So, you're a detective, and you've caught a major case: a child has disappeared perhaps, or an unidentified woman has been found murdered. The trail is cold. Then a person wanders into the station one day, and says, "I'm seeing a wooded area with a road nearby, the color brown, and also the number 5 is somwhere near - that's where you'll find the body/identity." You say...

A) That's very interesting. Now get the hell out of here.
B) That's very interesting. Keep talking (because I think you're the weird psychopath who did it and who is now trying to get an extra little thrill out of it, so I am going to keep you talking hoping you'll make a mistake!)
C) That's very interesting. Let me grab my coat, my hat, maps of the area, and let's ride around looking for this vague description!

You've probably guessed I'm an A, unless the person is very suspicious, in which case I'm a B. But never a C. These psychics are, at best, at BEST, well-meaning harmless crackpots. Most of the time they aren't harmless, and often they aren't crackpots either. In any event, I like evidence, not bull****. What do you all think? Prove me wrong!

Very interesting question. Years ago, I would have elected for A) just as you but we had 2 personal experiences in the course of our daughters case (Lisa Marie Kimmell) that have changed my mind to elect C). Of course, we were approached by some crack pots simply seeking large sums of money and those trying to exploit us, but setting our skepticism aside, in desparation we agreed to meet with a couple of them. The people we dealt with were not seeking money from us, very sincere and down right on target even in the vague sense of things. Up to that point, I felt like ESP was a bunch of hogwash but don't believe that anymore. And I base that on acutual experience not merely my opinion.

Very interesting question. Years ago, I would have elected for A) just as you but we had 2 personal experiences in the course of our daughters case (Lisa Marie Kimmell) that have changed my mind to elect C). Of course, we were approached by some crack pots simply seeking large sums of money and those trying to exploit us, but setting our skeptism aside, in despartion we agreed to meet with a couple of them. The people we dealt with were not seeking money from us, very sincere and down right on target even in the vague sense of things. Up to that point, I felt like ESP was a bunch of hogwash but don't believe that anymore. And I base that on acutual experience not merely my opinion.

Thanks for sharing, Shek. Do you mind telling us what information the psychics who assisted you came up with?

Having never needed a psychic for personal reasons, I treat it with a grain of salt. Some people are out to take advantage of others, some aren't. If you can weed those out, you can at least listen to what the honest ones have to say, and within reason, investigate it.

A) That's very interesting. Now get the hell out of here.
B) That's very interesting. Keep talking (because I think you're the weird psychopath who did it and who is now trying to get an extra little thrill out of it, so I am going to keep you talking hoping you'll make a mistake!)
C) That's very interesting. Let me grab my coat, my hat, maps of the area, and let's ride around looking for this vague description!

None of the above, i would choose D.

D. "That's interesting. What's your name, address and how did you come to get know about this case? Oh, you were called in by someone? What's that persons name?". Then Do a quick interview and determine whether the suspect is a :

1. quack/scam artist/attention whore
2. genuine psychic
3. possible witness who didn;t want to come forward directly and did this as an act of protection.
4. A suspect
5. Someone who has a legitimate connection to the suspect.

If you determine that the person is a legitimate pyschic, I would keep the persons info in my notepad and label as "cleared/witness/psychic??"

I would probably only go to her as a an actual investigative resource unless I could verify that other investigators and law enforcement have used that person.

Even though pyschics powers may be bs, there could be some interesting pyschological data that comes from a reading that could be derived from it.

I do think a lot of pyschics are people who are very good at reading and understanding human behavior.

Thanks for sharing, Shek. Do you mind telling us what information the psychics who assisted you came up with?

Sorry for the late response. But the first encounter was a call from a man by the name of Clyde Praye who called my husband (who is even more skeptical and less open minded than me on the subject) on a Friday evening telling him he thought he could help us find our daughter. (She was still classified as missing at the time) What did he want? My husband learned he was doctor by trade in a nearby rural town and rarely reached out because of the opportunists that taint the "gift". To my surpise, my husband agreed to meet him for coffee the following morning at a nearby coffee house between 7 -8 AM. He only asked us to bring a few personal belongings of Lisa's - no money. Still skeptical, we met with him the following Saturday morning. We took with us one of Lisa's stuffed animals she kept on her bed, a tennis shoe and a Wyoming map. He was an elderly man in his near 70's, well dressed and appeared to be genuinely concerned. We showed him the map outlining her intended route. After studying the map breifly, he asked he we brought any of Lisa's personal belongings. We handed him her teddy bear and tennis shoe. He held them close to chest and closed his eyes. When he opened his eyes, they were welled up with tears. Then he said that we probabably alreay knew (or sensed) that she was not alive but he was sure he knew where to find her so we could at least bring her home. He went on to explain that she was in the river and then pointed out and circled the location on the map that was near Casper off of HWY 220, which made no sense to us at the time because her intended route would take her on HWY 20-26. Regardless, he insisted she was there. Even though the following day was Easter Sunday, he offered to go with my husband to search for her.They made plans to meet early the following Sunday morning. We left Mr. Praye at about 8:30 AM on Saturday and by 2:PM, fishermen found Lisa's body in the exact location that he pointed out and circled on the map give or take a half mile.

Actually, I am glad the fishermen found her before my husband and Mr. Praye did because there was not doubt that they would have based on the location they planned to search.

Unless there is more interest, I will not go into our second interaction with the "sisters" some years later. It would be a more lenghty story to tell.

Sorry for the late response. But the first encounter was a call from a man by the name of Clyde Praye who called my husband (who is even more skeptical and less open minded than me on the subject) on a Friday evening telling him he thought he could help us find our daughter. (She was still classified as missing at the time) What did he want? My husband learned he was doctor by trade in a nearby rural town and rarely reached out because of the opportunists that taint the "gift". To my surpise, my husband agreed to meet him for coffee the following morning at a nearby coffee house between 7 -8 AM. He only asked us to bring a few personal belongings of Lisa's - no money. Still skeptical, we met with him the following Saturday morning. We took with us one of Lisa's stuffed animals she kept on her bed, a tennis shoe and a Wyoming map. He was an elderly man in his near 70's, well dressed and appeared to be genuinely concerned. We showed him the map outlining her intended route. After studying the map breifly, he asked he we brought any of Lisa's personal belongings. We handed him her teddy bear and tennis shoe. He held them close to chest and closed his eyes. When he opened his eyes, they were welled up with tears. Then he said that we probabably alreay knew (or sensed) that she was not alive but he was sure he knew where to find her so we could at least bring her home. He went on to explain that she was in the river and then pointed out and circled the location on the map that was near Casper off of HWY 220, which made no sense to us at the time because her intended route would take her on HWY 20-26. Regardless, he insisted she was there. Even though the following day was Easter Sunday, he offered to go with my husband to search for her.They made plans to meet early the following Sunday morning. We left Mr. Praye at about 8:30 AM on Saturday and by 2:PM, fishermen found Lisa's body in the exact location that he pointed out and circled on the map give or take a half mile.

