Location: Christ the Consoler, (near Newby Hall), Skelton-on-Ure, North Yorkshire.
Haunting Date: 1963.
Type of haunting: Photographic apparition.
Sources of research: Published information, photographic evidence and witness reports.
My conclusion: Hoax, resulting from double-exposure photography.
The 'Spectre of Newby Church' originates from the purported figure found in a photograph of the altar at the church of Christ the Consoler in the grounds of Newby Hall, near the village of Skelton-on-Ure in North Yorkshire. The photograph allegedly depicts a human figure, with many differing accounts as to what type of person it is. The majority of claims suggest the figure is that of a 16th-centrury monk, with his face shrouded in a white mask, which has led to suggestions that it was masking leprosy or another facial disfigurement. Sceptics believe the figure is an acquaintance of the photographer in costume.
The photographer was Reverend Kenneth F Lord, who was in the church photographing it's features, and he considered the Altar to be one of the building's finest features. There have been claims that the figure measures at some 9 feet tall, but this has since been disproven due to the location of the figure's gown trailing down a step, the height of which the photograph was taken and the feet not being visible. I am of the opinion that it is likely that the figure was standing on something to artificially raise it's height, and the position of the camera, led to the depiction of a taller figure. The Reverend Lord at the time of taking the photograph, claimed to have been alone in the church. There had been no history of paranormal activity to that point.
The have been cases in the past that similar images have been created, purporting to depict similar phantom figures, many of which have been found to have been the result of double-exposure photography. It would be remiss of me to not comment on the striking similarity of the figure at Newby Church to that of proven hoaxed photographs. As soon as Lord made the photographs public, there was almost immediate negative and sceptical reaction. Many critics citing that the photograph was ''too good'' to be true, the figure was 'conveniently completely cloaked' and it was looking directly at the camera. Lord was annoyed that his photograph was criticised.
The photograph was later sent away to be professionally examined, with scientists believing that the photo had not been tampered with and was therefore assumed to be genuine. Despite the many criticisms and scepticism associated with this photograph, it has become one of the world's most famous ghost pictures, on the basis of it's ''perfection'' and allegedly genuine origin.
I find it tricky to make a determination as regards the conclusion of this photograph. On one hand, I'd like to hope that a generally regarded respectable witness such as a Reverend would not create a knowingly hoaxed image, but the fact that a very simple explanation of a double-exposure photograph would easily not only account for how a photograph such as this could be easily created, but also that in recent years recreations of the photograph have been made and they all almost identically create a similar image. It is due to the latter that, reluctantly, I determine that the photograph is a hoax. I would, however, be delighted to be proven (beyond reasonable doubt) that my determination is wrong. It is a spectacular image in it's own right.