Michael Prescott's Blog

Worth a look

I'm doing my best to avoid blogging on David Thompson again, but for those who are interested, there are some very worthwhile discussions going on at Spiritualist Chatroom.

To access these discussions, you first must register with the site. (It's free.) Then log on to the forums and go to the Physical Mediumship Newsgroup.

Two threads of particular interest right now are "Let there be light on these questions DT," which includes some posts from a participant named Empress about the amount of money Thompson and his promoters are charging for a US tour (it's a lot), and "FAO Lettherebelight," which in recent posts deals with Victor Zammit's answers to various specific questions posed by the group.

Now back to our regularly scheduled blogging.

A word from Banachek

A while ago I wrote a post about Project Alpha, a ruse concocted by James Randi in which two magicians pretended to be psychics in order to fool some parapsychologists. One of the magicians went on to a professional career, using the stage name Banachek.

Today, Banachek wrote to me. He very politely pointed out that the article I relied on when writing my post - "Science Versus Showmanship: A History of the Randi Hoax," by Michael A. Thalbourne (PDF file) - is inaccurate in important respects.

I asked Banachek for permission to publish his email message here, and he kindly consented. As I said to him, I wasn't there, so all I can do is present both sides of the story.

Here is the email, complete except for a brief paragraph that included some personal contact info that I don't want to make public.

---

Hi Michael,

I was surfing the net and found your blog. Great stuff by the way. However, here are a few mistakes in your blog about Alpha.

Phillips did indeed present a tape to the parapsychology community and in it he states that Schaefer was able to corroborate his findings and even found more abilities in reference to our "powers".  This is direct evidence of him stating he believed what we did was real.

Also the fact about them having suspected us was not true at all. They did not and they did not stop the testing. The testing became tighter after the convention due to the feedback they received. They were surprised that others did not accept their findings and wanted to produce the phenomena in such a way to convince others of what they believed. This was a hard one for Phillips due to the fact he felt that the powers would only manifest themselves in a relaxed atmosphere.

The Thalbourne article is riddled with mistakes and accusations that are just not fair. I think he was trying to save his own reputation.  In fact Thalbourne did not come around till the end of testing.

In fact after we announced the fact it was all a hoax, Phillips and Schaefer would not answer their phones until they heard from Edwards and myself. They then proceeded to keep asking, "well what about this," and "what about that," desperately trying to hold on to one shred of evidence that might be real.

There is so much wrong in the cover up at the end. For instance, we were never ever asked if we were fakes. We were told about a rumor, (one Randi started by the way) and also told about a second rumor. The first was the truth that we (Mike and I) were working with Randi to fool them, and the second was that Randi and Mike and I were working with the MacLab to fool the rest of the Parapsychology world.  They laughed at both as being ludicrous and we joined in, relieved as for a moment we thought it was all over with.

In case you did not know, I have been the magic producer for Criss Angel Mindfreak for the last four seasons, now we have parted ways.  I may have a psychic investigation show on A&E. Up in the air now due to my parting with Criss.

Also right now there is a screenplay on Project Alpha being written. It would make a great book if interested :-)

All the best my friend and look forward to talking to you if so inclined.

Oh here is a PDF of a recent article on me.
http://www.banachek.org/nonflash/Articles/MUM%20final.pdf

In thoughts and friendship
Banachek
www.Banachek.com

College Performer of the year, 2 years
Novelty Entertainer of the Year
PEA Creativity Recipient

Rise above it

This weekend I got an email from a reader who suggested that my little feud with Victor Zammit has gone on too long, and that I should take to heart the Buddhist saying, "Rise above it."

My reply was that while "rise above it" is generally good advice, I felt that Victor was trying to wear down his critics through incessant vituperation and stonewalling, and that I wasn't going to let him get away with it.

However, upon reflection, I think this was the wrong answer. The Buddhists are right. In a case like this, further argument will not result in any progress. Each side will only dig in its heels. Our egos will only get more invested in the outcome. The exchanges will inevitably get nastier, and no good purpose will be served.

