Author Archives: projectreveal
Lee steer claims the Deborah Davies HAUNTED DOLL Collection, that contains annabelle and more.
In the world of paranormal research, taking custody of high-energy spirit vessels is never routine business. But when Lee Steer and the Ghosts of Britain (GOB) team hit the motorway to collect a notorious haul of haunted dolls from celebrity psychic medium Deborah Davies, they expected a standard transport run.
What transpired on the journey home has sent shockwaves through the UK paranormal community and ignited a fresh wave of debates over item-bound attachments and spirit contagion.
The Handover: Passing the Torch
The collection—which includes infamous vessels like “Annabelle”, the viral Edinburgh charity shop doll that captured national headlines on ITV, BBC, and Sky News—had been causing escalating physical and emotional distress. Recovering from health battles, Deborah made the difficult decision to purge her home of the items to protect her own well-being and energy.
Lee Steer and the GOB crew answered the call, agreeing to take full custody of the dolls and transfer them to their secured research facilities in Rotherham.
“Annabelle”: The Edinburgh Charity Shop Doll
Few objects in recent memory have captured the public imagination—and terrified local shoppers—quite like the porcelain doll known as Annabelle. Her journey from a quiet Scottish charity shop window to national television headlines represents one of the fastest viral paranormal cases in UK history.
Timeline of a Viral Haunting
The Window Warning
Early 2024
The vintage 1970s porcelain doll, clad in a blue velvet dress, is donated to St Columba’s Hospice Charity Shop in Morningside, Edinburgh. Volunteers and shop patrons report feeling unnerved by her piercing, lifelike expression.
Going Viral & Price Slashing
February 2024
A photograph of the doll posted in the shop window goes viral on social media after shoppers joke about her sinister appearance. Originally marked at £180, shop staff repeatedly cut the price to £90 to quickly find her a new home.
Celebrity Acquisition
March 2024
Former Real Housewives of Cheshire star and psychic medium Deborah Davies purchases the doll, naming her Annabelle. Davies reports immediate paranormal activity at her home, including unexplained knocks, footsteps, and electronic glitches.
Mainstream Media Frenzy
Spring 2024
Annabelle becomes a national sensation, making headlines on BBC News, Sky News, and featured live on ITV’s This Morning as Davies discusses the vessel’s attached energy.
The GOB Handover
October 2026
Following health battles, Deborah Davies announces she is rehoming her vessel collection. Lee Steer and Ghosts of Britain (GOB) take custody of Annabelle, leading to the infamous, illness-plagued transport journey home.
Vessel Specs:
- Type: Vintage Porcelain / Composition Body
- Origin: St Columba’s Hospice Charity Shop (Morningside, Scotland)
- Reported Phenomena: Nausea upon approach, temperature drops, electrical interference, residual attachment
Taking custody of active vessels rarely goes smoothly, but the journey back to Rotherham proved particularly harrowing for the GOB crew.
Shortly after loading the sealed containers and hitting the motorway, the environment inside the transport vehicle shifted dramatically. Team members reported all of this below.
Within miles, multiple occupants experienced severe, simultaneous physical symptoms:
- Acute Nausea & Dizziness: Unexplained, violent disorientation affected the crew while driving.
- Electrical Failures: Live-stream feeds, mobile devices, struggled to work..
- TEETH started to tingle – john and john both felt strange feelings on their teeth like they started to tingle..
A National Paranormal Landmark
Compared to single-item events—such as Neil Packer’s famous WWII hospital wheelchair featured on ITV’s This Morning—the transfer of Deborah Davies’ full collection to Rotherham stands as one of the most significant UK paranormal stories in recent years.
Now residing within The Haunted Objects Museum Poltergeist House in Rawmarsh, Rotherham, items like Annabelle and Elizabeth undergo continuous baseline monitoring, thermal tracking, and electromagnetic field analysis.
For Lee Steer and the Ghosts of Britain team, housing these entities under one roof remains an ongoing experiment in containment, research, and respect for the unexplained.
Smug Puppy, Beardo and the Cost of Defending a Lie
Smug Puppy has now admitted that the paranormal videos which helped build the channel were staged. But the fakery itself is not really the worst part of this story. Plenty of people make fake paranormal content. If Smug Puppy had made the videos, kept quiet when people called them fake, and then revealed the truth later, this could have ended up being a clever little experiment.
The problem is what happened when people started questioning it. Debunkers such as Beardo Gets Scared, PSI had been calling the videos fake for years, and instead of simply ignoring them, Smug Puppy kept defending the footage. People who questioned the videos were pushed back on, and some critics say they were mocked or blocked. That is what makes the confession look so much worse now. It is one thing to fool people with a video. It is another to keep defending something you already know is false.
