|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1078
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 5:59 am: | 
|
Caz,
Unfortunately by that logic, anyone writing a book on a dodgy diary that is suspected of being fraudelent would have to hand over their profits too.
Or do we try to decide completely willy nilly which frauds are bad and which aren't?
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1079
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 6:02 am: |
|
The people at bad psychics pitched a wig because they got called names. SO please let's not discuss BP anymore, discuss most haunted, but not BP because apparently, they can dish it out but not take it.
|
MTR
Sergeant
Username: Rigby
Post Number: 41
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 6:07 am: |
|
Pitched it at who and by what means ? An email to somebody ? If so, who ? And what was threatened ?
Mike. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2228
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 6:40 am: |
|
Hi Ally,
But our book wasn't promoting anything - it was telling the story of a disputed document's emergence and investigation.
I would not object to a documentary on the subject of the paranormal. My question was more of a passing nod to those mediums and spiritual healers etc who do their work for free, because they sincerely believe they have been blessed with a gift and don't want to abuse it.
And by the way, how do you know I won't be giving my profits to charity - if I ever make any?
Hi Jeff,
I didn't mean to come across so harsh. I know you are not personally claiming any psychic ability, and I know everyone has to earn a living somehow. I would never expect to earn one writing a ripper book though - that's a labour of love. And it's why I have another job that pays the bills.
Love,
Caz
X |
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 262
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 6:49 am: |
|
Yesterday i received an email from Stephen rider saying that he received an email from...the site that I am sworn not to mention, my account was threatened with closure.
I have out of respect for this site agreed not to mention said website. My word is my bond.
I also think it would be in very bad form for me to discuss a programme that has a commision to make a psychic programme about Jack the Ripper.
The fact that i have spent the last three years working on a psychic programme about the Ripper that has not, obviously leaves me a little up set. However no sour Grapes, or grape storks.
I have however spent the last three months producing a two hour special on Guy Fawkes with Derek Acorah which is due for broadcast on the 5th nov.
And last year made a number of programmes called 'Psychic Detective' which covered the Hammersmith Nude murders and the Death of Brian Jones.
I therefore feel a little qualified to discuss psychic Mediums like Derek Acorah and Tony Stockwell...I can only really give my experiences of working with them.
If at any piont I had thought these people were working frauduantly then I would not have made these programmes.
In my experience these people genuinely beleive what they are doing. I have never acted out of bad faith our tried to deceive my audience.
These programmes at the end of the day are entertainment...I go to great lengths to ensure information is historically accurate.
Had I been given the 'Ripper' the 3D models i created for that programme would have been the most accurate reconstructions of the Ripper murder scenes every created...from the broken wine glass to the Fishermans widow. And I can assure everyone it would have been a damn site more creatible than anything since Barlow and Watts.
Not all psychics are frauds or conmerchants and neither are all TV producers. I will stand by my work. Whether you choose to beleive the psychics is up to you....this is left for each person to make up there own mind..psychic programmes are require to carry a disclaimer at the end to this effect..I still havn't made up my mind..but always try and approach information with an open mind. I do not think my audience has to beleive in the psychic's and I am more that happy to work with people who are scepticle...infact it makes for a better programme.
I aim to make programmes that are historically acturate and using a medium is an interesting way of discussing a story, that is all...as i said these programmes are entertainment, personally i feel my re-constructions are better than the stuff you get from far bigger budget terriestrial productions, but then I'm bias...
I am willing to discuss the use of psychics in producing factual entertainment and productions I have worked on, as my hands are tied in other directions.
Jeff
|
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 263
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 7:19 am: |
|
Hi Ally
I'm getting a little out of sink with postings.
The green night vission cameras are a stylistic divice used by this production...I can not comment directly on how they use these.
I use Panasonic night vision cameras that do give a slightly green cast but are fundermentally Black and white.
Night vision has some advantages technically, they are light easy to use and aviod having to carry around heavy lighting equipment.
However as I understand whether filming during the day or at night makes little differance to the mediums ability to make conections. Much of the filming i did in my last production was during the day and shot on Digi Beta, which I feel just gives a far better picture.
However mixing camera styles, I feel makes for more interesting television....the producers job is to make a programme flow and you require cut aways to make the editing process work...I get away with things by using re-constructions of events, and I am careful to make these as accurate as possible.
however when the medium gives his reading the cameras are left running..there length varies sometimes just a few minutes sometimes an hour, they average about thirty minutes..they just get what they get and its down to the producer to try and make the best sense of it and keep the story running..what you get is the edit highlights that is how all TV is made...I'm afraid I have no blondes in my productions but I gather they are great for veiwing figures.
Yours jeff |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1564
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 7:27 am: |
|
Ally
SO please let's not discuss BP anymore
So just to clarify, you're not "going to have to start bashing them well and proper at every given opportunity" after all?
Chris Phillips
|
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 264
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 8:40 am: |
|
Obviously not Chris we are asked to leave said subject alone. J |
Steve Swift
Sergeant
Username: Swift
Post Number: 41
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 9:59 am: |
|
Did'nt they say that Darwin was a freak & a fraud?
