Sensing Murder –
see also Sensing
A Lawyer Evaluates The Tracey Ann Patient episode
by Victor Zammit
(those coming from the homesite skip the bracketed
introduction - and go from the bold print below)
recently, the New Zealand version of “Sensing Murder”
(Ninox TV/TV NZ Production) was shown in Australia. We fully
understand that when it was shown in New Zealand some months
ago, Sensing Murder raised much controversy. Anything of
value inevitably would raise controversy – and so
it should. Why?
Because it will force us to closely examine the evidence
of the controversial issue. In this case the critical issues
are the paranormal and afterlife. My professional background
is the admissibility of evidence. To resolve the issues
therefore we have to closely look at the objective evidence
– and to remove all existing prejudices.
In the highest courts we get the highest level of professional
debate. This is the very special venue where we are informed
by experts which argument is correct and valid and admissible,
and which argument is not. So, let’s see how the professionals
at the highest level would deal with “Sensing Murder”.
The obvious questions that arise are: considering that
psychics Deb Webber and Sue Nicholson were both highly accurate
in their discernment of the circumstances of the death of
Tracey Ann Patient, was there fraudulent conduct? Where
did they get their accurate information from? Was there
a conspiracy between the Production executives, the television
station and the psychics? Was someone aiding and abetting
the psychics? Was someone trying to mislead the public?
Or can it be that these said psychics are genuine?)
Sensing Murder - the Tracey
Ann Patience case
Historically, the paranormal has elicited a great
deal of curiosity because it is highly controversial. The
skeptical materialists say it does not and cannot exist.
Those others who investigated it – including Nobel
Prize winning scientists, empiricists and even police officers
and others say the evidence shows the paranormal does exist.
Remember, that in any inconsistency between objective
admissible evidence and negative subjective prejudice, inevitably
the admissible objective evidence prevails. Logically it
will always prevail notwithstanding any noise made by those
who try to tell us that subjectivity prevails over objectivity.
I watched this Sensing Murder episode about the
missing young thirteen year old Tracey Ann Patient very
carefully. The presenter, Rebecca Gibney, informed us of
the basic facts. Briefly on the 29th January 1976 Tracey
left her girlfriend’s home late at night; she was
kidnapped, murdered and her dead body was found next morning
in a bush some sixteen kilometers away from where she was
The psychics were to tell us what exactly happened
to Tracey Ann Patient more than 30 years after the incident.
The psychics chosen had had to prove their skills
by describing details of an obscure murder from a photograph.
Deb Webber was one of 5 out of 100 Australian psychics who
was able to do this accurately. Sue Nicholson was one of
three out of 75 New Zealand psychics who passed the test.
In this case we were informed that only the photo
of the victim was given.
No other details of the case were given. The two chosen
psychics never met and were not allowed to talk to each
other during the investigation. The psychics were kept under
constant supervision. The crew only confirmed positive statements
they made. They were filmed non-stop in one day.
What did these two psychics come up with?
According to the information given to the viewers:
1. The two psychics related virtually identical
information about the case which is summarized below.
2. The information given by each psychic corresponded one
hundred per cent with what was known about the case.
3. ... this is a woman … young woman …
4. … she’s thirteen years old …
5. … she loves animals … she had a horse …
6. … she liked riding.
7. … she’s English …
8. … name is …. Tracey … Ann Tracey …
9. … went missing in 1976 …
10. … it was January … before school started
11. … she had been with a girlfriend (the night she
12. … took a short cut through a park …
13. … I see a car … light colored car …
14. … car stopped … she’s walking towards
the car ...
15. … he pushed her into the car …
16. … he put something around her neck …
17. … he’s white Caucasian …
18. … he’s unshaven …
19. … he’s got dirty fingers … grease
20. … (victim) couldn’t breathe …
21. …drove her a fair distance …
22. … *something happened in the car … sexual
23. … something around her throat … stocking!
24. … man struggling with her in the car …
25. … car in bushland, he got her out … and
dumped her, he walked off.
26. … her body was found the next day …
27. … she’s taking me to Henderson Valley area
28. … found near scenic Drive …
29. … lived in Henderson …
30. … (both psychics independent of each other) go
through a short cut victim went through on the night of
the kidnapping …
31. … (before the kidnapping) she was with a friend
32. … (Deb correctly pointing the direction Tracey
went that night) …
33. … area of home in Dellwood Avenue …
34. … stocking went around her neck straightaway -that’s
why no one heard Tracey screaming.
35. … (being driven towards the area where Tracey
was found, psychic directs the television crew driver when
to turn right …correct) …
36. … Deb walks out of the car towards the bush and
points specifically where Tracey was found … (Waitaken
Range is 17 hectares wide) …
37. … Kidnapper lives locally …
38. … he moved away … went North …
39. … he’s got two children … is separated
… and his name is …… (Deb Webber gives
the kidnapper’s full name)…
40. … piece of jewelry missing …
41. … it’s a ring …
42. … there’s an engraving on the ring …
43. … she left it in the car …
44. … this man works in heavy machinery ...
45. . .. her parents went back to England …
Rebecca Gibney informs us that the information
related by the psychics was stunningly accurate –
Deb Webber actually naming the killer. The police were able
to trace the suspect who is now working as a mechanic. He
lives in Northern Henderson as both Deb Webber and Sue Nicholson
The record shows that there is no evidence that
the production company tried to cheat and mislead the public
or to act fraudulently. Nor was there evidence that the
psychics cheated or were into conspiracy with anyone or
The film crew, those who assisted in the production
and the presenter herself related absolutely no critical
information to the psychics and did not act fraudulently
in anyway whatsoever. Nothing illegal or unethical or unfair
The inevitable conclusion after analyzing the evidence
shows that both mediums must have obtained the correct information
They state they are gifted psychics and have a
proven successful track record and that they were able to
obtain the information psychically by communicating with
In absence of any evidence to the contrary and
when all other alternative explanations have been canvassed
and dismissed, we have no option but to accept that.
The mediums work on the basis that with us humans
there is a brain and a mind. The brain dies when the physical
body dies, but the mind survives physical death and retains
all memories from the earth-plane. The brain is subject
to physical energy and dies when the physical body dies,
but the mind survives physical death and in the afterlife
has recall of incidents from the time it was on the earth-plane.
What’s the evidence for this?
The authority for the separation of mind-brain
has been empirically established for more than a hundred
and twenty years - see www.victorzammit.com
– a lawyer presents the repeatable and empirical evidence
for the afterlife.
And what other external evidence is there to support
the psychics’ claim of separation of mind and brain
and the existence of the paranormal and the afterlife?
Some Scientists Who Accept the Paranormal:
The objective evidence is that quite a number of
scientists all the way from the nineteenth and twentieth
century to the present accepted the paranormal after investigating
it. See A Lawyer Presents the Case for the Afterlife:
2. Respected Scientists Who investigated
Chapter 25. Quantum Physics
and the Afterlife
Some of these scientists include Sir William Crookes,
the most decorated scientist of his time, physicist Sir
Oliver Lodge, a Fellow of the prestigious Royal Society,
Sir William Barrett, Dr J J Thompson the discoverer of the
electron, Alfred Russell Wallace. More recently we have
other physicists who have explained the existence of the
paranormal, for example, physicist Professor Fred Alan Wolf,
physicist Nobel Laureate Professor Brian Josephson, Professor
Jessica Utts, physicist Dr Harold Puthoff, Professor Russell
Targ, Professor Dr Ernst Senkowski, physicist Dr Amit Goswami,
scientist Ron Pearson, physicist Professor John Bockris,
physicist Dr Claude Swanson, Professor Marilyn Schlitz,
Dr Dean Radin whose brilliant book showing in scientific
terms why the paranormal is to be accepted in his book The
Conscious Univserse– now because of its critical
importance to the ‘new science’ was translated
into fourteen languages. There are of course dozens of other
scientists who have accepted the paranormal.
The above mentioned works would make most impressive
and vital impact in a court of law explaining why these
brilliant scientists accept the paranormal.
Can you imagine these brilliant scientists telling
the court, “Yes, I have scientifically investigated
the paranormal and concede that the evidence shows that
the paranormal exists.”!
Lawyer Rebuts Skeptical 'Scientist'
Australian Psychics Beat Orthodox Science