The money side does not help either. Smug Puppy has argued that the money came from adverts rather than directly from viewers, but that is a pretty weak distinction. The viewers created the traffic, the traffic created the advertising value, and the content was being monetised while a large part of the audience believed they were watching genuine paranormal activity. Nobody outside Smug Puppy can honestly say exactly how much they made without seeing the platform records, but the fact money was being earned from the content makes the trust issue harder to brush aside.
This could have been handled far better. If it really was an experiment, the easiest thing to do would have been to say nothing when people called it fake. Ignore the comments, refuse to explain how the videos were made, then reveal everything at the end and show the tricks. That would have kept the mystery without leaving years of denials behind. Instead, the lie was defended for so long that coming clean was always going to look bad.
Coming clean was still better than carrying on, but by that point a lot of the damage had already been done. Beardo’s criticism now is not really about proving the ghosts were fake anymore, because Smug Puppy has already done that themselves. It is about the fact that people were saying it for years and were repeatedly told, directly or indirectly, that they were wrong.
That is the real problem here. The ghosts being fake is almost the least interesting part. The damage came from defending the story long after people had started seeing through it. Once you spend years telling people something is real, admitting later that it was not is always going to come with a price.
Spirit Box Videos on the Recently Deceased Need to Stop
There is something about recent spirit box videos that does not sit right with me, When somebody has only just passed away, especially if their death is all over the news, it feels wrong to see channels rushing to make ITC or spirit box videos about them.
The family may still be grieving, the funeral may not have even happened yet, and strangers are already putting that person’s face in thumbnails and claiming they have made contact with them. That is where paranormal investigation starts to look more like content chasing. Spirit boxes also need to be treated with a lot more caution than they often are.
These devices scan radio frequencies, so if somebody’s name is already being mentioned on the radio, in news reports, interviews or talk shows, then hearing that name come through a spirit box is not automatically paranormal. Of course certain names, places or details might appear, They are already being talked about everywhere.
That is why a name coming through during a session on a recently deceased famous person should never be treated as solid proof that the person is communicating, Editing can also make these sessions look far more convincing than they really are.
A session might last an hour, but the viewer only sees the few moments that seem to match the questions being asked. Add subtitles telling people what they are supposed to hear and suddenly a random bit of radio sounds like a clear response. This does not mean every investigator is deliberately misleading people, but it does mean viewers should be careful.
There is also another side to this that does not get talked about enough, people who disagree with these channels and do commentary can sometimes fall into the same trap without realising.
If a creator makes a video saying that spirit box channels are exploiting a recently deceased person, but then uses a huge photograph of that same person in the thumbnail and puts their name in the title to attract clicks, there is a contradiction there, the intention may be different, but the deceased person is still being used to sell the video in a different way more then likely not fully thinking about it.
these videos does not always need the deceased person’s face plastered across the thumbnail. The focus should be on the behaviour, the method and the ethics of what is happening. a title such as “Why Recent-Death Spirit Box Videos Are a Problem” makes the point without turning the person who died into the main attraction.
Sometimes a screenshot or image may be needed for context, and there is nothing wrong with discussing a case responsibly, but there is a difference between showing something for explanation and using somebody’s death as clickbait. The same rule should apply to everyone.
ITC channels, paranormal investigators, debunkers and commentary channels should all remember that behind the story is a real person and a real family. Whether you believe spirit communication is possible or not, there should still be some respect. i understand its coming from the right place in heart for the debunkers and commetnery channels. If the ITC channel wasnt making the HIDOUS videos in the first place this wouldnt be happening.
If a person has only just died, maybe the most respectful thing is not to rush to contact them, debunk them, react to them or build content around them. Sometimes people should simply be allowed to rest.
abit of a contreversial one but interesting i would love to know your thoughts on this.
Sick Emojis Spark Paranormal Feud as Nick Groff Fires Back at Adam Berry Over Cripple Creek ParaCon
A handful of emojis appear to have helped ignite one of the paranormal community’s latest public fallouts, after Nick Groff responded furiously to Adam Berry following Berry’s reaction to the Cripple Creek ParaCon 2027 lineup.
What might initially have looked like a relatively ordinary complaint about not being invited back quickly escalated into something much more personal, with Groff accusing Berry of disrespecting both himself and his wife, Tessa Groff, before bringing years of alleged behind-the-scenes tension into the open.