Actually, I am glad the fishermen found her before my husband and Mr. Praye did because there was not doubt that they would have based on the location they planned to search.

Unless there is more interest, I will not go into our second interaction with the "sisters" some years later. It would be a more lenghty story to tell.

Wow...so this guy was genuine. Thank you for sharing! I'm weirded out by the story, but in a good way.

I, for one, would be fascinated to hear about "the sisters," Shek, but please fill us in on your own time. I know it must be tough for you to share these stories.

I am not the kind of person that automatically disbelieves something that can't be explained. I think most "psychics" are probably just looking for money or attention, but I think there are a few people out there who have a special ability that is hard to explain.

I consider myself pretty open minded, and I do think that it is very possible that some people do have psychic abilities, ESP, whatever you want to call it.

That said, I think there are a large amount of alleged "psychics" that are either frauds out to gain a buck, or delusional individuals who think they have some kind of super powers that the average person does not. How many times have we heard about a supposed psychic telling police/family that a missing person is "near water"? well okay, great! Does that mean the ocean? a lake? a creek? a puddle?! The descriptions are often so vague that they could match with just about any scenario.

So in answer to the original question: I'd keep an open mind, I'd talk to the person and try and get a feel for their sincerity and sound state of mind. I'd make notes of what they said, and go from there.

With regards to what Ms. Bates said, when those supposed psychics give such vague clues like "near water", this information can only be connected to the case after the fact.

After the missing person has been found, well... that's when you hear how accurate the psychic was in their "predicitons", because only after the case is solved by traditional means can you say "yes the body was found near water", etc.

The predictions rarely lead anyone to find the victim. Shek has stated that a genuine psychic gave correct information in her case. And I recall the Melanie Uribe case (murdered nurse) where a psychic gave correct information that led to finding her body. But the psychic was locked up in jail for several days on charges of being the murderer!

I have had several experiences myself, that I would call psychic. However, they were of no real value.

For example, as a child, I had a vivid dream that my cousin died. (My cousin was 13 years old when I had this dream, and I was about 9.) I dreamed that her casket was baby blue. Her body was in the funeral home, but the viewing and visitation was being held in the basement.

Well, 10 years later, my cousin died, at age 23. She was driving drunk, and died in a one car accident. She was not wearing her seatbelt, but she did have her 5 year old daughter in her car seat. The child survived.

Nothing else in my dream was accurate. My cousin had requested that she be cremated. Her diary entry about this wish was not discovered until after the family had arranged the funeral. Her casket was not baby blue. The service was held, not in the basement, but in the usual area of the funeral home. After the service, she was cremated, as she had requested.

So, I would consider my dream to be accurate, only in that my cousin died young (this was in the dream), but nothing else in the dream was of any value. I didn't know when or where the death would take place, I had no details that would help prevent the death, etc. All I did was see a future event, which was not accurate in many aspects.

As a teenager, I heard a conversation between my mother and grandmother who were miles away from me at the time. When they returned home, I was able to recite the entire conversation accurately. This was another "psychic" type event that was of no use.

When I recall my less than helpful personal experiences, that makes me question the usefulness of what most psychics have to offer. How accurate are most psychic experiences? What use can they be to helping victims? Etc.

IMO, the majority of people who have some type of psychic ability (the genuine ones) are like mine. They exist, but aren't helpful enough to affect the case.

Is getting advice from a psychic really any worse than reading an FBI profile or a regressive analysis report. :lol:

I mean ultimately there is no magic or science that's going to tell you where to find your suspect. Ultimately no matter what it's going to be good old fashioned detective work that closes a case. ;)

i think general consensus is that psychics have not been proven to be any more accurate...statistically. although i do believe psychics are very perceptive and can offer a unique look into the case that detectives may have not thought of.

i'm a science guy. i've done actual dna testing before although that was not my ultimate destination....i'd take good dna evidence any day. alot of UM cases are cold cases and a vast majority of cold cases have benn solved by dna. thank goodness.

Hmm, I go back and forth on this one. If I were a detective and a psychic offered help on a case I was working, I would certainly listen to anything they had to offer, especially if I have reached many dead ends on other leads. I mean when you are desperate for leads you should pursue all avenues no matter how much of a waste of time it may seem. Of course some psychics are total fakes, out there to make money or seek attention but I think some have legitimate abilities but I also believe that these legitimate abilities fall short of being a total psychic ability. I think that some psychics are people that have superior abilities to read people and pay attention to detail but again I would stop short of saying that any can truly predict the future accurately or things of that nature.

So, you're a detective, and you've caught a major case: a child has disappeared perhaps, or an unidentified woman has been found murdered. T

in regards to pyschics in a missing child case.

1.It should be pointed out that in missing child cases where time is even more of the essence any resources will and can be used. Every jurisdiction, neighborhood watches, search parties, EVERYTHING is used to search for the child.

2. Considering the missing child case is a joint FBI/local police/county/state police action. It wouldn't just be my decision to speak to the psychic.

3. The parents could have a lot of say in whether to consult the psychic. Personally if I were a parent I would listen to the psychic out of pure desperation.

Remember. The key in the missing child case is to FIND the child first. Prosecution is secondary, unless you believe it is a murder.

I would be less likely to use a psychic in a murder investigation, unless it is a cold case with no leads.

As good as the psychic could be, he can't testify in court or provide evidence to warrant an arrest of a suspect.

I think a scenario like this really happened and it was profiled on UM. I vaguely remember the circumstances but a woman had been abducted. No one was able to find her. This woman comes into the stations saying that she has had dreams about the woman, her murder and where her body could be found. The body is found just where the lady said it would be but she's ultimately arrested for the crime. I forgot how many days/hours the woman was in jail but she was cleared because someone else had confessed to the crime.

i know it was UM that this aired on. in fact, i think it was part of some special segment about psychics....

Psychics are a waste of time and resource for law enforcement. Their "predictions" are no more no less likely to be true than chance.

Is getting advice from a psychic really any worse than reading an FBI profile or a regressive analysis report. :lol:

I mean ultimately there is no magic or science that's going to tell you where to find your suspect. Ultimately no matter what it's going to be good old fashioned detective work that closes a case. ;)

Actually, yes it is.

At least profilers attempt to infer possible information and conclusions from factual data and compiled statistics that might lead law enforcement officers toward a certain direction. It may be controversial and a times a bit obscure and unscientific, but at least most profilers backed by real formation from competent authorities attempt to be systematic. And profilers at least ackowledge that they can be wrong.

The problem, of course, is that anyone can pretend to be a profiler. Unless it is restricted to formed law enforcement officers with right background and certification methods, it is always possible to have a an amateur sleuth, or even a con man, pass off as a "profiler".

Psychics, however, pull information out of their arse either by telling people what they want to hear (through either cold or hot reading), or by giving such general and unfalsifiable information that it becomes meaningless (i.e. you can find the body near a body of water). All of that under totally false pretenses of having information they cannot have possibly have access to.

Some profilers might be incompetent phonies, yes, but all psychics and mediums are incompetent phonies, even con artists.

Actually, yes it is.

At least profilers attempt to infer possible information and conclusions from factual data and compiled statistics that might lead law enforcement officers toward a certain direction. It may be controversial and a times a bit obscure and unscientific, but at least most profilers backed by real formation from competent authorities attempt to be systematic. And profilers at least ackowledge that they can be wrong.

This is the old argument about how statistical data proves that there are more violent activities in places that are near churches.

Statistics can lie and be deceptive as much as a crackpot witnes.

Ultimately a dectective has to intepret all data and select the ones that make sense.

The point ultimately I am saying is that all data whether via a pyschic, pyshical evidence (yes even DNA), eyeball witness or regressive analysis can be misleading or the result of a crackpot.

Also what needs to be kept in mind is that the profiler, pyshic or analyst is not responsible for the case. You the detective are. Your job is the one that's going to be on the line. Those people are only acting based on your request for information. They will not be testifying nor will anything they say be evidence.

IMHO, while studying the Zodiac killer case, profiling has hurt that case in that it has lead to a lot gross misconceptions about Z.

Look at how off the profiling was on the DC sniper case.

I personally do believe some people have psychic abilities. I do not believe EVERYONE who claims to have these abilities actually does however. I've found that you simply cannot label a group, because there will always be exceptions. I could say all blond women are dumb, but of course that isn't true. I could say that all lawyers are crooks and sharks....but that isn't true as well. So saying that ALL psychics are fake and fraud is inaccurate as well...as one could produce anecdotes stating that certain ones are frauds, I highly doubt that anyone has interviewed and met everyone who claims to be a psychic so that alone is an inaccurate statement.

I will say I agree with Mastermind on this one, particularly The point ultimately I am saying is that all data whether via a pyschic, pyshical evidence (yes even DNA), eyeball witness or regressive analysis can be misleading or the result of a crackpot. I think that what we have to remember is that NOTHING is infallible, as it is imperfect man that has created technologies and techniques.

Well another one that the profilers were way off on was the Green River Killer. Like they were predicting things like the Green River Killer was a mountain man, a heavy drinker, a heavy smoker, had a beard and all of this stuff. Gary Ridgeway was overlooked for a long time because the profile overall was completely the opposite of him. Ridgeway lived in the suburbs, was not a mountain man, did not have a beard, did not smoke and was only a moderate drinker. Ridgeway also worked at the same job for over 25 years and at least in all outward appearances was quite stable.

However that said, I am a fan of John Douglas, Roy Hazelwood and others in the profiling field. They have overall done a good job, but they are human beings so of course it is bound to happen that they will make a mistake or two along the way. Profiling is not meant to be absolute like some people expect. I think this is a big part of the problem is that people tend to be under the misconception that this is an absolute science and then get angry when it is not absolute. Profiling is a tool, it gives you a generalized idea of the kind of individual you can be looking for in a case. More often than not the profile in general is right but like I said mistakes can be made.

I think a scenario like this really happened and it was profiled on UM. I vaguely remember the circumstances but a woman had been abducted. No one was able to find her. This woman comes into the stations saying that she has had dreams about the woman, her murder and where her body could be found. The body is found just where the lady said it would be but she's ultimately arrested for the crime. I forgot how many days/hours the woman was in jail but she was cleared because someone else had confessed to the crime.

i know it was UM that this aired on. in fact, i think it was part of some special segment about psychics....


I think that's the Melanie Uribe case. It was on UM. The psychic was Etta Smith. Here's an article about the case:

http://www.skepticfiles.org/mys1/arrestps.htm

I have had a couple requests to share the "sisters" story but first I must explain my delay in responding before now. So you are going to hear two stories (I will post them separately)

About 2 weeks ago we were in the midst of a really bad electrical storm. I am thinking - uh oh, this is right on top of us so I better shut my computer down. I go to my office and sit in the chair in front of the computer and my 7 pound, 3 legged Pomerian (Missy) is scared to death with all the noise and jumps up into lap. Now I am just getting ready to shut down the computer when CRACK, KABOOM! Then instantly, a huge blue blinding light englufed my desk. I screamed, the dog peed in my lap and I won't even tell what I did to mine other than to say I just blamed it on the dog.

Anyway, it was intense. My modem, power supplies, routers, serge protecter, cables, printer, phones, my husband's computer and printer in the adjoining office (which were shut down) and even our wireless tower on the roof was all fried. And this is no lie - some of the stuff literally exploded sending pieces flying all over my office. We took a direct hit right over my ofiice. Suprisingly it did little damage to the roof and the stranger thing is I didn't get my computer shut down in time but it was the only thing that survived with the exception of losing the sound card. Everything else was toast. We have most of our stuff up and going again but still not quite up to 100%.

But now the point of sharing that story is to explain my delay in responding but more importantly (and you'll love this) - You wouldn't believe how many people think that when someone is engulfed in such an instense energy field, like I was, that they develop unsual talents / gifts or even ESP. When asked, I just laugh and tell them, "Nope, sorry. I am not going to be able to pick out your lottery numbers for you this week." Now on the other hand, maybe my dog could because she hasn't been the same since.

Now that I am nearly back to normal, I promise I will tell you the "sisters" story in the next day or two.

Oh my goodness.... what an ordeal you went through!

The lightning storms have been really bad this summer. Lots of houses and people getting hit, it seems.

Glad to hear that everyone is okay... but it's a bummer that you can't pick our lottery numbers for us. ;)

Psychics are a waste of time and resource for law enforcement. Their "predictions" are no more no less likely to be true than chance.

You watch the psychic shows and you will note everything is pre-recorded.

