VICTOR J ZAMMIT: A New York Lawyer Challenges David
Lawyer Victor Zammit’s replies to a New York
lawyer’s Mr J's cross examination of what Victor stated
in his report about the successful materializations of David
(For full text of the N.Y. lawyer see end of
this page under ANNEXURE 'A')
Victor: Absolutely, I can answer
all the issues/objections and negative imputations and nuances
raised by the New York lawyer. It is good that another lawyer
communicates and tries to cross-examine me on one of the
most important critical and sensational phenomena of our
time - David Thompson's materializations.
A) Mr D, the New York lawyer states, “I
was very disappointed to read your rather positive review
of a séance you attended with David Thompson this
June. As a lawyer myself, I looked forward to more critical
and creative thinking than you displayed”.
Victor: Close ‘content analysis’ of
your overall statements and questions reveal that you are
operating with at least three unfair and unfounded ‘presumptions’:
i) the presumption that the paranormal does not
exist and therefore whatever I report cannot be right,
ii) the presumption that fraud is taking place in these
iii) the presumption that you have a monopoly on truth and
anything inconsistent with your truth just cannot be valid.
Further content analysis of what you stated reveals:
iv) your own deeply entrenched negative partiality against
v) that you are a ‘hard line skeptic’.
A more impartial analyst would not have stated, “…I
was very disappointed to read your rather positive review
of a séance…” but would have demanded
more information to confirm what exactly occurred during
the materializations of David Thompson in June 06 in order
to come to the right conclusions. You came to your negative
conclusions without having the full information and your
conclusions are not consistent with the evidence stated
in my report (stated in my original first report about David’s
B) Essentially, you bound a man to a chair
and sat in darkness while experiencing various phenomena.
You then turned on the lights and a man was still bound
in a chair.
Victor:That would be an oversimplistic description
of what actually happened and tends to reduce the fundamental
changes which took place during the materialization experiment.
You left out many critical procedures. For example, we bound
to a chair a special man - a ‘materialization medium’,
not just a ‘man’.
This medium is a gifted materialization medium.
He emitted ectoplasm. Ectoplasm mediums are extremely rare
in this world. I only know of one in Australia. Two in the
UK and none in the U.S. that I know of. This ectoplasm was
the ‘medium’ which reduced the afterlife vibrations
of the etherians to physical vibrations for materializations
- for the etherians to become solid. Those with scientific
background have scientifically explained materialization
process in my chapter 6 of my book, Einstein’s ‘E=mc2
and materialization’ (A Lawyer Presents the Case for
the Afterlife www.victorzammit.com
The critical importance of ectoplasm: ectoplasm,
a whitish gaseous substance, can only function in total
darkness and sometimes in low red light. When police raided
the British materialization medium Helen Duncan 1956 in
Nottingham, England (see chapter 11) and put the light on
during a materialization experiment, the ectoplasm was quickly
drawn back into the medium with great force, eventually
Ectoplasm was scientifically studied, Professor Richet,
Nobel Laureate and Professor of Physiology and by Professor
W D Crawford from Queen’s University, Belfast. Both
admitted its existence and wrote scientific reports about
ectoplasm. Baron Von Schrenck-Notzing, a Munich physician,
showed that ectoplasm is composed of leucocytes –
white or colorless blood cells – and epithelial cells
– those from the various protective tissues of the
C) Your inability to see during the performance
would seem to make you a very questionable witness.
Victor: If by ‘questionable’ you mean
unreliable, then I reject that completely. If by ‘questionable’
you mean needing further questions, yes, I accept that.
It all goes to credit. It is not dissimilar to a situation
when you close your eyes in a room sitting down and someone
comes up to you very close – up to twelve inches away
from you, talking to you in an intelligent way. You know
that someone is holding a conversation with you; you know
that the conversation is being taped, you know a voice is
produced with its peculiar rhythm, pace, pitch, intonation;
you know that someone actually shakes hands with you; you
feel the materialized hand, it is solid as yours; that someone
asks you intelligent questions. You ask the voice questions
and obtain intelligent answers.
Now I submit that when this situation occurs it
does not mean that it is impossible or impractical that
someone is actually there in a materialized form, performing,
doing the talking, the conversing and the answering of questions.
Besides, there have been other prominent people with the
highest credibility in this world who reported similar incidents
to what I reported – including the abovementioned
Nobel Laureate Professor Richet and Professor W D Crawford.
D) Your professed belief in the supernatural
would also make you a biased observer - preferring to see
confirmation of your beliefs than all of the ways you may
have been deceived.