But did Adam Berry actually accuse Nick Groff of getting him removed from the event?
From what we can establish from the posts circulating online, that isn’t quite what happened.
And that distinction could be important.
Adam Berry Wasn’t Happy About the New Lineup
Berry had previously appeared at Cripple Creek ParaCon and made it clear on social media that he was disappointed about apparently not being invited back for the 2027 event.
In the post being shared around the paranormal community, Berry said he was confused by the decision, pointing out that he had supported the event and believed they had enjoyed a successful turnout.
He described it as feeling like a “slap in the face” and joked that he would now have to find another event to attend that weekend.
However, the part that appears to have really caused trouble wasn’t simply Berry saying he was disappointed.
It was his reaction to who was apparently appearing instead.
Berry used sick or disgust-style emojis when referring to or reacting to members of the announced lineup — a lineup which included Nick Groff and Tessa Groff.
And Nick clearly didn’t see the emojis as an innocent joke.
Were the Emojis Aimed at Nick and Tessa?
This is where interpretation becomes important.
Putting a sick or disgusted emoji beside somebody’s name or photograph can obviously be interpreted as insulting.
If Berry intended the emojis to represent his opinion of the people appearing at the convention, it’s understandable why Nick would regard that as disrespectful toward both himself and his wife.
But an emoji is still not the same thing as a written accusation.
There is an important difference between saying:
“Nick Groff got me removed from this event.”
and posting a disgusted reaction to seeing Nick and Tessa on the lineup after discovering you are no longer appearing yourself.
The latter can certainly be rude.
It does not, by itself, establish that Berry accused either of them of orchestrating his removal.
That distinction appears to have become somewhat lost once the argument exploded.
Nick Groff Responds: “None of Us Had Anything to Do With Adam Not Being Invited Back”
Groff responded with a lengthy public Facebook statement, opening by saying:
“Adam Berry publicly brought my name and my wife Tessa Groff name into his complaint about not being invited back to Cripple Creek Paracon 2027.”
Nick then made his position crystal clear.
He said neither he nor Tessa had anything to do with Berry not returning to the convention.
Groff also said that he hadn’t even known Jason Hawes and Shari DeBenedetti were appearing at the event with himself and Tessa.
That is arguably the most relevant part of Nick’s response.
If Berry’s emojis gave followers the impression that Nick or Tessa were somehow responsible for him being excluded, Groff had every right to correct that impression.
At present, there is no evidence in the material we’ve seen showing that Nick or Tessa had any involvement in deciding whether Adam Berry appeared at Cripple Creek ParaCon 2027.
But Nick Didn’t Stop There
This is where the dispute went from an argument over emojis to a full-scale paranormal-industry feud.
Instead of simply saying, “We didn’t have anything to do with this, please leave us out of it,” Groff unleashed years of apparent frustration.
Nick accused Adam Berry and Amy Bruni of what he described as attacks, poor behaviour, false accusations and false narratives.
He wrote:
“Unfortunately, I’ve had to deal with Amy and Adam’s attacks, poor behavior at events, false accusations and narratives…”
Groff also accused the pair of subsequently portraying themselves as victims.
Those are substantially more serious claims than anything conveyed by a sick emoji.
And Groff wasn’t finished.
Why Did Amy Bruni Get Dragged Into It?
Perhaps the strangest element of Nick’s statement is that Amy Bruni apparently wasn’t involved in Adam Berry’s post at all.
Nick actually acknowledges this himself.
He wrote that Amy wasn’t part of Adam’s post but argued that Adam and Amy had worked together professionally and personally for years.
That history is clearly relevant to how Nick personally views the situation, but it doesn’t necessarily make Amy relevant to the specific Cripple Creek ParaCon dispute.
Nick’s response therefore appears to demonstrate that this wasn’t really just about an emoji.
The emoji may have been the match. There was already plenty of fuel underneath it.
Groff appears to have regarded Berry’s post as the latest incident in a much longer-running conflict involving himself, Tessa, Adam and Amy.
That helps explain the intensity of the response.
Whether it justifies it is another question.
Nick: “If You’re Not Being Invited Back… Take a Look at Yourself”
Groff then delivered perhaps the harshest part of his statement.
He suggested that if somebody wasn’t being invited back to events, they should consider whether their own behaviour might be responsible rather than blaming others.
That significantly changed the nature of the exchange.
Nick was no longer merely denying responsibility.
He appeared to be suggesting there could be another reason why Adam wasn’t invited back.
However, Nick didn’t provide evidence showing why Cripple Creek ParaCon made its decision.
Unless the organisers themselves confirm the reason, people should be cautious about assuming Berry’s alleged behaviour caused his removal.
“I Have the Receipts”
Nick finished his response with what may turn out to be the most significant sentence in the entire argument:
“I know the facts. And I have the receipts.”
That’s a powerful statement.
But receipts only settle an argument when they’re actually produced.
Nick may well possess messages, emails or other information supporting what he has alleged about previous encounters with Adam Berry and Amy Bruni.
At the time of the post shown to us, however, those receipts weren’t included.
Until they are made public, Nick’s broader accusations remain Nick Groff’s account of events, rather than independently proven facts.
Daniel Klaes Sides With Nick
Paranormal investigator Daniel Klaes also weighed into the discussion underneath Nick’s post.
Klaes argued that publicly attacking other talent or the convention itself was unlikely to help somebody’s chances of being invited back.
He wrote that there were “far more professional ways” to deal with disappointment or disagreements privately.
His point raises a fair question.
Even if Berry had every right to be annoyed, was using sick emojis against people on the replacement lineup the right way to express it?
Probably not.
If those emojis were intended as an insult toward Nick, Tessa or others appearing at the event, then it was an unnecessary public swipe.
Berry could have criticised the organisers’ decision without making the other guests look responsible for something they may have had absolutely nothing to do with.
But Did Nick Overreact?
This is where our assessment becomes more nuanced.
Nick had a legitimate reason to be annoyed.
If somebody publicly put a sick or disgusted emoji next to a lineup featuring you and your wife, it’s perfectly reasonable to take that personally.
Nick was also entirely entitled to make it clear that neither he nor Tessa was responsible for Adam not being invited back.
That could have been the end of it.
Instead, Nick’s response expanded into allegations about years of behaviour involving Adam and Amy Bruni, accusations about victim narratives, comments suggesting Adam should examine his own behaviour and a declaration that he possesses “receipts.”
In other words, Adam threw a small social-media grenade. Nick responded with the paranormal equivalent of an artillery barrage.
Whether that response was justified depends heavily on whatever history exists between them that the public hasn’t seen.
So Who Was in the Wrong?
There are really two separate questions.
Was Adam wrong to use the sick emojis?
If those emojis were aimed at Nick, Tessa or the other announced guests, yes — it was petty and unprofessional.
Those guests are not necessarily responsible for who a convention books.
Being disappointed with the organisers doesn’t justify publicly insulting other people simply because their photographs appear on the new lineup.
It also creates an obvious implication.
Followers seeing Adam react with disgust to Nick and Tessa appearing where he expected to appear could understandably conclude there was bad blood or that Berry somehow associated them with the decision.
That’s exactly the impression Nick appears to have objected to.
Was Nick wrong to respond?
No — not for correcting the record.
Nick had every right to say neither he nor Tessa had anything to do with Adam not being invited back.
In fact, making that clarification publicly was probably sensible considering Adam had made his reaction public.
But Nick’s response went much further than correcting the record.
Dragging Amy Bruni into a post she apparently wasn’t involved with and raising years of alleged incidents transformed what could have been a simple clarification into a much larger personal feud.
Those broader accusations now carry their own burden of proof.
Our Verdict
On the original disagreement, Nick Groff has the stronger argument.
Adam Berry was perfectly entitled to be disappointed about apparently not returning to Cripple Creek ParaCon.
He was perfectly entitled to question the organisers.
But directing sick or disgusted emojis towards a lineup containing fellow paranormal personalities was always going to be interpreted as a public insult.
Nick and Tessa didn’t organise Adam’s post.
They didn’t choose the emojis.
And, based on the evidence currently available, there is nothing showing they made the decision not to invite him back.
Nick therefore had every right to tell Adam to leave his and Tessa’s names out of it.
Where Nick potentially went too far was turning the dispute into an indictment of Adam Berry and Amy Bruni’s behaviour over several years.
Those allegations may have history behind them, but they are much bigger claims than the original emoji incident and haven’t been proven by the Facebook statement alone.
So, in simple terms:
Adam appears to have started this particular confrontation with an unnecessary public dig.
Nick was justified in responding — but then escalated it considerably.
And perhaps the most revealing part of the whole controversy is that something as simple as a few sick emojis was enough to expose what appears to be years of unresolved tension between some of the paranormal world’s best-known names.
The ghosts might not be fighting — but the ghost hunters certainly are.
Editor’s note: This article distinguishes between comments visible in the circulating social-media posts and broader allegations made by those involved. Claims concerning past behaviour have not been independently established and are attributed to the individuals making them.