I find people talk a lot of rubbish sometimes,some even make a career or maybe a website out of it too ;)
Logic tells us that just because we have not seen something does not mean it does not exist. I myself have never clapped eyes on the Mississippi River - does that mean it does not exist?
If you are going to slate something then surely a better argument than,'well I've not seen it so I do not believe it' is needed.
Bill Shankly to a Liverpool fan:
"Where are you from?"
"I'm a Liverpool fan from London."
"Well laddie . . . . What's it like to be in heaven?"
|
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 265
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 12:29 pm: |
|
Yes yes Steve it is always easy to ridicule what we do not understand and making claims that people are lying and cheating dosn't get us any closer to the truth.
The thing that has racked my brain over the last few years is exactly what that truth is and dispite of hundreds of psychic readings and working on numerous programmes I find myself no closer to that truth.
The acusation that I am feeding information is the one that really gets me because it is not true. These guys just turn up and come up with stuff...sometimes very fast...sometimes accurate...some times way out.
Its something I've discussed with the old wizard of ripperology over the odd pint a number of times.
The basic truth is that if a psychic supplies you with information which you know and can confirm there is always a possibilty that he could have cheated read stuff in advance...possibly the psychic is even unaware of this, the information sitting in his subconcious.
If the psychic comes up with new information then how are we possibly going to know that it is new information? So no matter how genuine the psychic and how brilliant your expert if the information is that 'Kenith Plant Pot' commited the murders and we have no record of a 'kenith Plant Pot'...what do you do with that information,
And then theres the interpretation problem...on the reading that Neil mentioned Tony drew a picture and said it was very important to our investigation...to me the picture was obviously a thimble, a series of little circles in a timble shape...to me it was obvious...to Neil it was a Rasbury...(the fantom Rasbury blower did it) the fact is that without any idea of scale or size we could have been looking at anything which i eventually had to conceed.
This dosnt make anybody a cheat or a fake, its just that this information is always largely how we interpret it...eventually you just cant see the wood from the trees and you just go insane trying to pull it all together...and even if you do you've probably had to knock round pegs into square holes.
Ok my sister says to me what about the birth certificates surely that is proof that Tony supplied information that he could not possibly not have known..and yes that is true to some extent but there is always the possibility that he just got lucky...he picked a number four...coincidence and probability is a mine feild on its own. The mathamatics of coincidence says it should actually happen alot more. Not that I've ever won the lottery
If Derek comes up with information I will garantee you will all interpret that information in different ways depending on your veiw piont.
If I have learned anything about the information psychics supply it is that the journey and the voyage of discovery are more important than its end. If it sparks off a good story and it takes you in some interesting directions thats the best you can hope for.
I am still not completely sure where that journey is going...if I had a personal chioce I'd like a psychic to go over the military records of mary Kellys brother...at least it would give us something to fix on and you'd be working in an area where you could find new information and prove it through records.
But from a TV piont of veiw its costly and not vary entertaining.
Even if you do not beleive in a psychics ability you can probably see the sence in using one to narrow down a search...thats how remote veiws worked for the CIA.
To some extent I've come to the conclusion its best to just go with the flow..those who beleive will do so, those that dont will never see it another way.
Like Steve however I am prepared to except that you can never get all the answers and perhaps the Ripper will and should always remain a ghostly enigma.
Jeff |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1507
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 4:14 pm: |
|
Hi,
Psychics do exist that is a fact, the degree of how accurate they are is debateable.
I Find it unacceptable that in this modern day and age, people still dispute genuine atempts to contact the spirit world,
The average person who has ever been to a medium will have come away with some positive memories, this obviously could be only in the mind of the beholder, but I believe that there are individuals that can contact the past life., just because the average Joe cannot comprehend such a possibility does not make it a hoax.
lets just sit back this weekend with a bottle of ones preference or a six pack[ or two] and ravel in this Tv special.
Richard. |
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1080
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 4:16 pm: |
|
Actually, Chris I am. I know this will come as a shock to you, but there are other places on the net that discuss psychics and mediums...Duh.
Jeff,
You didn't answer the question. You gave several long explanatory paragraphs about night vision cameras, but did not address the points:
1. They faked the night vision.
2. They faked it being live.
3. How did the shrieking blonde know that their "historians" would be all amazed by what Derek was saying, unless it was rehearsed.
|
David O'Flaherty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 1075
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 4:40 pm: |
|
"How did the shrieking blonde know that their 'historians' would be all amazed by what Derek was saying, unless it was rehearsed."
Maybe she's psychic herself! I think women just are anyway, because they all seem to be able to read my mind.
Here's what I don't understand. . .are people saying this Most Haunted special is going to be really good, or what? I would like to know because I've ordered the T-shirt, but I don't want to wear it if I'm going to look stupid.
I would make a wonderful psychic if someone would just put me on television. Becephalus is my spirit guide, and that British parrot that just died of the flu.
(Message edited by oberlin on October 25, 2005) |
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 266
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 6:33 pm: |
|
No Ally I did answer your question...
I have not and have at no point, have ever worked for Antix productions.
I need to be very careful about what i am going to say next as i do not wish to get into trouble and I have a carrer to think about.
The basic fact is that this is Derek's last show with Most Haunted. Some beleive that Derek is the main star of the Show, others that it is the show itself that has made its remarkable veiwing figures possible. Which ever you choose to beleive Dereks future direction is in other area's. He has been working on other projects including the 'Quest' project (with bright, talented,witty, sexy and up and coming producer/director) and on his own series 'Ghost Towns.'
I simply can not comment on what Most Haunted have been up to. Derek and Most Haunted have differant futures.
All television is television. Have you ever made a TV show? It requires reshoot after retake after re-take.
1, They put naff green colour over their pictures... If some one did this over my beautiful framed and carefully coloured Digi Beta masters I'd cut there arm off. If their producer has no colour sence what is Derek supposed to do about this?
2. Sorry to tell you all this...its going to come as a big shock to you all...but no television is actually live, it has delays and VT incerts are often played in, Top of the Pops is recorded 'as live' and they mime! shock horror...so bloody what, most tv is recorded 'as live' and not actually live...none of my programmes are live Thank god...I'm just not good enough, what is the problem here exactly? Its a television show is it not. THey are making entertainment are they not..it does what it says on the tin 'entertainment'. TV presenters are scripted, its hard bloody work, Derek is not scripted..he just gets what he gets.
3. I have no idea...perhaps if I got my historians to lose some weight and put on a blonde wig I could combine the two and treble the veiwing figures. Paul Begg in a frock, that would be something to behold dont you think.?
I'm afraid I really cant see what this has to do with Derek being a good or bad psychic. Derek has no control over the creation of these programmes..he turns up does his stuff and leaves. What people do with that footage he has no control over what so ever.
Please please dont ask me again to comment on this show again.
My interest is in psychics...what is it they do? and more inportantly how we interpret that information...theres a debate here honest.
Jeff |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4185
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 7:02 pm: |
|
Dave,
I am afraid you're going to have to send that Most Haunted T-shirt back or donate it to some society. Or burn it. Just don't wear it.
You can be sure of that that episode - in spite of its interesting subject - will be as much crap as the other ones and the usual parody of and spit in the face on everyone who are seriously interested in the paranormal and ghosts.
Hi Jeff,
I hope I never stop surprise you; I hate being predictable. And although I don't share your fascination for Acurah, I concur totally with much on what you say on this matter.
Hi Philip,
Note that I didn't refer to you when I said that I 'have stopped discuss this with extreme sceptics'. With this I referred to sceptics that do not believe in the paranormal at all. Note also that I didn't think for one minute that YOU thought every medium are frauds.
As for your opinion about mediums in fact being mind readers, knowingly or not, this is a notion I have come across earlier, and you must forgive me when I say that I believe that to be utter nonsense and not supported by any more evidence than the fact than any other theory, although I don respect your opinion. However, I have heard it all before.
Personally, I think the mind reading thing is just as 'supernatural' as the fact that they are in fact communicating with the other side. It is a rubbish attempt to find an explanation to a phenomenon that fits the rather narrow scientific physical boundaries we can adapt to so far.
From my close contacts with GOOD mediums (not the bad ones), it is obvious that they were not reading my mind, since they certainly weren't revealing any information I was thinking about at the time. And I am talking about very specific and detailed information. Believe me, if they were reading people's mind, they could use this power for more economically or personally rewarding things than imagining or faking that they're speaking to spirits.
Some believes that ghosts are just images originating from events being recorded in the materia and then being played up like a video tape (the Stone Tape Theory), but this only works in some sightings, like from historical battlefields etc. - it doesn't hold up in cases where people have had actual personal communication with a ghost, like a relative.
As for Most Haunted, you know we totally agree about that show, Philip, and I agree with everything you say about it, although I believe you have more information that I have. The show is rubbish and hilarious, but also does a lot of harm. I can not see it as pure entertainment, because it creates quite a lot of damage to a filed that already has problems with being taken seriously.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on October 25, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4186
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 7:04 pm: |
|
Furthermore, Jeff is quite right; many people expect mediums to be exactly accurate and they get surprised when a medium can't spit out an exact name or a number. But that is based on ignorance. Like Jeff says, a medium sees pictures, receive more or less clear telepathic info, get sensations and some even sees the spirits in question. But whatever info they get, it has to be interpreted and this can be tricky. The ones I've spoken to says, that the toughest bit is that they have to fight against their own intellect, since logical thinking might interfer with the communication process and lead them to the wrong conclusions during the interpretation of the information. Which is why it is extremely important for a medium to receive as little outside facts as possible, preferably zero.
Which - in turn - is why Jack the Ripper is an extremely bad subject to experiment with in this context; too many people knows at least something about the Ripper crimes and there are loads of of information flowing around, which means that a medium easily can get the opportunity to read up on it beforehand. If this is possible, the subject is not relevant to approach with these methods, because you can never be sure of whether or not the medium are communicating or are influenced by factual information (or are faking it by having read up on it).
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1081
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 25, 2005 - 7:20 pm: |
|
If Derek cared about his reputation more than he cared about making money, he could refuse to go on after the last time they "faked" night vision and mislead the viewers.
