6 Most Disturbing Pieces of Lost Media
Lost media is any media that is no longer accessible due to being destroyed, misplaced, or unreleased. These are some of the most unnerving known cases of lost media on the internet.
Follow our telegram group to get the latest movie updates
https://t.me/seriestoponlineUSA
Lost media is any media that is no longer accessible due to being destroyed, misplaced, or unreleased. These are some of the most unnerving known cases of lost media on the internet.
Follow our telegram group to get the latest movie updates
https://t.me/seriestoponlineUSA
Category
🎥
Short filmTranscript
00:00Unsolved Mysteries Lost Episode
00:02On July 9th, 2024, one Reddit user made an extremely unsettling post on the RBI or the
00:10Reddit Bureau of Investigation subreddit which read,
00:14Help finding a TV episode to possibly solve a murder.
00:18I've spent years and hours through Google trying to locate this and was advised you
00:22guys might be able to help.
00:24Trying to find what rerun episode of Unsolved Mysteries aired on a specific date slash location
00:29that I'm convinced had a story of my ex-husband murdering a couple.
00:34I was at a hotel in Bakersfield, California on August 17, 2000 and at 11pm they had a rerun
00:40of Unsolved Mysteries on the TV.
00:43I have no idea what station would have played it.
00:46I'm watching them talk about a situation where a smooth-talking stranger gets himself invited
00:50into their home, etc.
00:53I jokingly kept thinking to myself, yeah I know someone smooth like that.
00:57This person ended up murdering the couple.
00:59Fast forward to the end and they show a sketch.
01:02I literally sat up in the bed.
01:05It was my ex.
01:06Yes, he would have been capable of that and I believe he would have been driving through
01:10that area around that time, angry that I just left him.
01:13The user also mentioned that they had already contacted the show but hadn't received any
01:17answers from them.
01:19And despite years of looking online, they haven't found any clues.
01:24Now my first assumption when I came across this post was that it was nothing more than a
01:27hoax created by the user.
01:29After all, the idea of someone stumbling upon their ex-husband's involvement in a murder
01:34during a late night rerun of a TV show feels almost too cinematic.
01:38Maybe they had a flair for dramatics or maybe they were just a fan of lost media.
01:43So they crafted their own dark tale with a personal twist that would leave the readers yearning for
01:47an update that would never come.
01:49However, the more I looked into the case, the less plausible this theory seemed.
01:54For starters, I looked through their posts and common history on reddit and didn't find
01:58a particular interest in lost media, horror, or anything of that nature.
02:03The account was also created back in 2018, so it wasn't created recently to fabricate
02:08this bizarre story.
02:09More importantly, the details given in the post seem a bit too specific to be something
02:13the original poster just made up.
02:16I went through old TV schedule guides from around that time, and sure enough, a rerun
02:21of Unsolved Mysteries did air on the live channel on the 17th of August 2000 at around 8pm.
02:27But if the reddit user is telling the truth, how did an entire episode of such a popular
02:32and well-documented TV show just vanish into thin air?
02:36Especially since the whole show is now available on YouTube, and yet there's no sign of an episode
02:41matching their description.
02:42The closest case I found was from a 1994 episode about the disappearance of Jonathan Francia.
02:49The investigators working on this case were able to create a sketch of the potential suspect,
02:53and it was a man with a long face and a cowboy hat.
02:56This did match the description the reddit user gave in a comment about the sketch they saw on TV.
03:01However, this is where the similarities ended between the two cases.
03:05To make matters even more puzzling, another person claimed to remember something similar
03:09in a comment reading,
03:10I have a vague recollection of this episode as well.
03:14I'm going to go through the episodes I've watched on Unsolved Mysteries on YouTube and
03:18see if I recognize it.
03:20Unfortunately, despite re-watching all of the available episodes, they didn't find anything
03:24about the mysterious case either.
