained entry he saw the body of the deceased hanging from the bars of the cell window by a rope made from strips of sheet material twisted together. It was in a noose around his neck and tied to the last two bars of the cell window. Adam tried to find a pulse but without success. The position of the deceased's body was consistent with his having jumped from the bed with the noose tied firmly.

At about 6.07 am Chief Prison Officer Frederick Henry Colebourne was advised by 1/C Prison Officer Phillip Anthony Latimer that a body had been found hanging in F Wing. He directed Latimer to assist in lowering the body and he contacted Prison Officer William Ronald Martin, a medical orderly at the prison hospital. He asked Martin to attend at F Wing.

On his arrival at Cell 4 Colebourne observed:

'Senior Prison Officer Collins and I/C Prison Officer Latimer in the process of lowering the body of a person from a position at the rear of the cell, onto a bed; the body appeared to be stiff and my observations at this time would lead me to believe that the death had occurred some considerable time before the body was discovered. The body of the person, now known to me as [deceased 's name] was examined by Prison Officer Medical Orderly, Mr R. Martin.'

Martin went to F Wing and entered cell 4 where he saw the body of the deceased on the bed with the rope of sheeting tightly knotted around the neck. Martin felt for signs of life but the body was cold and stiff. He notified the hospital to inform the Government Medical Officer, Dr Kenneth John Morrison, and then instructed the Senior Prison Officer Neville Raymond Collins to lock the cell door until the doctor arrived.

At 7.20 am Dr Morrison arrived and examined the body. He noted in the deceased's prison medical record: '... Deep ligature mark. Knot on right side. No petechiae noted. Face swollen. Cold. Life extinct ... '. Dr Morrison told investigating police officer, Constable Jeffrey Gordon Thorpe, that in his opinion death had occurred at about 10.30 pm on 4 December 1980.

One important point I have made in the past is that people like this died while in the custody of the Queensland Government, and inside a government facility. That is why I felt it particularly inappropriate that the Queensland Government gave the go-ahead for commercial 'ghost hunts' to take place there in 2014 and, by means of rents charged, draw indirect income from them. Fortunately a change of government led to a change of heart and the ghost hunts have since been stopped.

I have published the report extract above because F Wing has been used for commercial ghost huntsin which people pay to use bogus equipment to 'hunt ghosts'. It shows that beyond the corny schlock-horror approach to ghost tours in places like this, these incidents involved real people.

I have already requested that a refurbished Boggo Road historical site feature some culturally-appropriate marker of respect and remembrance for all those who died and suffered within the walls of the old prison. They should be allowed to rest in peace.

↧

The Sad Case of the Belanglo Forest Ghost Tours

July 14, 2015, 6:07 pm

≫ Next: Travels in East Moreton, 1859: An Introduction

≪ Previous: 'They Don't Know What Death Is': Ghost Hunting at a Suicide Scene

Well, well, well… only a week or so after my writing a few articles about the unethical nature of ‘ghost hunts’, there have been national(and eveninternational) headlines about disrespectful ghost hunters in Australia who went too far and brought the wrath of the public, the media and the state government down upon themselves.

In case you missed it, this story was about ‘Goulburn Ghost Tours’ in New South Wales and their Belanglo State Forestry ghost hunts/tours. The forest is where psychopathic serial killer Ivan Milat buried sevenof his victims in the 1990s. Tour customers could pay $150 per head to visit the forest between 6pm-3am with ‘paranormal equipment and training, snacks and billy tea.’

The mere act of selling a ‘hunt’ for the alleged ‘ghost’ (however you define that) of a real person, especially one who died within living memory, is unethical enough. The main issues are selling a fake product (scientificky ghost-o-meters) and disrespecting the dead and their loved ones. What turned the media pitchfork mob onto Goulburn Ghost Tours was the tactless way in which they sold the event like it was a slasher movie. The promo blurb for this ‘Extreme Terror Tour’ included such statements as:

‘Come with us to Belanglo where Ivan Milat buried the bodies of his victims! Once you enter Belanglo state forest you may never come out…’

According to this report, the now-deleted advertising ran like this:

'Are you ready to turn grey overnight? Come with trained and experienced Paranormal Investigators to Belanglo State Forrest where horrific crimes have been committed and bodies have been found. Learn about his crimes and use paranormal techniques to help solve the baffling murder of Angel, believed to be murdered AFTER Ivan Milat was jailed!'

The creators of the post continue to try to entice crime enthusiasts to the tour by asking them if they feel like they are being watched and if there is another victim just waiting to be found.

When the shit hit the media fan, the New South Wales government stepped in to ‘block’ the tours on the technicality of the group not having a permit to enter the forest.

Goulburn Ghost Tours sparked controversy with their ghost tours about Ivan Milat's murder victims.

Last time I checked, the Goulburn Ghost Tours website and Facebook pages had both been taken offline. In their defence, tour manager Louise Edwards claimed that the tour was run ‘with sensitivity’.

“Lots of people know about Ivan Milat, but not about the people he murdered,” Ms Edwards said. “We wanted to remind people that the victims are real people. They are not just victims of Ivan Milat. They are more than that.

“We don’t want people to forget about them.”

And what better way to reframe these people as being more than ‘just murder victims’ by charging ‘Extreme Terror Tour!’ punters $150 to visit the scene of their murders and try to find their ghosts?

Personally, I’m sick of the way these people mouth off meaningless PR keywords such as ‘sensitivity’ and ‘respect’ in relation to activities which are in fact the complete opposite. It’s what politicians often do, and it insults our intelligence.

To my mind, the only real difference between the Balinga State Forest ghost hunts and the ones at Boggo Road is in the marketing. Goulburn Ghost Tours clearly went over the top in calling their product an ‘Extreme Terror Tour’. The marketing spin for Boggo ghost tours and hunts is more subdued, but that is only a result of pressure on the state government from community groups demanding that the prison’s history be treated with at least a modicum of respect. The tour operator was ‘being watched’ and had to refrain from using disrespectful language to advertise disrespectful business activities. It has to be remembered that the Boggo ghost hunts were actually banned by the Queensland Government until 2014 because they were deemed to be too disrespectful. After all, the people who died inside that prison were in the custody or employ of the Queensland Government itself. The ghost hunts were only allowed after certain ‘political manoeuvrings’ that I won’t go into here, but they were blocked again after a change of government in 2015.

Regardless of the content of their advertising, what all these commercial ghost hunts have is common is that they commodify the tragedy and grief of other people by taking customers to places where murders and/or suicides took place and trying to find their 'ghosts'. They are in the business of cheap thrills. And they often do this against the expressed wishes of those most affected by the tragedy.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The ghost tour and ghost hunt industry is an unregulated mess. It has zero professional standards that allow charlatans to mangle science, history, religion and good taste while charging ridiculous fees. Even the TV ghost hunters supposedly at the top of this pile are clearly frauds.

What I would like to see is more government regulation of this commercial activity. That means a ban on ghost hunts in all government property, and strict approval for where ghosts hunts may take place. We need ‘truth in advertising’ rules for when people advertise the use of electromagnetic field detectors as ghost-o-meters. And hunts should only be allowed at specific locations after a certain amount of time has passed since any death took place there.

As it is, there is nothing stopping ghost hunters crawling over the scene of every horrific murder or suicide in Australia, even recent ones. And this does happen, often in secret. Groups tend to be more careful these days, but a few years back you could dig around the Internet and find ghost hunters discussing their clandestine exploits. For example, back in 2009, people were visiting a spot at Deep Water Bend, near Bald Hills on Brisbane’s northside. The story was that the bound-and-gagged body of a murdered woman was dumped there and her ghost now haunted the spot, where her distraught spirit could be heard ‘begging for help’.

I also heard rumours of ghost hunters snooping around the place where the body of murder victim Alison Baden-Clay was found a few years back.

What this indicates to me is that there are people interested in ghost hunting who have an almost sociopathic lack of empathy for other people. This doesn’t include all paranormalists, as I know some very good people interested in the subject, but there are clearly a few who just don’t get it.

They seem determined to prove that, despite your most fervent wishes, your loved one is NOT resting in peace.

I hope that the recent government inteventions with Goulburn Ghost Tours and Brisbane Ghost Tours act as a reminder to other ghost-hunting groups to think hard about the ethics of what they are doing, especially when it comes to respecting the feelings of real people who are struggling with traumatic loss in their lives. Their pain is not your gain.

These people include this woman whose 17-year-old grandson was lured into Belanglo State Forest in November 2010 by Milat’s great-nephew and tortured and killed with a double-sided axe. She had this to say about the ghost toursthere:

“It is a money-making tour at our expense,” she said. “I can’t stop people from running these ghost tours, but I think it’s disgusting. They are taking advantage of our grief.”

Mrs Auchterlonie said her family was only just “getting some normality back in our lives”.

“We are hurting and this is just opening up old wounds again,” she said. “We are just trying to become normal people again. It would be same for the families of all the backpackers who were murdered there.”

In a similar vein, the granddaughter of a man killed at Boggo Road in 1966 wrote to me about her family’s treatment by some in the ghost industry:

“For years my family have been tormented with nonsense in the media and on the internet about my grandfather’s death. This was a traumatic event that affects all of us to this day. My own father wasn’t much more than a boy when Bernard was killed, and the sadness and struggle the family endured shaped the adults they became, and the children that they went on to have. The loss has been compounded in the years since by an awful man perpetuating stupid stories and rubbish about Bernard. He conducts tours and interviews focusing on my grandfather's supposed ghost... This man has even contacted me, as have a few ‘internet crazies’. It has all been very upsetting...

Personally, the stories are more than ‘vague and unconvincing’. They are also hurtful and distressing. And it makes me so angry that people are trying to make money by exploiting my family history. This man… is still a very large part of some people’s lives.”

I have given other examples elsewhere of how families and friends of the deceased feel about paranormalist exploitation of their loved ones. Unfortunately, in the absence of a media frenzy or government action, the commercial exploitation of their tragedy continues.

↧