Critic’s “Top 15” claims by psychic detective Noreen Renier

[Resume]

So, maybe she's a clever charlatan, but again, I inquire whether you or anyone else here can name a skeptic who has been instrumental in helping the police close a case of this nature.

How many successful detectives do you imagine are credules just off the rhubarb truck?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

The great majority of Posner's article is devoted to challenging Renier's alleged hits, and speculating that she knew of a May 1995 report that the decedent (Norman Lewis) had told a handyman that he was despondent. But Posner never explains why, if that were the key to solving the case, the police didn't immediately solve it on their own, rather than calling in Renier two months later. Posner also is guilty of using 20-20 hindsight throughout his article; e.g.: "If Mr. Lewis and his truck were somewhere within the potential reach of the Williston police, where could they possibly be? In the middle of a densely wooded area? In an abandoned building? (Either, perhaps, if only a body was missing. But a truck?) Only one possibility even comes to mind -- submerged in a body of water." Yep, it was totally obvious where Lewis's body was -- that's why police called in Renier 16 months after an extensive search had turned up nothing.

Now, it is possible that Renier somehow picked up on non-paranormal clues that the police had overlooked.

Why didn't they have divers in the pits beforehand? I don't know, maybe it was the expense. Maybe they're as competent as the Keystone Kops. But they knew he had said he would drown himself in a pit, Reiner described a pit different to the one he was found in, and the police decided to search that one after looking at 30 or so and establishing that that particular one was "an obvious first impression . . . being the closest and the most accessible from the Lewis residence."

So, in the way that Reinier maybe provided an impetus for the gullible to spend money they otherwise wouldn't have spent? Sure, she solved the case. In the sense of actually providing any information the police didn't already have? No, not at all.

 

[Rodney]

How many successful detectives do you imagine are credules just off the rhubarb truck?

Very few, which is a major problem with Gary Posner's article. Throughout the article, he implies that Norman Lewis's disappearance was easy to solve, and yet the Williston police failed to do so.

 

[beren]

Very few, which is a major problem with Gary Posner's article. Throughout the article, he implies that Norman Lewis's disappearance was easy to solve, and yet the Williston police failed to do so.

You have never read a mystery novel, have you?

 

[Rodney]

Why didn't they have divers in the pits beforehand? I don't know, maybe it was the expense. Maybe they're as competent as the Keystone Kops. But they knew he had said he would drown himself in a pit, Reiner described a pit different to the one he was found in, and the police decided to search that one after looking at 30 or so and establishing that that particular one was "an obvious first impression . . . being the closest and the most accessible from the Lewis residence."

You should try applying some skepticism to Gary Posner's article, which is little more than wild speculation. For example, Posner asserts that Norman Lewis committed suicide, but that's not what Williston Police Chief Olin Slaughter believes:

"Several different roads led into the pit. 'On one road,' said Slaughter, 'You would come up over a rise, and the road turned right. If you were on the next level up, the road comes over a rise and it just goes off a shear drop. We're not sure how or why Norman ended up in the pit. But I think he probably got confused.'" See http://www.lawofficer.com/article/magazine-feature/psychic-detectives

Further, Posner's conclusion is downright bizarre: "By then, I had accumulated a number of newspaper articles and maps and had come to an unexpected and provocative conclusion: Norman Lewis' remains appeared to have been found not because the police had the Navy divers search the body of water best fitting Renier's psychic clues, but because they had the Navy search the wrong watery pit!"

So, in the way that Reinier maybe provided an impetus for the gullible to spend money they otherwise wouldn't have spent? Sure, she solved the case. In the sense of actually providing any information the police didn't already have? No, not at all.

I guess we can either believe Posner's speculations or believe Chief Slaughter: "I can only tell you what the facts are that led us to Norman. And I can also tell you that we wouldn't have found Norman Lewis without the help of Noreen."

 

[Loss Leader]

So, it was just a coincidence that the case was solved after Renier became involved?

A man who said he was going to kill himself in a river or a rock pit was found in a rock pit.

Believing that Renier in any way aided the investigation must take a near superhuman amount of credulity and willful deafness to facts.

 

[Sherlock]

Rodney skips the 15. And a new website launches.

