Revealing the tricks of Psychic John Edward Part 1

Since I published the analysis of a couple of readings by Harry T whereby I showed step by step exactly how he was doing it, it occurred to me that the name of this site is indeed BadPsychics, that perhaps I should expose a few more psychics, as I had become a tad lazy, and by doing the reviews of Most Haunted, I had become a bit of a whore for ratings. Reviewing Most Haunted gets me easy traffic to the site, but after I checked how many people had read the Harry T article, I realised that in fact more people read that, than the review of MH I had done the day after.

So bizarrely it seems that people are more interested in seeing me expose fake psychics than make fun of a fake ghost hunting TV show.

Well, after speaking to someone via email, who had insisted that John Edward was the real deal, I thought I would revisit this man. A man who has in fact been exposed as a fake many many times over the years.

I was challenged to analyse a reading he had done on an Australian TV show, as this I was told was similar to the reading they had received, and that they could not figure out how he was doing it.

So I summoned my favourite minion to transcribe the reading for me, (Forum member girlseeksghosts), and below is what I found out.

Now for the record because people ask, when I analyse these types of readings I prefer to make it as analytical as possible, I take out any emotion. So right now, as I write this I have not seen the video. I will work only from the transcript.

I do this as it allows me to concentrate purely on what is being said.

Now should I come to a part that I cannot understand how it is done, or I need to know a bit more about the person being read for context, I will then watch the video to see what clues were given away by the audience member, or to better understand why something was said. But usually the words are enough. It allows the purest form of analysis. And I advise anyone who has ever been convinced by a medium, to get the reading transcribed, and read it through.

Much like any magic trick, when you see the routine written down, it is much easier to figure out how it was done. So with regards to a psychic reading, you can see how many questions are asked, how many hits/misses there are and so on.

First you can watch the video yourself if you like. And after you have scroll down to see my analysis.


KEY:
John Edward - Regular font
Audience Member - BOLD
Jon Donnis (Me) - Red

I was getting pulled to this section and I feel like there is a father figure reference that they want me to bring through so I don't know if there is a father figure for you guys who passed but that to me would be like father, uncle or grandfather. There is J or a G name that they want me to highlight so that's either someone who is living or passed but it's in that section over there, does that make sense?

My father in law.

Passed?

Yes passed.

I always find John Edward easy to expose, since he uses a technique called "Shotgunning" basically that means he fires a load of information out very quickly and hope that some sticks.

Whenever you hear the words "Father figure" you know you are dealing with a fraud, someone cold reading.

The reason they use these words is because it widens their net for catching the fish. It is deliberately vague.

Father Figure could be, an actual father, step father, father in law, grandfather, great grand father, older brother, older male friend, any older male relative, uncle, cousin, a friend of the family, someone you work with. Basically any male who is older than you. And even John admits this when he says "father, uncle or grandfather"

He then says that it could be someone who is alive or dead! 

So to clarify here, the man who claims psychics powers, and can talk to the dead, is ASKING the audience member if they know someone alive or dead, or could also be a father, uncle or grandfather. 

And then he expands this by saying a "J or G" name.

So to get a hit, he needs the woman to acknowledge, 1 of 3 possible relatives that are dead or alive, with a name that could be, John, Jonathan, James, Julian, Jacob, Jason, and Jeffrey, Jushua etc etc. 

or

George, Gavin, Greg, Gabriel, Grant, Graham, Gordon, Glenn, Gilbert etc etc

So this as you can imagine is a pretty huge net.

But the hilarious thing is the woman says Father in Law, so not even one of the 3 that John Edward guessed at, but since it was a father figure, the net is so wide he will count that as a hit.

And then he asks her again "Passed?" and she confirms.

And there's got to be a J or G name connected to that.

Yes, he's Giovanni but we call him Jonny.

So with the huge net cast, the woman comes back with Giovanni or Jonny as the name.

Note. John Edward asked the woman if she knew a G or J name, He did NOT know the name he did NOT tell her the name, he did NOT know the relation to her, he did NOT know if the person was dead or alive.

ALL of this information the woman told to him. This is how basic cold reading works.

There's a five connection that they want me to talk about so the five connection to me would either be the month of May because that's the 5th month or the 5th of a month, birthday or anniversary but there is something 'five' related that they want me to talk about and he has to have a child that's with him or there is a younger energy that passed so there's a younger person that's connected to him, correct?

He had 5 kids.

Back to shot gunning, he is giving a lot of information here very quickly, this doesn't let the woman really think, every guess he makes regarding the "five connection" is wrong, every single one is wrong. Not a month, a day, an anniversary a birthday, hell just by pure chance I am surprised he didn't hit on anything there.

But the woman has found something that matches the number 5, that being how many kids he had. Remember John Edward did NOT say this, he did NOT tell her, she is telling him the connection. All John said was the number 5.

So other possibilities to the number 5 could be, outside of what he said.

House number, so 5, 15, 25 etc. Age the person died (50, 55, 65, 75 etc), a favourite number, how many animals he had, a military number, a number on a tattoo. Basically when a psychic is this vague, and just asking questions, then something like a simple number is almost impossible to miss on.

Ok, and is one of the kids passed or is there...

Two of them.

John guessed that one of 5 children had passed, it was in fact two, so John is wrong here, just think how much more impressive this had been if he had said straight off that 2 of the children had died. But please don't forget, John did NOT know that any child had passed just seconds earlier, remember the audience member told John that this man had 5 kids, John Edward was going on about months and birthdays. So he has taken information given to him by the person being read, and is letting that shape how the reading continues, again this is basic cold reading.

So far it is safe to say that John Edward has not said a single thing that could be classed as a straight forward statement, he has only asked questions, and in fact he has pretty much been wrong on every single thing when he was slightly specific

Ok somebody passed from something head related or there was something...

That was him.

John is clearly talking about one of the dead children here, probably assuming that someone died in a motorbike accident, or a car accident, it is a typical go to by many psychics as everyone knows someone who has died in such an accident.

But again John Edward is wrong, and the audience member tells him that it was her Father in Law who passed from someone head related.

But lets quickly look at how common head trauma is when someone dies.

As I previously mentioned, any kind of vehicle accident, whether as the driver, passenger, or even being hit by car, then there are brain tumours, brain cancer, water on the brain, brain swelling, stroke, dementia, and on and on. So any of that would be a hit if you are so vague as to say "something head related".

Ok so there was something head related that comes up with him. A Catherine or Karen, there is a C or K name but it's a nickname not a real name so it's like somebody that was known to have C or a K, I hear the 'K' sound.

He's got a younger daughter Celina.

John quickly moves on, since as part of the shotgunning technique, you want as much info given in as short a period of time as possible, then you move on, that way after the reading when the client is remembering back, there is simply too much to remember, so they tend to concentrate on things they feel were right, not realising that it was in fact they who gave all the information away.

It is time for more guess work. I wont bother listing all possible C and K names, you get the idea.

The woman desperate to keep helping John forwards the name Celina.

That would be an S.

It's a C.

No, no it phonetically would sound like an S to me so I can't accept that, its got to be a 'K' name. Think like Coco or Kiki or Keara or someone with like a 'K' kind of name and then they are telling me to you that.... has his wife also passed?

Yes.

Just keep in mind they are in Australia, and you can understand why he guesses those names.

Next he then ASKS the woman if her father in laws wife had passed, again note John does NOT know, he is asking a question, not making a statement. The woman answers, and therefore is giving John information, not the other way around. If you have to ask, then you are not psychic.

Because I see him with his contemporary which is the wife energy and someone had congestive heart failure that means like they fill up with fluids or heaviness in the chest in some way and that was either his sister or somebody that would be like a sister figure to somebody that's here because they are talking about the sister figure, now is there some reference to him losing a sister as well as his wife?

There was a lot of family overseas in Italy but there was one that went..

and do you know her? (points to lady nearby)

It's my sister.

Hang on, we moved away from the wife, and now to a "sister figure" of the man who died, John is very clear here, he is talking about a dead sister figure, to the dead father in law of the woman being read.

But then that quickly changes as he points to a woman near the woman being read. John ASKS her "do you know her?" And the woman reveals it is her sister.

Because I feel like I need to bring you into this and I am supposed to talk to you about , is it your mum thats passed? (now addressing the sister)

No no.

So again John is jumping all over the place here, what happened to the father in laws dead wife, or his sister/sister figure, all of that is quickly forgotten. He then starts talking to the woman's sister in the audience, and instantly gets things wrong when he ASKS if her mum had passed. Again he did NOT know, he is asking a question, and this time the reply is "no, no"

Then who would be the aunt you are named for or the older female that has passed the name down? They are showing me parallel lines so when I see parallel lines it usually means a name has been passed down.

Crystal, my auntie's daughter is Crystal and my daughter is Crystal.

This is hard to keep up, when reading text on a screen, imagine facing this barrage of ever changing info face to face and trying to keep up with what is being said.

So John was wrong when he asked if the mother is dead, so he goes to the next best thing, that being an aunt, but John was originally asking who the woman being read was sharing the name with, that is what he was saying. But the woman then TELLS John that her cousin and her daughter share the same name of Crystal. Again none of this information has come from John Edward, he has been consistently wrong on every question he has asked, ever assumption he has made. Everything, every important detail he has been wrong on, but the sheer amount of information he has said, the speed in which he says it, the way he asks a question and latches onto the answer, its incredible how fast he is.

Ok and is your aunt passed?

Yes.

Again John does NOT know, he is asking a question, something a real psychic would never need to do, this time the assumption made in the question is correct. It is afterall a 50% chance of being right, and looking at ages and so on, its a fair assumption to make.

So that aunt, C or K name, is connected to you as well, correct?

Yes, yes, of course.

Yes it is her Aunt, that is how she is connected, she has literally just told you that.

You are all connected its just how I have to get it in my head, so the C or K name is telling me to come to you to you to acknowledge how the name has been passed down, so you both have children with the same name?

Yes.

Back to the C/K name, and he is now stating that this person with this potential name is dead, and that is who is talking to him. Bizarre that the dead person couldn't just say "my name is...." Instead they say "I have a C or K sounding name, you work out the rest"

Now I don't know if there is some reference to you going to school for healthcare or somebody dealing or doing something healthcare related?

Crystal is.

Which Crystal? The cousin, the daughter? 

Ok that so thats just my way of backing up the information. Why do I do it like this? Well for all the people that are going to tweet me that I am not actually doing this, we have never met, correct?

No.

I have not spoken to you?

No.

So who is the dead person with the C/K name?

John is now for some reason doing the old magicians technique of making sure everyone knows the audience member is not a plant, but he has literally gotten everything wrong, so who would think this was a plant I don't know.

I just want to be very very clear. One of the most important things is validation and what this does is show that your father in law, your mother in law, with their children and connected to your aunt who's passed, its their way of saying they are around you guys and they see what is going on. Did you know that somebody is expanding their family did you know that there is either like an engagement and somebody is kind of getting together or there is a marriage and people are expanding, do you know this?

Yes.

I am legit getting a headache trying to keep up with all of this.

Since when was there a mother in law? This is the first she is mentioned as far as I recall?

Now he is ASKING if someone is pregnant, well lets be clear here, we already know that this woman has a lot of family, her father in law had 5 kids for a start, we have cousins mentioned, daughters and so on. So to guess that someone might be pregnant or thinking of starting a family, but then to not actually specify who is really really vague if you think about it.

But also notice that he also threw in their a marriage, an engagement, blimey this net is so big I don't see who wouldn't be in it.

Ok so its been announced already?

Yes.

Now at this point, John does not actually know what the announcement is, is it a baby, an engagement, a marriage, so note how he will not specify anything until the woman tells him.

Why am I feeling like we had to put it off? Like what did we have to put off like did somebody put off their date? Or they put off doing this. They had put something off, I feel like it can't happen now it has to happen then, its like a putting off of something?

Well she can't have the baby when she was supposed to because it falls on your birthday! (said to daughter)

So they decided to it put off?

Once again the woman gives away the info, John Edward did NOT know.

The wedding?(daughter)

Well no, the wedding is in April but the baby is due October but she found out yesterday she might have to have a Cesarean I said that would be good because then it won't be on her birthday (points to daughter)

And again all this information is coming from the women in the audience and NOT John Edward, he did not know any of this remember, he asked a vague question and the women filled in all the blanks. This is known as "fishing" hence the reference of nets I keep making.

This is what I talk about this being a current event and it's their way of saying to you we see whats going on around you and if I could be so bold and I know its live television and if you dont want to go there its absolutely ok you don't have to but you were saying that you wanted to keep things separate in other words you wouldn't want to have two people... its like having your birthday on Christmas...

Oh exactly I don't want ... you can't have the baby...

Its all good! Now we saw a very cute video ealier in the show of a little dog messing around with the cat. They are telling me that you have one of those that passed, somebody has a dog thats there and it's so funny I supposed to talk about all these people in your family and the reaction the dog got was bigger than the people, no matter where I go it's the same.

Yes.

So first of all do you think that John was perhaps watching the audience while this video of a little dog was playing earlier, and seeing peoples reactions? How often do you see a dog on the TV or in real life and turn to someone and say "oh look at him he is just like Rex", so that is a possibility here, however I just think that John took a simple guess here, since most people have pets, and everyone has had a pet die on them, and he is talking with 3 people pretty much here, so its an easy assumption to make that one of them would have a dead dog.

I could start on the logistics of pets being in the afterlife, the sheer number of dogs and cats etc that have ever existed, then you have to ask about other mammals, are all mammals in the afterlife? All mammals that have ever existed? Just think about that for a moment. Is it starting to sound ridiculous enough yet?

I supposed to talk about either somebody had a mishap on the big boat or there was a mishap in the family on the boat or there is a joke about the mishap on the boat?

She was just on a cruise (daughter)

I just got off a boat!

Was there a mishap?

Once again John makes a vague comment and then ASKS a question about a boat, straight away the daughter comments about a cruise (not a boat), but then the mother continues.

There was a lot!

So hypothetically could we say that there was a reference of umm I don't want to say man overboard, but could we say there was an issue where maybe somebody did...

They were kicked off the boat!

So a man overboard is what John says, the woman however says something completely different in that someone was kicked off a boat, two very different things I think you can agree.

Yes, It happened? Was it somebody you were with?

(daughter says no)

Indirectly?

John doesn't know because he is not psychic, so he ASKS the women. He assumes it was someone they knew, but his assumption is wrong, and by telling him it was not someone they were with, that sets up his next reply.

Yes, because I have a feeling of good riddance like good riddance...

Yes, yes!

Now if they had answers his questions with a "yes" and that being someone they knew, would he still have then said "good riddance"? Probably not. This is how the reply of a client shapes the reading.

If you had to ask for someone to come through today, would it have been your father in law to come through for us?

I feel like he's in our house all the time.

More questions from John, remember back at the beginning, John had no idea who he claims had come through, the woman gave him all the information.

Yes because I feel he's making me feel like it's no big deal

John Edward asks a question, gets a reply, and then uses that as part of his reply to make it sound like he knew all along.

So to better understand.

Psychic asks Question: Would you want this outcome

Client gives Answer: Yes that is what I want

Psychics gives Answer: Yes that is what I thought.

Can you see how the psychic is using the answers to his questions to shape what he says next. This is cold reading. This is the method used so that after the reading has finished, and the client is remembering the reading, they will remember these confirmations as if the psychic knew all along, or like the psychic told them, when the truth is the complete opposite. The ONLY way to keep up with what is going on, is by analysing the reading and really seeing and understanding how they are doing it.

I'm so glad that you have said that, I'm not going nuts, I can go home and tell my husband.

You're not nuts but why is your husband not taking care of his stomach stuff? I'm just passing on what I see I am not a doctor I can't diagnose I just want to know why your husband is not taking care of his stomach stuff?

Oh I don't know about any stomach stuff!

The woman mentions her husband for the first time, and straight away John Edward jumps on it, and ASKS why he is not taking care of his "stomach stuff".
And of course its a complete miss. 100% wrong.

But to understand why he said this is to understand how psychics work, they work on statistics, on educated guesses, and so on.

Looking at the woman he is talking to, he is guessing her age, looking at her own outwardly physical condition, and making assumptions about the husband without ever seeing him. So she looks to be in her 50s, over weight, so it is fair to assume her husband is older than her, so maybe 60 or on his way to 60, and if she is overweight then good chance he will be too, so an overweight man around 60, well most have issues with diet, with their stomachs, many will be on drugs for other issues, and those drugs can affect the stomach as a side effect, however in this case the woman's husband has a good stomach, but I wanted to show you how psychics think and why they say the things they do, it is all about educated guesswork.

No, no, isn't he the person, oh maybe I got the wrong guy. Is there another son that he has that has like really bad acid and stuff?

Yes one of my sons, yes yes.

So John admits he is wrong but doesn't want to give up, so moves it to a son, the woman then tells him it is her son.

Why is that not checked?

Oh it is he has been to a specialist about that and he is on treatment now for it.

It's happening?

Yes.

There is no way around this, John is wrong on every step, first he assumes the husband is ignoring a problem with his stomach, he is wrong so moves onto the son, and again assumes he is ignoring the problem, but is wrong as the woman says that the son is being treated and not ignoring it at all.

Ok, so maybe it's just they are showing it to me, it's like we see it happening. I always err on the side of lets be cautious, lets look at it!, Maybe ask him if he is taking his meds, maybe see if there is any change in that. I know I'm in Sydney but is he in a different part of the country, in a different place?

No he lives with me but he is going soon, moving soon.

Despite being proven wrong John is trying to reword things to get out of it, he then makes an assumption that the son lives far away, but yet again John is wrong

Away?

Yes.

That's just his grandfather's way of looking after him. Thank you very much I hope this helps.

And that is that. Every full name that John said was wrong. All of them were wrong.

He got the relations wrong, he got the conditions wrong, he literally got every single thing he said wrong, he asked a ton of questions, the woman gave him all of the information.

This was a really poor reading. But look at the audience, look at the reactions, the people lapped it up. John Edward never said a single statement that was correct, the closest he got was by saying there was a dead dog, he never said the name of the dog, the breed, nothing. There was not a single part of that reading that even came close to being right. Yet the audience all lapped it up. And the reason why, is because John Edward is incredibly good at his particular type of mediumship, he has performed this style day after day, year after year, he does it now without thinking, he just fires off so much information, that it is hard to keep up, even me with text on a screen which I can read over and over found it hard to keep up. Yet when you really get to the bottom of it, he is a terrible psychic who gets nearly everything wrong.

Yet he is one of the most successful psychics in the world. He is charismatic, he has a near perfect method of delivering his readings in a way that make it very hard if you are the recipient to even follow, never mind debunk.

Anyway I hope that I helped people better understand how Psychic John Edward works. And perhaps give you the tools to spot other fakes who use similar techniques. As always if there is anything you disagree with, let me know in the comments.

If you would like to show your appreciation for my work why not donate an Amazon Email Gift Voucher to me to show your appreciation. I do this for free, you will never see a load of ads on this site, so the only way I get anything out of writing, or running this site is if people donate.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Amazon-E-mail-Amazon-co-uk-Gift-Voucher/dp/B006AUF6X0/

Just click the link above, and you can donate anything from £1 to £1 Million!

Just send any voucher too webmaster@badpsychics.co.uk 

This is the best way to show your appreciation for the work I do. So if you enjoy the site, then how about donating me a voucher, and I promise I will only spend it on good stuff like video games or whiskey! And if not that's ok. I will keep doing my reviews regardless.

Please leave your comments below. 

Tweet me on @JonDonnis and send your abuse to @TheBadPsych

You can also join the Forum and share your thoughts there. 

We are also on Facebook, just search BadPsychics and you will find us. 

By Jon Donnis

REVIEW: Most Haunted Series 20 Episode 10 (The Judges Lodgings Pt 2) to air 24th November 2017

Welcome back to another exclusive review of Most Haunted Off Camera. 
Yes they have officially changed the name of the show.

I am going to try something different this week. I will start by summoning by spirit guides Steve and Phil first, oh great guides, tell me what happens on Most Haunted this week?.......

Ok so I have had a word with them and apparently there are some knocks, and stuff thrown OFF CAMERA.

So lets turn the episode on, and see if my guides were right. (They are)

Wait a sec, just had something delivered to the BadPsychics offices through a courier named Ahmed, its a box..... opening the box, and what is this inside, is a sealed plastic container, ok lets open it. Oh its full of some disgusting white thick liquid, oh there is a note attached. It says, here is my blurbage.

"Spook-searching with Yvette and co! The investigation continues into the Judge's Lodgings where the team seems to be under attack, and something is trying to get through a door."

I just checked the ratings for the Halloween week on REALLY, and if you take out the Most Haunted As Live Halloween special, the ratings for Ghost Chasers and Most Haunted regular shows were pretty close, that is an amazing achievement for Ghost Chasers which is a brand new show, perhaps UKTV might realise they finally have a successor to Most Haunted that is not only more credible, but causes them a lot less bad press.

And so we begin with a reminder that the show is NOT real, is NOT a serious investigation in any way.

Sometimes I feel like one of these know it all WWE Wrestling fans who knows the show is all scripted, but find themselves endlessly arguing with 13 year olds who think it is real. I guess someone has to do it.

Show starts and we get some highlights of last weeks show, again they are showing the "colour" scenes but with the fake post production night vision filter on.

I cant stress this enough, the show is filmed in full colour, ALL OF IT. While filming they have lights on. It is not dark. That is all fixed in post production on the computer. The start of the episode is literally giving the game away of how they do it, but the idiot fans don't seem to understand.

A good few minutes of all the OFF CAMERA stuff from last week's episode is replayed and we then continue from where we left off last week.

About 5 minutes in, and we have a very well shot scene, whereby Karl makes sure he is on camera and has his hands in his pockets, with Fred partially hidden by Karl, Fred does the classic "no look pass", where by he looks at the wall, while throwing an item behind Karl to the other side of the room. It is classic misdirection.

Here is how it looks when it is done properly.

In the case of Fred and Karl it is simple, get both people on camera, filmed by a more honest member of the crew, Karl hands in pocket so he cant be blamed, Fred partially hidden, and looking the wrong way, and job done, you have a simple shot that would keep the believers happy.

But keep in mind since the throw is from behind Karl, and under the line of view of the camera, then this does indeed count as OFF CAMERA! And they do not find whatever it is that Fred threw.

You will notice that Fred always holds his book closely to him with one arm, and then has his other hand in his very large pocket. I can only imagine what kind of accoutrements he has in there.

Fred then decides to investigate a window, the cameraman follows, with Karl lurking behind them, when suddenly there is a noise OFF CAMERA, and upon investigation they find a light wicker basket has been chucked behind them, clearly by Karl who then tries to convince everyone that the basket must have been chucked in the opposite direction from another room towards them. 

Remember in part 1 when they set up some static cameras, well we still have not seen any footage from them. (And we never do)

So far this episode is pretty much the same as last weeks. And 8 minutes in and I am bored.

Another noise and a watering can has been knocked over...... OFF CAMERA.

Yvette then starts massaging Karl's left moob, no idea why, but the look of jealousy on Glen's face afterwards is palpable.

All five of them decide to stand around a table. Never forget that there is in fact more crew members than they let on, usually a producer or two that you never see.

Fred is clearly annoyed he is not in view of the camera, so makes sure to lean forward to make sure he is in shot, well he is paying for all of this, so damn right he should be seen, unlike poor Watson, the ONLY credible member of the crew, who cant even get on the show when they are throwing stuff about.

Yvette is asking the ghosts to move the table. 

We get a split screen front and back shot which is nice, shows that there is no naughtiness going on from Fred.

And because of the duel cameras, nothing happens, the table does not move, so the scene gets cut short quick.

Yvette is now walking with Karl and gives the game away again by saying she doesn't like it when it is dark, erm... isn't is supposed to be dark all of the time on these investigations?

Karl throws something OFF CAMERA, and Yvette ruins the scene by swearing which in turn gets muted out, so you hear the bang and then 5 seconds of silence.

Yvette then goes to great lengths to prove that neither her or Karl could have possible thrown the item, she admits they were stood pretty much facing a wall! Which is the one thing surely you would not do when trying to catch evidence of the paranormal! Of course the idea that Karl just picked something up, had it in his hand and then chucked it behind his back is beyond Yvette's comprehension.

One of the things I often hear in defence of Karl is that he needs two hands to hold the camera when filming, which would make it impossible for him to throw things, so here is a shot of him holding the camera with one hand, while the other hand is pointing at the ghost.

Karl and Yvette then have their weekly scripted argument.
Also rule number 1 of ghost hunting, always film yourself, so that the viewer cant see the ghosts.

This ridiculous scene with Karl and Yvette claiming they can see/hear something goes on for a good 10 minutes, but of course we the viewer see nothing as everything that happens is OFF CAMERA. It really does get pathetic, the overacting is too much even for Most Haunted.

Glen and the other guy are still at the table, and nothing is happening. Riveting television I am sure you can agree.

"It's not frightening but it's scary isn't it.." - Karl Beattie.

With insights like that the man should right a book.

Karl is on his own now, large bang, a door has supposedly shut on its own OFF CAMERA.

Highlight of the episode is this "private" sign.
It is a sign on a pole, but when he films it, it almost looks like a post production effect and seems to be floating in mid air. Of course the owners don't want anyone going in that room, I wonder why? Maybe that is where the ghosts live?

Glen is in a room all on his own, since nothing is happening and there are no ghosts around, he slowly pulls down his trousers and knocks a quick one out.

We keep skipping between all the crew members who are supposedly each on their own, no sign of Fred though.

We cut back to Karl, he asks the ghosts to move something in the room, as he turns around he notices the light fixture swinging.

Now clearly it was a ghost who did this, and not Karl who just walked up, pushed the light, moved back and started filming. That would be impossible.

Because there is a cut in filming, and we do not see a continuous shot of the light still, and then moving, that means that the evidence is useless.

Back with Yvette and you can clearly hear cars in the background, so they are right on a street, so any noise they hear could easily be someone outside.

We then have a hilarious scene with Karl, whereby it sounds like a door handle is being twisted, so Karl runs to the door, opens it, and low and behold there is no one on the other side.

Two explanations for this. Either the noise and Karl talking was added in post production, since we do not see Karl talking since for once he is filming in the right direction, and we don't actually see the handle moving, or it was someone crouched down on the floor, they move the handle, and as Karl bursts through they simply move into the room he came from, so when he looks left and right of course there is no one there.

The easier of the two to plan would be to add the noise in post production, it means Karl can plan and execute the scene on his own.

And with that the episode finishes off with some highlights of what happened. And in 90 minutes of investigation of The Judges lodgings over two episodes, they caught not a single piece of usable evidence of anything paranormal.

EVERYTHING that happened, happened OFF CAMERA.

There are only two options to consider when watching Most Haunted.
1. They fake everything, and that is why their filming techniques are so terrible.
2. They are the single most incompetent, and idiotic ghost hunters in the history of the world, that get more paranormal activity than anyone else, yet after 20 seasons, 100s of episodes, they haven't caught a single piece of credible evidence.

And with that I end my review.
I can only give this episode a 1/10, less sillyness than last weeks episode, but still dumb.

I hope that in some way I have entertained you today, if I did why not donate an Amazon Email Gift Voucher to me to show your appreciation. I do these reviews for free, you will never see a load of ads on this site, so the only way I get anything out of writing these reviews, or running this site is if people donate.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Amazon-E-mail-Amazon-co-uk-Gift-Voucher/dp/B006AUF6X0/

Just click the link above, and you can donate anything from £1 to £1 Million!

Just send any voucher too webmaster@badpsychics.co.uk 

This is the best way to show your appreciation for the work I do. So if you enjoy the site, then how about donating me a voucher, and I promise I will only spend it on good stuff like video games or whiskey! And if not that's ok. I will keep doing my reviews regardless.

Please leave your comments below. 

Tweet me on @JonDonnis and send your abuse to @TheBadPsych

You can also join the Forum and share your thoughts there. 

We are also on Facebook, just search BadPsychics and you will find us. 

By Jon Donnis

A look at 2 short readings by "Celebrity Psychic Medium" Harry T

I had never heard of Harry T and I am guessing the vast majority of people reading this will not have heard of Harry T either. Well he is a self proclaimed "Award Winning" Celebrity Psychic. So pretty much exactly the same as every other psychic out there.

I was made aware of him by one of the members of the BadPsychics Forum as he is making a name for himself in Australia and they asked what I thought of him.

So what has he accomplished? Well he has gotten into some twitter arguments with members of the Real Housewives of Melbourne which is an Australian TV show for brain dead people to watch. And he made TV history as one half of the first gay couple on First Dates Australia. So his claim to fame is that he is gay, and has been on a dating show. I am sure all of the homosexual community out there must feel very proud of him.

Anyway his day job is as a psychic and he works on radio show Smallzy's Surgery nationwide Nova FM. And has done the usual guest spots on day time TV talk shows.

I was given a video of him appearing on one of those shows, something called Studio 10.

And in this video there is a load of waffle for a few minutes and then he gives two readings to people in the audience, and it is these readings I want to look at, as they are not edited, and should be of complete strangers he has not met before or had chance to research, so what better way to see if a medium is real, than in a setting like this, even if these people are likely to be believers.

So I asked a forum member to transcribe the video for me, and I will work from that transcription. Thank you to "girlseeksghosts" for transcribing the video.

Also it is worth noting that this video has been uploaded by Harry T to his own youtube channel, so this video he uses to promote himself and is not one I have picked out or edited to make him look bad.

First you can watch the video below, the readings start after 3 minutes 30 seconds, so feel free to skip to that point. And after you have watched it, scroll down to read my analysis.

Key:

Harry T - Bold Lettering

Audience member - Normal Lettering

My analysis - Red Lettering

This lady over here, at the front, yeah ok, what was your name?

Pam.

and your star sign?

Scorpio.

So to start off, the man who claims psychic powers, to hear the dead, and to see the future has to ask someone 2 questions, their name and their star sign, two simple things that any real psychic should know surely. Anyway let's keep a count on how many questions he asks, remember anyone who could really do what they claim as a psychic would not need to ask any questions. 

Scorpio ok. As soon as I was around the audience before during the commercial, what I was doing was I was getting a sense of the audience and you were standing out very very strongly. In terms of psychic work I would understand that you would have a very good connection with this so its almost like you actually have a bit of this gift yourself, does that make sense?

It does.

So a bit of waffle, and then telling the woman he is reading that she has psychic powers too.

Now anyone who has ever been to a psychic might notice that they were also told they had some psychic abilities. In fact I myself, the UK's most notorious skeptic have been told by 5 different psychics that I have some psychic powers.

The reason they say this is because it is an easy way to find out if the person they are talking to is a believer or a skeptic.

Pretty much all believers will answer in the positive when it is put to them that they have "a bit of a gift". By telling the client this, it is creating something in common with them, it is making them feel special, for you are literally telling someone "you have magic powers just like me, lets be special together"

Now lets say the person answers in the negative, and says "no I do not have psychic powers" something I have answered many times. The psychic will ALWAYS respond with, "oh trust me you do, you just haven't realised them yet".

So regardless of how the client answers, the psychic is able to glean a lot of information out of just one question that is worded to sound like a statement.

Notice the vague words he uses too.

"almost like you actually have a bit"

He doesn't sound so sure does he? That is because again he has no idea, this is how cold reading works.

I know I rambled a bit on this, but it is said by pretty much every psychic everywhere, so I want you to be aware of it. If you have been told you have psychic powers by a psychic, let me know in the comments.

Ok. You will be receiving a lot of prophetic dreams recently and actually fortelling things that are actually coming up, does that make sense to you?

It does.

Firstly "does that make sense to you?" that is a question, to ask a question means you do not know the answer. (3 questions asked not counting the cleverly worded question about if she was psychic, I will let him off that one)

So how could he possibly know this?
Well think back, he already knows this woman is a believer in psychic powers, and she has already admitted that she believes she has psychic powers, so to say to someone who you have just found out believes they are psychic, that they have dreams that predict the future, well its not so big of a leap is it.

In fact ask anyone who believes they have "a bit of a gift" if they have ever had a prophetic dream, and I bet they say yes.

I'm being told from... you actually have a beautiful angel that stands around you. Have you got an angel ornament in your bedroom or in your home, there's like an angel figurine looking thing?

I was given an angel pendant last year.

He says he is being told from... Then stops, who is talking to you Harry T? Give us a name? Ok, he states she has an angel that stands around her, firstly this is pretty much a part of the belief structure of spiritualists, whether it is angels, or spirit guides or so on, she has already admitted she believes she is psychic, so hardly another big leap to assume she believes in angels/spirit guides.

He then asks a question about an angel ornament in her bedroom or home, and then clarifies that there is an "angel figurine" looking thing.


This is 3 question he asks here, all 3 are wrong. You could argue it is 1 question, but there are 3 different things he could have hit on here, no ornament in bedroom, and no ornament in her home, and no figurine.

So I googled angel figurine and here is the first image that comes up.

He gets this completely wrong, but desperate to believe the woman tells him that she was given an angel pendent. Or Angel on a necklace.

So now you understand why he stated "looking thing" at the end of his question.

I am sure you can imagine that after this reading the woman goes home and tells others that the psychic knew she had an angel pendent, how could he possibly know that and so on, yet when you actually look deeply into what he said and the context in which he said it, you can understand the truth.

Ok last year, this is something very connected to you, its to protect you, it was given to you to protect you.

It was.


A moment ago he thought it was an angel ornament, something you put on a window sill, yet now after the woman told him she had an angel pendent, he is now telling her that it is something very close to her, a necklace is literally touching you, so of course it is "connected" to you, often pendents, necklaces etc are given for these reasons, I have about 6 crosses given to me by religious relatives, which I never wear. 

By the woman telling Harry T that she had the pendent, that allows him to know how to word the next statement. Would he have said that an angel ornament would have been given to someone to protect them, to be very connected to them? I don't think so. The fact it is a pendent totally changes the meaning of the item being talked about.

In my parents house they have various ornaments including a couple of angels, none were given to protect them or any of that. They are just ornaments that have been in the family and have been passed down over the generations. 

Ok thank you. I am being told to actually wear it so its almost like you actually havent worn it.

Thats right, I haven't worn it.

Remember he started off thinking it was an ornament, now clearly the woman is not wearing the pendent, and she has gone to a show whereby she knew a psychic would be a guest, she herself supposedly has "a bit of gift" yet she is not visibly wearing the very thing they are talking about.

So notice how he words this, its "almost" like you "actually" haven't worn it.

She then confirms she has not worn it. He words it in such a way that gives a bit of an out if needed, since clearly she is not wearing it in the video, she does not wear it 24/7. So by saying it in a slightly vague way, if she says that she only wears it on weekends, or special occasions etc, then he can double down and say to her that she needs to wear it more.


Oh gosh I hope the person who gave it to you isn't watching, because I'm being told here that you actually need to wear it because it will protect you. It was given to you with love and I'm being shown that it's actually going to help you be more clear of the direction that you're heading. For some reason, this might sound odd, but I am being told to tell you that in many ways your life is just beginning. I don't know why I'm saying this but I feel like as of now moving forward there is going to be a lot of movement moving... almost like going towards May, it's like these next few months there's a big moving forward period for you. What's significant about May around you?

No significance I can think of.

Total failure here. He waffles a bit here then asks a question "What's significant about May around you?", and he misses as she tells him nothing.

When you go this route as a psychic it is usually quite safe, you choose a month slightly in the future, spring/summer months are easy, as usually a lot going on, from people moving house, weddings, changing jobs, it is a 1 in 12 chance that it is someones birthday, although he seems to have forgotten she is Scorpio. 

So the moving forward question could be anything really, yet it seems her life is pretty stable, so he is 100% completely wrong. And he asked another question, what are we on now? 5? 6? I lost count.

I think in May there's going to be something coming up that will be significant that will actually make sense to you and I'm almost feeling like you are going to say ah, that makes sense and I'm being told to also.... amethyst, what's the purple stone? Why am I seeing amethyst?

I have an amethyst ring.

Classic cold reading trick, you get something wrong, and then say "it will make sense to you in the future" Therefore pushing the blame of the miss on to the client, if you never see them again who cares, and if something happens in May purely through coincidence she will remember the psychic and think he predicted it.

He then asks another question, and asks why he is seeing an Amethyst.
She then confirms she has such a ring. Note she said ring, not him.

Is it hardly surprising that a believer who has "a bit of a gift" owns some new-age jewellery?

Could have been a necklace, ear rings, a rock, an ornament, perfume, nail varnish, basically anything Amethyst and he gets a hit, pretty easy thing to claim.

Ok fantastic (audience clapping) thank you, because Im being told that this actually resonates with your energy very very strongly and also take a walk near the water because I think you need it.

Ok thank you very much.

You're welcome.

So he guessed that someone with "a bit of a gift" a believer in psychics, owns something new-age, and it is fantastic and gets a round of applause. If that is your level of evidence of real psychic powers, then I really feel for you.

This was basic cold reading, and if you really look at things, what did he actually tell her that made any kind of sense? He asked a lot of questions, got a lot wrong, and pretty much all the main points she in fact told him.

Yet I bet you after the event she went away and told people
"How could he have possibly know any of that, I never told him anything, I only answered yes or no"

This is why you should always get a recording of a reading. It really is surprising how much people give away without realising.

(Harry T Im being told if you could talk to someone else now.)

Yeh ok lets have a look at who else we can go to. Who wanted to ask a question? I think the man in the red.

Yeh when my father passed away..

Were you younger?

Yeh, I'm the youngest.

Yeh.

So Harry T now moves on to someone else, straight away the audience member reveals that his father has passed away, and then Harry T asks a QUESTION. Why he needs to ask a question so quickly I will never know.

I said to him when I got back from the hospital, I said to him can you show me a sign that you're alive and my mother came from a great background and she had like a candle and it was broad daylight and um...

The flame, did something happen with the flame?

and I said to him.. the flame automatically just blew out.

As the man is telling his story, Harry T realises that he is missing his chance here, so jumps in to try and get in on the act. The man has revealed that he had a candle, and it was the day time and he wanted a sign, so of course the sign would be connected to the candle, Harry T realises this and quick as a flash he gets his comment in there.

Thank you while he was speaking I saw a flame.

This made me laugh. The man literally just told you there was a candle.

To be fair this is a terrible client, as he is talking way too much and giving way too much information, and not letting Harry T do his job of pretending to be psychic.

and I said thank you and I got angry with him because he was stalking me at one stage and I told him to back off.

Yeh, who is the G name? Is there a G like a George or a?

G?

Its the classic guess the name game. All psychics do this, again Harry T is asking the question, he is not making any statements, he is dangling the bait and allowing the fish to bite.

Yeh, who's George, like a G name?

My uncle on my father's side George.

So the man manages to find someone in his family with one of the all time most common and popular male names in George.
In my family I have at least 5 Georges I can think of straight away.

Sorry is that your brother, his brother?

No, my uh, George...

(sorry to interupt but we are running short of time)

Even after the man tells Harry T who the George was, Harry T still has no idea, and has to ask him.

Ok thats ok that was him as soon as you said, I saw the flame so that was a sign from him to let you know he is at peace. He has actually healed a lot. His physical body had a lot of issues....

Now to be fair they get cut off here, but even so Harry T tries to claim this car wreck as some kind of success, repeating back that he saw a flame, and then makes the hilarious comment about the dead persons physical body had a lot of issues, yes Harry T, it had a lot of issues, so many in fact that he died.

And that is the end of that.
I have analysed thousands of readings, so I say with complete confidence, that based on two readings that Harry T himself uses as an example of his mediumship and psychic abilities, it is my opinion that Harry T does not communicate with the dead, he does not hear the voices of the dead, he cannot predict or see the future, and that in my opinion he is performing an act.

What do you think? Leave your comments below.

By Jon Donnis.

REVIEW: Most Haunted Series 20 Episode 9 (The Judges Lodgings Pt 1) to air 17th November 2017

I am curious, has any of the BadPsychics readers ever been to see Barcelona FC play live? You know, sat in the Nou Camp Stadium, and watched Luis Suarez and Lionel Messi play? I have. I saw them play, and it was amazing. About a month later I was back in the UK and I happened upon a couple of free tickets to see Walsall FC play. For those unaware, Barcelona play in the top tier, top league in Catalan, Spain and are possibly the biggest team in the world, and Walsall play in the 3rd tier of the UK leagues. 

Now imagine watching a ghost hunting show whereby nearly everything is good, the filming is excellent, the subject matter taken serious, very few silly gimmicks, and like-able hosts. That is Ghost Chasers, that is Barcelona.

Well now I am watching Most Haunted, and they could only dream of being as good as Walsall FC reserve team.

Anyway for some reason Karl has left his blart sock stuck against the wall, and once you peel it away you see all that congealed blurbage inside and here it is.

"Spook-searching with Yvette and co! The team head to Presteigne in Wales and the famous Judge's Lodgings where they are put through their paces by an unseen spirit."

This disclaimer has taken a lot of flack over the years, for it is an admittance that what you are about to see is not real, it is scripted reality show, a spoof, a parody, however you like to interpret it. But I do not think Most Haunted should have to display this. Yes it is scripted, it is a spoof, a parody, but to claim it is "entertainment" that I just cant accept.

I think it should be changed to
"This programme is for viewing purposes only"
That would be much more accurate.

Anyway I have taken two Tramadol tablets, I've drank half a bottle of Jack Daniels, and I should just about be capable of getting through this review.

Yvette starts off by introducing us to the location and priming the noobs watching of what to expect, also Arsene Wenger is well pissed off that Yvette has copied his look.

No sign of Watson again which is a huge disappointment.

I think Yvette must've had an accident as she has hung her pants up to dry.

To be fair to the place, the Judges Lodgings does look pretty cool, and definitely spooky, of course not at all haunted, but still a fun looking location.

"As soon as we stopped filming objects seemed to be thrown"

Well that makes a change, that or Fred didn't realise the cameras had been turned off.

Do Most Haunted bring their own gimmicks to throw in these old locations, or do they just use what is present? I can't imagine that the owners of such places being happy with MH throwing their property.

With all the crew moving about, there seems to be a lot of noise, and they all start ruining about, therefore creating more noise.

Looking like another typical episode with knocks, taps and stuff being thrown OFF CAMERA.

They keep hearing a noise, and run back to a room where they claim the noise is, but they cant find anything, of interest.

Yvette thinks the noise might be this, and I tend to agree with her, and it is just Karl throwing it as soon as he is not on camera.

Because everything that happened was OFF CAMERA it is all instantly useless as "evidence".

For a moment I was feeling happy as I realised that there is only 1 more episode left in this series after this one, but then I felt sad as I remembered that I had not reviewed the earlier episodes yet. 

This is a very fair representation of me.

Yvette etc are still setting up when....
A fork has been thrown OFF CAMERA.
Now a knife has been thrown OFF CAMERA.
A Pudding mold has been thrown OFF CAMERA.

Yvette turns her back to the room and says "can we do some more" while clearly waiting for someone, sorry I mean a ghost to throw something else. Bizarrely the cameraman films Yvette and not the room which means the wooden spoon that is then thrown is thrown OFF CAMERA.

Yvette says thank you to the ghosts for throwing things.

Worth noting that there is 3 people in the room, and two of them have cameras, yet in this square room, neither of them caught 4 separate items being thrown. I wonder why that would be? (No need to wonder, Karl is throwing the items)

Now a wicker basket has been thrown OFF CAMERA.
Again this was clearly thrown by Karl since he is at the back and he waits for Yvette and the other Cameraman to walk away from him. 

Karl claims to have "caught that" meaning the item moving, but of course when we see his footage, it is after the item has been thrown (by Karl's left hand).

Ok lets put this into context as many believers of MH will claim this is real.
MH is claiming here that 5 separate items have been thrown by the ghosties, not one of them was caught on camera from the moment it was thrown, despite there being two cameramen. Don't you think that if you really wanted to catch evidence of paranormal activity you would try to film as much of the room as possible at the same time and keeping everyone else in frame as to avoid claims of fakery?

To believers of MH ask yourself this, Either Most Haunted after 20 series are still incredibly incompetent at the most basic of filming techniques, or the ghosts somehow only throw stuff OFF CAMERA because they do not really want to prove that they exist but they want stuff to happen?

Think rationally here, and ask yourself what is more likely, that something that is easily faked, is being easily faked, or that MH are just insanely unlucky 100% of the time?

Now for those of us in the know, none of this is a surprise, if you are making a fake ghost hunting show, you need to fake stuff, but do it in such a way that you cant get caught out. But the problem is a lot of people think this show is real, and it is these people I want to get to, and hope that somewhere in their heads they will start to question things.

17 minutes into the episode and Glen makes his first appearance and surprise surprise he has his hands in his pockets.

Yvette explains the early happenings to Glen and he is doing his best not to look to bored.

As soon as Glen's back is turned some more things are thrown OFF CAMERA, and all from the vicinity of Karl.

I will leave this image here without comment, those in the know will understand.

23 minutes in and they still haven't switched to the night filters yet, don't think we have ever gotten this far into an episode without the fake night vision.

They are back in the kitchen and another knife has been thrown OFF CAMERA.

This really is getting ridiculous now. Just purely by luck if any of this was real one would get caught on camera.

Even Glen is saying how they are not getting anything on camera.

As they leave the kitchen, Karl is last out and surprise surprise another fork is thrown OFF CAMERA.

Surely even the most noobiest of noobs watching can't be believing this is real. It is so obviously Karl every day.

Glen has set up his EVP experiment using different types of technology.
Quick reminder that all of these experiments are instantly evidentially worthless and a complete waste of time.

Hilariously Yvette then talks about not liking the spirit box, and has a little rant about them, which is clearly a shot at the Ghost Adventures show.
God help her if she ever sees the Echovox app that Ghost Chasers use.

"EVP does work, it has been proven" - Yvette Fielding

Yes she really does say that.
A bit like a toddler saying "The tooth fairy is real, it's been proven cause there was a 50p under my pillow and my tooth had gone"

The same level of evidence.

They have now set up the locked off cameras, which really would have been useful earlier in the episode, but of course we know the real reason why they weren't set up then. (Note: This is the ONLY shot from this cameras, about 2 seconds, they are not mentioned again in this episode)

It also occurred to me why they wasted so much time doing the early stuff OFF CAMERA, this is a two part episode, so that is 90 minutes they need to fill, so the first half hour of that has been the pre-investigation fannying about.

The fake night vision filters have now been put on, and funnily enough they give the game away when they show some highlights from earlier that were filmed in colour, but are now mysteriously in "night vision".

Fred is looking suspicious as he moves in front of the camera, and then suddenly a wooden spoon is dropped in front of him. And in the replay if you look really carefully it looks like it comes from within Fred's coat.

You know that look you have when you have just had a quicky and your hair is a bit ruffled but you are trying to pretend nothing happened........?

No Stuart again this week, maybe he has buggered off with Watson.

Back with Karl and Fred, and there is a noise, it is a rolling pin, it has been thrown............. OFF CAMERA.

Lots of shots of Glen and Yvette at Glen's computer.

I am surprised it even works with the sheer amount of porn he has on there, and some pretty weird stuff too. A lot of parody porn. I recall seeing one video labelled "A Very Blue Peter"

Not sure what that could have been about.

You can tell they are trying to stretch things out as we then get a 30 second shot of Glen's computer playing back an audio file of background noise, that shows nothing.

Worth noting that the "night vision" effect they use is added in post production, as opposed to an actual filter used on the cameras at the time.

If you remember the classic Mary Loves Dick scene from MHL many many years ago, you can see that they are using the same fakery techniques from then that they are using now, to convince the viewer that a scene is darker than it really is.

There is a lot of time wasting in this episode with Yvette and Glen at the computer, a lot of filler.

Then there is a big noise, Yvette is panicked, and they cut the shot to leave us on a cliff hanger.

Another truly terrible episode, nothing of note happened, usual knocks and things thrown OFF CAMERA. Zero evidence of the paranormal, a lot of time wasting.

I cant give this episode more than a 0/10
Tedious and boring to watch.

I hope that in some way I have entertained you today, if I did why not donate an Amazon Email Gift Voucher to me to show your appreciation. I do these reviews for free, you will never see a load of ads on this site, so the only way I get anything out of writing these reviews, or running this site is if people donate.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Amazon-E-mail-Amazon-co-uk-Gift-Voucher/dp/B006AUF6X0/

Just click the link above, and you can donate anything from £1 to £1 Million!

Just send any voucher too webmaster@badpsychics.co.uk 

This is the best way to show your appreciation for the work I do. So if you enjoy the site, then how about donating me a voucher, and I promise I will only spend it on good stuff like video games or whiskey! And if not that's ok. I will keep doing my reviews regardless.

Please leave your comments below. 

Tweet me on @JonDonnis and send your abuse to @TheBadPsych

You can also join the Forum and share your thoughts there. 

We are also on Facebook, just search BadPsychics and you will find us. 

By Jon Donnis