Psychics and the police - medium Patrick Hutchinson poised to make judicial history

[Alice Shortcake]

An English psychic named Patrick Hutchinson has made a truly extraordinary claim on his website - that he will soon be telling a jury how the spirit of a dead grandmother contacted him during one of his shows and told him that her young granddaughter, who was in the audience, had been the victim of child sexual abuse.

Not surprisingly Hutchinson's claim has been met with sceptism, best summarized here:

http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=658

I'm sure we'll all be waiting with bated breath for Hutchinson to enter the witness box and explain how the case was broken by a dead granny. :mad:

[Tricky]

An English psychic named Patrick Hutchinson has made a truly extraordinary claim on his website - that he will soon be telling a jury how the spirit of a dead grandmother contacted him during one of his shows and told him that her young granddaughter, who was in the audience, had been the victim of child sexual abuse.

Not surprisingly Hutchinson's claim has been met with sceptism, best summarized here:

http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=658

I'm sure we'll all be waiting with baited breath for Hutchinson to enter the witness box and explain how the case was broken by a dead granny. :mad:
"Bated" breath, unless you suggest we are all having sushi for lunch.

[Alice Shortcake]

Noted and corrected. It's almost one in the morning here and I should really be in bed. :blush:

[Tricky]

Noted and corrected. It's almost one in the morning here and I should really be in bed. :blush:
Very good. It's a common mistake. Hope you had a nice rest.

As to Hutchinson's claim, I suspect it will be like most other claims of this type. It will disappear without fanfare from his website when it falls through and he won't mention it again. It doesn't mean he won't make another claim. Still, keep us informed if anything significant happens.

[chillzero]

An English psychic named Patrick Hutchinson has made a truly extraordinary claim on his website - that he will soon be telling a jury how the spirit of a dead grandmother contacted him during one of his shows and told him that her young granddaughter, who was in the audience, had been the victim of child sexual abuse.

Not surprisingly Hutchinson's claim has been met with sceptism, best summarized here:

http://badpsychics.com/thefraudfiles/modules/news/article.php?storyid=658

I'm sure we'll all be waiting with bated breath for Hutchinson to enter the witness box and explain how the case was broken by a dead granny. :mad:

Now, surely THAT will consitute a clear breach of the false medium's act (still in force for a short time yet). How can a court support evidence from a medium, when mediumship is defined as 'entertainment only'?

[CFLarsen]

Very good. It's a common mistake. Hope you had a nice rest.

As to Hutchinson's claim, I suspect it will be like most other claims of this type. It will disappear without fanfare from his website when it falls through and he won't mention it again. It doesn't mean he won't make another claim. Still, keep us informed if anything significant happens.

On the contrary: This will go down in psychic-lore as a stamp of approval by the authorities: "Look, even the courts have used psychics!"

No, psychics and their believers won't tell the whole story about this, but when have they ever done that about anything?

This story will pop up, again and again, with the odd reference from an uncritical reporter, fueling it even more.

You just wait and see.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I don't get it. Won't the lawyers for the other side simply ask for proof that he actually talked to the dead grandmother?

~~ Paul

[Tricky]

On the contrary: This will go down in psychic-lore as a stamp of approval by the authorities: "Look, even the courts have used psychics!"

No, psychics and their believers won't tell the whole story about this, but when have they ever done that about anything?

This story will pop up, again and again, with the odd reference from an uncritical reporter, fueling it even more.

You just wait and see.
Oh, I don't doubt that it will be reported in the third person by countless believers, but the actual evidence, the web page in question, will no longer be available. The owner of the website will remain mum on whether or not he was "ordered" to remove it.

So it might actually be wise to dump the current files to a time-stamped document to keep as evidence for what was actually said. I don't care enough about this to bother to keep such records, but perhaps someone who manages an on-line skeptic magazine would.

I don't get it. Won't the lawyers for the other side simply ask for proof that he actually talked to the dead grandmother?

Gosh, they might at that! Another reason why the initial claim will probably vanish.

[Pup]

Putting aside any of the psychic stuff, I'm thinking this would get into the rules of evidence concerning hearsay, pretty quick. Would it even be admissable for someone to say "Her live grandmother told me she was being abused?" Wouldn't that be considered hearsay? Or am I thinking of U.S. law only?

So I'd think the only evidence admissable would be what the psychic witnessed happening in the room at the time the girl made the accusation. And in fact, he'd be a better witness for the defense I'd think, because of what the author at the link says: "the first thing that crossed my mind for some reason was the reports some time ago of 'false memories' of child abuse placed by therapists and a lot of retractions of allegations of abuse..."

If the psychic can be shown to have pressured the girl into making the accusation, the credibility of the accusation decreases, and the psychic just looks like a jerk, maybe a slanderous jerk if he identified who the abuser supposedly was.

But I'm not a lawyer, and not in the UK, so somebody please correct me!

[CFLarsen]

Oh, I don't doubt that it will be reported in the third person by countless believers, but the actual evidence, the web page in question, will no longer be available. The owner of the website will remain mum on whether or not he was "ordered" to remove it.

So it might actually be wise to dump the current files to a time-stamped document to keep as evidence for what was actually said. I don't care enough about this to bother to keep such records, but perhaps someone who manages an on-line skeptic magazine would.

I'm way ahead of you.

[Tricky]

I'm way ahead of you.
Good lad.

[darkstar27]

Well by all accounts he's done it - go to Patrick Hutchinson's website on the Media page and you will see what I mean. At least, one more peodophile off the streets can't be bad.

[chillzero]

and as a few have tried to discuss with you here:
http://www.skeptics.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=2003

no. He didn't.

[darkstar27]

I feel its just that you don't want to accept it rather than he hasn't done it. He said originally he had unearthed the pervert at his show - he obviously did - he said it was going to court - it did, he said he had given evidence - obviously did so how can you simply say "he didn't - why can't you simply accept the facts laid out in front of you and stop continually trying to discredit a man when he's done a good deed to the community in getting rid of this peodophile - surely that's the important thing.

[chillzero]

Maybe you could read my linked post for my reasons.

The girl brought this to the police, and the girl decided to bring it back to people's attention because after she and her friend discussed what had been 'highlighted' (a.k.a. guessed) during the show, she realised the other girl had been through the same ordeal.

This was no secret, as the girl had previously tried to bring this to her family's attention, but they chose not to believe her. Nice of them to embrace this stranger, though.

I have yet to see any indication that Hutchinson's evidence was remotely relevant let alone helpful and am still appalled that he was allowed to 'testify' in this manner.

I have yet to see any evidence that he gave any corroberating information regarding the alleged abuse. If the grandmother could be clear that there was abuse inflicted, and on who... then I am sure she could divulge some other details that could be independantly verified against the girl's account. Otherwise, in my opinion, this was a lucky strike in cold reading.

[sophia8]

Did he actually give evidence in court, though? All I can find is that he gave a statement to police.
AFAIK, this trial is still ongoing - no verdict has been reached. Dunstan has yet to be judged a paedophile. It is worth noting that in 2005 he was accused of indecently assaulting three teenage girls some years earlier, and was acquitted of all charges; his present defence is that his current accusers are friends of these girls and concocted the allegations between them.
I don't find this wholly unbelievable. Why did these two go to the psychic meeting in the first place? Going out with their mums and their mums' middle-aged and elderly friends to sit in a hall for a whole evening listening to some bloke channel dead grannies wouldn't really appeal to young women, I would have thought.
I can see it being possible that these girls decided to go to this meeting and steer the medium into making the claims. With the allegations out in public, undoubtedly in front of family friends, the families would have to stop denying the stories - which would suit the girls' purpose very well (whether their stories were true or not).

