|
Support Science Not Superstition
|
|
|
|
Sensing Murder Episode: A Fallen Angel — Angela Blackmoore
Readers' Comments
UPDATE: In May 2019 NZ Police offered a $100,000 reward for information that led to a conviction. This resulted in the arrest of Jeremy Powell, 45, and Rebecca Wright-Meldrum, 47, on Oct 25, 2019, and David Hawken, 47, in April 2020. On 10 Jun, 2020, Powell was found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years. He had pleaded guilty to Blackmoore's murder which he had carried out as an amateur contract killer. In December 2023 Wright-Meldrum and Hawken were also both found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years for Blackmoore's murder. Apparently Hawken wanted to 'receive financial benefit from her property' and hired Powell who was helped by his then-girlfriend Wright-Meldrum to kill her. The nonsense dreamed up by the 'Sensing Murder' psychics played no part in the arrests or the trial, the psychics having no knowledge of the people who actually committed the murder. No surprise there. |
In this episode of Sensing Murder ( broadcast in April 2006) we learn about the murder of Angela Blackmoore, a 21 year old woman with a 2 year old child. Divorced (or separated) from the father of her child she lives with her new partner in Christchurch. When her partner returns home from working late on the night of the 17th of August 1995, he finds Angela murdered in the kitchen of their home. She had been stabbed 39 times. The child was not harmed and the killer has not been found.
|
The episode begins by revealing what family, friends and the police know about the case, the episode then has actress Rebecca Gibney, the show's narrator, explain how the psychics were chosen: Rebecca: 70 psychics from across NZ were tested. A little known solved murder was chosen for the testing procedure. Presented with only a photograph of the victim the psychics were asked to produce details of the crime, the location and the killer. Of the 70 psychics tested only three were able to describe intimate details of the case. 100 Australian psychics were also tested. Only five were able to describe intimate details of the case used in the testing procedure.The three psychics involved in this episode of "Sensing Murder" were:
(Note: We have been threatened with legal action by Ninox Television, the producers of 'Sensing Murder', and told to remove the photos of the psychics. So to give you an idea of what your typical male and female psychic medium looks like, we have inserted what we believe are close facsimiles.) Before we see the psychics performing their readings, Kelvin seems to suggest that he must be getting information from the spirit world because he just isn't bright enough to come up with this stuff himself: Kelvin: I didn't get School C, I'm not the brightest, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed man, OK? I can tell you that I'm dyslexic, I'm colour blind, I'm not a very good reader, in fact I don't read books. I'm not that sort of person. I'm a person who trusts in the spirit.He may not be that bright, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to make things up. Kids do it all the time. So do con men and scam artists. Rebecca describes the rules under which the psychics and production team will operate: Rebecca:This 'rule' is a major flaw in the program's design: Rebecca: Only positive statements were confirmed during the readings.While this may seem fair, all it does is let the psychic know that their guesses are correct, and they will phrase their following statements and questions accordingly. It also means that if a statement isn't confirmed then the psychic can safely assume it to be false, and they can quickly move on to something else. By their silence they are in effect saying to the psychic, "No, that guess / statement is wrong". Whether they realise it or not, they are providing the psychics with information. The only way to prevent this transfer of answers from production team to psychic is to use a camera team that knows nothing about the crime. They merely record the reading and producers later view it to discover whether the psychic said anything of relevance to the case. The psychic knows exactly what information they need to provide — intimate details of the crime, location and killer. They have supposedly already done this to win a place on the show. However what the psychics do on the show is nothing more than a party trick involving 'cold reading' and a version of the games 'Twenty Questions' and 'Animal, Vegetable or Mineral'. The readings that the viewer sees are short, heavily edited segments, often only one sentence, interspersed with the readings of the other psychics. Spliced into this are actual photos relating to the crime and a re-enactment of the crime using actors. These act out the crime in a way the psychics or production team think it may have happened. They are only guesses and sometimes they are completely false, but they