Options
psychics being used to solve crimes good or bad?
![[Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0e0e3ec0e59fa7501dbe37c360a4d9cd.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 2,893 Forum Member
✭✭✭
psychics being used to solve crime good or idea??
if phychics can solve crimes why dont they solve every crime such as murders,missing people etc
if phychics can solve crimes why dont they solve every crime such as murders,missing people etc
0
Comments
That is because there are no psychics. They are all frauds.
If a 'psychic' ever leads the police to where a body is buried then you have your prime suspect right there.
Oh how true!
The problem is is becuase the police will speak to the psychics, it gives them the illusion they are being taken seriously and are helping them. The reality is the police have to chase up ALL leads, and the psychics are simply taking up police resources that could be used elsewhere.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2092504,00.html
The Soham psychic makes all sorts of claims but as soon as he is asked about finding Madeleine he produces the usual excuses.
Soham is a good example of the hindrance of psychics. Not only were all the odd balls writing in (it made national headlines over a number of days), but one of the parents brought in their psychics (probably justified under "it can't do any harm").
While none of them charged for their services, there were many psychics who claimed to "help the police", and said so in their adverts for many years afterward.
EDIT:-
I forgot to say that none of the psychics did produce any information that lead to the discovery of the bodies.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1290&dat=19920125&id=utgPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=SI0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6621,5215357
Worthy of note is the psychic who claims to have been in contacting with a police officer every ten or so weeks. I find this believable , and so this is why we have to be careful with any claimed "hits" psychics make. There source may not be supernatural.
I know of one case in Birmingham where a psychic contacted the papers with details of a killer. Two months afterwords he turned out to be correct in virtually all his predictions. However the alarm bells were ringing when he made the "predictions" becuase the claims were very specific, something psychics don't tend to do.
It turned out that the parents of a murdered girl had received information from the police about a "mysterious boyfriend", and they had passed on the details to the psychic, and these details became his predictions.
One thing of note, in the original article the quotes from the psychic were always ambiguous, never saying they were his predictions, simply implying it, but the journalist wrote the article as if they had been predictions.
This is very true. If the police DON'T chase up every lead, they are risking missing something (someone claiming to have information on a case should ALWAYS be listened to, however batsh*t insane they may appear to be), but when they do, it grants the "psychics" legitimacy. Of course, solving the case is the prime concern, so the cops have no choice BUT to listen to information volunteered; unfortunately it's easy for the "psychics" to say they're being "consulted", when in fact they're probably just bothering cops who are trying their hardest to solve a case. But the alternative, to disregard information offered, would be unthinkable. So the cops kind of have their hands tied in this regard, and it's a PR win for the corpse-botherers and a PR fail for the Dibble. I'm not sure it could ever be any other way, though.
I agree with that. No one is going to ignore any information provided, when there is a remote chance it could lead to something.
Often though there is evidence in other directions, which allow this rubbish not to take up too much time, but in cases of missing kids etc, no one is going to ignore information.
The police aren't obliged. If they are clueless enough to turn to psychics then it's entirely at taxpayers' expense.
You can't state for certain that all psychics are frauds. This may be an opinion of yours, but you can't state it as fact, though.
Well I can be certain until one proves otherwise. Proofs have to be in the positive not the negative.
They only have to be significantly better than guesswork.
Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science.
Well no one has ever managed to prove such powers.
They may be right sometimes - enough for the police to have to check their leads - but the provenance of any correct information is, without exception, mundane.
I literally bumped into Derek Acorahs wife whilst he was filming something in a famous haunted house near my old gaff. I asked her some probing questions and she as good as admited to me that he just makes it all up as he's going along. If there are people with unusual talents out there Derek Acorah isn't one of them. Unless you count the talent of getting paid for absolutely eff all. That's quite a talent.
You are absolutely right. Why cannot everyone see that?