So, for now, I'm going to exercise self-restraint and forgo further discussion of l'affaire Thompson on this blog. I reserve the right to return to this subject if some major breaking news warrants it. (Further unsubstantiated claims of Thompson's abilities, or further eccentric diatribes on Victor's part, don't constitute breaking news. Only something really noteworthy counts.)

I will, however, continue to follow the discussion in the Spiritualist Chatroom forum and to contribute occasional thoughts. (To use the forum, click here, register, then use the search feature to find the topic - e.g., "David Thompson" - that you're looking for.)

It's important for us all to realize how insignificant this whole controversy really is. There can't be more than a few hundred people who are following it. Caught up in the drama of it all, we may start to think we're engaged in a historic struggle of epic dimensions, when actually it's a petty quarrel that would appear ridiculous to 99% of the general public - and with good reason. Even parapsychologists aren't interested.

By all odds, the names Victor Zammit, David Thompson, and Michael Prescott will not even be footnotes in the history of the paranormal. We are just not that important, and our opinions are not that important. It's only too easy to lose sight of this simple fact and to take ourselves much too seriously. I believe that's what has happened here. It's time to take a step back and look at this whole nonsensical dispute with self-effacing humor. If someone had told me a few years ago that I would be arguing strenuously about whether or not an ectoplasmic Satchmo was playing the harmonica in a pitch-dark room, I would have said they were crazy. Yet that's what I've been doing. Who's crazy now?

As I said, if there's some big new development, I'll certainly cover it. Maybe Thompson's abilities will be vindicated by infrared photography or foolproof security measures, and I'll have to eat a healthy serving of (white?) crow. Or maybe the lights will come in the middle of a seance, and Thompson will be caught playing the harmonica in the middle of the room. Most likely, neither of those things will happen, and the argument will go on and on, until it eventually peters out from sheer lack of anything new to say.

In the meantime, the Buddhists have the right idea, and many thanks to my email correspondent for mentioning it. Rise above it. Imagine how much brighter our world would be if we all followed this advice.

Happy New Year!

Button, button, who's got the button?

One detail of the David Thompson seances that has drawn some comment is a trick involving his cardigan sweater. Before each performance, Thompson has the buttons of the sweater tied into the buttonholes with cable ties. When the performance is over, the sweater is sometimes found to have been "reversed."

I originally thought that the sweater had been turned inside out, but apparently "reversed" means simply that it is worn backwards, with the front buttons now on Thompson's back. Either way, however, the trick is no big deal.

It is easy to turn a sweater inside out without unbuttoning it. Try it yourself. (I did.)

And of course it's even easier to slip out of a sweater and then put it on backwards.

But, Thompson's supporters will say, how could he take off the sweater when the buttons are tied into the holes? Most sweaters are flexible enough to allow you to pull them off and on without unbuttoning them. After all, many sweaters have no buttons at all, and are intended to be pulled on and off over the head.

The cable ties prove nothing except that the sweater remained buttoned throughout the act. (Technically, it is possible to undo a cable tie by slipping a pin into the locking mechanism, but there would be no need for Thompson to do this.)

Of course, the "phenomenon" is considered significant by Thompson's fans. Why? Because they assume that he remains secured to the chair at all times. If this were indeed the case, then it's true that the reversal of his sweater would defy normal explanation.

But if Thompson can slip out of the cable ties that hold him to the chair, then it is simplicity itself for him to pull off his sweater and put it on backward. Apparently it's never occurred to the dedicated investigators in charge of the Thompson seances that the "medium" uses a sweater precisely because it is expandable enough to be pulled off and on without being unbuttoned.

If he really wants to demonstrate paranormal powers, he could try being secured in a dress shirt, with the front of the shirt tied shut, all the way up to, and including, the collar. Assuming that the collar is reasonably tight, he would probably find it impossible to extricate himself from the shirt without unbuttoning it.

Anyone think he's going to do this? If so, I have some New York real estate to sell you.

Merry Christmas from Victor!

Just in time for the holidays, Victor Zammit has updated his "Michael Pisspot" post. This time, I'm glad to say, he actually uses my name (in addition to the sarcastic nickname). This is the first time he has ever identified me by name in all of his attacks, so I feel I am making progress.

Or maybe not. You judge. This is the revised post. I've put the new stuff in red:

MICHAEL Prescott - PISSPOT – He tries to stab Victor in the back. He's got blogs to try to denigrate, discredit and debase everything Victor stands for. He tries to take away Victor's credibility, integrity and honesty. He imputes dishonesty. He implies fraud and trickery in Victor's materialization methodology. He's not an empiricist, not a scientist, not qualified, knows nothing about scientific method, knows nothing about evidence - but he's negatively prejudicial against materializations. He shows he's full of hatred, jealousy and green with envy, exudes sewer-level information – someone who tries to attack me. Michael Pisspot - a closed minded loser defeatist is too silly to rebut the afterlife evidence, too dumb and negatively prejudicial to understand objective, repeatable evidence, too much of an imbecile to understand intellectual afterlife substance. This Pisspot who tries to attack me shows he experiences too much frustration in not being able to rebut my hard core evidence for the afterlife – so he does the next thing he knows: he throws mud at the source of his frustration and LIES and cheats to mislead the unthinking readers - one of America's greatest cowards! Wake up loser!

Does anyone else find it weird that Victor refers to himself in the third person?

Some readers have commented that it's awful for me to be subjected to this kind of attack. I don't feel that way. Although I was taken aback by Victor's first shot across my bow more than eighteen months ago, I've gotten used to his diatribes and have even learned to enjoy them. And believe it or not, I don't think he really intends any of this personally. He writes essentially the same thing about all his critics, even using the same words and expressions (loser, defeatist, imbecile, liar, closed-minded, lives in a sewer, throws mud, etc.). This just seems to be the mode that he enters when he feels he is under assault. He has certain catch-phrases that he starts blurting out.

I believe he's quite unconscious of resorting to the same (rather limited) arsenal of invective over and over. But the subconscious is wiser than the conscious mind, and it is letting him know. Notice that many of the insults he flings at others accurately describe his own behavior - "throwing mud," for instance.

I think he would benefit from reading Eckhart Tolle and learning how unconscious much of our everyday, conditioned behavior really is. Of course, I have no realistic hope that he will take my advice.

Anyway, Victor, if you're reading, there are no hard feelings on this end, mate. I get a kick out of your posts, especially when they're about me. Keep 'em coming! I wish you a Merry Christmas, and a Happy - nay, a world-shattering - New Year!

The same goes sentiment goes out to all my readers, even those who don't think I'm one of America's greatest cowards. Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!

Wake-up call (updated)

Someone at the Spiritualist Chat Room directed my attention to this posting by Victor Zammit. Why, I do believe he's talking about moi.

MICHAEL PISSPOT – He's not an empiricist, not a scientist, not qualified, knows nothing about scientific method, knows nothing about evidence - but he's negatively prejudicial against materializastions [sic]. He shows he's full of hatred, jealousy and green with envy, exudes sewer-level information – someone who tries to attack me. Michael Pisspot - a closed minded loser defeatist is too silly to rebut the afterlife evidence, too dumb and negatively prejudicial to understand objective, repeatable evidence, too much of an imbecile to understand intellectual afterlife substance. This Pisspot who tries to attack me shows he experiences too much frustration in not being able to rebut my hard core evidence for the afterlife – so he does the next thing he knows: he throws mud at the source of his frustration and LIES and cheats to mislead the unthinking readers. Wake up loser!

He seems just a tad, um, disgruntled, wouldn't you say?

In other Zammit-related news, a commenter named Veritas on the same thread (which is titled "Victor Zammit/DT" and is found in the Physical Mediumship Newsgroup; free registration required) casts some doubt on Victor's career as a lawyer. Veritas writes:

Five minutes research locates that his claim to be a 'solicitor of the NSW Supreme Court' is bogus. A solicitor is defined by possessing a practising certificate from the Law Society, and being admitted as a solicitor by the NSW Legal Practicioners Board. Only a Barrister is admitted to the "bar of the court" which is what the term Barrister means.

