How do you know that police do not use or rely on Psychics? Simple, because the whole criminal judicial system (at least in the U.S. and I would imagine the UK) would fall apart if police relied on “psychic” evidence.
Why, you might ask? Well just imagine. A psychic calls up, tells the police “I am a psychic and I have had a vision of …” a crime scene, a murder, what have you.
First, the police designed to enforce the law (we are not yet living in the age of Minority Report), would only be interested if they had knowledge that a crime has been committed – for example a missing person. Otherwise, their first response would be complete dismissal. However, it is critical to keep in mind that the police don’t just investigate crimes; their goal is to gather evidence of crimes for presentation to proper judicial and legal authority. In short, they are very concerned with not just the fact of a possible crime, but in the evidence that proves the crime exist.
So, second, let us next say that there is indeed a crime being investigated. In the US, at least, calling up and telling the police that you know where a body is buried while potentially interesting information, is in and of it self insufficient to trigger many of the things that the police need to act on a possible crime. For example, they need to have some idea how the informant knows? I.e. is there a reasonable basis for that knowledge?
Why, because in many cases, for example, the police must get a warrant to search a premises or site. To get a warrant, they have to convince a judge or magistrate that they have reliable information that a crime has been committed, that a search is necessary, and that the police have a good faith, reasonable belief that the warrant will turn up information necessary to the investigation.
In any case involving a psychic, this basic requirement does not even pass the first level of credibility. I.E. “your honor, we need a warrant?”
“Why?”
“A psychic called and told us that there was a body buried at that location.”
“A psychic you say? How do you know they are psychic? What is the proof?”
You can see where it degenerates from there BECAUSE there is no scientific proof, little less consensus that psychic powers exist (one of the problems of Luci’s assertions and the psychics doing everything they can to avoid proving their powers to a scientific certainty).
However, in that instance where the police do not need a warrant – for example requesting permission of a property owner to search a site that is granted. They still are faced with two critical questions?
How did the psychic know – evidence of psychic power can not be presented to a judge or jury specifically because it is not recognized as scientific evidence. In short, the police must, ultimately dismiss the “psychic evidence” as being usable because it has the same quality as the police arguing to a judge when asked how they found the body: “well, your honor, a little birdie told us.” Indeed, at least in the US, any criminal defense lawyer would get that evidence tossed so quickly as to make one’s head spin.
So, second, they almost have to assume that the supposed psychic who calls up and) states that they have had a vision of where a body lies (which, btw, I contend has never occurred) that the alleged psychic is in on the crime, for how else would the psychic know where the body was buried? I note that psychics are not generally being prosecuted as murder suspects, or abettors of these kinds of crimes. Indeed, it would provide them with a perfect and very public opportunity to make their case to a jury – “I didn’t do the crime, but I have visions. Let me show you how this works…” (it has never happened).
In the end, and where I am getting with this, is that the police cannot legally make a case with “psychic” evidence. Their job is to make a legal case. Even in that circumstance where they have heard “psychic” information and consider it (as they state they consider all offers of help in solving a case), they have to have usable evidence from credible sources to make a case. To this end, psychic evidence is not only unusable it is irrelevant. Again, why? Because you couldn’t get a search warrant for someone’s house based on the assertion of a psychic…it makes for a bad case, and for bad law.
Which gets back to a point I made earlier. Luci: if you are serious about this, are your supposed beliefs in this mumbo jumbo so strong as to state that you would you stand before a judge in a criminal case and let that judge (or jury) determine your guilt or innocence based on the police use of psychic evidence?
Would you tell your lawyer not to challenge the validity of the psychic and psychic evidence?
Do you believe that any of the citations that you’ve posted here to prove your case about Uri or any psychic should or world stand in a court of law to make the case that “psychics” are real?
If so, why hasn't it been done so...for instance, 10 years ago, DNA testing was at lest "questionable" evidence (Remember the challenge in the OJ case?). Today, because the scientific community accepts the premise, it is generally accepted, indeed dispositive in many criminal cases. IF the science proving psyi is so good, why hasn't it been accepted in courts as evidence?