03:27Though, it's entirely possible that Unsolved Mysteries changed parts of their episode after
03:31it's rerun in August of 2000.
03:33As redditor Rob Frey mentions in their comment,
03:36The reason why it might be so hard to find, and why you can't just watch old episodes to find it,
03:41is the segment may have been changed from what was originally aired.
03:45Unsolved Mysteries used to edit segments as new information came forward, especially after a case
03:50was officially solved.
03:52If they caught the guy who did it, they may have removed a lot of the information from the case that
03:55made you think it was your ex.
03:57Especially information that was completely speculative, or a red herring.
04:01As an example, I remember they had a really good segment about a murder in a family who owned a
04:06U-Haul, and it went into a lot of the family infighting and drama, and there was at least an
04:10implication that a family member was most likely to blame.
04:14When they caught the guy, and it turned out to be a random breaking and entering,
04:18they cut all of the family drama stuff out of the segment, and added an update that the case
04:22was solved.
04:22The only potential flaw in this theory is that if Unsolved Mysteries changed that episode
04:27because the case was quote-unquote solved, the Reddit user would have likely learned about
04:32their ex getting arrested, but that didn't happen.
04:35From what I've seen, the most likely theory is that maybe they saw the sketch on some other
04:39crime show, and are simply misremembering it as a part of the Unsolved Mysteries episode
04:43after so many years.
04:45This would explain why no one was able to find the hint, despite scouring every episode of
04:50the show from its conception.
04:51However, if this turns out to be true, it would also make searching for what they saw
04:55on TV that night exponentially more difficult.
04:58Unfortunately, unless someone finds concrete evidence, we have no way of confirming or disproving
05:03any of these theories.
05:05That being said, if this lost media is ever uncovered by people on the internet, it could
05:10help authorities solve a decades-old crime and catch the suspect.
05:17Easily Available Explosive
05:18During the 2016 Silicon Valley Comic Con, one of the hosts of Mythbusters, Adam Savage,
05:25was doing a panel answering questions from fans of the show.
05:28Near the end of the panel, someone asked him about the biggest disaster he's experienced
05:32on Mythbusters.
05:33What is the biggest disaster that you've ever had behind the scenes filming Mythbusters?
05:40Now, this fan was likely expecting something tame, like a crew member spilling something,
05:44or one of the devices they built breaking before they could film the episode, something of that
05:48nature.
05:49However, no one could have anticipated the answer Adam gave for this simple question.
05:53The material they discovered was so explosive and dangerous that they had to report it to
06:21DARPA, which is a research and development agency of the United States Department of Defense.
06:26Adam also quickly moved on to the next question, likely in an effort to avoid giving any hints
06:31about what this dangerous material could be.
06:34Following that panel, he refused to utter a single word about the last episode or the
06:38material that made them destroy the footage.
06:40That silence was held until the 20th of November, 2023, when he uploaded a Q&A video on his YouTube
06:46channel titled, These Mythbusters Stories Got Scrapped Due to Danger.
06:51The first question in this video was someone asking about footage that was destroyed outside
06:55of Adam's control.
06:56At first, he gave a predictable answer, explaining how network decisions, like cutting scenes to
07:01make room for advertisements, had led to some lost content.
07:04By the way, before moving on to the next question, he brought up the commonly available explosive
07:08again.
07:09And while he was careful not to drop any hints about what the material could be, he did go
07:13into more detail about why they decided to erase the footage from existence.
07:17We were looking at the explosive, the purported explosive power of a commonly available material
07:24and what we found was something so energetic when we executed it that we agreed to not talk
07:33about what we learned.
07:35Mm-hmm.
07:35Yeah.
07:36Yeah.
07:37It was common enough, easy enough to implement, easy enough to execute that we were like,
07:41the world will not benefit from this knowledge.
07:44This is the reason you never saw a silencer episode from Mythbusters.
07:48Is a potato a good silencer?
07:50A pillow?
07:50A two-liter bottle of soda?