You'll notice I asked Rodney to come up with credible reasons for the 15 claims I listed. Does he attempt 15? Ten? Five? No, he goes for zero and trys to bring up one of his own. I guess that failing to come up good support for her 'top 15' is a little too difficult. And for those who want more information on Renier you can now visit the brand-new (as of this evening) web site http://www.gpinquirygroup.com/gpinquirygroup/IndepthRenier.html
which includes some of the reasons Rodney and others may likely distance themselves from supporting Renier's credibility in the future.

 

[Rodney]

A man who said he was going to kill himself in a river or a rock pit was found in a rock pit.

That's Posner's interpretation of a two-page May 12/June 15, 1995 report, in which a handyman claimed to have "recently told [a client] that [Lewis] had told him that if [Lewis] were not able to take care of himself because of illness, he would find a river or pit rather than the [retired] sailors home. . . . Four days before his disappearance, [Lewis] told [the handyman] that if his health were failing, he would never be cared for by relatives or submit to the sailors home, that there were too many pits and canals. . . . [The handyman later] arrived at the police station . . . and he related [to Hewitt] the last conversation he had with Norman Lewis . . . indicating it [actually] took place approx. three weeks before his disappearance. He stated Norman seemed agitated and dissatisfied with . . . his life [including having] problems at the house with his girlfriend, relating she did not make him feel needed. . . . Told [handyman] not to get old, and made some reference to knowing every rock pit in the county. . . ."

However, the police chief, who -- unlike Posner -- knew Lewis believes that Lewis's death was an accident. In any event:

"Lewis had often been seen driving around town with fishing rods poking out over the tailgate of his truck. Fishing was his passion, and he frequented many spots near Williston and the outlying areas of rural Levy County.

"The initial search for Lewis," recalled Slaughter, "included all of his favorite haunts; borrow pits, phosphate mines and sinkholes. There were more possibilities than you could probably count, including the fact that he sometimes drove over to fish the ponds and springs in the Ocala National Forest. The initial search was extensive and included ground personnel, K-9 and air. We also notified sheriffs in adjacent counties to keep a look out for Norman and his truck."

So, even if it was known that Lewis had committed suicide, that would have been of no use in determining the location of his body.

Believing that Renier in any way aided the investigation must take a near superhuman amount of credulity and willful deafness to facts.

Almost as much as believing Posner's speculations.

 

[Sherlock]

I will let Gary Posner answer for himself as he knows this case far better than I. However is it a coincidence that Williston Police Chief Olin Slaughter and Noreen Renier were informal associates? In fact Noreen Renier actually had a very extended visit from the Orlando area to the town of Williston during the time being discussed. Williston at the time was down in population to about 1700 people. Anyone take the time to compare the locations for the residence of Police Chief Slaughter and that of Noreen Renier? Rodney --- check it out. Williston just isn't that big. There are reasons that sources who support paranormals may not be unbiased. Enough said.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

You should try applying some skepticism to Gary Posner's article[...]

I have done.

[...]which is little more than wild speculation.

No it isn't.

For example, Posner asserts that Norman Lewis committed suicide,[...]

No he doesn't. He points out that the police were in possession of testimony saying that he had said he was going to commit suicide if he thought his life was bad, as well as testimony that he believed his life to be bad.

[...] but that's not what Williston Police Chief Olin Slaughter believes:

"Several different roads led into the pit. 'On one road,' said Slaughter, 'You would come up over a rise, and the road turned right. If you were on the next level up, the road comes over a rise and it just goes off a shear drop. We're not sure how or why Norman ended up in the pit. But I think he probably got confused.'" See http://www.lawofficer.com/article/magazine-feature/psychic-detectives

Now, that is speculation with no evidence to support it.

And neither of these points is relevant to Rainer's "prediction", except in that the data to suggest his body would be found in a pit was in the hands of the police before she was involved.

Further, Posner's conclusion is downright bizarre: "By then, I had accumulated a number of newspaper articles and maps and had come to an unexpected and provocative conclusion: Norman Lewis' remains appeared to have been found not because the police had the Navy divers search the body of water best fitting Renier's psychic clues, but because they had the Navy search the wrong watery pit!"

It's only bizarre if you disregard the evidence which points to that conclusion. If you assess the evidence, however, it's obviously a reasonable conclusion to come to.

I guess we can either believe Posner's speculations or believe Chief Slaughter: "I can only tell you what the facts are that led us to Norman. And I can also tell you that we wouldn't have found Norman Lewis without the help of Noreen."

Or we can look at the evidence for ourselves and draw our own conclusions. If we do that, then it's obvious that Reiner didn't give the police any data that they didn't already have, that much of the data she gave didn't fit reality or had to be retrofitted to match, and that if she was instrumental in finding the body it was only by giving the gullible the impetus to spend money on brining in the Navy to search, rather than by providing any information which helped locate the body.

 

[Rodney]

No he doesn't. He points out that the police were in possession of testimony saying that he had said he was going to commit suicide if he thought his life was bad, as well as testimony that he believed his life to be bad.

Posner's claim is that "it was now apparent that as a result of his failing health and other personal problems (an early newspaper article had also described him as 'despondent' over financial matters), Lewis had threatened to commit suicide in a 'river' or a 'rock pit'."

However, the idea that Lewis had threatened to commit suicide in a river or rock pit is "apparent" only if an unnamed handyman's claim is credited. According to Investigator Brian Hewitt's May/June 1995 report, the handyman had only recently come forward to claim that Lewis had told him prior to Lewis' March 1994 disappearance that Lewis was despondent. So, why did it take the handyman more than a year to come forward with this information? Further, according to Hewitt's report, the handyman initially told a client that Lewis had conveyed this information "four days before his disappearance", but then changed the time to "approx. three weeks before his disappearance."

But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the handyman's belated account was accurate, and that the police believed him. How valuable was this information? Chief Slaughter observed: "The initial search for Lewis included all of his favorite haunts; borrow pits, phosphate mines and sinkholes. There were more possibilities than you could probably count, including the fact that he sometimes drove over to fish the ponds and springs in the Ocala National Forest. The initial search was extensive and included ground personnel, K-9 and air. We also notified sheriffs in adjacent counties to keep a look out for Norman and his truck." See http://www.lawofficer.com/article/magazine-feature/psychic-detectives

Did the handyman's information lead the police to the correct pit? Not at all. So, finally, after no further progress in the investigation, Investigator Hewitt recommended that the Lewis family enlist the aid of a psychic.

It's only bizarre if you disregard the evidence which points to that conclusion. If you assess the evidence, however, it's obviously a reasonable conclusion to come to.

What evidence might that be? Posner concedes that, even though the case was solved only after Renier became involved and the police fully acknowledge that fact, it was solved because "they [the police] had the Navy search the wrong watery pit!" If you turn the situation around and assume Posner were the psychic, rather than the skeptic, people here would be rolling in the aisles at his argument, which can be summarized thusly: "A fruitless missing person's investigation finally succeeded after a purported psychic gave the police information about his whereabouts. However, the psychic's information was actually worthless. Rather, the police misinterpreted what she said and searched the 'wrong pit' which, by an amazing coincidence, turned out to be the right pit."

 

[Loss Leader]

Did the handyman's information lead the police to the correct pit? Not at all.

Neither did Renier's. She told police the pit was east, it was not. She gave numbers that were, coincidentally, the numbers of local highways. The pit wasn't on those roads. She was wrong.

 

[Garrette]

For those interested, the idea of non-psychics finding people when the police could not has been discussed before, with examples given. Try this thread starting around post #63. Rodney, of course, dismisses the examples because the dragon in his garage becomes invisible, then incorporeal, then capable of flight.

 

[Rodney]

Neither did Renier's. She told police the pit was east, it was not. She gave numbers that were, coincidentally, the numbers of local highways. The pit wasn't on those roads. She was wrong.

Why did the Williston police order a search of the pit where Lewis' body was found?

 

[Rodney]

For those interested, the idea of non-psychics finding people when the police could not has been discussed before, with examples given. Try this thread starting around post #63. Rodney, of course, dismisses the examples because the dragon in his garage becomes invisible, then incorporeal, then capable of flight.

How is that thread relevant to the question that I posed on this thread? To refresh your memory: "But can you name a skeptic, such as Gary Posner or Joe Nickell, who has assisted the police in the manner that Noreen Renier did in the Williston Case?"

 

[Wolrab]

Why did the Williston police order a search of the pit where Lewis' body was found?

Why didn't they before? Sounds like general incompetence, to me. Hell, they had the handyman's testimony.

How is that thread relevant to the question that I posed on this thread? To refresh your memory: "But can you name a skeptic, such as Gary Posner or Joe Nickell, who has assisted the police in the manner that Noreen Renier did in the Williston Case?"

Sounds to me that Posner, Nickell, and myself help equally as much as Renier.

 

[Garrette]

How is that thread relevant to the question that I posed on this thread? To refresh your memory: "But can you name a skeptic, such as Gary Posner or Joe Nickell, who has assisted the police in the manner that Noreen Renier did in the Williston Case?"

Ah. So it has to be Posner or Nickell? If it doesn't have to be them, then who is acceptable?

I find it difficult to believe that you do not see your shifting goalposts here. The link is exactly relevant to the thread, regardless if you think it is not relevant to your question, because it shows examples of people finding people that the police could not and doing so without using psychic abilities. The fact you do not care to admit that does exactly nothing to detract from it.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Posner's claim is that "it was now apparent that as a result of his failing health and other personal problems (an early newspaper article had also described him as 'despondent' over financial matters), Lewis had threatened to commit suicide in a 'river' or a 'rock pit'."

However, the idea that Lewis had threatened to commit suicide in a river or rock pit is "apparent" only if an unnamed handyman's claim is credited. According to Investigator Brian Hewitt's May/June 1995 report, the handyman had only recently come forward to claim that Lewis had told him prior to Lewis' March 1994 disappearance that Lewis was despondent. So, why did it take the handyman more than a year to come forward with this information? Further, according to Hewitt's report, the handyman initially told a client that Lewis had conveyed this information "four days before his disappearance", but then changed the time to "approx. three weeks before his disappearance."

But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the handyman's belated account was accurate, and that the police believed him. How valuable was this information? Chief Slaughter observed: "The initial search for Lewis included all of his favorite haunts; borrow pits, phosphate mines and sinkholes. There were more possibilities than you could probably count, including the fact that he sometimes drove over to fish the ponds and springs in the Ocala National Forest. The initial search was extensive and included ground personnel, K-9 and air. We also notified sheriffs in adjacent counties to keep a look out for Norman and his truck." See http://www.lawofficer.com/article/magazine-feature/psychic-detectives

Did the handyman's information lead the police to the correct pit? Not at all. So, finally, after no further progress in the investigation, Investigator Hewitt recommended that the Lewis family enlist the aid of a psychic.

None of that counters the statements that I made. Posner did not "assert that Norman Lewis committed suicide", and Reiner didn't provide any evidence the police weren't already in possession of. How reliable a witness the handyman was or was not is entirely irrelevant to either of those statements.

What evidence might that be?

The evidence outlined in the article.

Posner concedes that, even though the case was solved only after Renier became involved and the police fully acknowledge that fact, it was solved because "they [the police] had the Navy search the wrong watery pit!" If you turn the situation around and assume Posner were the psychic, rather than the skeptic, people here would be rolling in the aisles at his argument, which can be summarized thusly: "A fruitless missing person's investigation finally succeeded after a purported psychic gave the police information about his whereabouts. However, the psychic's information was actually worthless. Rather, the police misinterpreted what she said and searched the 'wrong pit' which, by an amazing coincidence, turned out to be the right pit."

Not if there was evidence backing it up, they wouldn't.

 

[Rodney]

Ah. So it has to be Posner or Nickell? If it doesn't have to be them, then who is acceptable?

Any skeptic would be fine.

I find it difficult to believe that you do not see your shifting goalposts here. The link is exactly relevant to the thread, regardless if you think it is not relevant to your question, because it shows examples of people finding people that the police could not and doing so without using psychic abilities. The fact you do not care to admit that does exactly nothing to detract from it.

My point is that police generally do a good job of exploring all realistic possibilities, so it is unusual for assistance to be provided by someone who does not have inside knowledge regarding the case.

 

[Garrette]

Any skeptic would be fine.


My point is that police generally do a good job of exploring all realistic possibilities, so it is unusual for assistance to be provided by someone who does not have inside knowledge regarding the case.

And we have shown that, more than once. Your insistence that it be a skeptic is ludicrous. Perhaps they were. Perhaps they weren't. The point is that those people we have shown to have found missing people have actually been proven to have done so.

The best you can come up with your psychics is that they gave statements which can be retrofitted.