Victor: I NEVER professed any belief in
the supernatural. That is an assumption which I reject,
totally. Unlike you with your skeptical beliefs, I do NOT
have the luxury of ‘beliefs’. As a matter of
fact since I started investigating the paranormal and the
afterlife I have never stated at any time that I believe
in anything. I am on record for accepting the evidence for
the afterlife. Objective evidence has nothing to do with
beliefs. One is objective the other is subjective.
Notwithstanding that I am a university trained
lawyer (now retired) I am also an empiricist. I am also
formally qualified with a Major in Psychology with three
years full time of Scientific Method. For the last sixteen
years I have investigated the paranormal using empirical
methodology. I have technical knowledge about what variables
I have to control when conducting experiments. That technically
and inevitably excludes subjectivity, personal beliefs and
assumptions. The endeavor is always for strict empirical
objectivity and accordingly, that would not and could not
make me a biased observer. If I am biased, then I am biased
towards objectivity. I do not investigate to prove anything.
I investigate and report what I find.
1. Are you aware that magicians have been replicating
the performance you described for over a hundred years?
Victor: Not only am I aware that a couple of magicians
have been putting on shows claiming they are replicating
the paranormal – but without scientific scrutiny -
I am also aware there have been, and there are, genuine
empirically based materializations experiments taking place.
I am also aware that there are quacks, charlatans and other
tricksters of every kind in every profession, in science,
in medicine and in the paranormal.
To my knowledge, there has never ever been a magician
who was able to duplicate the performance of a gifted materialization
medium producing phenomena under strict empirical scrutiny.
Never. It just could not be done. There has never been an
instant where strict empirical methodology was applied and
where a magician was able to produce materializations, produce
materialized phenomena and produced materialized voices.
Never. And to the claim that a trained actor can come up
with seven different voices, with a gag firmly around his
mouth, I guarantee it can never be done.
I would be most interested if you could name me
just one instant where empiricists reported that magicians
were able to produce speaking materialized beings. I am
also aware that magicians, including James Webster (who
is also a member of the British Circle of Magicians) from
the United Kingdom, have investigated the paranormal and
have unqualifiedly stated that no magician can do what a
genuine medium can do.
2. Are you aware that many magicians and their
accomplices have confessed to putting on convincing performances
like the one you described using nothing but trickery? http://www.prairieghosts.com/seance2.html
Victor: That website would be irrelevant and inadmissible
because it states itself ‘TRICKS OF FRAUDULENT MEDIUMS.’
I am not involved with ‘tricks of fraudulent mediums’.
There was never an empirically conducted materialization
experiment where the mediums used tricks or fraud or deceit.
The website given is a narrative, hearsay account of some
of the séances and is inadmissible. The narrative,
third party writer there does not identify just one specific
materialization experiment, let alone just one séance
conducted by a scientist.
The article also concedes that whereas there have
been many fraudulent séances, there must have been
genuine séances as well. Relating to fraud, the writer
of the same article concedes, “… this was not
the case with every medium …’ meaning that cheating
and fraud did not happen with genuine mediums. My research
is strictly empirical. I would be more interested if you
cited an example where empiricists, who were able to perceive
the paranormal with empirical equanimity, were in control
and where they had a gifted materialization medium - and
to see what the results were. That you conveniently chose
not to report. (See end of article for relevant links on
A repeated fundamental objection by the hard core
skeptics is that there is no ectoplasm – that in fact
the medium uses ‘cheesecloth.’ Two things I
say to that: first, Professor Donald West (Society for Psychical
Research U.K.) is on record for seriously suggesting that
materialization medium Helen Duncan hid the ‘cheesecloth’
in her anus to fool the sitters. This he stated when he
was severely criticizing Helen Duncan’s materialization
mediumship chapter 11 of my book
www.victorzammit.com (see http://www.victorzammit.com/book/chapter11.html
. “It’s possible” Professor West boasted
defiantly, for that to be done. So I challenged this good
Professor to demonstrate himself that to me. I would accordingly
challenge Randi or any hard core skeptic who claims that
- to show how they can stick long piece of white cheesecloth
- the size of a long scarf – then make it appear in
form of a human being – e.g. like Louis Armstrong,
then to make it sing “Hello Dolly” in the raspish,
deep, resonant voice of Louis Armstrong.
3. Do you know that many magicians take great
care to secure themselves to a chair (or in a locked trunk
or something) specifically for the purpose of misdirection
because their tricks do not depend on them being free?
Victor: Be that as it may, you are obviously implying
that the medium has accomplices. I stated and will re-state,
that it physically impossible for the genuine materialization
mediums such as David Thompson to have had accomplices.