Or he could refuse to get information in advance..actually do it cold, and not rehearse the information, clearly in blatant violation of what reputable mediums would do.
SO I would have to say that if a medium knowingly and repeatedly participates in a fraudelent show, that doesn't say a whole lot about the honesty and ethics of the medium and it does nothing at all for his credibility as an actual medium.
|
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 267
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 4:31 am: |
|
Yes yes yes At last a voice of reason on the subject thank you Glenn.
I'm afraid that I am out of time now but I will answer your post in more detail later Glenn.
Like you I have some experience with psychic mediums and I am convinced most are very genuine and all are very different.
I will continue to deffend Derek..because my experience of him is through shows like Antics Ghost show and the Three Mediums. You forget that Derek does hundreds of live shows that are very differant to most haunted.
But my interest is the phenominen as a whole and I will discuss this at a greater length later.
Your right Glenn about the problem of using mediums in well known cases and of course right about the interlectual mind interfering with readings...the best stuff comes on a very subconcious level..
we will talk more later, and hopefully get a more interesting discussion going.
Many thanks
Jeff |
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1082
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 5:40 am: |
|
I love how when someone says they agree with you in almost every respect they are considered "the voice of reason" but when someone puts up questions or statements that disagree with your world view or you don't want to answer, that's unreasonable and ignored.
Ah well, it's the way of the world, I guess.
|
MTR
Sergeant
Username: Rigby
Post Number: 45
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 26, 2005 - 8:28 am: |
|
Ally,
Don't forget that "non-believers possess closed minds". It's true: I read it on the internet somewhere so it must be so.
Mike.
(Message edited by rigby on October 26, 2005) |
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 268
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 6:52 am: |
|
Yes REASON. I take that to meen someone who is willing to take veiw pionts they may not necessarily agree with and understand anothers piont of veiw and argue rationally and clearly. I have locked horns with Glenn over a number of pionts on Casebook. We make no secret of the fact that we disagree about the Tabram murder. Yet if I was ever to get a programme on the Ripper off the ground I would want Glenn putting his incites on this subject because good discuission and lines of thought often come out from two people willing to hold two differing pionts of veiw.
Ally you illustrate my piont about INTERPRETATION very well. By assuming that I say Glenn is a vioce of reason you interpret that I am calling you Unreasonable. Which I most certain have not.
The brain is basically an organic computer designed to interpret the world around it. Thats why when the brain is confronted with a random image, like an ink blot, it needs to turn it into something. This is why I'm very cautious about psychic readings and exactly what they are.
So while may brain interprets Mikes sarcastic message, I'm thinking that he's implying that I am a BELEIVER. What ever that means...beleive in what exactly? I'm not certain what I beleive when it comes to the possibility of psychic activity. But it has me facinated.
I just object to anyone whos sole aim is to debunk or ridicle at any cost no matter how many baby's are thrown out with the bath water.
I was recently involved in a seance for the Guy Fawkes programme I worked on. I was on camera at the time but must admit I was aware of some thing happening in the room, of my sences being aware of something, although unlike the rather synical sound man I had employed, I have already said I felt no pysical experiences. Although I have no doubt about the sincerity of those that claimed they had.
I've thought about the experience and realized that its Not the first time in my life I'd been aware of such an experience. Three other rather non ghostly happenings come to mind.
The first was at a football match watching England play at wembly. The second was one evening travelling back in a packed tube when the electric engine cault fire and the lights went out and the last was years ago playing to an audience in a confined area with my band.
Now these were all incidences where I felt heightened awareness of other peoples emotions and feelings. It was an experience rather than anything knowing or concious...but I am prepared to except that we have ways of knowing things beyond or excepted five sences...I've just no idea how that works, because it defies rational thought to a certain extent.
Interesting there are a number of phenomina within nature that diffy the rational. A bumble bee for instance should not be able to fly but we can see that it can. Were you aware that groups of women in close proximixty for any length of time will sincronize their periods?
Strangely the reason I was unable to post yesterday was because I went for a job interveiw for a programme that turns out to be about investigating psychic ability....I think the offer was 'are you willing to be poacher turned game keeper'.
I certainly would welcome a total imparcial investigation into the subject and I'm considering very strongly.
Anyway I beleive that the Ripper investigation starts tomorrow. I will be unable to watch it as beleive it or not I do not have cable TV and have to get my sister to tape it....so there will be a delay in my responce.
however I certainly will take anything on board that Derek says and be willing to discuss it. Thats how this stuff can work sat best. Raising debate and conversation.
Do I beleive we will have the answer to who commited these crimes by Monday morning?
If i did i would certainly drive to the end of the world and be there.
I think taking my partner out for a meil might be more practical and life harmonizing experience.
Yours Jeff |
MTR
Sergeant
Username: Rigby
Post Number: 46
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 9:32 am: |
|
Jeff,
As soon as you start implying that acceptance of a spiritual realm (or however you want to describe it) is somehow being 'enlightened' whilst we all non-accepting sceptics are 'in the dark' you are going to get people's backs up (and probably invite sarcastic comments from anyone so inclined).
I could just as easily posit that I am enlightened because I don't believe certain things which, say, Colin Fry does and therefore that he is 'in the dark'.
Neither stance moves the debate on at all, does it ?
And whatever people like Colin Fry are doing, I don't (usually) doubt their sincerity. After all, there are autistic savants who can perform great feats of mental dexterity in music and arithmetic (e.g., date/day calculators); they don't always know how they do it either. Perhaps some of us just have a similar intuition for people ?
Mike. |
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 269
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 11:09 am: |
|
Yo Mike, then we are in argreement.
I have no idea what Colin Fry does, and yes I think there is deffinately something in saying he doesn't fully uderstand it either.
Although I happen to know that his position is very much apart and inline with that of the Spiritualist church...
And I think when we're talking about the function of the unconcious mind your autistic referances are a good one.
My back simply gets up when people start bandying around words like Fake and Fraudulent.
This implies that these people are deliberately deceiving people for financial profit.
It also implies that those of us who work on and produce such programmes are miss leading and deceiving the public.
Not on my watch.
What ever you wish to say about Colin Fry he does what he does...He has know idea who is in his audience...usually about one hundred...there are no plants and no information is collected by the production team and passed on to Colin Fry.
If I ever found any evidence of this happening I would have sacked those responcible straight away.
What you do watch are the highlights of each session which can very in accuracy greatly.
I've seen him knock of these readings with alarming speed and accuracy and on other days nothing...there's no ryme or reason to it.
I am interested if someone like Darren Brown could stand infront of an audience like this, under the exact same conditions as colin fry...no cheating..and get similar results...
qite genuinely if there was a way of undertaking it I'd give it a go. Perhaps I can come up with something similar if a take this new show.
Anyway bettre do some work.
Yours Jeff
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1085
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 2:56 pm: |
|
Jeff,
You say you get irritated when people bandy about the words "fake" and "fraudelent".
So let me ask you something. Are you saying that they didn't fake the night vision? Are you saying that Derek's reading wasn't faked, even though they somehow magically knew what people were going to respond to it hours later? Are you saying that a show where a psychic is supposed to get information cold, with no prompting and yet tapes exist of them rehearsing what he says isn't fake?
And if you think these things aren't indicative of a fake, then what exactly would constitute a fake in your mind?
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2732
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 5:24 pm: |
|
I can answer your last question, Ally.
Any book on Jack the Ripper. |
Ken Proctor
Detective Sergeant
Username: Gizmo
Post Number: 117
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 5:58 pm: |
|
Hi All, I have not watched this program so I am not in a position to comment on it. I did however watch a program a couple of nights ago, it was called "The Girl with the X-ray Eyes". The show was about a russian teenage girl, who is idolized in her homeland for her ability to diagnose people's illnesses and medical problems. She was flown to New York to face an independent panel of experts in the paranormal. The rules governing the tests of her ability were, what i would call fair and reasonable. They did not in any way favour the sceptic or advocate sides of the legitimacy of her gift. Bottom line, she flunked big time! I must admit though, I was pulling for her. What we beieve and what we would like to believe is a tug of war. There are people out there that are still convinced David Copperfield really did make the Statue Of Liberty dissappear,and they would be first in line to see the Televangelist Faith Healer. With regards to psychics and mediums,well, i think the jury is still out on that one. "GIZMO" 
" Don't be reckless with other people's hearts. Don't put up with people who are reckless wih yours." Baz Luhrman
|
Piltdown Diarist
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 24, 2005 - 12:07 pm: |
|
While I have no wish to defend television psychics, I would like to point out that the program is likely to be as well researched as Richard Wallace's "Light-Hearted Friend" or Cornwell's "Case Closed." I mean, let's be fair... |
SteveMcQueen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 24, 2005 - 12:58 pm: |
|
You should read the expose of Tony Stockwells psychic detective on the Badpsychics website.
It was the first episode, the woman involved was not happy with Tony at all, |
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 271
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 - 11:56 pm: |
|
Ally I've stated over and over to you that I do not and have not ever worked on Most Haunted.
However I have worked with Derek Acorah on shows like Antics Ghost Show and recently on Quest for Guy Fawkes.
I think I know enough about derek to know he is incapable of working to a script...even picking up basic links is a problem for Derek. He only works as a medium.
He simply does what he does. It makes little differance to a psychic whether he makes his reading during the day or at night.
The nature of all television is that you sometimes require pick ups. I think that you simply miss understand the television process. However beleive it or not I have only ever seen one episode of most haunted.
If you fail to see that i am telling you the truth then come out and accuse me of being a liar.
As for the show that Steven McQueen mentions this was my show 100%. My idea. My responcibility.
Tony had never met, heard of or contacted the people involved until they arrived for their reading on the day of filming, there was only one person in the intere world that new about this story. Who and what was involved.
It was me...
Are you acussing me of being a Fraud and a liar...I really would like to know about this because you are talking to the horses mouth ?????????????????
I am extremmely up set about these acusations as they are untrue...
What more can I say...
I am a televisiion producer...infact I mainly make historical Television, that is my main area of expertise..
My journalistic credibility and ethics are very important to me...
I have to be very careful about this because I have already been threaten with closure on these borads..