Zammit is making a misleading claim to inflate his legal qualifications (his scientific qualifications being nonexistent)....

Zammit says he is a "Retired Lawyer of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, and the High Court of Australia." Is he trying to fraudulently represent that he was (is) a BARRISTER? It says on his bio details that he was a SOLICITOR, in which case he's not actually admitted to the Bar of any court (i.e. can't make representations to the court). 

Solicitors must instruct the Barrister to address the bench of the court, the Solicitor can't do this themselves (at least in the higher courts, as he listed). I'm no legal expert, but perhaps someone who is can look closely at the rule governing the way a Solicitor can represent themselves.

I know zilch about the legal system in Australia, so I can't comment on this statement. Anyone out there better informed than I am about this whole barrister/solicitor thing? Not that it really matters at this point; I'm just curious. (NOTE: see "Update" below.)

I'll admit that it always seemed odd to me that a high-profile attorney would write and reason (and even spell) as poorly as Victor does.

P.S. Further searching turned up two posts identical to the two published by Veritas, but appearing much earlier on a different site and attributed to someone named Scot. Is Scott the same person as Veritas, or did Veritas copy Scot's posts?

Anyway, the site includes this anecdote from hard-line skeptic Andrew Skolnick:

About a half year ago, I found myself being vilified and defamed by Victor Zammit on his crackpot web site. Rather than reply to him, which would have accomplished nothing, I created a spoof "Victor Dammit" web site, that is almost as funny as the original. He went ballistic. At first, he demanded that I immediately stop "defacing" his web site. He threatened both legal action and implied physical threats from his friends "on the East Coast." "If you knew who they are," he said in an email, "you would shit in your pants." So far, I haven't received any legal notices or any visits from da boys from New Jersey. As you can see, my spoof site is still getting almost as many laughs as his.

Sounds like Victor has been channeling The Sopranos ...

As I wrote on the Spiritualist Chat Room thread, I'm beginning to think Mr. Zammit is a few hops short of a kangaroo.

UPDATE (12-22-07): A contributor to the Spiritualist Chat Room thread named Mickey_D has this to say about Victor's legal background:

"Solicitor to the Supreme Court of NSW" is the full title of a NSW solicitor. This is what would appear on his practise certificate. He's not, therefore, claiming to be a barrister. Solicitors can (and usually do) represent clients at the pre trial stage in any court. By using the full title he's trying, possibly, to aggrandize himself but he's not lying about his legal qualifications.

That flippin' coin

I've been sadly derelict in following David Thompson's shenanigans of late, but one noteworthy incident recently came to my attention.

Apparently, some time ago, the sitters at a Thompson seance were promised that Harry Houdini, a frequent ectoplasmic visitor, would apport (i.e., materialize) an object he had owned in his lifetime. In a later seance, a coin was produced, said to have belonged to the great Houdini himself. This exciting development was trumpeted as mind-boggling, earthshaking, paradigm-shifting proof that Thompson is for real.

Ah, but the course of true love never did run smooth, and neither does Thompson's star-crossed mediumship. Ere long, embarrassing questions were raised.

But why should I tell the story when a participant in a Spiritualist Chat Room thread has done the heavy lifting for me? (To read the thread, go here, register for the site, then navigate to the Spiritualist Experiences topic, and choose the thread titled "Victor Zammit." This particular post appears on p. 10 of the increasingly long - and very interesting - discussion.)

JimW, a senior member of the forum, reports on the controversial coin as follows:

Let us consider the strange case of Harry Houdini and his personal possession....

HH comes to a COSC circle [i.e., the Circle of the Silver Cord, Thompson's "investigators" - MP] and promises that something personally belonging to him will be apported in the UK to be taken to the Magic Circle (which strangely he confuses as being in New York not in London).

The next stage comes at the COSC first seance in the UK where some special USA guests are attending. HH apparently materialises and a hand appears on the luminous planchette producing a coin.

Attendees keep quiet so that Victor and COSC can pronounce this major event and it is publicly trumpeted about the coin appearing, a commemorative coin of HH. This then appears on the COSC site.