With extreme care, I (and others) checked the security for
fraud myself and guarantee, with absolute certainty, that
it was physically impossible for accomplices to have participated
in the materialization experiment.
We would be confident to take the medium to anyplace
– of your choice - where trapdoors – floors,
walls and ceilings do not exist. That the room, floor, walls
and ceilings are solid concrete with no windows and only
one door which would be secured, sealed and guarded all
the time by any independent party. But then, a magician
of your choice would have to duplicate the experiment under
identical conditions – and when that magician fails,
he’s got to hand over half a million dollars to the
medium David Thompson (see below).
4. Are you aware that, for over a century,
magicians have been using accomplices?
Victor: Magicians use accomplices. Genuine materialization
mediums do not. Magicians are professionally trained to
‘cheat’, to ‘lie’, to fool the audiences,
to misdirect, misinform, to deceive. Gifted, genuine materialization
mediums who are spiritually advanced, do not lie, do not
cheat, do not fool or deceive anyone. For over a century,
there were magicians who used accomplices- that’s
how they give the impression of magic. But a definitive
distinction has to be made between a cheating magician and
an genuine materialization medium and no expression should
be used to expressly state or impute the two are or can
ever be the same.
5. Did you take any precautions against Mr.
Thompson's use of accomplices?
Victor: Absolutely. I know all the sitters. I can
absolutely guarantee that there were no accomplices. It
would be a physical impossibility for anyone to sneak into
the experimenting room. All walls, floors, ceilings were
very carefully checked. Windows were locked from the inside.
The only door to the experimental room was sealed, locked
from the inside and a chair put under the lock from the
inside. Obstacles were put between the door and where chair
of the sitter was, so that it would be physically impossible
to open the door. All seven sitters were at one time or
another conversing with the materialized etherians. When
any entity materializes all sitters have to join hands.
It is very easy to account for every sitter by the physical
position, by holding the hands. Further, when materializations
take place, all sitters converse with the materialized etherians
and each sitter is accounted for by his/her vocalizing and
from identifying the position from where they are verbalizing
– sitting in their respective chairs.
6. Did you mark the other attendees with glow
Victor: No that was not done when I attended
the first materialization experiment. There were luminous
strips put on the medium himself in other sessions. But
do understand these are very early days. We are improving
and refining the methodology all the time. In all fairness,
there was a time, where the medium’s chair was translocated
one foot away from me. With very low red light on, I was
told to hold the medium’s hand and check the seals
– which were intact. I also checked his gag and left
my hand on the gag – but the voice from the materialized
entity was still being heard.
7. Did you secure the other attendees to their
Victor: The only security, at the moment, is by
way of accountability of holding hands. In one experiment
the sitters during materialization were told to identify
themselves by name when the voices were coming from the
opposite direction. When the voice was heard, each sitter
was accounted for and the voice came from the area they
were sitting. Briefly, the medium David Thompson sits in
the corner – he does NOT use a cabinet. Then the sitters
sit in a semi-circle facing the medium. The only door to
the experimental room, facing the medium would be on the
extreme right hand side – opposite the sitter on the
right hand side.
8. Did you bar all entrances to keep out any
accomplices unknown to you?
Victor: (**** see answer to your question 5, above.)
Yes, absolutely. As I stated, it is physically impossible
for accomplices to enter the room because there are obstacles
to open the door. There was only one entrance/exit door.
All windows were locked from the inside. There were no trap
doors in the ceiling, walls or floor.
9. Did you place bubble wrap on the floor or
employ motion detectors?
Victor: No we did not. As abovestated, we only
had three brief sittings. There is still so much to consider.
I am hoping that the experiments will go on for the next
six months where other method will be used to assist in
the empirical procedure. We will be employing different
methods to continue to show what is really happening. In
one experiment in England the experimenters among other
things put talcum powder on the floor.
10. Would you repeat this experiment while
wearing night-vision goggles (such goggles merely collect
ambient light and do not give off any light or energy of
Victor: That was my first question in the very
first experiment to the materialized etherian who calls
himself ‘William’ who is the ‘control’
of the medium. I wanted infra red video, night vision goggles.
The reply was that we have to understand that we are dealing
with very highly volatile and extra sensitive afterlife
energies. We just cannot superimpose our conditions (what
we think is reasonable) onto the afterlife conditions. Patience,
this etherian stated, patience. In the future, the afterlife
will bring its own light. In England there are materialization
experiments going on where sitters are using infra red filming.
We would need a few months of investigations on these materializations.
Accordingly, answering your question, yes, one day in the
future, we will be wearing night-vision goggles, we will
be taking still photographs.