07:52These are all really interesting questions.
07:55And silencers are fascinating technologically.
07:58But silenced rounds are not a benefit to humanity.
08:04This makes total sense considering Mythbusters had tens of millions of viewers from around the
08:08world.
08:08The show built its reputation on demystifying myths and delivering facts, no matter how surprising
08:14or dangerous they might be.
08:16By withholding the episode, it may seem like they went against their own character.
08:20Some might even argue they had a responsibility to release the episode, both for the sake of
08:24scientific transparency and to educate the public about potential risks.
08:29Educating people about the potential dangers of a common material could have sparked important
08:33conversations about safety and regulation, potentially preventing accidents born out of ignorance.
08:37But here's the other side that's hard to ignore.
08:41Mythbusters wasn't just a science show, it was also entertainment.
08:45Publishing a step-by-step guide on how to weaponize an easily available material would
08:50have been, at best, irresponsible and, at worst, catastrophic.
08:54The world isn't short on people who might misuse such information, and the stakes were simply
08:59too high to ignore.
09:01So, the team's decision to shelve the episode was the responsible thing to do.
09:05That said, I did some digging online, and speculation about what this mysterious explosive
09:10could be is all over the place.
09:13Some claim that it's simply flour.
09:14For those who don't know, non-compacted flour is extremely flammable, and can easily create
09:20a sizable explosion upon combustion.
09:23Another chemical that came up in multiple theories was tannerite.
09:26It's a binary explosive that is commonly used for long-range weapons practice.
09:32It's helpful for marking targets since it detonates visibly on impact.
09:36More importantly, it's widely available online.
09:39Someone can easily buy tannerite online for relatively cheap without any permit or verification.
09:43However, here's the problem with both of these theories.
09:47Neither material creates an explosive dangerous enough to justify the drastic steps the Mythbusters
09:52team took.
09:54For instance, while a tannerite explosion is certainly impressive, it's not nearly dangerous
09:58enough to warrant such a drastic response from the Mythbusters team.
10:02While researching the topic, I came across a chemical known as triacetone triperoxide, which
10:07perfectly fits with what we know about the mystery chemical.
10:10For starters, both of the materials required to make triacetone triperoxide are found in
10:15most homes.
10:17Acetone, which is used as paint thinner and nail polish remover, and peroxide, which is
10:21commonly used as a bleaching agent for white laundry.
10:24More importantly, even tiny amounts of triacetone triperoxide can do unimaginable damage.
10:31Ultimately, unless someone somewhere has a secret copy of that episode and releases it on
10:36the internet, we'll never know for sure.
10:39And given how Adam described the danger of this material, it's just one of those rare
10:43cases where it's honestly better for the video to remain lost media.
10:50Jay Leno Blade Incident
10:51On April 14th, 2022, an anonymous user on 4chan's TV board mentioned a disturbing incident they
10:59remembered from an old episode of The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.
11:02They stated,
11:03One time Jay Leno had a magician on his show and he was doing some sort of cut the lady
11:08in half trick.
11:09He starts to cut and the lady starts yelling for him to stop like she was actually getting
11:14cut or about to get cut and they start helping her out.
11:17I have never seen or heard anything since and never been able to find the clip.
11:22The episode in question aired on the 21st of June 2001.
11:25And as the story goes, one of the guests on that episode was Arsenio Hall, who was going
11:30to perform a classic magic trick of cutting a person in half.
11:34However, while he was performing the trick, something went horribly wrong.
11:38He accidentally stabbed the woman who was volunteering for the trick.
11:42A notable thing about this episode was that Leno wanted to show solidarity with the California
11:46power outages.
11:48So, he hosted his show in a set that was only illuminated by scattered candles and handheld
11:53flashlights given to the audience.
11:54Maybe the lack of visibility caused Arsenio to make a mistake and harm the woman.