[darkstar27]

You obviously havent read about the case. He has been charged with 5 counts of indecent assault by a jury and will be sentenced in June. He has been told it will be a custodial sentence. He pleaded guilty to all the charges back in 2005, was put on the sex offenders register and told to attend a course for sex offenders which he never attended. The girl who had previously told her parents was not the girl in question whose Gran had come through but another one. The previous case back in 2005 was one girl who did know the new ones but 2 others who were originally babysitters of the man and were much older and had no connection with any of the others. The pub was the focal point of all community activities and the girls were always in the pub virtually all their lives so it wasn't a "hall" with loads of grannies. Also I may add there was no steering of the medium as he does not allow anyone to tell him ANYTHING except Yes or No. Why do I know all these things because I was at the pub that evening and KNOW all that went on from start to finish as I was also in court every day. So ask any details you want and I'll tell you the actual truth and not all the nonsense that is written in papers etc.

[sophia8]

Thanks for the correction, DS. But this: The pub was the focal point of all community activities and the girls were always in the pub virtually all their lives . All their lives????
Anyway, did the medium actually testify in court?

[chillzero]

The girl who had previously told her parents was not the girl in question whose Gran had come through but another one.

OK, I have re-read and seen my misunderstanding. However, my point was that the girl who brought this to court did so because her friend had also been abused by the same man, and her father advised her to; not because some psychic told her to. (The family of the other girl had ignored her claims)

She confided in her childhood friend during the night out of an incident of abuse she allegedly suffered as a youngster while visiting Terrance Dunstan, 61, at his home in Morley.

The court heard the same friend, now aged 19, had previously claimed repeated abuse by Dunstan she endured from aged nine to eleven.

But the jury heard her parents didn't believe her at the time and she had to apologise to Dunstan.
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Psychic-uncovers-child-sex-attack.4005324.jp

The previous case back in 2005 was one girl who did know the new ones but 2 others who were originally babysitters of the man and were much older and had no connection with any of the others.

That's incorrect. From the same link - bolding mine.

Prosecutor, Richard Mansell told the jury the trip to see the psychic ended with the girls resolving to contact police on advice from the 20-year-old's father.

Mr Mansell said: "She burst into tears and then went to one side with (her friend) and told her, for the first time, that on one occasion the defendant had sexually abused her. As a result of that event, the two women talking about the whole thing, they decided to go to the police and made their complaint in late October 2007."

Also I may add there was no steering of the medium as he does not allow anyone to tell him ANYTHING except Yes or No.

That's exactly how cold reading works. Maybe you should research it a little. I still see no evidence that he gave any actual information - factual, verifiable information (which room, what days, what clothes... ) other than a guess that the girl had been abuse. We also don't know how often he throws that guess out in his regular readings and doesn't get a hit.

Why do I know all these things because I was at the pub that evening and KNOW all that went on from start to finish as I was also in court every day. So ask any details you want and I'll tell you the actual truth and not all the nonsense that is written in papers etc.

Were you there when the children were abused? No - that's the evidence that matters, not what some guy claims to have heard from some spirit.

[Rocko]

Do we know if he actually gave evidence? The website hints strongly he did, but reading it carefully, he never actually states that he did. He's made a big deal of the stock letter from the CPS, but that doesn't refer to him giving evidence either - just that he was a witness in the case. I'd imagine anyone who gave a statement would receive that same letter.

Reading between the lines, I'd say he gave a statement to the police but wasn't actually called to be a witness at the trial. The article on his website, however, suggests he actually attended the trial. If that's true, then he spent 6.5 days there for no discernible reason whatsoever.

[Locknar]

I for one, and impressed. A psychic, using his “paranormal abilities” to explain publically known information after the fact – WOW!

[sophia8]

Still waiting for Darkstar to come back and tell us how this medium testified in court and made history.

Drums fingers....whistles tunelessly.....

[amindformurder]

Psychic Noreen Renier previously testified in a U.S. court that a dead woman contacted Renier with information about the dead woman's attorney and Renier was able to resolve the unsolved problem and in so doing made whirlpools and toilets stop overflowing. Renier further testified she also received information from two entities she calls Robert and Sing who themselves communicate with the dead. So I regret to say claims made in a U.S. court are already years ahead of what's happening on the other side of the water. See: www.amindformurder.com (http://www.amindformurder.com)

[Gene L]

Sounds like the Japanese classic movie Rashmonon were a medium testified before a tribunal or trail or whatever they had back in 16th Century Japan on behalf of a murdered man.

The medium lied, at any rate. I think.