11.Would you like $1 million US dollars? If you can
repeat the events that you described, James Rand will pay
you one million dollars. Go to www.randi.org for more information.
Victor: Let me say this first, I have been advising
leading psychics in the U.S. and elsewhere not to fall for
Randi’s trap. My research into the offer is that it
is propaganda, not a genuine offer. I do not consider the
$1million dollar challenge to be genuine. First, he is on
record for stating to one of the founders of CSICOP, “I
will always have a way out (of paying the $1million)”.
That speaks volumes; that reveals intention and that is
not denied by Randi. That expressly stated intention shows
that he is not genuine and will find someway of not paying
the $1m. We are on notice Randi is going to do that.
I had complaints from psychics and investigators
– Michael Roll, Chris Robinson and others, who had
great problems communicating with Randi, notwithstanding
they acted according to the instructions on his offer. He
just does not respond to their correspondence.
However, David Thompson would take him on but not
on the unilateral conditions set by Randi. Among other things,
the $1million would have to be deposited with a truly independent
stakeholder and on proving the paranormal has taken place,
the $1m would have to be handed over to the medium forthwith
– no subsequent if’s, but’s, or maybe’s
or “let me think about it”.
Randi fails to beat my own challenge
For the record, Randi has not applied to beat my
own $1million challenge. He implied he would when my offer
first came out on the internet – some eight years
ago. I am still waiting for him and any of those highly
qualified empiricists closed minded skeptics on the East
Coast to take me on.
By countering Randi’s offer, we are too making
another offer for any magician – for anyone to duplicate
our materializations experiments under strict scientific
conditions. At least one debunking skeptic ex-magician claimed
he could duplicate any psychic experiment and gets the same
results. Let him try. If he fails, he has to hand over the
medium David Thompson, half a million dollars. As to one
of the fundamental conditions, there will be only one minute
notice where the experiments or the duplication of the experiments
will be taking place. Also, payment has to be made immediately
12. I predict that, like most biased witnesses
I have examined, you will not express the least doubt in
your story. However, as an attorney, I wish you would honestly
evaluate whether you could withstand a real cross-examination.
Victor: Again, you are making erroneous assumptions
by your ‘predictions’ when you do not have all
the information to make any prediction. Further, you yourself
show that you are a negatively biased witness by your own
sustained and consistent anti-paranormal negativity. I reiterate,
I am an empiricist and do not have the luxury of beliefs
or partiality in any way.
Was Newton biased in his observation of gravity?
Was Einstein biased in his mathematical findings? Was Galileo
biased in his heliocentric view of the solar system?
David Thompson’s materialization experiments
are empirical – they are duplicated over time and
space, variables are held constant and they yield the same
results – therefore they are repeatable. That is a
being empirical. That is being objective.
By contrast, content analysis shows you are a skeptic,
even a debunker, with your own personal, subjective beliefs.
That is your prerogative. But you are arguing from a position
of extreme weakness because you do not have science to support
your ‘beliefs’ that the paranormal does not
exist, that materializations do not take place. Again, you
cannot independently substantiate your personal, subjective,
personal beliefs. And as you know, anything subjective is
itself subject to error, to complete invalidation. There
is no empirical basis for skeptical beliefs.
We have expressly stated WHAT the evidence is.
As you know, the onus shifts on to the opposition to show
that the evidence cannot be admitted as admissible objective
evidence. No one - no scientist, no lawyer, no debunker,
no theologian, no closed minded skeptic in the eight years
has been able to rebut my evidence and findings for the
afterlife. And my own definitive prediction is, with the
professional knowledge and experience that I have, no one,
no one will ever be able to rebut or duplicate the materializations
of David Thompson. And as we all know, anything expressly
stated and not rebutted stays valid.
For the record, I guarantee that paranormal activity
is taking place in these below- mentioned materialization
experiments. I also state that I shook hands with an entity
claiming to be a materialized Arthur Conan Doyle (1859-1930)
and state that his hand was solid, and that his voice was
inches away from where I was. His answers to my questions
were taped. At this stage, we are empirically studying the
materialized voices to see if there can be an correlation
between the voices of those who materialized and their voices
when they were alive on earth. At this stage we only have
a prima facie case made out that these materialized
etherians are who they claim to be. We will be announcing
all empirical results on my website in the future.
The above information is very likely to upset the
conservatives because it is questioning entrenched traditional
cherished beliefs and values. It is challenging scientific
orthodoxy and materialism. It is evidence that consciousness
survives physical death.
EXTERNAL CREDIBILITY OF MATERIALIZATION
The SCOLE EXPERIMENT http://www.victorzammit.com/book/chapter05.html
which is well documented confirms everything David Thompson
is doing. The investigators are highly credible scientists,
psychologists, lawyer, and other professionals. See below.
Senior scientists and investigators who participated
in the Scole materialization experiments included Professors
David Fontana, Professor Arthur Ellison and Montague Keen.
Of course, over the four years and five hundred sittings
there were many others who attended as senior scientists
and guests in the actual experiments: Dr Hans Schaer a lawyer,
Dr Ernst Senkowski, Piers Eggett, Keith Mcquin Roberts,
Dr Rupert Sheldrake, Professor Ivor Grattan-Guiness - all
with scientific or other relevant background and a host
of other highly credible witnesses who have had years of
experience in dealing with the paranormal. In the United
States sessions were also attended by a number of scientists.
There were a number of senior scientists from the space
agency NASA and others from the Institute of Noetic Sciences
near San Francisco as well as representatives from Stanford
Some of the most famous materialization mediums
of the last two centuries include Daniel Dunglas Home, who
was investigated in a laboratory by Sir William Crookes,
Franek Kluski, the Warsaw medium who was notable for materializing
large numbers of animals and mediumship was verified by
Dr Gustave Geley, who participated in Kluski's seances at
the Paris Institut Metapsychique International and by Prof.
F. W. Pawlowski.
When you investigate the sheer number of testimonies
of highly credible witnesses of the phenomena of materialization
you cannot help but be struck by highly credibility of the
witnesses and the similarities in the phenomena. For example
see the online accounts of the following materialization
Elizabeth S and May E Bangs (known as the Bang Sisters)
of Chicago, Illinois,
Arnold Clare http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/seance/78/aclare.htm
Florence Cook, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/cookflorence.htm
Margery Crandon, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/crandon.htm
Stella Cranshaw, better known as 'Stella C.', http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/stella.htm
Frank Decker, http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/seance/78/deckerg.htm
Elizabeth Hope who worked under the pseudonym of Mme. D'Esperance,
The Eddy Brothers, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/eddy.htm
William Eglinton, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/eglinton.htm
Rita Goold http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/mediums/crossley/crossley_pn83-en.html
Alec Harris whose wife documented his mediumship in They
Walked Among Us.
Minnie Harrison, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/harrison/index.html
Cecil Husk, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/articles/barrett/years.htm
Stainton Moses, an Anglican clergyman, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/moses.htm
Eusapia Palladino, http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/palladino.htm
Estelle Roberts, http://www.harvestfields.ca/ebook/02/033/10.htm
Rudi and Willy Schneider, http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/seance/78/schneidr.htm
Hunter Selkirk, http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/seance/78/selkirk.htm
Jack Webber http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/seance/78/webr.htm
ANNEXURE 'A' - full text of New York lawyer
I was very disappointed to read your rather positive review
of a seance you attended with David Thompson this June.
As a lawyer myself, I looked forward to more critical and
creative thinking than you displayed. Essentially, you bound
a man to a chair and sat in darkness while experiencing
various phenomena. You then turned on the lights and a man
was still bound in a chair. Your inability to see during
the performance would seem to make you a very questionable
witness. Your professed belief in the supernatural would
also make you a biased observer - preferring to see confirmation
of your beliefs than all of the ways you may have been deceived.
Were this a court case and were I to have you on the stand,
I might ask some of the following questions:
1. Are you aware that magicians have been replicating the
performance you described for over a hundred years?
2. Are you aware that many magicians and their accomplices
have confessed to putting on convincing performances like
the one you described using nothing but trickery? http://www.prairieghosts.com/seance2.html
3. Do you know that many magicians take great care to secure
themselves to a chair (or in a locked trunk or something)
specifically for the purpose of misdirection because their
tricks do not depend on them being free?
4. Are you aware that, for over a century, magicians have
been using accomplices?
5. Did you take any precautions against Mr. Thompson's use
6. Did you mark the other attendees with glow tape?
7. Did you secure the other attendees to their chairs?
8. Did you bar all entrances ro keep out any accomplices
unknown to you?
9. Did you place bubble wrap on the floor or employ motion
10. Would you repeat this experiment while wearing night-vision
goggles (such goggles merely collect ambient light and do
not give off any light or energy of their own)?
11. Would you like $1 million US dollars? If you can repeat
the events that you described, James Rand will pay you one
million dollars. Go to www.randi.org for more information.
I predict that, like most biased witnesses I have examined,
you will not express the least doubt in your story. However,
as an attorney, I wish you would honestly evaluate whether
you could withstand a real cross-examination.
Mr D, New York.
Return to Articles