Jump to content

Talk:Cock Lane ghost

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleCock Lane ghost is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 1, 2011.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 27, 2009Good article nomineeListed
January 17, 2010Featured article candidatePromoted
April 1, 2011Today's featured articleMain Page
Current status: Featured article

Not proven fraud

[edit]

Elizabeth Parsons was caught engaging in fraud only once, and that was on the night that she was told that unless the ghost manifested that night, her parents were going to prison. That is strong motivation for fraud, even if it had never been committed previously. In addition, the witnesses that night commented that the raps sounded different than they ever had before---they sounded like they were coming from Elizabeth's bed, whereas always before, they had emanated from around the room. Given these facts, I believe that it's erroneous to claim that this case has been proven fraudulent, and although I know that it is common (but erroneous) to state that it was, I object to it in this article. 2600:6C5D:5A00:B1D:CDE6:F417:35D9:A70E (talk) 22:57, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source supporting your viewpoint? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wilson, Colin, "Poltergeist! A Study In Destructive Haunting", London, New English Library, 1981
The book has an extensive bibliography, but only one title specifically refers to the Cock Lane ghost: Grant, Douglas, "The Cock Lane Ghost", London, Toronto, and New York, Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1965.
It states in this very article that the only time Elizabeth Parsons was caught in fraud was the night she was told that unless there were knockings that night, she and her father would be committed to Newgate Prison. Of course, having been told that, she made sure there were knockings that night. Poltergeists don't perform on command, she knew that, and she was not willing to take the chance.
The fact that they don't perform on command was the only other so-called "evidence" for fraud. At times, the knocking didn't happen when people wanted it to. That doesn't prove the case was fraud or a hoax.
This was not a hoax. It was a poltergeist. That, of course, does not mean that the phenemona were caused by the deceased Fanny Lynes and it does not mean that the allegations made against William Kent were true. Poltergeists, in the cases in which they have communicated with humans, have not been known to be truthful. Poltergeists are trouble-makers. This poltergeist was particularly and wildly successful at creating trouble for its victim, Richard Parsons. 2600:6C5D:5A00:B1D:A830:DB06:CBB1:B81A (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]