come across as factual. So let's look at some of those sound-bites in the order they were screened and see if they show evidence of trickery. Note that the transcript is not complete. I am only detailing those segments that display clear evidence of cheating and those that can be more simply explained by trickery rather than psychic ability. This deception could be on the part of the psychic or the production team or both. I have tried to include all segments where claims are made that can be verified. As for the critics, it's no good claiming that certain segments that I don't list could have been the result of true psychic ability if the numerous ones I do list are obviously false. If true psychic ability exists there is no need to fake any of the segments. At the very least the believer must explain why deception and cheating was required for at least some parts of the show. The first psychic reading begins with Debbie: Rebecca: Debbie is given Angela's jewellery to help her tune in to the young mum's spirit.There appears to be at least 2 rings, a watch and possibly a necklace. All are obviously feminine jewellery. The other two psychics are offered Angela's photo, so it can be assumed that Debbie was also offered the photo but turned it down. She no doubt assumed that she could pick the victim's sex by first 'holding' the jewellery and that this would appear more impressive to the viewer. Debbie: I feel it's female.She would easily guess that from the type of jewellery she was given. Sue doesn't even try and guess. She accepts all the information she is offered: Rebecca: Sue is given a photograph of Angela and her jewellery to help her tune in.The fact that he was, nevertheless, given the option to hold the victim's jewellery would indicate to Kelvin that the victim was more likely to be female. Thus Kelvin begins his reading with: Kelvin: Come on sweetheart, you can do better than this....By calling her "sweetheart" Kelvin gives away the fact that he already knows the victim is female. Yet only later into the reading does he indicate that he has now determined the sex of the victim: Kelvin: Firstly female.... I haven't seen her physically..None of the psychics are able to name Angela. This statement about 'A' is the only possible attempt that is screened. However it is not clear that he is even referring to her name in this segment that is stuck in between comments from the other psychics. What other letters did he suggest? If she had been born or murdered in Auckland, raised an Anglican or if her mother's name began with 'A', then the production team would have suggested that this is what Angela was referring to with 'A'. Kelvin states that he was 'talking' to Angela so obviously she is able to speak normally. Able to speak many different words and not just 'A', but seemingly not her name for some mystical reason. Kelvin: There is a reference to her mother and there is a reference to her health or a person, a grandmother even, passing of cancer, there's cancer in the family somewhere.However this is 8 years after Angela died. It's hardly related to the murder or Angela's life. It is also unclear whether "a reference to her health" is referring to her mother or to Angela herself, and whether it is bad health or good health. If the mother or Angela had great health the psychic could reply, "Yes that's what I'm getting, Angela referring to her amazing health. She never needed a doctor." He then adds "a person, a grandmother even, passing of cancer". If it wasn't a grandmother then it was a "person". Who can't find cancer in their extended family? This vague statement from Kelvin could fit most people on the planet. Sue: There's definitely a baby there...Immediately after she said that, Debbie's expression indicates (eyebrows shoot up etc) that the production team have indicated that this is a positive statement, ie she really did have children. Thus Debbie continues with: Debbie: I actually feel that she did actually [have children]...Only two of the three psychics discuss children at this point. Debbie actually says she doesn't know, saying she may or may not have children. The production team give her the answer. Neither psychic can provide the age, sex or name of the child, or even that there was only one. Debbie saw two children. Neither picked that she was pregnant. Rebecca: The psychics have correctly identified that...she endured a stormy marriage...Again only two of the three psychics discuss a possible marriage. Neither determine that she is no longer married or in a permanent relationship with a new man to whom she is pregnant. Next the psychics try and guess how the killer got into the house: Sue: [talking to Angela] Tell me why you didn't lock that door?This statement indicates that the psychic believes that locking the door requires more than just shutting the door, ie turning a key or putting on a latch chain. In fact the door is self-locking, it locks on closing. The psychic doesn't suggest that the