Science0 min ago
Courts And The Supernatural
38 Answers
Why is it described as "bizarre" when a Court considers evidence obtained from spirits at a seance?
http:// www.hln tv.com/ article /2013/1 0/04/am anda-kn ox-retr ial-tak es-supe rnatura l-turn
Surely the supernatural is part and parcel of Court proceedings.
As the author Peter James has pointed out, witnesses who speak in Court are asked to confirm their belief in the supernatural by taking an oath to a supernatural being called God.
Surely Courts should more often whip out the ouija board and look for evidence from the spirit world?
http://
Surely the supernatural is part and parcel of Court proceedings.
As the author Peter James has pointed out, witnesses who speak in Court are asked to confirm their belief in the supernatural by taking an oath to a supernatural being called God.
Surely Courts should more often whip out the ouija board and look for evidence from the spirit world?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by joggerjayne. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I don't think the spirits submit evidence.
What they do is guide the witness, and communicate through the witness, rather as God guides witnesses to tell the truth.
And, presumably, if they don't tell the truth, smites them with a big stick or something.
I can't see any problem with a Ouija Board in Courts.
Swear by Almighty God, blah blah, yada yada ... now, would you please place your hand on the upside down glass on the board in front of you ...
What they do is guide the witness, and communicate through the witness, rather as God guides witnesses to tell the truth.
And, presumably, if they don't tell the truth, smites them with a big stick or something.
I can't see any problem with a Ouija Board in Courts.
Swear by Almighty God, blah blah, yada yada ... now, would you please place your hand on the upside down glass on the board in front of you ...
The Court asks witnesses to swear ... on a Bible ... by Almighty God ... while happily accepting that the witness has no need to believe in God ... and thus no belief in the sanctity of the Oath ...
... and still thinks the Oath makes a difference?
Maybe they should just dispense with the Oath?
As to an affirmation ... that's the one where fraudsters, thieves etc, just "promise" that they are telling the truth, right?
... and still thinks the Oath makes a difference?
Maybe they should just dispense with the Oath?
As to an affirmation ... that's the one where fraudsters, thieves etc, just "promise" that they are telling the truth, right?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.