It seems even at the earliest stage, when it should have been obvious that no commemorative coin was struck in HH's lifetime, no one questioned that this was not the long awaited truth. 

Then shock and horror - the coin was minted well after the date of HH's death and was probably a copy anyway of an original. So clearly not a personal possession of HH.

As an empiricist what would be my conclusions to this? Why on earth would HH "apport" something like this in a seance?

It is probably one of the singly most troubling events in the whole chain of concerns.

As for me, your humble correspondent, I'm long past being troubled in any way by David Thompson. I only wonder what he's going to apport next.

May I suggest a DVD of the Tony Curtis biopic Houdini, an item which - like the commemorative coin itself - was surely owned by Houdini in his lifetime?

The ectoplasmic chickens come home to roost

I haven't said anything about everyone's favorite materialization medium in a while, because there's really been nothing to say. But recently, commenters Gaylord Pompledinkler (!) and J Richards pointed me to a discussion about David Thompson at the Spiritualist Chat Room. (To see the thread, you need to register with the site, then click on "Spiritualist Philosophy" and then on "Spirit Guides.")

It's fun stuff.

First, David Thompson himself enters the chat room to talk about his spirit guides:

I have a few guides that work with me, my main friend and contact is:

William Charles Cadwell, who passed in 1897.

(William was check up by the SPR when Monty Keen did his report into my mediumship and was found)

Timothy Booth.

(he helps draw out the ectoplasam for the physical seances)

White Soaring Bird. (Door Keeper) ...

Jack (Surname unknown) ...

Dr Theobold Slavinski (Cardivasculor surgeon) helps with healing and psychic surgery.

Shortly afterward, someone named Leo joins in. He is not at all skeptical about Thompson and reports that he's looking forward to an evening with Thompson.

Next week I am visiting a Dave Thompson psychic surgery evening..... a Dr Slavinski.... think I got that right.... comes through him.... I have googled the doctor's name wondering if he has lived on earth under that name, but found nothing.... not that it matters, I am still looking forward to the experience.

But Leo's perspicacity in Googling the good doctor's name is an ominous sign of things to come. Soon, like the title character in one of those Poltergeist movies, he's baaaack ... asking about Thompson's claim that the Society for Psychical Research (SPR) verified the earthly existence of his main spirit guide.   

I wonder, would David be so kind as to produce an extract from the SPR report that refers to the finding of William Charles Cadwell. I am curious to know about what was found of this guides life and death and how it might have confirmed his existence.

Now, I've read Montague Keen's report on the Thompson seance he attended, and it says nothing about verifying the existence of William Cadwell. (You can read it, too. Right here.)  So it would appear that the SPR did not, in fact, check out William's identity.

On his next visit, Leo describes himself as "a rather dispirited Spiritualist."

When I wrote last time I was quite excited by David Thompson's remark about his main spirit friend and contact William Charles Cadwell who passed in 1897 and that this William Cadwell had been checked out  by the SPR and Monteque Keen and was found to exist. 

I had a look around and found that William Cadwell was according to David Thompson's website born in 1830.

I thought I would try to find out more and so looked at the Government Record Office Death Registrations (what used to be called the St Catherine Deaths Index) and I also looked at the Census records for 1841, 1851, 1861, 1871, 1881 and 1891.

There was no point looking for a birth registration because it was not until the second half of 1837 that such registration came into effect. Without a known place of birth it would be very difficult to establish the church where a person was baptised in 1830.

Anyhow, I have decided to let people on the Spiritualism Chatroom know what I found. 

In brief - NO William Charles CADWELL died in 1897, nor did a William Cadwell or a Charles William. 

No such person died the year before or after either.

In the 1841 census records there was NO William or William C Cadwell born 1830 anywhere in England. Because in the 1841 census records ages were rounded down (eg 43 would be recorded as 40, 47 as 45 etc) I next checked the 1851 census and found just 8 William Cadwell - NONE were born in 1830.

There was one William Charles Cadwell found in the 1851 census records - he however was born in 1843 in Chelsea. Sadley he died in the December Quarter of 1865 in Chelsea - so cannot be considered a possible for David Thompson's William Charles Cadwell.

The subsequent census records also do not show any William Cadwell born 1830 - so all such records fail to show this purported guide who plays such a vital role in David Thompson's physical mediumship and seances.

Feeling frustrated I took a look for Tmothy BOOTH the child guide who is said to play an important role in the seances. He is said (on the circle of the silver cord website) to have been born in 1899 and died in 1908.

Oh dear!!! There were NO Timothy Booth's born in 1899 anywhere in England. There were NO Timothy Booth's who died in 1908....

Are these personalities just alter-go's? Is David Thompson being duped by spirit entities? Is he too a fraud? ...

Once again I ask David Thompson to provide the Spiritualism Chatroom with the evidence found by the SPR and Montegue Keen that would refute the evidence of my research into this matter. Should I wait in hope of an early response or expect a deathly silence?

Someone named IceBlue repsonds thusly:

If william isn't who he says he is,how would this make david a fraud?If montegue keen found the info so can we,but iam sure david will enlighten us.

Hmm. Well, if William isn't who he says he is, then why should we think he's anything other than a persona created by David Thompson to fool people in the dark? As for Montague Keen, there is no reason (other than Thompson's assertion) to think that he found out anything about an earthly William Cadwell.

Eventually we hear from David Thompson again. He is quite above it all.

Oh! dear how people speculate and put on public forums there thoughts that are not always right.

So for the very last time for.

1. Monty Keen did a report that can been see on the website Zerdini published on these threads.

2. the report was also done with Guy Lyon Playfair who did the checks on William and found him, I will ask the lady who is a member of this site to put up the recent email she recieved from Guy Lyon Playfair regarding William and his exsistance.

3. Am I a materialization medium, to be honest judge for yourself or listen to others, up to you.

To be honest, when I joined SCR it was a great site with a lot of nice people, but now it seems to have turned into a bitchfest on everyone.

Please now feel free to say what you will about me and my mediumship and to be honest I dont really care, this will be my last post here.

So it seems the disgruntled medium is taking his baseball and going home. Prickly types, these mediums. I guess that's why they're called "sensitives." Rather than answer a straightforward question, Thompson spins excuses and then quits the group.

Leo will not let him off the hook quite so easily, though.

Well it was a pleasure  to see Mr Thompson give a reply to what I had written about William Charles Cadwell though I notice that he fails to mention young Timothy Booth claimed to have been born 1899 and died 1908 who also did not exist!

Let me say it again, and please do anyone on the list that is still in contact with DT pass this on, NO William Charles Cadwell died in 1897 as DT has claimed for a long time. 

There was indeed a William Caldwell [note the different spelling of his last name - MP] who died in 1899 aged 67 so born 1832/3 not 1830 and please note everyone he was not recorded as William CHARLES Cadwell and if that had been his name that is what the death record would have said!!!

Now let DT ask his so called guide who his parents were and whether he married and what his wife's name might have been.

And let him explain why we suddenly have  the name Guy Lyon Playfair appearing now as the source that found William Charles Cadwell and how this connects to his statement that it was the SPR and Montague Keen who found William Charles Cadwell.

As to Dt's comment: Oh! dear how people speculate and put on public forums there thoughts that are not always right. 

Firstly, let me respond by saying what I wrote was not speculation it was fact. Second what I wrote was not my thoughts it was cold hard evidence and it IS RIGHT.

By all means let the lady who has the email from Playfair put it up. All it can say is what I have already said above: a William Caldwell died in 1899 in the registration district of Leigh Vol 8c page137. Not William Charles Cadwell. Not 1897. Not born 1830.

So DT has a guide who doesn't know when he was born and doesn't know when he died. What else doesn't he know I wonder.

Again I say to DT what about young Timothy Booth?

Of course, DT has, having thrown in his spurious information, spat the dummy and run away.

I have not taken part in what he calls a bitchfest. I have merely stated the truth. If the truth causes DT a problem then there has to be something wrong.

Yes, indeed. Let's quote that last sentence again:

If the truth causes DT a problem then there has to be something wrong.

Now I suppose we might give David Thompson the benefit of the doubt and say that "Caldwell" is pretty close to "Cadwell," and 1832 is pretty close to 1830, and 1899 is pretty close to 1897. It's a stretch, though. Why couldn't "William" get the facts right? Was he wrong about his middle name, too? 

Then there's the total absence of Timothy from the records. Well, maybe he was a street urchin whose death went unrecorded. Maybe ...

But what about Thompson's claim that Montegue Keen verified William's existence? And his claim that Guy Lyon Playfair verified it, as well? I have not seen any evidence to support these assertions. The least Thompson could do is point us to a magazine or Web site that includes the relevant articles. (My Google search for "Guy Lyon Playfair" + "David Thompson" turned up nothing relevant - no indication that Playfair has written anything about Thompson at all.)

Most interesting of all was David Thompson's reaction to a few serious questions from an admirer.

He ran away!

Secrets of "A. Medium"

Darryn in comments pointed me to the complete online text of the rare old book Revelations of a Spirit Medium, by "A. Medium." The book, written by a phony 19th century medium, goes into detail about tricks in the seance room. Here are a few excerpts.

(In what follows, "A. Medium" is describing the early stages of his own career, but writing in the third person. I have broken up the material into shorter paragraphs for easier reading.)

He procured a flat, two-ounce druggists' bottle and filling it about one-fourth full of water, cut the heads off about one hundred parlor matches and dropped them in. When the composition was dissolved he poured off the water, saving it, and threw away the bits of pine left in the bottle. He now returned the brown fluid to the bottle and corked it. After labelling the bottle "Cough Medicine," he put it in his pocket and sought a dark closet to see how his "cough medicine" would work. Getting into a dark place he took the bottle from his pocket and was not [sic] disappointed to find that it was not at all luminous, and of course a failure. However, he thought he would smell of it and see if it would have passed for a cough mixture in odor as well as appearance. What was his surprise, on admitting a little air, in the effort to extract the cork, to have the bottle become a beautiful yellowish luminous shape. Ha! now he could furnish all the lights they wanted ...

The "medium" had learned a thing or two about this time about stealing some of the slack of the rope for future use, while being tied. By sitting well forward on his chair when the ends of the rope were made fast to the back rung, he could, by sliding back in his seat afterward have the use of as much slack rope as any ordinary, unselfish "medium" could wish. The coat falls close up to the back of the chair, thus hiding a move of that kind. When the wrists have been tied and are being drawn down to the knees, to the chair-legs or together at the back, one twist of the hand, and, consequently the two ends of the rope, and by a reverse twist, when the time arrives, you have all the slack you need, or you should go out of the business ...

As a matter of course, there are very few experts at tying and the gentleman who tied the "medium" on this particular evening was no exception to the rule, and before he had finished his undertaking to his satisfaction, the "medium" was as good as free. Before he reached his seat the tea-bell was violently ringing and the guitar sounding. Now a hand was thrust out at the opening and the fingers snapped. The trumpet was thrust out and an unintelligible sound made through it. One of the gentlemen strangers mistook the sound to be the word William and exclaimed.

"William, is that really you come to see your old father?"

"Yes," replied the horn, and the old gentleman stated it was the first time he had been able to get his son's name through a "medium."

Once more the "medium" made a noise through the horn that could be mistaken for Charles or Clarence or almost any name beginning with C, and again was it recognized as a son, this time of one of the lady strangers. She mistook the sound to be Clarence. The horn was dropped, and a communication written from Clarence to his mother. It proved satisfactory, and the "medium" concluded that was "tests" enough for the initial "seance." An examination was now made of the condition of things in the "cabinet," and the gentleman who did the tying stated that he was positive the ropes were in precisely the shape he had left them.

Mr. King [the purported spirit "control"] now requested that the room be made dark, as they desired to illuminate their hands. The lights were turned down and a screen put between it and the "cabinet." The "medium" brought forth his "cough medicine," and, after wrapping his handkerchief about it to conceal the shape of the bottle, gave it a dash up and down the front of the "cabinet." This light was different from the former ones [produced by matchsticks], being the size of a man's fist, while the first ones had been only small specks. The lights were the hit of the "seance," and drew forth many expressions of wonder and delight. Especially were the regular "sitters" delighted.

After showing the light three or four times, always in motion, he loosened up the handkerchief, making it stand away from the bottle on all sides, thus producing a light about the size of a human head. This he slowly pushed through the opening in the "cabinet" and allowed it to stop a few seconds and then he drew it back and put it away. The "sitters" now claimed that the last light was a human head and face, the features being distinguishable. It was set down as a case of etherialization, as they declared they could look right through it, and see the curtains behind it. One gentleman, a doctor, declared he could see the whole convolutions of the brain. Thus they helped out the show with their imaginations and made a reputation for the "medium." ...

Since his "sitters" had mistaken his handkerchief for a human face, he had an idea that he could provide something that would not require so much of the imagination to make it appear a face, and to that use was put the dollar received at his first public "seance." Repairing to a toy and novelty house he purchased one of those wire gauze masks, which would permit a light to shine through it. This he trimmed down until it could be put into the breast pocket, and yet enough remained to make quite a good spirit face. By putting this mask in front of the luminous handkerchief a luminous face and head was presented. It was bald of course, until he discovered that with a small piece of black cloth he could put hair on the gentleman.

That wire mask has been recognized by dozens of persons as fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, cousins, sweethearts, wives, husbands and various other relatives and friends. None but the "medium" knew that it was only a fifty-cent wire mask, hence none but the "medium" could enjoy the humor of the occasion. His fame rapidly spread ...

Grabbed from comments

Roslyn Walker, the British escape artist who has said he can duplicate David Thompson's act, left a comment on this thread. Since not everyone may have seen it, I'm posting it here.

It's clear that Roslyn is more skeptical about psi than I am (and as far as spoon-bending is concerned, I don't think magic tricks can account for the hundreds of PK parties hosted by Jack Houck). Be that as it may, I have no reason to doubt that Roslyn can escape from flex-cuffs. That's what the man does, after all.

Roslyn's Web site, which includes contact info, is here.

Also, commenter David Craig has pointed me to a discussion of escaping from flex-cuffs in this forum. (Scroll to "Physical Mediumship" and look for the entry on flex-cuffs. You have to join the forum to see the thread.) Escapologist "Wolflock," who has also said he can duplicate Thompson's feats, makes an appearance on the fifth page of the thread.

Anyway, here's Roslyn:

Hi,

Thought I'd drop by and introduce myself in person.

My name's Roslyn Walker and I'm an escape artist and variety performer.

I've been training in the art of escapes, sideshow and circus for the past 12 years now and I've had an interest in seances, mediums and psychics since I was a kid.

As a child I used to be fascinated mainly by the physical phenomena produced by psychics, and for years I used to rub that spoon wishing it would bend... it never did.

Until I started practicing the art of deception that is. Now I can make that spoon bend anyway I want... but its all just a trick.

Since learning how to bend a spoon using magicians techniques I've tried to discover other possible methods to duplicate what mediums claim they can do by getting in touch with spirits.

I've never publically exposed any medium or psychic in the past as being fake mainly because I never saw the harm in what they do... however, what really got my goat about Thompson is the fact that on his UK tour he's going to be demonstrating psychic surgery.

This I absolutly HATE!

Not only is he taking the gulible for a ride, but he's claiming he can heal them. I strongly believe this to be the most evil thing a person can do to another.

It disgusts me.

So I decided to make it known that I can free myself from zip ties AND resecure myself without the aid of spirits (although I am partial to a G & T now and then), trained assistants, fake chairs, fake zip ties, fake arms... I think you get the message.

Thompson claims to use borrowed chairs and all real stuff to hold him down, so I have done the same and I can still get out.

So, anyway, that's who I am and that's my position with the whole David Thompson thing. If he or anyone who knows him reads this I would be honoured to meet him when he comes to the UK, swap ideas and share escape techniques. In fact, it would be an honour to witness what he does and for him to see what I do.

Let me know, I'm contactable through the site.

Roslyn Walker