Psychics.
After having watched a documentary on one of the TV Channels, which programme was on psychics, I was intrigued by the suggestion that certain Police Forces have acted upon the unsolicited information from such individuals when cases have 'gone cold'
I would think that this is a subject that is not spoken about in the British Police Forces?
All the examples seem to come from the American Police.
What I would now like to know is what makes a Police Officer who is in charge of an investiagtion consider this type of 'Hearsay' evidence.
The reason that I call it 'Hearsay' is that the individual receiving the detail gets it from a third party and can not identify the source of that detail?
I am sure that there maybe the odd one or two uniformed individuals who are viewers of the ads on this site...so, you can always respond to this posting, here in the Forum. Alternatively, and better still send me a private message.
I find this subject so fascinating that maybe the offer of a cuppa at my place might be on-the-cards?
Has anyone got any contacts, or who knows someone with an interest in this subject?
obediance.
...............................................
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Psychics
Sex God
Surely any suggestions or hints of advice coming from a pshychic could never ever constitute evidence, nor could it be considered as evidence. On the other hand, it might be hoped that such shared information might well lead to the uncovering of evidence.
Good luck with finding a police officer to "sit down" with.
It might be worth writing to the "Met.", or to some other force, and to tell them of your interest. They might well be able to point you to a source of information.
Good luck with finding a police officer to "sit down" with.
It might be worth writing to the "Met.", or to some other force, and to tell them of your interest. They might well be able to point you to a source of information.
Dear Skinny, many thanks for your suggestion.
My latest discovery is one that may bring a smile to everyone's face. It concerns the civil case in America within which the family of the late Michael Jackson took on the organisation AEG Live.
During the course of the Hearing, an individual from the Witness Box repeated details that they had received either from a psychic or which they themselves had received because of such an ability. (I think it was Lionel Ritchie's ex, but don't quote me)
When the evidence concluded the Los Angeles Superior Court Judge declared that the evidence given "..shall stand".
I often wonder whether an officer may be influenced by a personal philosophical belief/outlook when it come to either accepting or rejecting the detail.
But thanks again for the advice.
regards.
.............................
My latest discovery is one that may bring a smile to everyone's face. It concerns the civil case in America within which the family of the late Michael Jackson took on the organisation AEG Live.
During the course of the Hearing, an individual from the Witness Box repeated details that they had received either from a psychic or which they themselves had received because of such an ability. (I think it was Lionel Ritchie's ex, but don't quote me)
When the evidence concluded the Los Angeles Superior Court Judge declared that the evidence given "..shall stand".
I often wonder whether an officer may be influenced by a personal philosophical belief/outlook when it come to either accepting or rejecting the detail.
But thanks again for the advice.
regards.
.............................
Nobody would ever submit it as evidence, it is usually used to locate missing persons or bodies, used as evidence I have no doubt it would be inadmissible not as hearsay but as conjecture. Whatever they call it, it would never be accepted since convictions can only be obtained where the prosecution can prove their case "beyond reasonable doubt"
I am not a believer in the occult, mediums, tarot cards and all that but not a disbeliever either and there is compelling evidence that the Police have achieved results which they themselves believe they would not have achieved without the assistance of mediums. Perhaps it is something in minds in a similar form to De je vu that many of us experience and is not 100% explained.
I am not a believer in the occult, mediums, tarot cards and all that but not a disbeliever either and there is compelling evidence that the Police have achieved results which they themselves believe they would not have achieved without the assistance of mediums. Perhaps it is something in minds in a similar form to De je vu that many of us experience and is not 100% explained.
Very interesting points.
Conjecture usually means something along the lines of guesswork, and is often used by counsel to put question to a statement.
In Criminal Law, I think it is as you say "Beyond reasonable doubt". However in Civil Law it is "On the balance of probabilities".
What would you say if one of the victims of a Criminal Act managed to survive that Act - whilst the other perished. The survivor subsequently making a statement to the effect that they had foreseen the fatal act a week prior to it happening?
Then a short time after the crime, further lucid 'dreams/visions' that enabled that surviving victim to describe the perpetrator eventhough they had never seen the person?
A person is arrested for the fatal crime. The survivor is called to the Witness Stand to present their "psychically" received sightings and confirm the identity of the accused and their criminal act.
The question that now arise is: "Should that survivor of the Criminal Act be permitted to take the Witness Box and give evidence regarding what they saw previously and what they saw after the act?
If as you say, you have the right to believe it, does it not follow that you also have the right to express it - within the law? This brings up the consideraqtion of Human Rights 'Freedom of Expression' I suppose?
................
One appreciates life when there is the possibility of it being taken from them - reflection on the circumstance of that "taking" and the circumstances of its being retained is something that has to be appreciated.....
It is not a one-off encounter, perhaps?
Is the water in a well appreciated before or more so after that well runs dry?
....................
When you can take the pebble from my hand - then it is time for you to leave
.
................
Conjecture usually means something along the lines of guesswork, and is often used by counsel to put question to a statement.
In Criminal Law, I think it is as you say "Beyond reasonable doubt". However in Civil Law it is "On the balance of probabilities".
What would you say if one of the victims of a Criminal Act managed to survive that Act - whilst the other perished. The survivor subsequently making a statement to the effect that they had foreseen the fatal act a week prior to it happening?
Then a short time after the crime, further lucid 'dreams/visions' that enabled that surviving victim to describe the perpetrator eventhough they had never seen the person?
A person is arrested for the fatal crime. The survivor is called to the Witness Stand to present their "psychically" received sightings and confirm the identity of the accused and their criminal act.
The question that now arise is: "Should that survivor of the Criminal Act be permitted to take the Witness Box and give evidence regarding what they saw previously and what they saw after the act?
If as you say, you have the right to believe it, does it not follow that you also have the right to express it - within the law? This brings up the consideraqtion of Human Rights 'Freedom of Expression' I suppose?
................
One appreciates life when there is the possibility of it being taken from them - reflection on the circumstance of that "taking" and the circumstances of its being retained is something that has to be appreciated.....
It is not a one-off encounter, perhaps?
Is the water in a well appreciated before or more so after that well runs dry?
....................
When you can take the pebble from my hand - then it is time for you to leave
.
................
Quote by Max777
The term ' beyond all reasonable doubt' is no longer used and has not been used for some time. Judges now direct juries that they must 'be sure that the defendent is guilty'
I knew you were going to say that
Seems like a wise move really since it is extremely difficult to ever prove something beyond reasonable doubt as history has proved.
When an individual who has a vast knowledge of a particular subject enters the Witness Box, to confirm or put question to a particular set of facts, they are often referred to as "Expert Witnesses"?
But if a psychic - or person of such perceptions - is called to the Witness Box, by what status would they be called, would it be "Expert Witness"?
and would the recent removal of "expert witness" immunity still apply to a psychic?
Would like to know the answer to that one!
Surely there must be a member of SH who wears silk.
regards.
......................
Which is the greater DEATH - that within or that from without?
.....................
Grass-Hopper; When you can snatch the pebble from my hand - then it is time for you to leave
..........
But if a psychic - or person of such perceptions - is called to the Witness Box, by what status would they be called, would it be "Expert Witness"?
and would the recent removal of "expert witness" immunity still apply to a psychic?
Would like to know the answer to that one!
Surely there must be a member of SH who wears silk.
regards.
......................
Which is the greater DEATH - that within or that from without?
.....................
Grass-Hopper; When you can snatch the pebble from my hand - then it is time for you to leave
..........