door wasn't closed, but that it wasn't locked. Kelvin: We go to that front door, we open the door up, knowing, 'Oh hi, how's it going, how are ya?' and then... bang...full noise... worst nightmare...Yet Sue says the killer came through an unlocked door while Kelvin insists that Angela let the killer in. Which scenario should we accept? If you provide enough different versions then of course one could be correct. Kelvin later reiterates that the version Angela is telling him is correct and that the one Angela is telling Sue must therefore be wrong: Kelvin: There's no kindness from the moment that door handle turned..Kelvin is still insisting that the door was opened by Angela, and is also missing the fact that there was no actual door handle. Why is Angela telling two versions? Next Rebecca explains why Angela was home alone, then we get a different version from the psychics: Rebecca: Laurie [Angela's fiancé] was asked to work a late shift... For the first night ever Angela would be alone in the house...Angela is willing to go into detail regarding the surveillance by the killer or killers but still isn't prepared to name them. Both psychics indicate that the killer knew when she would be alone, yet this is the first time that her partner had ever had to work at night. There was no pattern here for the killer to discover, as suggested by the psychics. Also this is the first mention of a partner (and not husband, boyfriend or fiancé). Why weren't we privy to the psychics channelling this info, or did the production team give them this? Next the psychics try to determine how Angela died: Sue: He stabbed her...Although Angela was stabbed 39 times, Debbie is not certain that was Angela was stabbed, but possibly only hit in the chest. Sue says Angela was stabbed, but again didn't pick up on '39 times', which is unusual. She also doesn't say where she was stabbed, but doesn't believe it was in the head, believing instead that something hit her. (It's probably unusual to get stabbed in the head so the psychics don't opt for this option.) Rebecca: Angela was stabbed 18 times in the head and neck.Gibney confidently says this in a manner suggesting that Sue saw these injuries, whereas Sue didn't realise she was stabbed in the head at all. Debbie also did not pick up on these horrific head injuries, concentrating instead on blows to the chest. Kelvin: The other numbers are 26, 13.The phrase 'the other numbers are', indicates that Kelvin has already revealed other numbers, but we are not shown this footage, probably because they can't be tied to the case in some way. We are not told what 26 and 13 relate to, perhaps he is trying to guess the street address, we aren't told, but obviously someone on the production team can see how these numbers, unlike the previous ones, can be salvaged. Kelvin is obviously asked by someone on the production team, "What do you get if you add 13 and 26 together?" These numbers are then flashed on the screen to hide this interaction and then they cut back to Kelvin who replies: Kelvin: Ah, 39. 13 and 26, 39. [Pause] Is that how many times she was stabbed? [Pause] Oh far out.He directs the question, "Is that how many times she was stabbed?" to the production team. We do not hear their reply but they obviously nod or respond (contrary to the rules), and he reacts with, "Oh far out." Rebecca: Kelvin is correct. Angela was stabbed 39 times.But Kelvin did not say this. He merely said 26 and 13 (along with other numbers that are edited out). He is then prompted to add them together and he then questions the production team. They tell him she was in fact stabbed 39 times. Without their meddling he would not have come up with 39 or seen it as significant. Sue and Kelvin describe the murder weapon. Debbie never mentions a knife: Sue: A big knife...While saying that it wasn't a huge knife, the knife he indicates is most definitely a big knife. This ambiguous segment covers Kelvin no matter how big the knife was. His actions indicate a big knife but his words indicate one that isn't big. He is covering all possible options. The knife was either big or not big. How can he lose? Debbie then comes out with a meaningless and false statement: Debbie: I don't know whether she tried to make a phone call, the phone was cut off...The important thing that Debbie admits here is "I don't know..." If I said "I don't know whether Hitler owned a cat", it can't be claimed that I know something about Hitler and cats. I am professing ignorance, but when Debbie does it with the phone Rebecca turns it in to a positive statement. Also several times throughout the show the phone is shown lying on the floor, the receiver off the hook and covered in blood. There is no police evidence that the phone was used or cut off. In fact her partner said that his mother rang Angela and got no reply and assumed Angela had gone to bed. Thus the phone was not off the hook as the production team showed in their completely bogus reenactment. Also the phone was evidently in the lounge and Angela was killed in the kitchen. If she had attempted to use it after the killer left she would not have crawled badly injured back into the kitchen to die. There was no physical evidence that Angela left the kitchen once the attack began. This footage of the blood covered phone is pure invention by the production team, designed to support Debbie's statement. In a court of law this would be described as falsifying evidence in order to sway the jury. Rebecca: Now the psychics ask Angela to describe her killer.Why not ask Angela to simply 'name' her killer rather than 'describe' him? But remember that none of the three psychics have even determined what Angela's name is, let alone the killer's. Rather than simply saying the equivalent of, "Joe Bloggs" Angela chooses instead to ramble on to the psychics: Debbie: Just hearing that she got caught up in the wrong crowd...Again, why waste time with all this vague information. According to the psychics she knows the person. Why not give his name? She desperately wants the person to be caught as Debbie later explains: Debbie: She's just telling me, "You have to bring this to an end" [Debbie breaks into tears].Angela can clearly say eight words, "You have to bring this to an end", but not two words, "Joe Bloggs". It's obvious that the psychics are not talking to Angela. They are merely making up stuff that might be relevant to this sort of case and the numerous bits they got wrong are edited out by the production team. Rebecca: The psychics are taken to the house where Angela Blackmoore was murdered... the house has been remodelled. [Angela's fiancé still lives in the house.]A more insightful way of looking at this statement from Gibney is that "as each moment goes by they pick up" more clues from the production team "on where and how she was murdered". Sue: Here. There was a door here...As Sue was speaking there were quick flashes on the screen to what is clearly an old door frame that now has a fridge sitting in it. By looking at other shots of the house you realise that it was the original door from the passage into the kitchen. It would be obvious to any fool that there used to be a door there, since as I said the old frame is still there. The production crew was careful not to provide a clear shot of this part of the kitchen. Sue tries to further impress us with her knowledge of the kitchen and where people stood: Sue: He's standing here.She indicates against an island bar, but fails to realise that the kitchen has been remodelled and this didn't exist when the murder was committed. Kelvin: Coming through here... [pointing to the lounge wall] see these spoons, there's stuff coming off, coming over, falling... there's one hell of a scrap... [he's now looking directly at the kitchen].Kelvin is indicating a violent struggle in the lounge, yet forgets that the house has been extensively remodelled. There was a passage where he is standing and a wall has been removed to make the passage and lounge one room. Also the wall between the passage, lounge and kitchen has been removed. The wall displays were most probably not even there then. The struggle could not have happened as he described it. Also there was no evidence that the attack occurred anywhere but in the kitchen. Rebecca: There were signs of a struggle in the kitchen.Gibney appears to confirm Kelvin's claim that there was a struggle by mentioning a "struggle in the kitchen". She doesn't refute his claim by stating specifically that there were signs of a struggle 'only' in the kitchen, not the lounge or passage. It's obvious that there will most likely be signs of a struggle somewhere in the house that a psychic can comment on. Kelvin: This must have been a room... because I'm being drawn right here. It's so strong here.Kelvin is standing in an area that was originally a room off the kitchen [now part of the kitchen], but Angela was attacked and killed in the kitchen, not this room. Kelvin's statement "It's so strong here" is merely fishing for confirmation of the site of the attack. Having received no positive confirmation we next see Kelvin standing in the original kitchen area: Kelvin: I know there's a bedroom over there but for some reason this is really important.Kelvin is standing in the exact spot Angela was attacked and killed but gives no indication that he knows this. He makes reference to a previous statement he has made about a bedroom but what this means has been edited out. It's possible he thinks the murder happened in a bedroom but that there is still an important connection in the kitchen. Kelvin's statement about the kitchen, "for some reason this is really important", is again fishing for confirmation of the site of the attack. Immediately after the ad break Kelvin is again in the kitchen but this time immediately describes the correct place of the attack and the location of the body, with extreme precision: Kelvin: [Standing in the kitchen] This is the wall where she was killed here... and her final destination I think.We are shown no footage of him channelling this information from Angela, or why he has forgotten about the bedroom or how he now knows exactly where Angela was murdered. Yet the very next segment with Kelvin has him again unsure of where she was killed and actually asking the production team if this was the spot: Kelvin: [Standing in the kitchen] I can't seem to pull away from here. Is this where she was killed? ...His expression betrays that the production team obviously confirms that the kitchen was where she was killed. Next Deb also reveals the exact site of the murder: Debbie: [Standing in the kitchen] I feel that it happened in here... [indicating correctly the area where the body was found]As with Kelvin, we are shown no lead up to this conclusion. Later we are shown footage of Debbie still unsure of where the attack occurred, suspecting it could be a bedroom and that Angela merely hid in the kitchen. Was Debbie also floundering and eventually led to the kitchen by the production crew? Rebecca: Kelvin and Debbie are correct. Angela died right where they have pinpointed.Yet it is very suspicious how Kelvin went from not knowing the murder even occurred in the kitchen to knowing exactly where the body lay. Also the above statements from Kelvin and Debbie where they locate the place of the attack and later ones where they are again unsure are clearly out of sequence. The production team are obviously splicing and editing footage to give the impression of psychic ability, but here their manipulation has backfired. If true psychic ability is evident why does the production team need to edit the footage, deleting most of the psychics' readings, and shuffling around the little that remains? Rebecca: Now Sue asks Angela for more information about the weapon...Again Angela is prepared to waste time talking about the knife, how he wipes prints and blood from it, wraps it up, removes it from the house, buries it etc. Yet she still can't find the time or the words to say who the killer was. Sue: She's drawing '10' on my hand... She's whispering, "Ten years, it's been ten years, ten years."Why would Angela bother passing on such a trivial and worthless piece of information. Yet again, if she can write '10' and whisper, "Ten years, it's been ten years, ten years", why can't she write or whisper the name of the killer? Rebecca: Kelvin attempts to explore the rest of the house but is stopped in his tracks [by Angela's spirit].His actions and statement indicate that he still hasn't located where the attack took place, yet an earlier segment already has him describing the exact location. The production team have obviously placed this segment out of sequence with earlier ones. Debbie: [Standing in the kitchen] It's more common sense to think it was down the front because it's a bedroom but I just feel she hid up here just to get away from him.Yet Debbie has already told us that she feels that the murder happened in the kitchen. This segment suggests she still doesn't know where Angela died and actually believes that Angela may have hid in the kitchen to escape the killer. She also betrays that she has been using 'common sense' to try and determine the place of the attack, but why does she need to rely on common sense, reason or even 'feelings' when she has Angela telling her exactly what happened and where? Kelvin: Why are you taking me here sweetie? [Kelvin has walked out to the road, mumbles, acts confused.] She knew the person.More time consuming theatrics on the part of the psychic that still doesn't reveal who "the person" was. Sue: He planned it, he thought about it, and got so angry.Yet Angela, or more importantly Sue, still refuses to say who 'he' is. "He planned... he thought...". Why wouldn't Angela say, "Joe planned... Joe thought..."? Kelvin: They've had a big fight through the lounge and she's been forced right back into that area that was a room, and that's where she has been repeatedly stabbed.Kelvin has already pinpointed the correct pace of the attack, yet now he's saying she was stabbed in the room off the kitchen — "that area that was a room". There is no evidence that she was attacked or was even in that room. There is also no evidence that there was a "big fight" in the lounge, with Kelvin again forgetting that walls have since been removed. Again the production team have obviously placed this segment out of sequence with earlier ones. In the next scene with Kelvin he seems to have forgotten "that area that was a room" and is outside again. Kelvin: They're telling me baby... there must have been a baby in the house... [loud sigh from Kelvin]Kelvin's reaction reveals that the production team has confirmed his prediction about a baby. Rebecca: Debbie finds photos of Angela and her son.Because of the photos Debbie now knows that Angela's 'child' is a boy, roughly how old he is and what he looks like. So much for not relying on real world clues. Remember that up until now none of the psychics, including Debbie, have disclosed the age, sex or name of the child. Debbie now knows that Angela's child is a boy so continues with: Debbie: She keeps coming to look for him, looking for her son."For him... her son". She adds this information as if she knew all along, when in fact she only discovered this by cheating and looking at the photographs. Note that she still doesn't refer to him by name. The photos weren't that helpful unfortunately. This is followed immediately with: Sue: She's saying, "I do, I just want to hold my son again".Did Sue also see these photos, or perhaps others on display around the house? Remember that Angela's fiancé still lives in the house. Kelvin: When you used the word 'baby', I got the feeling she was pregnant? [Pause] Oh man.Once again Kelvin's reaction of "Oh man" reveals that the production team has confirmed his question. And once again this is against the rules. Kelvin did not say she was pregnant, he merely thought she might be and tricks the production team into confirming this guess. If she hadn't been pregnant this "feeling" would perhaps have been changed to "Well, I feel there was a pregnancy in the family somewhere", just like his earlier silly cancer prediction. Or most likely this segment would have simply been edited out of the show, like the majority of his reading was. Even more damaging, Kelvin accidentally reveals that the production team mentioned 'baby' to him — "When you used the word 'baby". They obviously used the word in such a way as to lead him to believe or guess that she might have been pregnant. Once again this is against the rules — they are not supposed to provide the psychics with any information about the case. This is another example that the production team provides the answers, deliberately or otherwise, to the psychic. The psychic makes probing suggestions to the production team and modifies his or her answer depending on the response of the team, either by reading their body language or acting on a confirmation of a positive statement or the silent response to a negative statement. In this instance the team went even further by entering into a discussion with Kelvin involving a 'baby'. Following on from his earlier feeling that there was a 'baby' in the house (the production team confirmed this), Kelvin reaches the following truly amazing conclusion: Kelvin: She must have a son, who's alive.The psychics were clearly told they were investigating an unsolved murder, not murders. A single victim, thus it doesn't take a rocket scientist, or a psychic, to assume that her son is probably still alive. By saying, "She must have..." rather than "She has...", Kelvin obviously reaches this conclusion through reason, as any normal person would, and not through psychic means. However being a psychic in contact with the mother, why did he not say, "She tells me her son is still alive". And how does Kelvin suddenly know her 'baby' was a boy? Did he see the photos as well? Rebecca: Kelvin received an unexpected visitor in his dreams the night before his reading. The spirit of a young woman... demanded he draw a map. Kelvin is now convinced... the woman was Angela and that she was trying to lead him to the murder weapon.Again Angela is more obsessed with drawing maps than drawing names of killers. Was the map really drawn before the reading? When did he tell the production team about it? After the reading? After he had returned to his hotel alone? We have no way of knowing. Rebecca: Kelvin asks to stop at Bromley Park. Only 800 metres from where Angela was murdered.Was Kelvin driven past this park on his way to Angela's house? Did he simply sketch these landmarks and show them to the production team after the reading? Parks with trees and playgrounds and a church/cemetery near by are certainly not uncommon, especially in Christchurch. Rebecca: Psychics work with signs and coincidences, and a girl walking her dog provides Kelvin with confirmation that he's in the right place.The notes actually say "Not very well covered. Found by walker. Dog in the park". The notes say that something, presumably the weapon, is not very well covered and will be found by a walker. Kelvin has underlined 'walker'. It is not "walker slash dog" as Kelvin says and indicates on screen, suggesting that they are together. He has merely written that there is a 'Dog in the park'. However nothing was found, by a walker or a dog, so this prediction is worthless. And what park would you not expect to find walkers or dogs in? And why doesn't he mention the rest of the signs he has been told to look for. He has several pages of notes. Just above the ones he chooses to quote are:
