• 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.

Psychic attempts 2nd bankruptcy

Sherlock

Muse
Sherlock
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
674
Location
Salem, Oregon
Psychic Noreen Renier, often seen on the Court TV series 'Psychic Detectives' has filed for her second Chapter 7 bankruptcy in 8 years. On August 28, 2007 she filed in Virginia with her largest creditor skeptic John Merrell --- myself! Having recently won a $39,558 federal court judgment I hold 56%+ of her debt, and her own attorney holds much of the rest! I would be very grateful for any information known about income Noreen Renier may have collected from readers of this forum as clients, participants at her psychic lectures, regional expos, bookings, psychic readings, etc. since January 1, 2005. She claims her total net income for 2005, 2006 and 2007 totals under $41,000 for all three years. I would like to showcase to the Court anything she might have overlooked. You may respond at amindformurder@gmail.com and a complete review of her claims and my commentary is at www.amindformurder.com Thank you.
 
StopNoreenRenier? Oh, YEAH!

Have you perused the contents of Noreen Renier's website yet? The Special Events section might be of interest to you:

Recent Lectures
  • A.R.E. Virginia Beach Conference 2/ 25/07
  • Rhine Research Center, 6/16/06
  • International Remote Viewing Association Conference, 4/12/06
  • Illinois Coroners & Medical Examiners Association, 4/2/06
  • Virginia Festival of the Book, 3/4/06
You might also inquire with:
- Marlene A. Lantz, Coroner McHenry County, Illinois. 2007

Noreen claims to have had teaching appointments at:

Adjunct Faculty Member:
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida

Reitz Union Leisure Course

Santa Fe Community College
Gainesville, Florida

Rollins College
Winter Park, Florida

University of Delaware
Wilmington, Delaware

Piedmont Community College
Charlottesville, Virginia

University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia

How about asking the fine people at www.StopSylviaBrowne.com? I'm sure Robert Lancaster would be interested.

Happy Hunting!
 
Last edited:
quixotecoyote said:
I'm not telling him to go away. I just don't think you're going to find many psychic clients running around here.
Click to expand...

True. But he might find a few folks who keep up with the fakes and scammers and could provide a hint or two. As I note has been done. :)
 
Merrell responds:
Sometimes I have learned looking in places that don't seem the best can be enlightening. In fact I've had about a dozen direct responses from people who claim to have been paid clients. This cross-checking and re-checking often proves fruitful. It's one reason the info I have on my website is as extensive as it is.
Thanks --- and no embarrassment. I consider the facts I have been able to showcase at www.amindformurder.com well worth all the efforts.
 
quixotecoyote said:
I think the phrase is 'airing your dirty laundry', especially 'in public'
Click to expand...

What's "dirty laundry" about it? The facts have been on A Mind for Murder for ages. The only new tidbit here is that she's filed once again for financial protection. And since Reiner has book revenues and has once stated that she's too busy to take on new individual clients, it sounds like she's just hiding behind the bankruptcy to avoid paying off on the lawsuit. (The fact that her attorney is the other major creditor is not uncommon. Attorneys will help you in that special little way, especially when they lost the case!)

The guy asked a bunch of renowned Psychic-watchers if anyone heard anything of her whereabouts might they please inform him.

Reiner's another Sylvia, just smaller scale. And it may well be thanks to Merrell's work that she didn't get any bigger. The thought that someone here might have come across her at a "gig" somewhere seems very possible, and as the man says, he's gotten answers from surprising places in the past.
 
Hey, I'm just semantically correcting an idiom. If you've got an issue with the content, you should be quoting teek.
 
Both parties in this case are extremely fond of loudly and publicly declaring their woes/triumphs via emails and the internet even when there's no further info and even if instructed by the courts not to do so. This case has been going on for so long, it feels more like a personal vendetta than anything else. I've seen communications from both sides and frankly the level of pettiness is like nothing else. It does skepticism no good to crow about bankrupting a 70-year old woman.

My idiom is correct, quixotecoyote, yours is an alternative version. However I think mine is the original, certainly Wilde's quote uses that version (and also logically more correct as by the time you air your laundry, it's clean, surely. Who airs dirty laundry? Washing it in public would show everyone how dirty it is, which is rather the point of the idiom).
 
Well there's nothing wrong with airing clean laundry, after all. It's only the dirty stuff that you shouldn't show.
 
tkingdoll said:
It does skepticism no good to crow about bankrupting a 70-year old woman.
Click to expand...

It looked to me like he is suspicious that she is far from bankrupt. If she were truly bankrupt, I think she'd get left alone (this is merely an impression on my part).

Who airs dirty laundry?
Click to expand...

Before the days of automatic washers, used clothing and linens were freshened by airing them out, rather than by the frequent washings we are used to.

Linda
 
tkingdoll said:
Both parties in this case are extremely fond of loudly and publicly declaring their woes/triumphs via emails and the internet even when there's no further info and even if instructed by the courts not to do so. This case has been going on for so long, it feels more like a personal vendetta than anything else. I've seen communications from both sides and frankly the level of pettiness is like nothing else. It does skepticism no good to crow about bankrupting a 70-year old woman.
Click to expand...

Somehow I seem to have a completely different take on this.

Merrell exposed Renier as a phoney and a lier but lost the court case in 1986 that Renier brought against him for libel and that loss essentially established the validity of her psychic abilities.

Later evidence supported Merrell. Renier, by continuing the fight eventually gave Merrell a legal opening to get back at Renier (and why not given the injustice done to him?). This case he has won and Renier has been ordered to pay costs. Renier claims she has no money and yet she has made claims in the past of making 100s of dollars and hour and lecturing and consulting to TV. Merrell asks for help in identifying her sources of income. He would like to get paid as ordered by the court. Where is the problem?

It does skepicism no good to roll over if someone plays the age card. If she truely does not have the money, then let's have proof of this. Renier was perfectly happy to try and bankrupt Merrell in the first case and since, he wasn't allowed to, I presume he had to pay the $25,000.

I don't see any crowing in the original post. :confused:
 
Gord, every single one of John's posts here have been about Noreen. And Noreen has a mailing list doing exactly the same thing in return to people she feels might be sympathetic. This has been going on for years.

I don't believe it's possible to prove a negative, by the way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom