• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Last Sylvia Browne thread I start, I promise! This time, I have hit PAY- dirt! :D

EeneyMinnieMoe said:
Sylvia Browne was once paid by the police to give a reading on a case. For four hundred dollars for 30 minutes, she told them a bunch of nonsense about the victim's rejected homosexual stalker murdering him. The real killer was found 15 years later due to forensic evidence and police work, no thanks to Sylvia Browne.
Click to expand...

Well, so much for "never charging the police".

Has she ever told the truth about anything?

Turns out the man was killed by a local kid, then 14, who was just trying to rob him.

Here's a quote from the detectives:

Martin said, "She gave us some pretty good information that we're looking into. She pointed us in the direction of the type of individual and told us what she believes happened prior to the homicide. "

"We were very impressed," Estevens said.

"This psychic is a police tool that we're using. Our investigation is a compilation of all our tools. "
Click to expand...

I hope I don't live in that jurisdiction.
 
EeneyMinnieMoe said:
Sylvia Browne was once paid by the police to give a reading on a case. For four hundred dollars for 30 minutes, she told them a bunch of nonsense about the victim's rejected homosexual stalker murdering him. The real killer was found 15 years later due to forensic evidence and police work, no thanks to Sylvia Browne.

Turns out the man was killed by a local kid, then 14, who was just trying to rob him.
Click to expand...


Wow. At least we now know she doesn't always claim it was a hispanic that committed the crime. :rolleyes:

Seriously though, this is what is really disgusting about her becoming involved in police investigations. How much time and what resources were wasted following her wrong guess. And how many gay men were wrongfully investigated and possibly harrassed because of it? Sickening.
 
kakariki said:
Wow. At least we now know she doesn't always claim it was a hispanic that committed the crime. :rolleyes:

Seriously though, this is what is really disgusting about her becoming involved in police investigations. How much time and what resources were wasted following her wrong guess. And how many gay men were wrongfully investigated and possibly harrassed because of it? Sickening.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah...I forgot to mention.

She said the killer was a "mulatto".

:o
 
Darth Rotor said:
Does it occur to you that the network this show was produced on has lawyers who might be able to give the show the guidance it needs to stay legal, as in "well within the gray area" on this matter? If what you say was that simple, they'd have taken her off the air a while back. I will also point out that I have never heard of Ms Browne represent herself as a medical professional. (If she had, she'd have been busted for a grotesque fraud.)

DR
Click to expand...

Still if someone took her advice and got more ill or died then there is a possible lawsuit. So it is either that she gotten lucky or insist on seeing a doctor to "check it" that she is not in trouble.
 
Steelmage said:
Still if someone took her advice and got more ill or died then there is a possible lawsuit. So it is either that she gotten lucky or insist on seeing a doctor to "check it" that she is not in trouble.
Click to expand...

Possible lawsuit, yes. But the key phrase is "took her advice". Browne does not profess to be a doctor of medicine. People who take her advice do so at their own risk, and should be aware that psychic power does not take the place of a medical diagnosis-and I'll bet Williams' legal advisers cooked up an ironclad waiver for audience members that specifies something to that effect. In light of that, chances of such a lawsuit being thrown out of court are high. There's no clear violation of law there.
 
It's just that the kind of disclaimers currently accepted as legal seem totally unfair. A legitimate one should have to read, "I, said psychic, possess no greater powers than any other normal human being and my advice is no more valuable than anyone else's, and much less so than your doctor's, your own family and friends who know you, or that of your local police force, whichever is relevant."

By claiming psychic (superhuman) insight and a "direct pipeline to God" via a spirit guide, when a psychic gives out medical or other advice, won't the believers consider her advice superior to a doctor's (limited human) or any other ordinary human advice, no matter how she or he disclaims it?

True the individual is responsible for the choice to act on such advice, but if a psychic did not set themselves up as having magical powers of perception in the first place, it wouldn't happen. I've seen time and again that when people turn to a psychic (and are willing to pay such high fees), it's in hope that they will receive some sort of "ultimate" answer, meaning unless the answer is so far off base as to lose all credibility, they WILL take it more seriously.
 
ExMinister said:
It's just that the kind of disclaimers currently accepted as legal seem totally unfair. A legitimate one should have to read, "I, said psychic, possess no greater powers than any other normal human being and my advice is no more valuable than anyone else's, and much less so than your doctor's, your own family and friends who know you, or that of your local police force, whichever is relevant."
Click to expand...

I agree. I've never seen the waiver that Montel Williams provided to his audience members - have to check RSL's site to see if there is a copy on there - but if it contains the "for entertainment purposes only" catchphrase, then I think that it is the same thing, isn't it?

By claiming psychic (superhuman) insight and a "direct pipeline to God" via a spirit guide, when a psychic gives out medical or other advice, won't the believers consider her advice superior to a doctor's (limited human) or any other ordinary human advice, no matter how she or he disclaims it?
Click to expand...

Yes, they would. But, that doesn't mean they have a legitimate legal claim if she turns out to be wrong. Since psychic insight has never been proven to exist, then it boils down to personal belief-and I'm not sure anyone can prove fraud on that basis.
 
Oh my gosh, I just clicked on the link to the YouTube video of my appearance on Montel. It was devestating to watch all over again. She is a fake. I watched a validation video of a lady named Mary Jo who was brought back because she found the ring that was missing from her mother after she passed. Mary Jo was on the same episode as I was. I wonder why I wasn't asked back???:D Could it be because she was soooo wrong??
 
Last edited:
ExMinister said:
True the individual is responsible for the choice to act on such advice, but if a psychic did not set themselves up as having magical powers of perception in the first place, it wouldn't happen. I've seen time and again that when people turn to a psychic (and are willing to pay such high fees), it's in hope that they will receive some sort of "ultimate" answer, meaning unless the answer is so far off base as to lose all credibility, they WILL take it more seriously.
Click to expand...

That seems to be the main crux of the issue. When people are willing to give someone a large sum of money for advice and guidance, there is almost a need to follow said advice, otherwise you'd feel like the money was wasted. So, most people will likely follow paid for advice, unless the advice is so bad that the person paying for it can't help but notice how bad it is.
 
EeneyMinnieMoe said:
Deborah, do you want to hear the worst story about a guest being invited for a second show?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92123

I can't believe Montel got away with that. He must think his viewers have no memories.
Click to expand...

I don't understand something in that transcript.

In the summation of her story at the beginning, Mrs. Torres specifically said that she became pregnant with her late husband's frozen sperm. Then, when she was talking to Browne, there was this exchange:

LINDA: And I have another question. Does he know he has a child?

Ms. BROWNE: Absolutely.

WILLIAMS: By another person?

LINDA: By another person.

Ms. BROWNE: Honey, they know everything, absolutely.

I don't understand what they mean when they say "by another person". Are they referring to the pregnancy? Or I am reading something wrong?
 
Lt. Torres had an illegitimate son with a former girlfriend. He neither kept in touch with her or with his son and had no relationship with either of them when he died.

I believe this was before his marriage.

Maybe that's what it's about.

Edit: That theory doesn't make much sense, either, because the ex-girlfriend claims that he knew perfectly well that she was pregnant.

Then, maybe his wife did not know that.
 
Last edited:
EeneyMinnieMoe said:
Lt. Torres had an illegitimate son with a former girlfriend. He neither kept in touch with her or with his son and had no relationship with either of them when he died.

I believe this was before his marriage.

Maybe that's what it's about.

Edit: That theory doesn't make much sense, either, because the ex-girlfriend claims that he knew perfectly well that she was pregnant.

Then, maybe his wife did not know that.
Click to expand...

Seems strange, then, that his wife would know he had another child, if he didn't. But, that's a whole other can of worms.

Thanks for the clarification-I was baffled.

After reading about his altercation with the fan in Florida (?), his lack of response to the uproar surrounding Browne, and his continued sponsorship of her after her errors on his show, I'm of the opinion that Williams didn't care what his viewers thought or remembered, as long as they tuned in.
 
For what it's worth, he had the affair before he married Linda but while he was her boyfriend/fiance.

His mistress was a female soldier he had met when stationed in Fort Campbell in 1998. He married Linda in 1999 but had been dating her since high school- he graduated high school in 1996- and knew her since they were both 14.

Now, I do not condone adultery under any circumstances- outside or inside of a marriage- and conducting an affair with a colleague in Kentucky while another woman waits for you in New Jersey is particularly distasteful but maybe it's a good thing that he produced an heir, considering what later happened to him.
 
Here is a statement from law enforcement about psychics on the Angela Lee case:

Man faces charges in Angela Lee slaying
By MAGGIE BORMAN
The Telegraph
April 27, 2007 4:39 PM


...
Normal investigative practices were used from the beginning of the case, as well as monetary rewards offered by the family and Macoupin/Montgomery Crime Stoppers. On three occasions, psychics were called in at the request of the family to study the case and crime scene, and annual press conferences were held near the anniversary of Lee’s death to keep the case in front of the public. The psychics did not provide any substantive leads, authorities said.
...
Click to expand...

Full: The Telegraph
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom