Your paranormal experiences at the murder sites?

[Suzi]

Interesting John- (Like the feint!- all lined up then were you? ) hehe !

To subject.....

I've always felt strangely comfortable in Mitre Square- even in the early hours (!)

Dorset St site is slightly edgy, Annie and Liz ditto-

But the one place that's makes me seriously uncomfortable from years back is 'Bucks Row'- call me daft but it's a seriously uneasy place (IMHO) even during daylight hours

Suz x

[John Bennett]

I'm a bit of a skeptic myself and have never had any odd experiences at the murder sites.

I did, however, have a young lady on my tour last year who happened to be standing on the Kelly murder site in Dorset Street and before I'd even begun to talk about where we actually were, she came over all feint and nauseous and had to go home.

Also this year, a girl on a school group I was taking said she often heard 'voices'. At Gunthorpe Street (we were on the site of George Yard Buildings), she heard a voice calling out a name. She told me and Philip afterwards and Phil was very nice - he complimented her on feeling brave enough to mention it to us. Nice touch, Phil.

JB

[Ally]

No you don't. The fact that you dismiss out of hand that there might have been something to the story of the psychic and the dumpster, and conclude, with no evidence whatsoever, that the sheriff who backed the psychic was lying, proves that you are utterly convinced you are right and do not believe you could be wrong.

You don't know the sheriff, the story or the case but you dismiss it out of hand with "tv shows are full of lies". As if that proves anything, when in fact, it does not. You have no proof of your claim that the sheriff and the psychic made lucky guesses and lied but you are not open to the possibility that without proof you are just as wrong in your belief others are in theirs.

[The Good Michael]

they are believers of one ilk or another and they will rarely be convinced even by overwhelming evidence, that they might be wrong.

Ally,

I believe I could be wrong.

Mike

[Ally]

The Good Michael is not a skeptic, he's a believer. He just believes the opposite of what usually constitutes a "belief", but he believes it with as much fanatic passion as your most strident and devout.

Kensei is right, true skepticism requires doubting all, even ones own beliefs, which is why most people are not skeptics, they are believers of one ilk or another and they will rarely be convinced even by overwhelming evidence, that they might be wrong.

[DVV]

Truly funny, Jukka!

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

One thing did happen to me in 2007, while visiting The Ten Bells in London;

I took a photo. There was a strawberry-blonde girl in the pub, but she wasn't in the copy!

What makes this irrelevant to JtR, is; if she was Mary Kelly, why she was wearing a modern black blouse and modern black trousers?! And had a modern black purse?!

All the best
Jukka

[DVV]

If I went by myself or with a trusted friend and sat all night in a spooky house, and I heard something, I could probably explain it. If something touched me, I don't know what I'd think, to tell the truth. Things happen often because people want them to happen, not because they're real. If nothing happens, you've wasted your time.

TV mediums, time and time again, as well as Uri Geller types, and religious figures, have proven to be full of lies and deceit. TV wants ratings, and thus, sales, so results are expected. That's where I am on the TV stuff.

Alone, experiencing something, or with a friend, I may say, "Maybe." With a team and their silly equipment, I'd say, "sham."

As I've said, I don't care if people believe in the supernatural. I don't believe in taking it seriously enough to try and use the concept to solve crime. I also don't believe religious people should use God as a guiding force in their decision-making.

The reason people study such things is that they want to believe there's a purpose for their existence. There may not be.

Cheers,

Mike

Ah, Horatio...

Amitiés,
David

[Uncle Jack]

I know ghosts are real because I have seen them. Can I prove that I have seen them? No. Am I lying? No. I have no reason whatsoever to say I have seen ghosts so when people have in the past accused me of lying then I have to simply ask "why would I lie?" I have nothing to gain by lying. I know what I have seen and know that there are such things. I personally investigate paranormal phenomena to try and find evidence and prove what I already know to be true.

[The Good Michael]

If I went by myself or with a trusted friend and sat all night in a spooky house, and I heard something, I could probably explain it. If something touched me, I don't know what I'd think, to tell the truth. Things happen often because people want them to happen, not because they're real. If nothing happens, you've wasted your time.

TV mediums, time and time again, as well as Uri Geller types, and religious figures, have proven to be full of lies and deceit. TV wants ratings, and thus, sales, so results are expected. That's where I am on the TV stuff.

Alone, experiencing something, or with a friend, I may say, "Maybe." With a team and their silly equipment, I'd say, "sham."

As I've said, I don't care if people believe in the supernatural. I don't believe in taking it seriously enough to try and use the concept to solve crime. I also don't believe religious people should use God as a guiding force in their decision-making.

The reason people study such things is that they want to believe there's a purpose for their existence. There may not be.

Cheers,

Mike

[kensei]

Question for you, Good Michael, as I study paranormal and "fringe" subjects a lot: Is there any protocol, any level of transparency, resulting in any seemingly very impressive result, that could ever be part of an investigation of the supernatural that could ever get you to say, "Ok, maybe there's something to this"? If you were invited to be present for such an investigation to personally observe every step and to do background checks on everyone involved, would you still insist that anything appearing to be proof must somehow be faked? True skepticism involves an open mind that is willing to be convinced while still demanding proof.

[The Good Michael]

I'd still have to see it with my own eyes to believe it. but the sheriff WAS on the show backing up the psychic's story.

Of course he backed her. TV shows are mostly lies. She must have researched a bit and made an educated guess. She got lucky. There's no talking to spirits nonsense going on. No such thing.

Cheers,

Mike

[Pontius2000]

Ponti,

The woman you mentioned probably used common sense after studying the case. Detectives would most certainly want to chalk it up to psychic power rather than thinking about being bested by an amateur sleuth.

Cheers,

Mike

oh no. The woman told police that the person taken from their apartment would be found in a dumpter behind a warehouse on a certain side of town and that the killer was a friend of the victim's roommate. and it all turned out to be true. and if I'm not mistaken, the psychic wasn't local. she was brought in from somewhere else and just looked at some clothes and pictures of the victim.

I'd still have to see it with my own eyes to believe it. but the sheriff WAS on the show backing up the psychic's story.

[The Good Michael]

Ponti,

The woman you mentioned probably used common sense after studying the case. Detectives would most certainly want to chalk it up to psychic power rather than thinking about being bested by an amateur sleuth.

Cheers,

Mike

[Pontius2000]

if ghosts, evps, psychics, and seances are real, then why has no one solve this case yet?

I have seen "ghost hunters" a couple times and it is one of the dumbest things I've ever watched.


on the other hand, I watching one of those crime tv shows one night and they were talking about someone who had gone missing from their apartment. they had exhausted all leads. so on a whim, the sheriff calls this psychic lady. she tells them how the person disappeared, where their body would be found, and who killed them. they got an arrest and conviction as all her info was correct. the sheriff himself was on the show and said he would not have solved the case without her. now THAT lady, I'd like to have look at the Ripper case.