12:00Unfortunately, a vast majority of old Tonight Show episodes barely exist in archives and
12:05therefore are considered lost media.
12:07The June 21st episode is among those lost to time.
12:11So, there's no way for me to directly verify this incident.
12:14But I did find enough clues to piece together what might have happened and there are three
12:19distinct possibilities.
12:21First, is that such an incident never actually happened and the 4chan
12:24poster was making it all up.
12:27However, this possibility doesn't hold up because I found old forum posts from 2001 where
12:32people were actively discussing the incident online after watching it.
12:35Like this person named Dan whose post gives more details about what exactly went down.
12:40Did anyone else watch the Tonight Show with Jay Leno Monday night?
12:43It was a repeat, the one where they turned out all the lights in the studio and had a blackout.
12:48Anyways, so Arsenio Hall was the guest and he was going to do a magic trick where he was
12:52going to cut a woman in half.
12:54So, the woman is lying in the box and he's trying to shove the blade through and all of
12:59the sudden the woman starts screaming and yelling, it cut me.
13:02And like immediately they cut to a commercial.
13:05I was like, what?
13:06It has to be a joke.
13:08So then when they came back from commercial, Jay seemed flustered and they didn't mention
13:12anything else about the trick for the rest of the night.
13:15Did anyone else see this?
13:16Does anyone know anything about what happened with this woman?
13:19It was so freaky.
13:21I also found someone on Reddit who also remembers the incident and mentioned it in the comments
13:25of a post discussing the incident, stating,
13:28Holy, I thought I dreamed that episode.
13:31I've been wondering what happened to that lady for 20 years.
13:34So, a woman did get stabbed on the Jay Leno show, or at least that's what it looked like
13:38to the audience.
13:39Which brings us to the second possibility.
13:42The woman did get hurt and the incident was later covered up by the network to avoid
13:45backlash from the public.
13:47However, as much as some people would like to believe this,
13:50this is nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
13:53Because, as it turns out, the Jay Leno show is not live.
13:56It's taped ahead of time.
13:58So, if they wanted to cover it up, they would have edited that whole thing out long before
14:02the episode ever saw the light of day.
14:04Even knowing this, some claim that the showrunners simply forgot to edit this section out and only
14:09realized their mistake when it was too late.
14:11Which is a bit of a stretch.
14:14Think of it this way, Jay Leno's show was getting upwards of 7 million viewers in 2001.
14:18So, even if the network tried to bury the whole thing later, why didn't any of these
14:23millions of viewers cause any backlash?
14:26From what I've seen, the most plausible theory is that the incident did happen, but
14:30it was all part of a skit.
14:31And the people who thought it was somehow real were simply not paying enough attention
14:35or just didn't realize the dry humor of the scene.
14:38This would explain why there was no uproar from the public.
14:40And as for the episode becoming lost media, that wasn't a deliberate cover-up, just a
14:45side effect of the pre-YouTube era when preserving TV episodes wasn't a priority.
14:50But who knows, if the speculation gains enough momentum, Jay Leno, Arsenio Hall, or someone
14:56else from the show's production team might come forward with the truth.
14:59Until then, all we have are educated guesses to piece together the mystery.
15:03Sharon Davis' Unsolved Mysteries Episode
15:09Sharon Eugene Davis was a 51-year-old schoolteacher living in Dallas, Texas.
15:15She lived with her two children, Autumn and Ronnie, and their husband of 21 years, Ron Davis,
15:20who she married back in 1980.
15:23Unfortunately, her relationship with Ron wasn't ideal.
15:25Just five years after their marriage in 1985, Sharon filed for divorce while describing her
15:31husband as controlling and ill-tempered.
15:34She withdrew cash from their mutual account and was planning to move to LA with her two
15:38children.
15:39However, soon after filing for divorce, she mysteriously changed her mind and returned
15:43to living with Ron.
15:45Fast forward to June 11, 2001, Sharon once again found the courage to file for divorce.