But Mr Mc Queen I organised and arranged that production. It was done in good faith and I swear on my life,Tony new nothing about that story or reading until the day of the reading.
That is just a Fact..
It is unfortunate that they were not happy with that reading. However I did the research on this programme and there was nothing in this programme that was out of the realms of possibility...after the first reading the family had the option not to continue if they were not happy, they choose to continue.
Jeff |
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3306
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 5:32 am: |
|
From today's Mirror:
"SPOOKY TRUTH: TV'S MOST HAUNTED CON EXPOSED TV "
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16303507&method=full&siteid=94762&headline=spooky-truth--name_page.html
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 272
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 7:50 am: |
|
Ok I feel compeled to say something here.
Hopefully you will all have noticed my reluctance to talk about a programme that I have never worked for and with people i have never worked for except Derek. And I can only speek of my own experiences.
I think I posted as tactfully as I dare when I pionted out that Derek Acorah has gone in seperate directions from this series and has been working on new projects.
And I do not think it prudent to discuss the reasons for this.
As I have also been as tactful as possible about, is the fact that the one eposode that I did watch had more psychic activity in thirty minutes than I have witnessed in three years.
(Derek was not featured in that part of programme)
I have never witnessed one knock for yes two knocks for no.
Derek has no control over the making of this programme he is simply the guest medium. And some might think that his cult status and veiwing audience might have lead to certain problems.
Strange however that these accusations are being made at the same time that Derek has decided to leave the show and work on other projects. As the itom says nothing has been said in the last few years, why now?
Also you will note that the majority of the critism is about the crew and production, the information about Derek himself is simply that he claims to have picked things up that may not have been there, and as i've stated before Derek is a Medium he just gets Stuff and it varies greatly in accuracy. He is not Superman he's a medium.
Take it for what it is stuff that can lead to interesting discussion and programme making.
The timing of this article seems very suspicious and I wonder who has the most to gain from It?
Yours Jeff.
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2248
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 8:54 am: |
|
Hi Jeff,
I don't find it that strange. If Derek is psychic, he evidently saw it coming before we did...
Love,
Caz
X |
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 273
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 11:23 am: |
|
Absolutely Caz enjoy and have fun with it, thats the best thing..
Derek cant do a worse job than my last investigation....he had cotton wool stuck in his ears..."and even to me that seemed utterly absurd."
Still we all have our pet theries...who am I to say...I've no idea who the ripper was...
Enjoy Jeff |
Neal Stubbings
Inspector
Username: Neal
Post Number: 209
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 3:11 pm: |
|
The one thing that I've never understood about mediums is how they can make mistakes if they are supposed to be genuine? Like suggesting that they are in contact with someones father who might still be alive, rather than perhaps a deceased brother?
After all, if they are genuinely communicating with a dead person, that dead person surely isn't going to give innaccurate information. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4188
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 4:02 pm: |
|
I thin you missed the point, Neal.
They have to INTERPRET the information they get, which can - according to themselves - be more or less vague. Sometimes they receive pictures, sometimes they get sensations, if they are lucky they receive telepathic communication or even sees the spirit visually. But whatever they get, it has to be interpreted in a subjective way, which sometimes leads to mistakes, inaccuries and inconsistencies.
It is not like talking through a telephone, for God's sake.
Jeff,
Thanks for the nice words, by the way.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
David O'Flaherty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 1078
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 4:12 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn,
And then sometimes they're just guessing and making it all up. The problem with trusting interpretation is that it requires me to trust someone I don't really know, you know what I mean? "It's true, because I just told you it was" has never been very impressive to me.
Actually, I read that some mediums do telephone readings, so sometimes it is like talking through a telephone. Hope you don't mind a little psychic humor. If you do mind, it's not me saying it, it's Becephalus!
Dave} |
Baron von Zipper
Inspector
Username: Baron
Post Number: 197
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 4:30 pm: |
|
Glenn,
"It is not like talking through a telephone, for God's sake."
That is the reason we skeptics (I'm guessing I'm not alone)have a hard time believing any of this stuff. It's like horoscopes. It's all so vague that you can interpret whatever you want. Why is mediumology such a bad science? Why is there never anything exact? Why are there never any precise photographs? If I saw people get better at their work, rather than get more mysterious, I may believe some of it. I don't believe in UFOs either for the very same reasons. I would love to believe in all of it, but I haven't seen anything yet that can even minutely convince me. Houdini was a believer who found there was nothing real about it, so I'm in good company. Maybe I should contact him. Darn! Just when I'd mothballed that ouji board too.
Cheers
Mike
"La madre degli idioti è sempre incinta"
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4189
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 5:52 pm: |
|
Mike,
I wouldn't go as far as saying that you can interpret it into 'anything you want' - that is not how it works and is surely an exaggeration - but yes, I agree that one would have liked things to be more concrete. Since I have not developed such sensitivety myself, I can only put forward the explanations I've heard from those who have, and they say that though they sometimes can see for example clear pictures, they do not always see them in a context.
Take for example, if you see a photograph of a country road, a very good clear picture which describes a landscape quite in detail. But without a comment note or caption you have no idea where it is or what it means. It is the same thing for a psychic medium.
