Reading time: 4 minutes
Paranormal investigator Richard Case talks to DAVID SAUNDERSON about the film, Nandor Fodor and the Talking Mongoose, and his thoughts on the historical real-life mystery
Interview with Richard Case
Richard Case has more than 35 years of experience in paranormal investigation. He combines skepticism with a passion for history and regularly broadcasts live from reportedly haunted buildings around the world. He has a particular interest in the Gef the Talking Mongoose case, which has baffled experts since the 1930s and is the subject of a new film, Nandor Fodor and the Talking Mongoose.
DAVID SAUNDERSON: Thanks for speaking with us today, Richard. We’re all fans of the Give the Talking Mongoose case here on the Spooky Isles. What aspects do you find most intriguing when discussing the Gef the Talking Mongoose case and why?
RICHARD CASE: I found the whole thing fascinating yet bizarre. What I particularly enjoyed was the penny trick that Nandor Fodor apparently loved. They held a coin in their hands and Gef shouted heads or tails. And apparently, when some spiritualists arrived, Gef shouted incorrectly, as if to embarrass them.
When he heard someone say Viorrey was speaking, he also promised to kill their poultry. Further investigation revealed that their poultry was indeed missing. A few hundred years ago this would have put the Irvings at risk of being accused of witchcraft, and it would have been assumed that Gef was an acquaintance of a witch.
When you first saw the film Nandor Fodor and the Talking Mongoose, how did this resonate with your experiences as a seasoned paranormal investigator?
It resonates with me more from Nandor Fodor’s psychological approach. Admittedly, he assessed the evidence at a later stage. I don’t consider myself an investigator of the paranormal. I’m more interested in why people believe such fanciful things. Psychology is very important to me because of such beliefs.
Looking back on the 1930s, in what ways do you think the aura of that time influenced the approach to paranormal investigation compared to today?
The 1930s were a time of enormous spiritualist beliefs after the Great War. Times were much harder for the people, and it was essential to make a living, so I think this may have played a big factor in the belief in spiritual things; the Irvings may have had difficulty with the farm. It was said that they could not sell it easily. But there is no evidence that this played a role in Gef’s appearance.
If you were to delve into the enigma of Gef the Talking Mongoose, what first steps would you take to unravel its historical and contextual background?
I would study the background of Cashen Gap and the surrounding areas. A funerary urn containing black ash had been unearthed nearby and there were reports of people avoiding the farm. The house originally located in Cashen Gap had workmen during the war who refused to sleep there because of the foreboding feeling.
With the technological advancements we have today, what specific tools or methodologies would you use to investigate the paranormal allegations surrounding Gef?
I would use video and CCTV monitoring as I am not a fan of modern gadgets. I believe this would be sufficient for myself, and I would record behind the wood paneling. But if Gef was real, he was notorious for disappearing at such times.
Given the scientific community’s strict scrutiny of paranormal phenomena, how would you address or overcome skepticism and criticism from that sector?
I am very skeptical myself, but it is unscientific to dismiss something without thorough research and gathering empirical evidence. So I would urge an open mind until we complete our investigation.
In the digital age dominated by social media, how would you use it to gather information or disseminate findings about the Gef case?
I would probably check social media for input from Voirrey or the family and friends for signs of fraudulent activity.
When investigating historical paranormal incidents, it is inevitable that we will come across personal or sensitive data. How would you approach managing such sensitive information?
I would use today’s GDPR and respectfully request that all sensitive documents and information be kept strictly confidential.
Evaluating the investigative efforts of Nandor Fodor and Harry Price in the Gef case, what are your thoughts on their methodologies and conclusions?
I was surprised that Nandor decided it was probably James Irving’s split personality that created Gef, after initially believing Gef was real. I believe their methodology was excellent and I would use it myself. Observing the subject is the best way, and both Nandor, Harry and Mr. Lambert have done this.
As you delve into Fodor and Price’s legacy within the paranormal realm, how do you see their influence reflecting on your investigative approach to the Gef case?
I have always been a fan of the psychological aspect of investigating these anomalies, and I believe Nandor was way ahead of the curve in this approach. It would be my first thought. I believe the Gef may have been a split from James of Voirrey. Speaking Yiddish, which Mr. Irving was fluent in, was a possible candidate.
In closing, while I see no gain financially or otherwise for the Irvings to invent Gef, the photographic evidence was suspect, but it is interesting to note that mongooses were introduced to the Isle of Man to control the rabbit population. And the fact that a creature was later killed on the farm
Gef’s enigma becomes fascinating for everyone who encounters it. It had poltergeist elements, but was not attributed to this activity. It remains a beautiful true story and a pleasure to research.
Nandor Fodor and the Talking Mongoose will be available to watch on Amazon Prime in the UK from October 20, 2023.
More information about Richard Case can be found at The Ghost Challenger website.
What are your thoughts on this article? Tell us in the comments below!