That guy, what's his name ? who spoke to the dead ? What he would do is have his audience come in and then there would be show delays as people talked about loved ones in the audience. It would get reported back to him who died and of what. So, the jerk would play off a member of the audience who had a relative with an uncommon name.

Silvia Brown told the parents of Hornbeck (on Montel Williams) their missing son was dead and his body was East of the city when in fact Shawn was found alive and residing with a pedophile pervert West of the city. What a B. feeding that kid's parents BS.

The prominent Russian scientists were shown a photo of Ted Bundy and could not identify him as a killer rapist or anything about him.

It should be pointed out that in this scenario that the OP presented the psychic came to the detective and offered the help.

It was not the detective going to the psychic asking for help.

Huge difference.

I have heard several stories of homicide detectives using Tarot cards to help them.

There have been several detectives that have claimed to have chased down leads based on dreams they have about the case.

One detective has even admitted that he was visited by the victim of his case.

Keep in mind that police detectives can be some of the most superstitious people in the world. ;)

The big thing that most detectives ask and want from a psychic is the location of a murder weapon or the location of a body. These are things that if they are wrong, don;t really harm the investigation, but if they are right, could help the investigation greatly.

Okay, if they are psychics, why do the detectives have to go to them ?

The phone should already be ringing as the detective is reaching for it.

Whenever I used to see those 900 number comercials for psychics I used sit there thinking- "If you call me I will give you $5000 dollars- and none ever called me- shouldn't a psychic know my phone number ?

Whenever I used to see those 900 number comercials for psychics I used sit there thinking- "If you call me I will give you $5000 dollars- and none ever called me- shouldn't a psychic know my phone number ?

LOL! Good one Dragon!

I think I'm going to try that next time I see one of those ads. I'm even going to up the offer and telepathically send them my phone number and a promise to give them a million bucks to call me...

I'll let you know if I mysteriously become indebted to Miss Cleo for a million dollars. lol

Hmm, well I do not know dragon, your opinion while shared by many and while understandable is a bit simplistic. The reason I say that is, whether or not one believes in psychic phenomenon depends on what a given person's definition of psychic is? Of course some of these folks are phonies, that stands to reason. However if I were a detective and was in a bind, why not use them? The worst they can do is not provide any information that pans out, what about the non psychics that provide information that is wrong? 99 percent of info detectives get on cases turns out to lead to nothing but dead ends. I tend not to define or view psychics as people that literally have all the answers but rather view them as people that some of the time have certain powers such as perception, imagination things of that nature that your average person does not have as much of. To me psychics on average are people that pay close to attention to detail, to me psychics are basically like FBI profilers just that they do not work with the FBI. Profiling is very similar in certain ways to what psychics do. It is not absolute, it does not give you the individual or say it is for sure a given person, what it does do is give you (chances are better than not) the type of individual that you can be looking for. However some FBI profiles have been way of base, the profile of the Green River Killer was one that was notoriously off base and caused investigators to look at people that had nothing to do with it.

Now as for Sylvia Brown, this will tick people off but she is one that I have always viewed in my opinion, as a phony, 100 percent. Like in 2000 when she picked Al Gore to be elected President, remember how Montel would always have her on for the New Year's predictions? Well as we know she was wrong but she claimed that she did not know the electoral college existed since George Bush won by winning the electoral college but losing the popular vote. So she was able to explain away that mistaken prediction. She also predicted Arnold Schwarzenneger would lose re-election in 2006 but he won. Sorry for bringing up the politics, I only brought it up because I remember off hand those two predictions as being wrong.

Sylvia Brown is up there with John Edward, another fake,, have you seen the spoofs' on SNL about John Edward? They are hilarious. But again it depends on how the psychic defines themselves too. These people that just claim they have some extra 'tools' that can potentially help, yeah I am cool with that. However it does irritate me sometimes when some of these folks claim to be the end all, be all where they 'know' all of this stuff that has, can or will happen, that part I tend to have my doubts about. However overall I do believe in certain aspects of the para-normal. That is just my two cents.

However if I were a detective and was in a bind, why not use them? The worst they can do is not provide any information that pans out, what about the non psychics that provide information that is wrong? 99 percent of info detectives get on cases turns out to lead to nothing but dead ends.

Well said!!

Every detective has to deal with the possibility that evidence or a witnesses statement could be completely wrong and off base. Detectives follow dead ends all the time.

How many detectives cases are frustrated by crackpot informants that give them wrong information?

The problem with the word psychic is that it's too broad a term to encompass several different phenomenon.

Okay, if they are psychics, why do the detectives have to go to them ?

The phone should already be ringing as the detective is reaching for it.

Whenever I used to see those 900 number comercials for psychics I used sit there thinking- "If you call me I will give you $5000 dollars- and none ever called me- shouldn't a psychic know my phone number ?

Why? People use technology to predict the whether and are still 50% wrong?

Not even DNA technology is 100%. There are no absolutes in the world. I doubt pyschic powers would be any different.

Draggon, one of the things I think you are forgetting is that a lot of the cases that pyschics are brought into are cases that have no current leads. Detectives have jobs to do and careers that hang in the balance of closing cases. Victims are desperate. What do you have to lose by listening to the psychic? It's not like the case is being solved by ordinary means anyway??

I'm taking a risk here and opening myself up to a lot of critisism and name-calling but I'm one of those people that considers themselves "psychic", or at least possessing knowlege of things that I have no reason to have knowledge about. I've "seen" ghosts since I was a very small child and get "impressions" on things that are sometimes frightening and sometimes puzzling. I've been able to get accurate "visions" of things that have happened in the past based on objects (called psychometry).

Let me state that I do not "predict" things, will not give out lottery number and do not use my "gift" to benefit myself. I do no ask for money when I give any "impressions" I have, in fact, I rarely talk about my gifts because I've been ostricized, made fun of, even chased out of small towns because what I can do has a tendancy to scare people. That said, I also think that a lot of the people that claim psychic abilities are full of crap-ola. Especially if they charge a fee for what they do, or if they seek recognition for it publicly. I think that people like me that have genuine abilities are often too afraid to "come out" because of the ridicule they face because they happen to be different. It's even something that I've seen on this thread, which is actually what inspired me to post.

Not everything has the "right kind of energy" attached to it that cries out for help. Not every spirit that visist me tells me their name or why they are still around. A lot of the information I get is too vague to even be remotely helpful to others, so I simply keep my lips sealed tight.

I really just wanted to say that not everyone out there that has an ability is out for fame or fortune. Some of us are trying to understand what we can do, the same as everyone else. But putting a blanket explanation over all of mankind, that all psychics are fakes and idiots is like saying that all men are cheaters and all women are manipulators. It's not a fair statement to make in any case. There may be some people out there looking to take advantage of the greiving, just as there are some men out there who like to cheat and some women out there who get satisfaction out of manipulating others.

The best thing I can say is that Bad People sometimes do Good Things for Bad Reasons. Just as Good People sometimes to Bad Things for Good Reasons.

I'm taking a risk here and opening myself up to a lot of critisism and name-calling but I'm one of those people that considers themselves "psychic", or at least possessing knowlege of things that I have no reason to have knowledge about. I've "seen" ghosts since I was a very small child and get "impressions" on things that are sometimes frightening and sometimes puzzling. I've been able to get accurate "visions" of things that have happened in the past based on objects (called psychometry).

Let me state that I do not "predict" things, will not give out lottery number and do not use my "gift" to benefit myself. I do no ask for money when I give any "impressions" I have, in fact, I rarely talk about my gifts because I've been ostricized, made fun of, even chased out of small towns because what I can do has a tendancy to scare people. That said, I also think that a lot of the people that claim psychic abilities are full of crap-ola. Especially if they charge a fee for what they do, or if they seek recognition for it publicly. I think that people like me that have genuine abilities are often too afraid to "come out" because of the ridicule they face because they happen to be different. It's even something that I've seen on this thread, which is actually what inspired me to post.

Not everything has the "right kind of energy" attached to it that cries out for help. Not every spirit that visist me tells me their name or why they are still around. A lot of the information I get is too vague to even be remotely helpful to others, so I simply keep my lips sealed tight.

I really just wanted to say that not everyone out there that has an ability is out for fame or fortune. Some of us are trying to understand what we can do, the same as everyone else. But putting a blanket explanation over all of mankind, that all psychics are fakes and idiots is like saying that all men are cheaters and all women are manipulators. It's not a fair statement to make in any case. There may be some people out there looking to take advantage of the greiving, just as there are some men out there who like to cheat and some women out there who get satisfaction out of manipulating others.

The best thing I can say is that Bad People sometimes do Good Things for Bad Reasons. Just as Good People sometimes to Bad Things for Good Reasons.

Thank you for sharing. How do you receive visions? Do you meditate? Do they play like a movie in your mind or do thoughts just come to you? I'm always interested in how people glean info via visions.

I'm taking a risk here and opening myself up to a lot of critisism and name-calling but I'm one of those people that considers themselves "psychic", or at least possessing knowlege of things that I have no reason to have knowledge about. I've "seen" ghosts since I was a very small child and get "impressions" on things that are sometimes frightening and sometimes puzzling. I've been able to get accurate "visions" of things that have happened in the past based on objects (called psychometry).

Let me state that I do not "predict" things, will not give out lottery number and do not use my "gift" to benefit myself. I do no ask for money when I give any "impressions" I have, in fact, I rarely talk about my gifts because I've been ostricized, made fun of, even chased out of small towns because what I can do has a tendancy to scare people. That said, I also think that a lot of the people that claim psychic abilities are full of crap-ola. Especially if they charge a fee for what they do, or if they seek recognition for it publicly. I think that people like me that have genuine abilities are often too afraid to "come out" because of the ridicule they face because they happen to be different. It's even something that I've seen on this thread, which is actually what inspired me to post.

Not everything has the "right kind of energy" attached to it that cries out for help. Not every spirit that visist me tells me their name or why they are still around. A lot of the information I get is too vague to even be remotely helpful to others, so I simply keep my lips sealed tight.

I really just wanted to say that not everyone out there that has an ability is out for fame or fortune. Some of us are trying to understand what we can do, the same as everyone else. But putting a blanket explanation over all of mankind, that all psychics are fakes and idiots is like saying that all men are cheaters and all women are manipulators. It's not a fair statement to make in any case. There may be some people out there looking to take advantage of the greiving, just as there are some men out there who like to cheat and some women out there who get satisfaction out of manipulating others.

The best thing I can say is that Bad People sometimes do Good Things for Bad Reasons. Just as Good People sometimes to Bad Things for Good Reasons.

I think it's great to have someone like you here. :) I would love to hear your thoughts on any UM episodes you would like to share.

Let me state that I do not "predict" things, will not give out lottery number and do not use my "gift" to benefit myself. I do no ask for money when I give any "impressions" I have, in fact, I rarely talk about my gifts because I've been ostricized, made fun of, even chased out of small towns because what I can do has a tendancy to scare people. That said, I also think that a lot of the people that claim psychic abilities are full of crap-ola. Especially if they charge a fee for what they do, or if they seek recognition for it publicly. I think that people like me that have genuine abilities are often too afraid to "come out" because of the ridicule they face because they happen to be different. It's even something that I've seen on this thread, which is actually what inspired me to post.

Welcome to the board. Great to have a psychic on board.:)

To bolster your argument, I think it is important that people realize that psychics are advisers. Ultimatly what gets done with your predictions is up to the user. While you may give predictions on a murder, the lead detective is the one responsible for the investigation and whether he uses or doesn;t use the information is his responsibility.

The only gripe I have about your profession is that there is no checks or balances.

A detective has to get a license, a lawyer needs to be on the bar, a psychiatrist needs to be certified. Unfortunately there is no qualification or regulating body for psychics(and probably never will be...)

Is that something you worry about? Is there some effort to create organizations and some type of regulation to keep pranskters, hoaxsters and riff-raff from soiling the name of your profession.

I'm with you 110% until you bring me a psychic who's passed the Randi challenge.

Why? People use technology to predict the whether and are still 50% wrong?

Not even DNA technology is 100%. There are no absolutes in the world. I doubt pyschic powers would be any different.


Sure, psychics are not at absolutely 0% chance of being right or wrong, just that their percentage of success is not different from chance, i.e. a coin flip, a stroke of dice, or asking a five year-old child to pick a card.

Asking a psychic is the same as making a coin flip about searching the body at so-or-so place. In fact, I'd trust a investigator more if he admitted to be using coin flips than doing business with psychics, because at least the coin flips do not cost anything to taxpayers.


You and I can try to guess who will win the next World Series. We have 1 chance over 30-something to be right. If by luck you have it right, does it make you a psychic? No, it makes you a lucky SOB, especially if you wagered money on it. Same if, before Marie Hilley was found, one of us had said "oh, she must be dead in some woods somewhere". Being right here, without a clue, is no more different than a psychic saying the same and, a few times, hitting it right (or sort-of right).

I mean, even if I guess wrong on a coin flip a million times in a row (which is, probability-wise, extremely remote yet possible), I am still at a 50/50 chance of guessing heads or tails right every time. My decisions until now have no bearing on the odds of picking the next side of the coin right. Same with a psychic, who will be wrong thousands and thousands of time, then be right the nth time on a struck of good luck, which leads to the usual "A-ha! See my real powers!". Yet it remains a total guess from his or her part, not a proof of demonstration powers. The burden of proof is much higher than being right, by chance, on one or even a few high profile cases, which are usually what builds the reputation of many high-profile psychics in the public's eye, while in fact it might be simply variance.

If, following interviews with scientifically-sound methodology applied, a medium was able to be constantly right statistically significantly more often than a random John Doe picking cards at random, and variance was excluded, then we could talk about something amiss going on. Sadly, it hasn't happened until now. It has never been scientifically demonstrated that psychic "revelations" are right more often than by choices made randomly. They are statistically the same. Ergo, it remains at the level of guessing.

The only absolute I can advance, is that 100% of psychics do NOT have real access to "information" which wouldn't be available otherwise through normal, wordly investigation means. Unless, of course, the psychic is the culprit or a live witness. And still in the incredibly possibility that he or she was, his or her knowledge wouldn't be paranormal at all.

Welcome to the board. Great to have a psychic on board.:)

To bolster your argument, I think it is important that people realize that psychics are advisers. Ultimatly what gets done with your predictions is up to the user. While you may give predictions on a murder, the lead detective is the one responsible for the investigation and whether he uses or doesn;t use the information is his responsibility.

The only gripe I have about your profession is that there is no checks or balances.

A detective has to get a license, a lawyer needs to be on the bar, a psychiatrist needs to be certified. Unfortunately there is no qualification or regulating body for psychics (and probably never will be...)

Is that something you worry about? Is there some effort to create organizations and some type of regulation to keep pranskters, hoaxsters and riff-raff from soiling the name of your profession.

And how would you certify that a candidate is "really" a psychic, while another is a crook? What would be the objective set of criteria for granting such a license? How would one certify the candidate does have the "power", and another doesn't? Who would be the members of this "professional board of psychic evaluators"?

In fact, what is the difference between the two, besides mens rea, i.e. the intent to extract money out of a mark through fraudulent means, or through a falsely advertised service? In both cases, the service only exists due to the shared belief between the provider and the customer, not to some externally demonstrated phenomenon.

The fact is, whether the candidate is a hoaxer or a well-meaning true believer, zero evidence remains zero evidence. You cannot grant licenses for people pretending to do things that cannot be objectively proven to exist (just like you cannot grant a license for 'UFO chasing' or 'ghost hunting' trades) because, well, they cannot prove that their object objectively exists beyond a shadow of a doubt to any third party. How would you react if people came to your city council (or your courthouse) to request a license to become 'ghost busters' ?

In the eyes of the law, before a court, the hoaxer and the true believer are in the same category: posers, for a lack of a better word. So they have no legal nor professional status, like lawyers, doctors, and nurses do.

I'll play nice, however, and not use the other English-sanctified pejoratives: charlatans, fakers, snake oil dealers, hoaxers, tricksters, con artists, etc, because many psychics are well-meaning people, and I am sure 3rd.eyesight is one of them. I give her the presumption of innocence. But you've got to admit, there are a lot of bad apples there...

Besides, licenses like that open the door to legal liabilities if customers find out that the medium was flat-out wrong, when his or her advertisement advances that he or she is "most of the time" right. Let be honest, I know of no medium who advances that she is never right, not even most of the times right, because otherwise it wouldn't attract customers. If one had the power, it'd work 100% of the times. Better for them to remain in a legal limbo and thus untouchable (unless the confidence trick is so obvious that the fraud is evident from a legal standpoint), otherwise they'll be ripe victims for all kinds of suing from innocent - and no-so innocent plaintives who would cash in on the... uncertain existence of their services.

And how would you certify that a candidate is "really" a psychic, while another is a crook? What would be the objective set of criteria for granting such a license? How would one certify the candidate does have the "power", and another doesn't? Who would be the members of this "professional board of psychic evaluators"?

In fact, what is the difference between the two, besides mens rea, i.e. the intent to extract money out of a mark through fraudulent means, or through a falsely advertised service? In both cases, the service only exists due to the shared belief between the provider and the customer, not to some externally demonstrated phenomenon.

The fact is, whether the candidate is a hoaxer or a well-meaning true believer, zero evidence remains zero evidence. You cannot grant licenses for people pretending to do things that cannot be objectively proven to exist (just like you cannot grant a license for 'UFO chasing' or 'ghost hunting' trades) because, well, they cannot prove that their object objectively exists beyond a shadow of a doubt to any third party. How would you react if people came to your city council (or your courthouse) to request a license to become 'ghost busters' ?

In the eyes of the law, before a court, the hoaxer and the true believer are in the same category: posers, for a lack of a better word. So they have no legal nor professional status, like lawyers, doctors, and nurses do.

I'll play nice, however, and not use the other English-sanctified pejoratives: charlatans, fakers, snake oil dealers, hoaxers, tricksters, con artists, etc, because many psychics are well-meaning people, and I am sure 3rd.eyesight is one of them. I give her the presumption of innocence. But you've got to admit, there are a lot of bad apples there...

Besides, licenses like that open the door to legal liabilities if customers find out that the medium was flat-out wrong, when his or her advertisement advances that he or she is "most of the time" right. Let be honest, I know of no medium who advances that she is never right, not even most of the times right, because otherwise it wouldn't attract customers. If one had the power, it'd work 100% of the times. Better for them to remain in a legal limbo and thus untouchable (unless the confidence trick is so obvious that the fraud is evident from a legal standpoint), otherwise they'll be ripe victims for all kinds of suing from innocent - and no-so innocent plaintives who would cash in on the... uncertain existence of their services.

Well, in a way there are standards to some degree,

First off, I think most law enforcement offices and people only go to psychichs that don't ask for any monetary compensation. I would avoid anyone that wants any compensation.

Second, psychics like doctors, lawyers usually are met via recommendations. if there are enough people that feel good about the results that gives some type of standing to the psychich.

Third, results will ultimately proof to be the better qualifier in the long run. If a psychic is wrong more than 70% of the time, he will eventually be exposed as a charlatan and run out of business. If he's right more than 70% of the time, heck why wouldn't people still go to him? One thing I've learned in life is that people ultimately care only about the results. If running naked through the city, saying Robert Stack's name backwards can solve a case, people really don't care how you did it.


I was thinking more an more that psychichs might want a guild of some sort or even an organization, that reputable people could belong to. Some sort of psychichs guild that other psychics would have to pay dues be met and monitored by.

BTW, there are plentyof crooks and charlatans in the legal, psychological and privatey detective fields. I'm willing to bet the same people that think psychics are all crooks are the same people that were more than willing to throw tons of money at Bernie Madoff. A crook is a crook, with or without psychic powers.

Well, in a way there are standards to some degree,


What standard? Standards decided by psychics themselves? Way to set the bar low enough that toddlers could pass it.

The only acceptable standard I can see is using scientific methodology to demonstrate that the candidate does have paranormal powers. And if someone can pull it out, a million US$ sleeps in one of James Randi's JREF bank account, just for him or her.


First off, I think most law enforcement offices and people only go to psychichs that don't ask for any monetary compensation. I would avoid anyone that wants any compensation.

Sylvia Browne charged hundreds of dollars to Shawn Hornbeck's parents for her "consultations". For the rest, even the well-meaning, what they don't get in money, they get in customer base and publicity, which translates in cold hard cash.

And as of now, zero investigation cases have been solved due to psychic intervention. In fact, they are a waste of public monies due to pursuing leads that are bound to lead nowhere - except excluding the lead in the first place.

Second, psychics like doctors, lawyers usually are met via recommendations. if there are enough people that feel good about the results that gives some type of standing to the psychich.

Apples and oranges. Medecine and law are both based on existing phenomena: Biology, the presence of illnesses and ways to cure them for the former; law, the need to preserve order, ensure representation of parties in litigations, and the regulation of society for the latter. And both of them are based on a body of knowledge based on a wide consensus, scientifical for the former, and legal-doctrinal-philosophical-political for the latter. As their businesses necessitate absolute public trust to be effective, the need for strict regulations for their practices is needed to ensure the protection of the public. Hence professional orders.

For psychics, well, on what is it based? On beliefs in paranormal phenomena which, as of now, are not demonstrated to exist, not even in realm of philosophical positivism (which law is based on; laws don't exist as objective objects like rocks and trees, yet the need for them in human societies is very obvious).


Third, results will ultimately proof to be the better qualifier in the long run. If a psychic is wrong more than 70% of the time, he will eventually be exposed as a charlatan and run out of business. If he's right more than 70% of the time, heck why wouldn't people still go to him? One thing I've learned in life is that people ultimately care only about the results. If running naked through the city, saying Robert Stack's name backwards can solve a case, people really don't care how you did it.

No psychic is right 70% of the time. And even if he or she is "right", it might be because her customers reinterprete elements so that they can themselves believe that he or she was right.

Just like in cold-reading, when a psychic says "his name begins by... M?" and the customer reasons back "well, his middle name was Milhouse". It is ambiguous enough to be a right answer, yet note that the psychic didn't say "his middle name begins by M", or "his middle name is Milhouse". The psychic provides the guess, the customer the validation. That's cold-reading.

For example, if a psychic say "the weapon is close to a source of water" and the knife is inside a fish tank in a living room, was the psychic right or wrong in this case? Is a fish tank "really" a source of water? Does the expression "is close to" includes being submerged inside? All of these are provided by subjective interpretations which might tip the balance in favour of saying "well, the fish tank is water, so the psychic was right", and reason that the psychic said "the knife is in a fish tank" when he or she didn't at all.

Just go visit a psychic while pretending you are something completely different from what you are in reality. Pretend that you are single and on welfare while in real life you work full time and are married. Add to that, use a stone cold face and do not give him or her any facial reaction or feedback. I guarantee you her "readings" will be off by the width of the Pacific Ocean. Why? Because psychics need to adapt their readings to your personal situation so that they ring true.


I was thinking more an more that psychichs might want a guild of some sort or even an organization, that reputable people could belong to. Some sort of psychichs guild that other psychics would have to pay dues be met and monitored by.


Again, what is to distinguish between reputable psychics and disreputable psychics? What would the set of criteria be? And why the need to regulate a trade that is based on beliefs, gullibility, and woo-woo? That's called a religion, not a guild.

And I don't remember Catholic priests charging me a bill when I go to confession. It is free public service for us Catholics - well, except in penance. :)


BTW, there are plentyof crooks and charlatans in the legal, psychological and privatey detective fields. I'm willing to bet the same people that think psychics are all crooks are the same people that were more than willing to throw tons of money at Bernie Madoff. A crook is a crook, with or without psychic powers.

So because there are crooks in legal, legitimate trades, that proves that there are reliable psychics? That's a logical fallacy, plus a strawman argument, because nowhere do I argue that there aren't crooks and villainous in legitimate businesses.

But guess what? If a lawyer or a physician does a malpractice and violates the public trust, he or she gets to go to jail, pay a large settlement in money in compensation, and lose the license to practice for years if not forever under penality of criminal prosecution. Psychics? Well, they just change town, invent themselves a "successful" background and find new suckers. They don't go to jail because, well, their services don't exist outside of shared belief systems and are not included, sadly, in the current legal doctrine as defined as "fraudulent claims".

Second, psychics like doctors, lawyers usually are met via recommendations. if there are enough people that feel good about the results that gives some type of standing to the psychich.


Apples and oranges. Medecine and law are both based on existing phenomena: Biology, the presence of illnesses and ways to cure them for the former; law, the need to preserve order, ensure representation of parties in litigations, and the regulation of society for the latter. And both of them are based on a body of knowledge based on a wide consensus, scientifical for the former, and legal-doctrinal-philosophical-political for the latter. As their businesses necessitate absolute public trust to be effective, the need for strict regulations for their practices is needed to ensure the protection of the public. Hence professional orders.

For psychics, well, on what is it based? On beliefs in paranormal phenomena which, as of now, are not demonstrated to exist, not even in realm of philosophical positivism (which law is based on; laws don't exist as objective objects like rocks and trees, yet the need for them in human societies is very obvious).

But professional handicappers for sports charge dollars on a service based on no tangible statistical evidence either. Same for stock pickers. How's that any different from a psychic?:confused:

And I don't remember Catholic priests charging me a bill when I go to confession. It is free public service for us Catholics - well, except in penance.

Well actually you do via taxes, collections and charity. Indirectly you wind up paying for church services some how, you just don't know it.

Sylvia Browne charged hundreds of dollars to Shawn Hornbeck's parents for her "consultations". For the rest, even the well-meaning, what they don't get in money, they get in customer base and publicity, which translates in cold hard cash.

What standard? Standards decided by psychics themselves? Way to set the bar low enough that toddlers could pass it.

Why not? Bankers create their own standards(though that probably isn't the best example..) Several industries self-regulate themselves and you have no trouble using their services.

And as of now, zero investigation cases have been solved due to psychic intervention. In fact, they are a waste of public monies due to pursuing leads that are bound to lead nowhere - except excluding the lead in the first place.

It's actually very difficult to tell whether a psychic solves a case since his or her name most likely never will be in the case file, except under the investigators notes. From a legal standpoint the psychic would appear as "source" under any warrant. And in basic discovery, you don't have to reveal your source.

Sylvia Browne charged hundreds of dollars to Shawn Hornbeck's parents for her "consultations". For the rest, even the well-meaning, what they don't get in money, they get in customer base and publicity, which translates in cold hard cash.

Sadly, that mistake lies in Shawn Hornbeck's family.


For example, if a psychic say "the weapon is close to a source of water" and the knife is inside a fish tank in a living room, was the psychic right or wrong in this case? Is a fish tank "really" a source of water? Does the expression "is close to" includes being submerged inside? All of these are provided by subjective interpretations which might tip the balance in favour of saying "well, the fish tank is water, so the psychic was right", and reason that the psychic said "the knife is in a fish tank" when he or she didn't at all.


Which is actually just as vagues as plenty of

BTW, I should point out to you that I agree that there most likely is nothing to the psychic phenomenon.

I just don't believe that they should be dismissed so easily or that their efforts are completely useless.

BTW, the fact that a psychic can be used as a source on a warrant is a very useful legal loophole that could be of benefit in an investigation. (Though techicallyANYONE could be a source, just as long as the judge is willing to sign of on it)

But professional handicappers for sports charge dollars on a service based on no tangible statistical evidence either. Same for stock pickers. How's that any different from a psychic?:confused:

While trends and statistics do exist, I agree with you that to infer any necessary performance influenced by past results is often indeed a statistical fallacy (a well known one, called justly 'gambler's fallacy').

Again, they are not so different from psychics because, if they base themselves solely on past trends and exclude anything else, and some do indeed, they are charlatans and their choices are no better than random choices. As I have shown with my coin flip example, to infer any influence by past results is flawed. Having lost or won the last few (or last few hundred) coin flips does not make it more or less likely to have a favourable result later on.

That being said, many professional handicappers and stock pickers do based their predictions on a case to case basis from evaluations of performance made via access to news, information data, and intelligence gathered from teams or companies, which make them in comparison more reliable than psychics. While statistics do apply, outcomes there are not due to randomness, but performance and perceptions of performance, which both exist in our reality: people can be outstanding at their trade, people can perform well, and people can suck, and all three can be infered and evaluated from our perceptions: The only similarity between Randy Johnson and my kid being a pitcher in a local baseball team is that both are pitchers, otherwise Randy Johnson would undeniably be the best of the two.

For example, due to sport leagues' ranks, the teams at the top can be constructed as relatively better than others, and thus more likely to win the next match than lose due to their relative stength compared to weaker competition, while acknowleding that their current rank could be the result of a fluke and thus change with time (for example, a team being on fire for the first half of the season, than wheezing and crashing down during the second half of the season). Results are never constant, nor are they dependent on past results. It's not because you have Wayne Gretzky on your team that you are bound to win, but it sure helps win some.

If you put the best team of a league against its worst team, we can reasonably predict that the chances of winning are better for the former than the latter, with a decent margin of error, and thus put a reasonable (or not-so-reasonable) handicap on that current square-off. That does not mean, of course, that the best team cannot lose, but if we replayed the match a million times we could reasonably predict that the best team would win a majority of the time. However, we cannot infer that the odds for that team to lose this one, regardless of the opposition, have exponentially increased because it has won its 8 last matches. That would be a gambler's fallacy.

Of course, the difference between the best and worst team is rather small in a given professional league compared to, say, what a match between the Montreal Canadians and a team from the Montreal Pee-Wee A League would be, or a chess match between Gary Kasparov and your run-of-the-mill chess amateur. Chances that the latter win in both cases are very, very, very, very remote.

And anyway, it is still apples and oranges. Stocks and hockey players exist; spirits, ESP, and ghosts are not shown yet to exist except as a creation of our mind.

It should be pointed out that Unsolved Mysteries has never shied away from casting psychics in a bad light either. i.e. Ann Corecelli for example.

UM has had more more acclaim for the crime psychics and saved it's venom for the fortune tellers and religious scammers.

I have a son that just turned six. If he came up missing, I would definatly go to a psychic...just as someone said, what could it hurt? But if the psychic tried to gouge me for a load of cash--well, that's just pure evil, isn't it? I mean, putting our skepticism aside...if she had valid info on where my son was, but wouldn't give it up without a boatload of cash...that's just really evil.

I have been to a psychic once before. I had a friend that liked those Psychic Fairs. My husband was going into a new business deal and I asked the psychic how it (the impending business deal) looked. Great he said (it wasn't!!!) will make lots of money (it didn't!!!) hugely successful (ha!!!)

So even though he was less than talented...I don't know, I still sort of believe in psychic ability, believe that some people do have it....just not many.

I have a son that just turned six. If he came up missing, I would definatly go to a psychic...just as someone said, what could it hurt? But if the psychic tried to gouge me for a load of cash--well, that's just pure evil, isn't it? I mean, putting our skepticism aside...if she had valid info on where my son was, but wouldn't give it up without a boatload of cash...that's just really evil.

Exactly. If anyone, psychic or not, gouges you for cash you should be skeptical.

But if you have a case that has no leads and is going nowhere.

Also there are a couple of other things to consider:
1. The psychic could renew interest in the case and get police to look at case they otherwise have ignored or placed on hold.
2. Having a case in motion is never a bad thing, even if it is a bad lead. The police may look at a suspect that they never considered. The police might see or make a connection that is independent of what a psychic tells them.
3. A psychic can be the basis for a search warrant.
4. The psychic can at times be a better liason between suspects and witnesses. As crazy as it sounds, some people might be more willing to talk to a psychic than a police officer. Some people also might be willing to confess to a psychic as well.
5. It may cause the killer to come out of the woodwork. If the killer hears that there is a new lead on the case, this may prompt him to do something rash, like move a body, hide evidence or try to mislead the police. There's no rule saying the killer can't be superstitious? heck the killer might confess believing the psychic is going to rat him out. You could even use the psychic as leverage in an interrogation.:lol:

I thought you guys would enjoy this little article on Sylvia Brown (http://www.avclub.com/milwaukee/articles/unforeseen-circumstances-psychic-sylvia-browne-and,39534/). :lol: