Reply With QuoteTry looking here.Originally Posted by niggle
Why would the police keep such a database secret anyway? I'm not sure of the reason. There are plenty more embarrassing things they get up to that are publicly disclosed or obtained via Information requests.
This is conspiracy theory territory...
Mousse from a bowl is very nice, but to put it on a person is demented!
Try looking here.
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield
I keep getting this terrible feeling of deja woo.
The Houlahan case has been substantially discredited, so what's the next so called example?
No more cover up bs please, just plain hard facts or admit defeat.
You cannae kid a kidder kiddo!
I take it that's addressed to me, DD?
I don't see it as being 'substantially discredited'; some things are left up in the air which (who knows) may come to light at some future date. Assuming Christine Houlahan is still in the land of the living, it might not be such a hard task to find her.
That was just one example anyway - I've got plenty more case references - from the same source, the Roy Stemman book, but I haven't got the time or inclination to type out the relevant extracts (can't find it online).
If you're really interested, why don't you have a read of the book 'Spirit Communication'. Plenty of fodder for challenge in there. I'll be waiting ...
By the way, did you ever find out any more about that other person who claimed to have worked with the police on missing persons and murder cases? Did you even try?
Of course there are many things left up in the air. Many questions you could ask. Some question may appear on the surface to be pertinant. Such as was she employing cold reading, hot reading or genuine psychic ability when she offering infomration to the police. Nothing in the evidence enables us to either discount or prove any of those options. Other questions are more obviously trivial, such as her grandmother's inside leg measurement and mentioning that only serves to highlight that the posibility of information coming to light at a later date is a trivial point not worth making.
There is one question that has been answered which fully lays to rest the initial question of whether a psychic helped police to catch the killer.
That is that the killer was caught through DNA evidence and patient forensic policing and not by virtue of any information given by Holohan.
Ruark was already in the frame, the much feted jumper played no part in the prosecution, and the search that allegedly found it would have happened anyway.
Once again the demand for omniscience before reaching conclusions is invalid. Enough information has been verified to state for certain that she did not help the investigation in any substative way. Whatever futher information that might come to light will never be able to change that fact.
Sorry if these have already been linked, but there's good info here:
http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.p...d_psychics.php
and Dianne Lazarus was discredited here:
http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.p...Green_case.php
and again here:
http://www.skeptics.org.uk/article.p...water_case.php
Raise money for Robert and Susan Lancaster:
Fundraising for Robert Lancaster
1. Please just give us what you consider the very best example of a so called psychic or medium solving a major crime. Preferably relatively recently so that any evidence is not shrouded in the mists of time. I will be happy to review the case in as much detail as possible.
2. Which 'other person' are you referring to?
You cannae kid a kidder kiddo!
Maybe she means that chancer you were speaking to on the radio.
Mousse from a bowl is very nice, but to put it on a person is demented!
Matt said:
Further extracts from 'Spirit Communication'Ruark was already in the frame, the much feted jumper played no part in the prosecution, and the search that allegedly found it would have happened anyway.
Batters admits that while the medium was making these statements it 'didn't make a great deal of sense to me until we got out of the front door, where Andy (Smith) had turned white and was literally shaking. It had an enormous impact on him'.
In all, the medium made 131 statements, only one of which was shown to be wrong - Jacqui Poole spoke of being murdered on Saturday night, whereas the murder was on Friday night. Batters reassembled the information in a logical order and the picture that emerged became much clearer.
Unquestionably impressed by the medium's abilities, they decided to question at length the man who had been identified by the spirit of Jacqui Poole as her murderer. His name was Anthony Ruark. He had already come forward as one of Jacqui's acquaintances in response tot ehir appeal. Although he had a previous criminal record, he had no history of violence and was not a prime suspect.
The session with Hoolahan changed that. Jacqui Poole's spirit had given Ruark's nickname - Pokie - and also told them to look at his alibi. Ruark had given two alibis; one of these was disproved, the other could not be corroborated.
................
.... In 2000 the case was reopened and in the process a pullover belonging to Ruark, which had been removed from a rubbish bin and stored as possible evidence on the orders of one of the detectives, was re-examined using the latest DNA technology. In his Police report, Batters revealed:
"The findings were completely conclusive, identifying numerous exchanges of body fluids, skin cells and clothing fibres between the victim and her killer, Pokie Ruark. The chances of error were quoted in the court as less than one in one billion."
There were 46 such matches. Ruark was arrested and charged with murder. The jury's verdict was unanimous and he was sentenced to life, at the Old Bailey, in August 2001.
The involvement of Jacqui Poole in identifying her killer was not mentioned at the trial. However, without the victim's communications through medium Christine Hoolahan, the police would not have regarded Ruark as a prime suspect and the item of clothing that eventually proved his guilt and ensured that justice was done would nto have been preserved for future forensic tests.
When Irish television featured the case on The Late Late Show on 23 November 2001, both Christine Hoolahan and detective constable Batters took part. The police officer declared: 'I've accepted the fact that Jacqui communicated with Christine', and he subsequently informed the psychical researchers that all of his police colleagues with whom he had discussed the case agreed with that interpretation.
Playfair and Keen also say, 'We can find no plausible alternative explanation of how the information communicated was gathered.'
Last edited by Nasib; 29th January 2009 at 01:17 PM.
Nasib, do you have any other sources that agree with this obviously bias one? Only, I can't find any other news articles (of which there are plenty) that angree with the one you've posted.
Interesting piece here, reasonably in depth, havent read whole thing yet: http://www.tonyyouens.com/ruislip_murder.htm#Background
From the article I link above:
Summary
Let’s look once again at Holohan’s information. Anthony Ruark was already identified as a major suspect at least two days before Holohan wrote down his nickname, “Pokie”. According to both McKinlay and Lundy it was common knowledge that he was a suspect and apart from his arrest he had been seen hanging around both Jacqui Poole’s flat and her place of work. Holohan only lived about three miles from the murder scene and and less than one and a half miles from The Windmill pub. It would be entirely possible to discover much of this information from local gossip. Due to a similarity in their age it is quite likely that they moved in similar social circles and it may be that Holohan knew something about either Ruark or Poole long before the murder had taken place. We cannot even be certain that a close friend or even Jacqui Poole herself had not consulted Holohan in her capacity as a psychic. In Lundy's final report he wrote that, "of all the people interviewed Ruark was still the most likely person to have committed the murder."
Yet we have a different account here.
http://www.tonyyouens.com/ruislip_murder.htm#help
It turns out that I was wrong about the fibres not being used by the prosecution. I'd read that page and misremembered.From Did Holohan help the investigation?
Much has been made of the pullover retrieved from Ruark's dustbin and how if it wasn't for Holohan's information this might never have been seized. But just how significant did this piece of evidence turn out to be? When asked by Adrian Shaw, D.C.I. McKinlay couldn’t even remember the pullover. Tony Lundy does recall "fibres" being mentioned at the trial but he and McKinlay are emphatic that the conviction was achieved by the DNA evidence from semen and from skin found underneath the victims fingernails. The pullover played no part and even if it did it was not due to anything Holohan had said. I find it curious that Holohan gives a pretty detailed description of Ruark but not once describes what he was wearing at the time. If this pullover was of such significance why didn't she say what he was wearing? One explanation might be because she didn't know. What Tony Lundy is sure of, and he has re-stated this unequivocally, is that at no time during the investigation did he take any action based on information supplied by Holohan. He only ever followed normal police procedure.
It just goes to show how men of good faith can garble an account.
From http://www.tonyyouens.com/ruislip_murder.htm#alttheory
Now go back and read the account in Spirit communication. Pay special attention to what is a direct quote from people there and what is being said by Roy Steiman. What's his source - Lundy? Batters? Holohan? how much of his own interpretation is invloved?In my first conversation with Lundy he said Ruark was "suspected immediately" and held in custody within the first 24 hours of the investigation and it would have been during this time that Ruark’s premises were searched and the "vital" pullover discovered (at the time if a suspect was under arrest no search warrant would be required). This would have been at least 3 days before Holohan was interviewed. The officer who brought Ruark in (but not actually under arrest) also thought this happened within the first 24 hours. However according to Tony Batters Ruark attended voluntarily on that first Monday, but even if his being taken in wasn't until Tuesday this was still two days before Holohan was interviewed. Unfortunately there seems to be no way to pin this event down. Ruark was interviewed on a number of occasions and the pullover may well not have been retrieved until after she was interviewed.
Perhaps he's made the same error as I did in overstating his case from half rememebred details.
An error for which I do appologise.
Roy Stemman? The has-been trash-magazine writerYou are joking, right?
If you are reading a book by Roy Stemman you are seriously wasting your time. NEVER has there been such a nimble minded doufess with absolutely NO practical experience in the fields he pens his name to. He can write a tiny bit, and dips his pen in stupidity to ink utter BS. Get your information from those that actually have academic experience in your psychic and spiritual realms of interest, research experience that is FACTUAL (not his personal and shamefully limited comic book exposures) and have genuine demonstrable experience DOING the work. This guy is an utter fool. It is senseless that the UK hasn't run him out of the country ... there must be genuinely qualified and experienced people over there.
Like who, for instance? Do you have any particular recommendations?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks