The question of psychics and their utility was actually answered four decades ago. Back in 1979, the Los Angeles Police Department’s Behavioral Science Services (BSS) (currently responsible for planning, developing, implementing, and administering the department’s psychological services program) published a study of the efficacy of using psychics in a police investigation. The results of this study found that psychics often gave unverifiable insights and did no better than chance (or worse) when they offered specific details.
The BSS ultimately concluded that psychics were not useful in aiding investigations (Reiser et al., 1979).
Contrary to the scientific evidence, the popular media, now firmly entrenched in a 24-hour news cycle, has saturated the globe with fictional and non-fictional accounts and images of psychics working to help solve crime. In the words of Time columnist Leon Jaroff (2004),
They are ubiquitous, operating in shabby storefronts, appearing on national TV shows, keeping tabloids in business, working with naïve police departments and even participating in ludicrous studies by DARPA, the Defense Department’s Agency for Advanced Research Projects. They are the psychics, a motley collection of mystics, charlatans, hoaxers and smooth con artists who have successfully buffaloed a good portion of the public into believing that they have supernatural powers.
Dampening belief in psychic ability as it intersects criminal investigation is made far worse for advocates of the scientific method and critical thinking by the Homicide Investigator’s Bible. This widely used text dedicates five pages to the subject of purported psychics, ultimately advocating for their use by police. It first defines psychic ability in a way that is impossible to prove, support, or even defend with scientific fact—in other words, based entirely on belief (Geberth, 1996, p. 666; 2006, p. 718):
[A] psychic is a person who learns to control a portion of the brain which is not generally used in order to see and feel things which the average person cannot experience.
This bold assertion presupposes that psychic phenomenon involves special areas of the brain, and that pur- ported psychics actually do sense things that others do not—none of which has ever been proven. Next, the text suggests using psychics as an “investigative aid”, even though they will often be wrong and of little inves- tigative use (1996, p. 666; 2006, p. 718):
It should be noted that information may not always be accurate and in some instances may be of no value to the investigation. However, this should not discourage authorities from using a psychic, especially in homicide cases where there is limited information. The use of a psychic can be considered as an additional investigative aid.
There is no tenable reason for relying upon any purported “investigative aid” that provides inaccurate information, or information of no value. However this is precisely what is being suggested.
Unfortunately, the continued media attention on psychic phenomenon, and the support it has with a minority of police practitioners who provide training, bestow an unearned perception of reliability and validity on those who claim to be psychic. This is largely accomplished through unverified or unverifiable testimonials.17
xxxiii
Preface to the Third Edition
Testimonials are interesting, but they are more associated with press relations and advertising than with ana- lytical logic and the scientific method. Put another way, testimonials are irrelevant to the issues of reliability and validity—but they are necessary to sell a product, idea, or service when actual proofs are unavailable.
And, when evocative, they influence the availability heuristic.
This wishful and magical thinking (that psychics are real; that some people, specifically psychics and pro- filers, have supernatural abilities) is alluring to the inexperienced and ignorant investigator, who is often desperate to try anything on a big case because they don’t have enough training to know better. Accepting this and any other form of magical thinking has the additional benefit of not requiring the possession of actual investigative skill. It takes less ability, and less effort, to follow up on leads provided by a psychic and to believe in the supernatural, than it does to actually buckle down and work a case.
Consider the following examples of recent cases where police have used psychics. These demonstrate that not only are many investigators ignorant on the subject, but that they are necessarily ignorant of criminal investigation techniques as well. Given that the existence of psychic ability has NEVER been proven when proof should be relatively easy to find, this is a testament to the persistence of faith and belief over critical thinking and analytical logic.18
example: The case of elizabeth smart
Elizabeth A. Smart, a 14-year-old girl from Salt Lake City, Utah, was kidnapped from her bedroom on June 5, 2002. Police found her alive 9 months later on March 12, 2003, a few miles from her home, in Sandy, Utah.
Brian David Mitchell, 49, a drifter and self-described prophet calling himself “Emmanuel,” had abducted her. Mitchell had done some work in the Smart family’s home in November of 2001. Rather than focus on those obvious suspects with access to the home, and locating them and interviewing them, police spent a
17 A testimonial is when someone personally vouches for a product, idea, or person: this product works; this idea is sound; or this person is of high caliber and wouldn’t lie. The problem is that testimonials tend to be motivated by political or financial gain. As a consequence, many consumers are duped into buying or buying into the false and substandard.
18 Consider also that hundreds of purported psychics are arrested each year for fraud and theft, usually after taking money from victims in fortune telling and money cleansing scams. And remember the study debunking psychic utility on major cases by Reiser et al. (1979).
Two faces of Brian David Mitchell, the polygamous kidnapper of Elizabeth Smart.
In a Salt Lake City courtroom, he sings for the judge one day, and screams at her the next.
xxxiv Preface to the Third Edition
lot of time during those nine months responding to psychic tips and their “visions.” As reported in “Police, Archaeologists…” (2002),
The months-old search for Elizabeth Smart took a strange twist last week when two Salt Lake City detectives—at the behest of a group of psychics—ventured into a crypt that holds the skeletal remains of ancient American Indians.
Officials from PSI Tech, a Seattle-based company, claimed that more than a dozen of its members had determined the location of Elizabeth’s body by using a special psychic process they call “Technical Remote Viewing.”
Independently, the company claims, 14 visionaries all pointed to a concrete burial vault built by the state of Utah about 10 years ago. The vault, located in Salt Lake City’s This Is the Place State Heritage Park in the mouth of Emigration Canyon, contains the remains of 75 American Indians, many unearthed by construction projects around Utah.
But the crypt was searched and no trace of the 14-year-old girl, snatched June 5 from her bedroom, could be found, said state archaeologist Kevin Jones.
The investigators’ fruitless Aug. 28 search through cobwebs and stale air was one example of how thousands of tips from self-proclaimed psychics have occupied overworked detectives desperately trying to crack the baffling case.
“Many of these [psychic tipsters] are well-meaning, but these tips certainly take manpower away from the investigation,” said Salt Lake City Police Chief Rick Dinse.
Still, he said that investigators will check out every
“psychic vision” if the tip is specific.
“I don’t encourage it or discourage it,” Dinse said, speaking of psychics sharing their beliefs. In fact, Dinse said officers still may recruit a psychic to assist with the case.
Note that, as encouraged by the Homicide Investigator’s Bible, the chief of police refused to cease the use of psychics in the Smart case, despite the fact that they were wrong each and every time.
example: The case of Australian Prime Minister John howard
In April of 2006, a senior Australian Federal Police officer was suspended for consulting a psychic—Elizabeth Walker, a Scottish born medium based in New South Wales—over a threat to assassinate Prime Minister John Howard. As reported in Duff, Koutsoukis, and Shanahan (2006),
The ALP’s spokesman for homeland security, Arch Bevis, said he would be greatly concerned if the AFP was using clairvoyants.
Elizabeth Walker is a Scottish born “medium” based in New South Wales, Australia.
Preface to the Third Edition xxxv
“I think, perhaps, this fellow has watched a few too many of the US detective shows,” he said.
The AFP had doubled security staff between 2002 and 2005, Mr Bevis said, but that, apart from the comical aspect, the incident raised the serious issue of adequate training. “This does make you wonder … if the vetting of recruits is as thorough as it should be, and whether officers are receiving adequate training,” he said.
Barry Williams, of Australian Skeptics, said he “would be very worried” if he were John Howard. “I know security and intelligence gathering can be a very hard job at times,” he said.
“But if your critical faculties are intact and you are going to a psychic to ask for help on something like this, then I think you should be looking for another job.”
What this helps demonstrate is that the law-enforcement community is divided on this issue of psychics.
Some believe in psychics and want to use them; others recognize the use of psychics as a sign of investigative inability and ignorance. Yet there is pressure to use them because of a public saturated by media accounts of psychics helping the police. It takes a strong police agency with even stronger leadership to take a hard line against the use of psychics in the face of what can be overwhelming pressure, especially when it comes from a victim’s family.
example: The case of shawn hornbeck
According to an FBI Missing Person’s report, 11-year-old Shawn D. Hornbeck left his home riding a bicycle in Richwoods, Missouri, on Sunday, October 6, 2002, at approximately 1:00 p.m. He was headed to a friend’s house, but never arrived. Shawn’s family eventually reported him missing, and local law enforcement initi- ated an investigation.
In February 2003, The Montel Williams Show aired a segment with psychic Sylvia Browne. According to Boyle (2007),
Sylvia Browne told the family of missing Shawn Hornbeck he was dead shortly after the Missouri boy vanished—and later allegedly offered to help locate his body for $700 per half hour.
11-year-old Shan Hornbeck, reunited with his mother. He had been previously declared dead by “psychic” Sylvia Brown.
xxxvi Preface to the Third Edition
The popular TV clairvoyant appeared on the Montel Williams Show in February 2003, four months after Shawn disappeared, and told Pam and Craig Akers she believed their son was “no longer with us.”
She also advised that his body could be found in a wooded area 20 miles from their Richwoods, Mo., home, near two large jagged boulders.
Browne’s “vision” of his death caused search teams to redirect their efforts and drew dozens of calls from the public who believed they lived near the woods matching Browne’s descriptions.
The family also claims the psychic then tried to cash in, which Browne vigorously denies.
Shawn Hornbeck was found alive and well in January of 2007. The 15-year-old Hornbeck was discovered living just a few miles away from his home with 41-year-old Michael Devlin, a 300-pound pizza parlor man- ager, and 13-year-old Ben Ownby. Hornbeck was found because police were actively searching for Ownby, who had been abducted from his family four days prior. A tip from a witness led authorities to Devlin, who was charged with both abductions.
These are cautionary tales meant to educate serious investigative and forensic professionals that the reality of psychic phenomena is this:
1. Anyone who claims to be a psychic is either mentally ill, an intentional fraud, or has become proficient at “cold reading” without knowing it.
2. Anyone who claims to be a psychic that has actual information about the case that only the offender could know is something else—a suspect or a witness.
3. Any professional who supports the use of psychics in criminal investigations suffers from a serious training deficiency, and their investigative abilities should be viewed with the utmost skepticism.
Profilers And Psychics: sPeciAl PoWers?
What do psychics and psychic abilities have to do with legitimate criminal profilers? Unfortunately, more than one might think. The confusion of psychic ability with criminal profiling has become an increasing problem, as too many profilers have repeatedly suggested over the years that the ability to profile is a spe- cial, near psychic intuition that not just everyone has. It is innate, they argue, and not something that can be taught except to those who belong to a particular group or organization. It should come as little surprise that such profilers also tend to support the use of psychics.
Many profilers have come to enjoy the suggestion that they are among an intellectual elite who have special knowledge and divining powers. This is an image that a number of profilers have actively cultivated in their reach for celebrity. It may even be argued that some are drawn to the profiling profession because of it. And it becomes more problematic as psychics pretend to be profilers, as profilers stump for psychics, and as pro- filers themselves claim to have near-psychic abilities.
The reach for celebrity through special powers has the effect of defining some areas of profiling as more priesthood than profession—something that less than informed or capable profilers need in order to main- tain an aura of credibility and perceived infallibility. The belief that profiling is akin to special or psychic ability helps shield the fraudulent from legitimate scrutiny. By invoking a psychic aura, they avoid having to answer tough questions about how they arrive at their often general and inaccurate conclusions. In actuality, it should be a red flag suggesting a lack of training or worse, outright ignorance.
Consider the following prominent examples:
xxxvii
Preface to the Third Edition