October 5, 2013 – St. Petersburg
Each paranormal investigation is unique. In this instance, the home owner experienced activity since buying the house. As her job took her on extended trips she also had roommates, two of whom told their stories. Besides these individuals, at least one other roommate, a very strong man with military background, had stayed here. For reasons he never explained the man packed up and left, refusing to return for items he left behind. Reports ranged from shadow figures to moving items, unexplained noises, and energy shifts.
The entities here did not match the research. There were at least two specific personalities in the house. The first was a woman who resided in the workout room. She appeared to be drenched in water and panicked, almost as if something traumatic had recently happened. There is a possibility that she was the entity who slammed bedroom doors. She was not fond of couples in the house (some of the roommates had boyfriends over and the activities increased; she may have also chased out the man mentioned above). There is a possibility that she was the victim of an abusive relationship which is why she would not allow for men in the home.
This same room had the feeling of a vortex. Sensitives felt a high energy and motion, even fluttering movements. Others commented on a palpable sensation of an energy shift. Where this vortex came from and why remains a mystery as well. There were no reports of strange behavior other than a prior owner who was a so-called “cat woman” (had multiple cats in the house and associated primarily with them). We found nothing in the home to indicate tampering with the supernatural, either, and the home owner had a job that required psychological and physical examinations. It seemed unlikely that she would imagine these events.
Yet, the twist to this case is that there was a second energy present. It did not interact with the first but was likely the source of the shadow figures and physical sightings, as well as creating sounds. This person was likely a former home owner; we thought that he may have been the original owner of the house. He was an unpleasant fellow – bossy and loud. He was not dangerous, however. He simply put out a vibe of displeasure. Oddly, he also stayed with the older part of the house, the section nearest the kitchen and bar.
Overall, the unusual historic disconnection from the entities themselves is a bit unsettling. It is always preferable to have a case that wraps up neatly and connects the home owner to the situation. Here, however, the advise could only be to continue to exert influence over the house, to ask the entities to leave, and to attempt a cleansing.