Psychic attempts 2nd bankruptcy

[RSLancastr]

It does skepticism no good to crow about bankrupting a 70-year old woman.

I should be so lucky.

 

[Rodney]

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.

So, Gord, how many other court cases have you heard of where someone exposes another person as a "phoney" and a "lier" (are those the Canadian spellings? ) and yet manages to lose the case?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

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.

Teek,

I must admit this is one of the sillier discusions I have involved myself in in my short time here.

Can we not just ignore the personalities and concentrate on the facts? I know this is a long time feud -- I have read about it before much more than once. However, in the case of this post, I saw it as a genuine case of a request for information not some sort of stalking horse for another swip at Renier.

I knew someone would catch me on the "proving a negative" thing. A thorough search might have a positive outcome though.

 

[tkingdoll]

Teek,

I must admit this is one of the sillier discusions I have involved myself in in my short time here.

Can we not just ignore the personalities and concentrate on the facts? I know this is a long time feud -- I have read about it before much more than once. However, in the case of this post, I saw it as a genuine case of a request for information not some sort of stalking horse for another swip at Renier.

I knew someone would catch me on the "proving a negative" thing. A thorough search might have a positive outcome though.

Yeah, I suppose you're right. I just saw *another* one of these threads and thought "give it a rest already, we know you beat her, ding dong the witch is dead, etc". Publicity fatigue, I guess. We're being asked to help bury the corpse. But it's not all that bad, I could just simply ignore the thread instead. Point taken

ETA: You think this is silly? You should have seen the email Noreen sent round protesting the fact that she'd been instructed by the court not to discuss the case...clearly in breach of said instruction...

 

[Reno]

Hold on hold on....ding dong the witch is dead, let's bury the corpse? Don't be so hasty Teek. When Robert S Lancaster finally causes the death (as a psychic, not literally)of Talon Browne, I don't want to bury that corpse. I want to hang it up and gloat over it. I want to parade it all over the world. I want everyone to see it for what it is.

So let's not bury this corpse just yet. If we can rake this bankrupt psychic over the coals one more time for the vulnerable people she has hurt, then I'll be there watching the poor old 70 year old heartless, greedy, lying, thieving charlatan get her come uppance.

 

[hmmm...]

It does skepticism no good to crow about bankrupting a 70-year old woman.

I'm not so sure about that. Unfortunately this case has become somewhat convoluted, but in general, if a psychic tried to sue someone for calling her a fraud, then had to prove she wasn't - and lost, I for one would certainly be up for at least a small amount of crowing.

 

[Miss Anthrope]

I should be so lucky.

I hope!

 

[Foolmewunz]

Glad to see RSL dropped in. I was thinking towards his herculean efforts in re Kaz and Claws while reading this.

If one had looked at RSLs posts during last autumn, one would've thought we had a monomaniac on our hands. All about that Sylvia Browne, Sylvia Browne, Sylvia Browne!

Merrell doesn't post here often, and after a brief and misguided flirtation with being a minor troll, actually opened up and had some good discussions about his site, the case, etc... Except for Posner in Tampa, he's been essentially the one person taking on Noreen, who was just as publicized and dangerous as Sylvia at one point. Hell, they let her lecture at Quantico! Talk about undermining skepticism and critical thinking! The FBI, who are supposed to have the best investigative network in the world, inviting a two-bit Psychic to lecture on how to use paranormal powers to solve crimes.

So? The guy's a one-trick pony? I have no problem with that. I think this case has consumed him, but for many of the right reasons. He started out debunking a fraud. He's continued in that vein. I'm sure that even if he collects the full settlement, it's just going to represent a nice windfall. He could have made more concentrating on his writing/journalism over this period. He's obviously not in it for the money, and I don't think he's in it for a personal vendetta (more a professional, or even moral, one).


> Teek, sorry I forgot that you were pretty well read-up on this story. (I don't really understand why so few people are.) So, sorry if I was a bit "short", back there.

 

[Sherlock]

Continuing response from Merrell

I appreciate everyone’s comments. Some additional thoughts.
Since a U.S. District judge ruled in November 2006 that Noreen Renier breached the original settlement contract of silence that she and I had signed in 1992 --- one that provided silence for 13 years --- no further court order (including now) has ever been issued for any public silence. It is because there is no contractual or court agreement active that I have been able to "re-open" my public comments including opening the website on February 26, 2006. Four weeks ago Noreen Renier filed her bankruptcy petition with the Court which indicates an "average income" of $484, and her 1990 Volvo sedan with 99,800 miles her most valued personal property at $1360. The gross amount of income from her employment, trade, profession, and from the operation of her business is listed as $6371.00 in 2006 and $8,874.40 in 2007. Yet her public website shows her 60-120 minute phone session fees at $1000, and her least expensive private reading session listed at $350. She was also involved with lecturing for fees across the U.S. during 2005 and 2006 as well, though I am not aware of all of her seminars, expos, psychic readings, and paid speaking events --- and therefore seeking any additional information on any public announcements that have been previously made.

Gord in Toronto is correct. As recently as July 31, 2005 the Lynchburg News & Advance (Virginia) stated “Moreover, $1000 isn’t all that much to Noreen Renier anymore – it’s what she charges for her services.” And Renier responds in the same article with “It used to be $600, I actually raised the price to discourage people, because I’ve got more work than I can handle.” And I note the perceptive remarks from fls above. One final answer --- yes I did pay Renier just over $28,000 in my own settlement to her in 1992. That amount was $23,800 in a single check after she had already garnished the additional difference. I see nothing odd about making sure all is valid when someone declares bankruptcy and I find myself the principal creditor with more than 56.5% of the debt. Nor when her attorney helped push my responding legal costs well above $40,000 over 15 months while collecting just $1000 in total payments according to the bankruptcy petition filed by Renier. As a business person I would be reluctant to continue working on a project where I continue work month after month while just receiving $1000 against unpaid bills that finally are above $26,000. And as for those who find such psychic and skeptic squabbling tedious I note that this evening’s circus performance isn’t over. In fact here come the clowns with their silly painted grins. And over there I see several members in the audience with jars of cold cream and face wipes ready. Hhhhmmmmmmm. Is it possible some unexpected encore is brewing?

 

[tkingdoll]

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Stellafane]

Thanks for proving my point.

Sorry but I'm really, really not getting where you're coming from. I think Mr. Merrell's work is important and useful, and his posts informative and interesting. Perhaps it's because I don't have the thorough knowledge you do about the case and its past history, but so what? Can't this thread be valuable for people like me, and others can just ignore it?

I for one appreciate Mr. Merrell taking the time to let me know what's going on. And the criticism I've seen of him in this thread, to be frank, strikes me as a bit irritable and snippy, and ultimately uncalled-for.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Thanks for proving my point.

Sigh. I thought we had agreed to make up? Sniff.

 

[tkingdoll]

Sorry but I'm really, really not getting where you're coming from. I think Mr. Merrell's work is important and useful, and his posts informative and interesting. Perhaps it's because I don't have the thorough knowledge you do about the case and its past history, but so what? Can't this thread be valuable for people like me, and others can just ignore it?

I for one appreciate Mr. Merrell taking the time to let me know what's going on. And the criticism I've seen of him in this thread, to be frank, strikes me as a bit irritable and snippy, and ultimately uncalled-for.

Takes all sorts of opinions to make a forum, happily.

 

[Enlighten]

This is a very good part, linked to the JREF:

‘Court TV’ Psychic Loses to Skeptic in Real Court
Skeptical Inquirer magazine
July/Aug 2007

The epic legal wranglings between “psychic detective” Noreen Renier and skeptic John Merrell, which have spanned two decades in county, state, and federal courts from Orlando to Seattle, may have finally come to an end—though not with the results predicted by the psychic.
...
On his own Web site, Merrell has floated two intriguing, though somewhat fanciful, ideas for Renier to ponder. The first has her coauthoring another book, this time with a skeptic like me or Joe Nickell, revealing “how international psychics have fooled the public and media.” The second has Merrell agreeing to donate $10,000 in Renier’s name to a children’s charity and erasing her $39,558 debt entirely, should she in a timely manner be able to “prove under a qualified and sanctioned test something as simple as her claims of human levitation, psychic sight through clothing, or her two-way communication with trees.” The former—if Renier is consciously aware, and agreeable to confessing, that she is no more “psychic” than the rest—could have best-seller potential. The latter, on the other hand, would require that Renier actually demonstrate psychic ability under properly controlled conditions, and, based upon my own personal history with her, my money says she wouldn’t dare make the attempt—not even for Randi’s $1,000,000 reward.

http://www.csicop.org/si/2007-04/court-tv.html

 

[Sherlock]

Noreen Renier didn't take the offer

She unfortunately selected not to demonstrate her claimed abilities.
I even had offered to pay for a suitable public auditorium and limit the skeptical participants to a lesser number than her own participants --- so as not to sway the vibes in the place to much towards skeptics.
But no dice. She has selected to attempt bankruptcy instead --- which will be determined by a federal bankruptcy court on whether than proceeds. -John Merrell

 

[Blue Bubble]

This is a very good part, linked to the JREF:

Quote:
‘Court TV’ Psychic Loses to Skeptic in Real Court
Skeptical Inquirer magazine
July/Aug 2007

[...snip...]
On his own Web site, Merrell has floated two intriguing, though somewhat fanciful, ideas for Renier to ponder. The first has her coauthoring another book, this time with a skeptic like me or Joe Nickell, revealing “how international psychics have fooled the public and media.” The second has Merrell agreeing to donate $10,000 in Renier’s name to a children’s charity and erasing her $39,558 debt entirely, should she in a timely manner be able to “prove under a qualified and sanctioned test something as simple as her claims of human levitation, psychic sight through clothing, or her two-way communication with trees.” The former—if Renier is consciously aware, and agreeable to confessing, that she is no more “psychic” than the rest—could have best-seller potential. The latter, on the other hand, would require that Renier actually demonstrate psychic ability under properly controlled conditions, and, based upon my own personal history with her, my money says she wouldn’t dare make the attempt—not even for Randi’s $1,000,000 reward.

That's very clever ... I like it.

 

[pipelineaudio]

Has this board really come to this? A skeptic cant even come on and ask for help now?