"Held captive... Buzzing sounds... left outside...". He ignores these. Of all the signs that he was told to look for, finding only a walker and dog is pretty pathetic. A private investigator later searches the area indicated by Kelvin using a metal detector. No knife is found. Even if it was, the psychic prediction is that it will be "Found by walker". Angela clearly said a walker will find the knife, not Kelvin, so why even bother going to the park? If Kelvin had found it then the prediction was wrong. The location would have been right but the finder was wrong. Do spirits of dead people just guess like the rest of us? Kelvin then describes the movements of the killers, or killer, or maybe killers slash killer: Kelvin: They knew what they were doing. One in, one out, so possibility of two.Another example of a psychic being unwilling to commit to a precise prediction. Kelvin clearly says 'they', meaning more than one, and "One in, one out" signifying two, but then wimps out with "possibility of two". If he knows that there was one inside and one outside, there must be two. However his vague statement means that he can match the police version of how many they thought there were. Referring to the killer Debbie makes this empathic and insightful prediction: Debbie: My feeling is that there's a record of him with violent behaviour.She has a "feeling" of violent behaviour? This is a person that viciously murdered a young mother by stabbing her 39 times. You would have to be an absolute moron not to at least suspect that the killer had a violent nature and had probably committed other acts of violence. Of course Debbie can safely say anything she wishes about the killer as long as it's vague or common — He once owned a dog or wanted a dog. He knows how to drive. He likes women. Anything that could apply to untold people but won't actually lead to identifying him. Speaking about a police suspect, the private investigator says: Private Investigator: Kelvin also correctly stated the man's middle name.We are not shown the footage of Kelvin doing this, and I guarantee that if Kelvin did mention this name it was in amongst a list of other possible names. Kelvin most definitely didn't say, "The killer's middle name is...". Note that Kelvin is not credited with 'correctly stating' the man's first or last name, or anything that could really identify him. Kelvin sees a blue car for the killer and mentions licence plate numbers: Kelvin: There's YW817 or ZY187.How convenient. Why were they destroyed and by whom? The PI doesn't say and thus hints that there is a conspiracy. Has the killer got contacts high up in government departments? At most only one of these revealed number plates was on the killer's car, and if he had the ability to destroy all records relating to it, why would he destroy records relating to the other plate which would have no meaning to him? If either of these plates were actually on the killer's car, then they had obviously been stolen from a caravan, trailer or motorbike for the purpose of the murder and thus had no connection with the car's real licence plate number and owner. Destroying their records would have been meaningless. Although the psychics claim the killer was driving a blue car, was he in fact really driving a caravan? This is another example of concise information from psychics, which they rarely provide, turning out to be rubbish. This is why they prefer to stick with vague statements that can be interpreted several ways. I'm sure there are many other mistakes made in the show, but I think that's enough for this episode. So let's wrap up and see what the psychics have achieved. These are the questions police investigators ask when confronted by a murder. How did the psychics fare in answering these crucial questions?
To summarise: Regarding the murder, the psychics could not determine who was involved, when it happened, why it happened, where it happened, what happened to the murder weapon or any new evidence. The psychics could answer none of these vital questions. None. Because of the obvious deceptions employed in 'Sensing Murder', it is easily shown to be a scam. The fact that the case remains unsolved only confirms this. UPDATE: On 10 Jun, 2020, 45-year-old Jeremy Powell was found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years. He had pleaded guilty to Blackmoore's murder which he had carried out as an amateur contract killer. At that time Rebecca Wright-Meldrum and David Hawken had also been arrested and were awaiting trial. In December 2023 they were also both found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment with a minimum non-parole period of 10 years for Blackmoore's murder. Apparently Hawken wanted to 'receive financial benefit from her property' and hired Powell who was helped by his then-girlfriend Wright-Meldrum to kill her. The nonsense dreamed up by the 'Sensing Murder' psychics played no part in the arrests or the trial, the psychics having no knowledge of the people who actually committed the murder. No surprise there.
Authors: John L. Ateo, Gordon S.
Readers' Comments:
Add a Comment
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Support Science Not Superstition
|
||||||
|
www.sillybeliefs.com 
Last Updated Apr 2024 |