That being said, mediums are not always 'vague' - sometimes they are VERY detailed in their information and sometimes the communication seems to be crystal clear. But when that happens, skeptics either debunk it or totally ignore it.
As for mediumology (does that word really exist???) being a 'bad science'... well, that is not surprising, since it is NOT a science at all. It has nothing to do with science or traditional scientific proof.
Just to clarify, I am not interested in discussing if these abilities are real or not, or if ghosts exists or not. Those are all up to our own personal beliefs, and I have no intention whatsoever to try to convince anyone - that is irrelevant. I am just trying to explain how it works according to those who do it or know better. To me it is OK if people don't believe, as long as it is OK for me to 'believe' in some of it. We are talking personal experiences here, and since modern science still hasn't been able to find the right tools to prove the existense or non-existense of ghosts or paranormal phenomenons, we are pretty much stuck with doubtful paranormal investigations, conclusions drawn from information and personal beliefs. Therefore it is uninteresting when skeptics and believers are trying to convince each others in both directions; it is waste of time.
And Mike - I know you said it with tongue in cheek, but I would definitely stay away from ouija boards.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on October 28, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4190
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 5:56 pm: |
|
Hi Dave,
Well, it has actually nothing to do with believing someone just because 'they told you so'. You can test a medium by comparing his or her information with things only you know about, and you would be surprised how concrete and detailed info you could get sometimes. I have myself tried this with very old murder cases - note, LOCAL ones with very specific details hidden - without giving the medium any kind of information beforehand, and with the documentation very hard to obtain even for a very experienced researcher. I have received surprisingly good hits on very small and specific details.
Then it is up to you as the sitter to make your own personal judgements about it. If you already from the beginning, however, have decided for yourself that it is bogus or doesn't work, then it will all be a pointless exercise, and the same goes if you belong to those who believe in anything and is not sceptic in any way (which is just as bad). Unless one is totally objective and have no prejudice about it, it is a useless effort.
Unfortunately mediumship is also a commercial business today, subsequentely leading to that a lot of frauds or bad ones are pestering an area that already are seen with suspicion. There are a lot of frauds out there, or people who just don't know what they're doing and they destroy for others. But just because they are incompetent or even deliberate frauds, doesn't necessarily mean that they all are.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
David O'Flaherty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 1079
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 28, 2005 - 6:24 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn,
Thanks. Well, it seems to me that if a medium returned concrete details about something only I could know, that would be impressive and very different from one who said "it's true just because I told you it was." A psychic who could meet such a high standard of proof would be something indeed. Unfortunately, the latter type of psychic seems to be much more prevalent, people who offer vague information, fish for details, follows body language, makes excuses "oh, ghosts are confused" or "you're not concentrating hard enough", etc. Those kinds of frauds make it difficult to believe, like you say. So the lesson seems to be, to protect yourself from being a victim, set a high standard of evidence.
Cheers,
Dave |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4192
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 4:44 am: |
|
Hi Dave,
Exactly.
Believe me, a medium that fishes for information should be treated with suspicion indeed and put up all your warning signs.
If you don't know a good medium personally as a friend, as I do, then the best thing is to use the most reputed ones, check out their reputation and use the jungle telegraph. It is not easy, though, because it is a junge out there and unfortunately, unless you're lucky, you are likely to draw a blank or two before you meet a good one. It is also, as you say, up to yourself, to not reveal any information whatsoever and to be careful with your body language. A good medium should stop you immediately and remind you of this rule if you should happen to do any of this.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on October 29, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4193
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 4:46 am: |
|
Did anyone see the show last night?
I fell asleep and missed it, but I have heard that it had very little to do with Jack the Ripper last night.
I've got it recorded, though, and will watch it later.
I assume I continues tonight and the next couple of days?
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on October 29, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
MTR
Detective Sergeant
Username: Rigby
Post Number: 51
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 5:43 am: |
|
Glenn,
It was a joke. I didn't catch it all but saw enough to shake my head. I laughed out loud when they were all in a room and there was a clearly-visible flash in the corridor behind. A few seconds later they're all asking what it was, with some claiming that they saw nothing. Just plain silly. This programme has set back any paranormal 'seriousness' a hundred years or more.
Mike. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4196
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 6:26 am: |
|
Mike,
That was pretty much as I expected, then. Sounds pretty much like all the other silly episodes of the show. To tell you the truth, I didn't think this would be any different.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Steve Swift
Detective Sergeant
Username: Swift
Post Number: 52
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 6:39 am: |
|
It's TV - it's entertainment,any of you still burn witches by any chance?
Bill Shankly to a Liverpool fan:
"Where are you from?"
"I'm a Liverpool fan from London."
"Well laddie . . . . What's it like to be in heaven?"
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 605
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 8:31 am: |
|
HI Baron,
I know I am a bit late on this one, but you can't say you don't believe in UFO's it's like saying you don't believe in fog.......a UFO is an unidentified flying object. That means it could be a dustbin lid, an alien spacecraft or a weather balloon.......it's unidentified..........that's the whole point! 
Just yoshing......but there is a serious point here.......
Many people have a blanket view of anything which doesn't fit into the norm.......but there are scientific, normal and rational explanations for practically everything that is termed 'paranormal'. It isn't spooks and ghosties.......it's just our limited understanding of what constitutes 'the everyday'.
I think most people on the boards know that I am a psychic......although I loathe the word to death.......I don't communicate with the dead........I don't do tarot card readings, or use a ouija board........ I think most, if not all of the paraphenalia that goes along with mediumship and clairvoyance is pap and sometimes downright dangerous and offensive.
What I do know is that some people have the ability to read undercurrents........they can see and hear and feel things that others can't......probably just a quirk of nature and genetic, because it does seem to run in families........
I use this ability to paint and it works.......I paint portraits of dead loved ones for people and manage to somehow get a feel of what they were like, don't know how it works but it does. This to me is as natural and making toast..........I see people as colours, most people know that and I daresay they think it is very strange, but it is actually called synethesia.....it is very common and quite natural.........so not everything is as it seems in the world of the paranormal.
Derek Acorah seems like a very nice bloke to me, but I watched most haunted live last night with my daughter and we groaned and winced our way through it.........not his fault, I think he was sincerely doing his best......but when you have things like the female presenter asking in all seriousness.......'Is there anybody there, please move the table if there is.......or touch someone...' we were crying with laughter.........the dog barking was the highlight of the show, not because he had sensed something, but because he had probably had a boot up the bum from one of the camera men!
This is not serious psychic investigation.......there were no controls......there was no real attempt and scientific analysis........it was, as Glenn said, just plain silly.........
I will still watch tonight because I need a good laugh, but as for it being a serious investigative show........it is as Steve said, just entertainment, and taken as that it is amusing. if at times mind numbingly boring.......
So there you go.....I have come out of the closet.......and most people will tell you that far from being airy fairy I am about the most down to earth person you could possibly meet, and very cynical about a great many things.......so those of you who are skeptics........maybe have a rethink........accepting that there are some very odd things out there is not always a bad thing!
Hugs
Janie
xxxx
None of you are ever going to speak to me again now are you?
|
Howard Brown
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Howard
Post Number: 1088
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 9:02 am: |
|
I saw it and have one comment to add....
Apparently,the psychic guy got some vibes while on Tower Bridge that someone jumped off the bridge and from what I gather,this is going to be a link to JTR in the next episode shown tonight.
I sure hope not. Because Tower Bridge was not completed until 1894, 6 years after the you know what.....
http://www.towerbridge.org.uk/TowerBridge/English
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 3124
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 12:09 pm: |
|
Stephen
Just read the Mirror thing!.watched the beginning re Tower Bridge last night and then lost the will to live! Going to have another go tonight though in between having a look on the boards...as you do!
Lol
Suzi x |
Jeff Leahy
Inspector
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 274
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 12:14 pm: |
|
Well I havnt seen it yet...but I can already feel my blood boiling..what a missed oppertunity.
Again I find myself in total agreement with Glenn's postings and it is obvious to me that Glenn must have had some experience with psychics.
And can I say that i was probably the least surprised person in the world to discover they get things wrong..tell me something I dont know.
I once asked Paul Begg what he thought of a reading at Millers Court I was given,
"Its impossible to say, he replied, because I'm not certain what it is I'm being asked to comment on."
The trouble as he pionted out is we simply have no way of knowing what or how the Medium is coming by this information, and I've never found a medium yet that seems to actually understand it themselves. They just come up with Stuff at random...and it varies in accuracy from exceptional to utter drival...and as Glenn pionts out it not only goes through their INTERPRETATION before coming out of their mouths (they are also discribing feelings which is hard to do) but then has to go through my interpretation and possibly an experts interpretation.
Another rather peculiar thing I've noticed is that information can be very specific and detailed ie If the medium were cheating they would had to have done some fairly serious research before hand. And yet in the same sentance come up with stuff that anybody who had done such research would obviously know to be incorrect...basics.
I mean if you are going to cheat then why do it so badly?
And getting back to Paul's piont without knowing whether a Medium is picking up this information from a dead spirit, the environment or psychically channaling in on somebody or some other outside force or a mixture of these...it becomes almost impossible to know exactly what you are looking at or be asked to comment on
All you have is a load of stuff.
As Woody Allan pionted out "the food in this resturaunt is rubbish and such small portions"
Maintaining a sence of humour about these things is certainly the best plan, Most Haunted is quite dilliberately played out rather camp and its producers certainly do not take it seriously.
However such information can be used to make interesting pionts of discussion. It could have been done so much better, lead us through some interesting areas of the case often passed by, particulary stuff about the Victims.
Oh well I will pass judgement when I see it.
Hopefully it will not put everybody off watching next weeks Quest for guy Fawkes.
Yours Jeff
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 3125
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, October 29, 2005 - 12:17 pm: |
|
Janey
Youre not airy fairy!!!!!! . ......Well if you are ???????? I am too .........cos that's how I work too ........Maybe its an art /painting toot thing that we have ......no one understands it and puts us down as daft...........However I KNOW that when I'm in a situation or a place of 'feeling' I can feel things and hate to say it am 99.9% correct! God!! were both sounding daft now!!!!!!!
Yo
Suzi |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