15:50And this time, she was prepared to go through with the decision at any cost.
15:53She was planning to move out of her house in the 1900 block of Elderleaf Drive, all while
15:59her attorney was trying to obtain a temporary restraining order against Ron, her husband.
16:04However, just as everything seemed to be falling into place, tragedy struck.
16:08On June 13, 2001, at around 7 a.m., Sharon dropped her daughter at Rapid Transit Park and
16:14Ride Station, two miles from their home, and went on her way.
16:17She was scheduled to attend a training session at Stemmons Elementary, but she never arrived.
16:23Even after her children asked their father to report their mother missing on the evening
16:27of June 13, 2001, he refused to contact the authorities until a day later, starting a citywide
16:33search for Sharon.
16:35And after four days of searching, investigators finally found her car abandoned in a parking
16:39lot near the Southwest Mall in Oak Cliff.
16:42The car had a broken window and was also wiped clean of fingerprints.
16:46And while all of this was highly suspicious, the lack of evidence meant that Sharon's disappearance
16:51was filed as a missing person case.
16:53Ron and her two children were called in for interviews multiple times, but the investigators
16:58weren't able to find any leads from either of them.
17:01Sharon's mysterious disappearance two days after her filing for divorce also made Ron the
17:05prime suspect in many people's eyes.
17:07However, the complete lack of evidence prevented authorities from treating him as the potential
17:12perpetrator.
17:13When asked about it, this is what the lead officer had to say.
17:17We've had a lot of people ask us if he, Ron Davis, is a suspect.
17:21This is a missing person case.
17:23There are no suspects at this time.
17:25We don't have any criminal evidence, although we fear foul play has occurred.
17:29Right now, Mr. Davis is a witness, an uncooperative witness.
17:32And after months without any leads, Sharon's case caught the attention of the producer of
17:37Unsolved Mysteries, who wanted to air an episode on her case.
17:40They produced the segment in mid to late 2001, and it was scheduled for broadcast sometime
17:45in spring of 2002.
17:47The last thing they needed was an interview from Ron.
17:49However, when the producers approached him, he denied their request and was quite stern about it.
17:54But when they wanted to air the segment without Ron's interview, he objected again and
17:58sent an accusatory letter to the producers telling them not to air the segment on Sharon.
18:03And that's where the lost media aspect of this story comes into play.
18:07The showrunners complied with Ron's request slash threat and scraped the whole thing.
18:12And as far as I'm aware, the footage has never seen the light of day.
18:15It's entirely possible that a witness could have come forward with critical information
18:19after seeing Sharon's story on TV.
18:22However, Ron's refusal closed the door on any potential leads that could have changed
18:25the course of the investigation.
18:27This obviously put a lot more attention on Ron.
18:29He was even given nicknames like The Most Guilty Non-Guilty Man.
18:34But it's been 22 years without any updates to Sharon's case.
18:41Game in the Sand
18:42Game in the Sand is the name of a shocking short film by the German director Werner Herzog.
18:48If you've ever heard of him, you'll know he's famous for pushing boundaries, and not always
18:52in a good way.
18:54His sets are very well known for being chaotic, and there have even been injuries and deaths
18:59during his productions.
19:00And apparently, he's been this way since the very beginning.
19:05You see, Game in the Sand was the second film he ever created back in 1964.
19:10However, after completing the film, Werner was so horrified by the footage that he decided
19:15to never release it to the public.
19:17The only thing we know about the short movie is that it featured two children, a rooster,
19:23and a cardboard box.
19:24It was also filmed in a sandy area, hence the name, and according to Werner, things
19:30quote, got out of hand during shooting.
19:33The premise of the movie is also a complete mystery.
19:36The only thing Werner has talked about is a scene where the rooster was buried in sand
19:40up to its neck.
19:41Everything else we know about the film comes from speculation, and given Werner's reputation,
19:46people online have come up with some pretty wild theories over the years.
19:50Some think the rooster suffocated after being buried, forcing the children to watch it slowly
19:55die.
19:56Others suggest the kids might have killed the rooster in a brutal way, either on their own
20:00or under Werner's instructions.
20:02This could explain why it was buried in the first place.
20:05Some have also speculated the opposite.
20:07Maybe the rooster injured the children with its sharp beak or claws, and Werner captured that
20:11on film.
20:12The problem with these theories, however, is that none of this comes even close to the stuff
20:17that's been released under Werner's other productions.
20:20Like deaths being shown.
20:22What could have gone so wrong during the filming of Game in the Sand that was worse than this?
20:27Of course, there's the possibility that Game in the Sand isn't real at all, just something
20:31Werner made up to add an air of mystery or create hype for his future projects.
20:36Unfortunately, we'll probably never know the truth.
20:38The identities of the children involved were never made public, and the film's composer,
20:43Uwe Brandner, someone who might have been able to shed some light on what really happened,
20:47passed away in 2018.
20:49So, even if the short film is real, I highly doubt Werner would have a change of heart 60
20:53years later and release it to the public.
20:58The Skyway Man
21:00Ormer Locklear was an American daredevil stunt pilot who became popular in the early 20th
21:05century after doing the craziest plane stunt of his time.
21:09After footage of his stunt went viral across the country, Ormer was hired for a role in
21:13a pseudo-documentary film about stunt flights called The Skyway Man in April of 1920.
21:19Put simply, the film was like a collection of the craziest stunts Ormer could successfully
21:24pull off in a plane. Filming for the movie began on June 11, 1920 in the LA and San Francisco
21:30area. However, the stunts featured in the film were quite tough, including a church steeple
21:35being toppled by Locklear's aircraft and an aircraft-to-train transfer, both of which
21:39nearly ended in disaster. But, despite the many close calls, Ormer and the other stunt
21:44pilots remained unharmed. It was soon time to record the last stunt of the film, which
21:49was relatively safe compared to what Ormer had done before. It was going to be a simple
21:53spin move that was filmed during the day, with special camera filters to make it look
21:57like the whole thing was performed at night. However, when Ormer learned that the studio
22:02wasn't going to extend his contract beyond one film, he demanded to perform the stunt
22:06at night, likely as a desperate attempt to impress the producers. Unfortunately, this is where
22:12his luck ran out. On the 2nd of August, 1920, Ormer and his longtime flying partner Milton
22:17Elliott took flight at night. To make the plane visible to the camera in the dark, the production
22:22crew illuminated it with massive arc lights. However, these lights were a bit too bright,
22:28so the crew was going to turn them off after the stunts just so Ormer wouldn't be blinded
22:32and he could land safely. Maybe it was negligence or simply bad luck, but the crew forgot to
22:37turn off the lights. And to everyone's horror, the plane crashed into the ground, killing both
22:42Ormer and Milton on impact. However, unlike today, where such an accident would
22:47shut down even the biggest film productions, at the time, Ormer's death became the selling
22:52point of the film. People flocked to the theater to see the breathtaking stunts, and more importantly,
22:58the uncut death footage of the lead stuntman. Unfortunately, the film has since been lost
23:03to time. We do have some evidence which proves that it was real, like a memorial for Ormer and
23:08Milton in the November 1920 issue of Screenland Magazine. I also found a short review for the film
23:14from the same magazine issue, which reads,
23:16Ormer Locklear's last picture, directed by James Hogan.
23:20Louise Lovely, now a Fox star, furnishes delightful support. Full of thrills and mid-air stunts,
23:27the best picture we have had. The Fox company is giving 10% of the profits of this picture to the
23:32families of Locklear and Elliot, who are killed while filming the final scene.
23:36As for the film itself, it's become lost media in the truest sense of the word. Over the last century,
23:42there have been multiple attempts to locate a copy. All have been unsuccessful.