Sylvia Browne useless again: Erica Smith

Questioninggeller

Illuminator
Q
Joined
May 11, 2002
Messages
3,048
A girl goes missing and is found dead in 2002. In 2004, the family turns to Sylvia Browne for answers who gives the name of an alleged murderer. Then the family's attempts to track down the killer takes a turn in 2006, something Browne failed to predict and which would have been very useful for the search. Then after seven years the case remains unsolved.

A little background:
TITLE: Briefs
PAPER: Washington Post
DATE: October 28, 2004 Thursday
SECTION: Loudoun Extra; T10
LENGTH: 815 words

...
A silent auction and raffle raised almost $7,000 Saturday for the reward fund for information about Erica Heather Smith's killer.

Smith, 14, left her family's Ashburn townhouse July 29, 2002, and never returned. Her body was found 11 days later in a shallow grave in Beaumeade Corporate Park near Loudoun County Parkway. More than two years later, Loudoun County sheriff's detectives say they are still tracking down leads and conducting interviews and remain convinced that a break in the case is inevitable.
...
Click to expand...

Full: Washington Post

Without any answers the parents turn to Sylvia Browne (partial transcript of the show):

TITLE: Sylvia Browne: Celebrating 2,500 Shows; Review of past shows with psychic Sylvia Browne; Browne answers audience members' questions about events and loved ones
DATE: November 24, 2004 Wednesday
SHOW: The Montel Williams Show 5:00 PM EST SYND
LENGTH: 7056 words
HOST: Montel Williams
EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS: Montel Williams, Diane Rappoport


...
WILLIAMS: Well, I want you to take a look at how our next guests describes their ordeal. Take a look at this.

(Excerpts from video)

PAMELA (Daughter's Murder Remains Unsolved): On July the 29th, my daughter, Erica Heather Smith, was 14 years old. She left the home telling her brother that she was going to go to visit a friend, but she never made it to the friend's house. Eleven days later, her body was found in a shallow grave. This is very hard.

WILLIAM (Daughter Was Mysteriously Killed In 2002): We know that we can't bring her back. We truly know this. And it's just so unfair that someone would be this evil to such a beautiful child and such a beautiful person, and still just go on with their lives as if her life was not important. We just pray to God each and every day that whoever this evil savage was or evil person was will have a change of heart and turn themselves in, just do the right thing in the name of God.

PAMELA: I come into her room, and then I hear her voice tell me, `Mommy, please be strong. Don't cry no more. I'm OK.' In my heart and in my soul, I will fight until the day I die for justice for Erica.

(End of excerpts)

WILLIAMS: Please welcome Erica's parents, Pamela and William, to the show.

Pamela, where does the investigation stand now? This was another example, though, right, where your dau--first they called her a runaway, did they not, for a bit?

PAMELA: Yes, they did.

WILLIAMS: And she--at the time of her missing, she was how old? Thir...

PAMELA: Fourteen.

WILLIAMS: Fourteen.

PAMELA: She had just turned 14. They basically just assumed she ran away. And even though that was--we told them that was totally against her characteristic, she had no reason to run away. She didn't take any clothes. She didn't take any money, and she also said that she was going to be right back. She was going to her friend's house, and she would be right back.

WILLIAM: Right.

WILLIAMS: And they found her how far away from the home?

PAMELA: I guess it was about...

WILLIAM: Approximately three miles away from our home.

PAMELA: ...three miles.

WILLIAM: And...

WILLIAMS: Is there any way this is going to be solved?

SYLVIA BROWNE: Yeah. The--the guy's name who did this is...(censored by network).

PAMELA: Mm-hmm.

WILLIAMS: And is this somebody who lives in the community, lives in the area?

SYLVIA BROWNE: Yeah, lives in the community.

WILLIAMS: And if the police pursue that name, they'll find him.

SYLVIA BROWNE: Do you know anybody by the name of...(censored by network)?

WILLIAM: (Shakes head)

PAMELA: No.

WILLIAMS: Just look in the area. We have to bleep--we'll bleep that off the show.

Let me take a little break. We'll be back right after this.
...
Click to expand...

Full transcript/show at Source

Since that show and something Browne didn't predict:

TITLE: New Pain For Family Of Slain Schoolgirl
PAPER: Washington Post
DATE: May 28, 2006
BY LINE: Candace Rondeaux

It has been four years since Erica Heather Smith was killed after disappearing from her Ashburn home. If she were alive today, she would be graduating from Stone Bridge High School next month.

But the 14-year-old girl's slaying is unsolved, long after her body was found in a shallow grave in a patch of woods near Beaumeade Corporate Park, and Erica's parents are holding out hope that her killer will be found.

"We have to stand up and be Erica's voice. No matter how tired we are or depressed we are, we have to keep speaking up for her," said her father, William Smith.

Last week, Smith felt compelled to speak up again for his slain daughter when Loudoun County authorities charged a former family acquaintance with embezzling money from a reward fund that he had established to help solve Erica's killing.
...
Click to expand...

Full: Washington Post (He was convicted that following year. For details click here.)

After seven years, the murder is still unsolved:

TITLE: TV Show to Feature Unsolved Loudoun Case
PAPER: The Washington Post
DATE: February 26, 2009 Thursday
SECTION: EXTRAS; Pg. LZ02
LENGTH: 579 words

The unsolved slaying of Erica Heather Smith will be featured Saturday on the television show "America's Most Wanted."

Erica disappeared July 29, 2002, and her body was located 10 days later in a wooded area in the Beaumeade Corporate Park in Ashburn. She was 14.

Loudoun County sheriff's officials said this week that they continue to gather information and investigate leads surrounding the disappearance and slaying.
...
Click to expand...

Full: Washington Post


More case information from America's Most Wanted profile of Erica Heather Smith with broadcast dates.
 
Stop the presses! Sylvia Browne has made yet another(yawn)wrong prediction.
This is so 2005. Isn't she dead yet?
 
Brattus said:
Stop the presses! Sylvia Browne has made yet another(yawn)wrong prediction.
This is so 2005. Isn't she dead yet?
Click to expand...

We've had this discussion many times before but since you keep asking, I guess I'll keep answering you. I could do this on autopilot by now.

Then, you aren't the only one. A non-skeptic friend that I have in the flesh is completely puzzled as to why I'm so passionate about Sylvia Browne and has been laughing at me or irritably asking me when I will "Finally stop with Sylvia Browne already!" for about the past 3 years. (And, no, I do not pester her about it or talk to her about it at all. I've told her about my involvement with the site and told her why it is important to me but stopped there and haven't much brought up the subject when we are together or ranted about Browne to her or anything like that. She rolls her eyes at me and smirks whenever she sees me logging onto the JREF, finds out I've been at work researching a case or sees my Browne books at home. Comments like "I can't believe you spent all of that summer researching Browne!" and "I can't believe you wrote 'Please check out StopSylvia.com before you consider getting a reading with Sylvia or her son' in a library book!" are a plenty. I once did convince another friend it was a worthy cause...so maybe she'll eventually crack, too. Though I doubt it.)

StopSylvia.com defense mode- set!

1) She is still active, is still working.

2) Someone is buying what she is selling.

3) She is still making money.

4) She is the only psychic that has this wealth of material available on her stretching back so many years- books, TV shows, radio shows, personal appearances, etc.- and is the only psychic that has done missing persons/murder/lost body/rape/burglarly cases of which there is a record.

If John Edward did readings that could be followed up on and of which there was a database on Lexis Nexis, I'd certainly devote my time to debunking him. Sadly, all his readings are completely unverifiable, one way or the other, and there are no transcripts on him. Same for all other famous working psychics. Because I cannot do research work on Edward or anyone else, I don't. My research skills and knowledge of newspaper databases (I once seriously considered becoming a reporter and nearly studied journalism in college before it didn't work out and I thought better of it) is useless when it comes to him or anyone else. Because I can do work on Browne, I do.

5) The very list speaks volumes. You hear of one case where she just wasn't any help and the crime was never solved, you think "So what?" or "She can't get it right all the time" or "It's still unknown whether she was right or wrong". You see dozens of cases where she was useless or more than a 100 where she was no help, it makes a big statement.

6) She needs to be punished for what she has done. If she hindered a police investigation 14 years ago and has long since forgotten about it herself, she needs to be held accountable for it. At least psychologically- look at all the victims' families that have come forward when Robert put up an article on Browne! Even if their meeting with Browne was years ago! They want to tell their side of the story and Robert has given them an unexpected opportunity to do so and a lot have jumped on it.
 
Last edited:
Isn't it amazing how human beings are all similar? They think in exactly the same ways.

Brattus has never met my friend Jean- not as far as I know- and he says the exact same things she does. A lot of people say the exact same things. The objections to SS.com are always exactly the same.

"Aren't there bigger problems in the world than this?"

"Anyone is this dumb, they deserve to be scammed!" (A variation: "There is nothing you can do to help someone who just isn't smart. You can't save an idiot from being parted from his money. It's out of your control because it will always happen.")

"Hasn't she been debunked enough already?"

"Hey, what's the harm?"

"Why is it your affair?"

"Who cares about something like this?"

"It's their time and money, they can do with it what they like"

"Come on, does anyone even take this seriously? It's just for fun"

"Wouldn't your time and energy be better spent elsewhere?"

and

"Aren't you giving her more attention?"

From people of all races, religions or lack of, nationalities, ethnicities, both genders, all ages, all sexual orientations and social classes, I hear the same 10 or 15 things over and over again. Men, women, blacks, whites, Asians, Latinos, gay people, straight people, young people, old people, Americans, Europeans, educated people, uneducated people. The same arguments! Sometimes the same objections from people who don't believe in psychics as from the people who do!!

Someone explain this to me!

Robert, QG- do you have any light to shed on the matter? What is it? Cynicism? Apathy? Lack of compassion? A grain of truth to these arguments?

My guess: we are very much alike as a species and have the same good ideas and the same bad ideas and the same neutral ideas.
 
Last edited:
And "live and let live." That's another one. Have you noticed that the people who think it's a waste of time are the ones who don't believe she's psychic in the first place?

If I have evidence that someone is de-frauding someone else, I feel a moral obligation to get that information out there. I think "live and let live" is wrong, and I'm not going to stand by and do nothing if I can help.

It's sad, though. Why do people keep reading her books, attending lectures, scheduling readings? You know why? Because until they've had a reading with her, even if it's just a chance to ask a question at a lecture, they are convinced she's just being picked on unfairly, or they make excuses for her or accept the excuses she herself tries to use. They like her books, she seemed accurate on Montel, and she seems sincere to them. Once they have a reading or the chance to ask her a psychic question and they experience, in stunned disbelief, an answer that is completely off the mark, that's the end of it.

Sadly, it seems some people will not be convinced until they experience it for themselves. And what's so infuriating is that they will have made her $850 richer, or the price of the lecture, or worse yet, $1000 for a salon.

I've known wealthy people who have attended more than one salon, hoping that at the next one she'll be more accurate!

On the other hand, Robert has had so many great stories of people who found his web site and saved themselves a great deal of money by reading through the articles. It's such a great feeling to know you've helped keep someone from wasting their money or receiving potentially damaging advice, and an even greater feeling that you've kept someone like Browne from getting that much richer.
 
What ExMinister said! :)

This doesn't only extend to psychics, though. I've noticed people have this blame-the-victim-cynical-apathy-that-helps-the-criminal in a lot of areas in life. Why are people so comfortable with crime by proxy? Or allowing the criminal to scam/steal/lie? Why are people so ok with doing nothing or standing aside?

They would never, ever, ever give a pass to someone breaking into someone's house or car or store or holding someone at gunpoint for money- so why do they shrug at someone practically stealing?! What is this distinction people draw between unquestionable crime and Stuff That Is Pretty Much Theft?

Someone finds valuables that don't belong to them and they don't return them? "It's that other person's fault they lost it!". "It's not stealing!". "I have no obligation to try to find this person". "That guy should have kept a better eye on his things!". "Heck, I've lost so many things and people didn't give them back, I kind of have something owed to me". "I need the money! And it came to me!".

People defend other people who do this, even if they don't know them. :confused: You have a discussion about this and people instantly side with the person who behaved dishonestly! "Aunt Yvonne's godson/Your friend's boyfriend/Your girlfriend's brother found a wallet and didn't return it? Well, good for him! Nah, he's not a thief! How can you say that about him?"

Basically grown adults saying "Finders keepers!" :confused:

And, again, this goes across cultures, races, ages, social classes, nationalities, orientations, etc. I once returned a wallet I found in a library and my friend who was the same age as I was thought I was crazy, my sister who is younger than me thought I should have kept it and my parents said I could have kept it and a friend from another country shrugged and said I might have kept it if someone was dumb enough to lose it. The same exact line of reasoning, same line of argument, same train of thought.

Same situation for things like a cashier giving you too much change back, someone forgetting to charge you, a company accidentally selling things at the wrong price, someone making some sort of screw up in your favor, etc.

People who would never forgive theft instantly forgive scamming, theft by opportunity and taking advantage.
 
Last edited:
EMM, every once in awhile I hear the same comments you hear, and I agree it's strange. It seems so obvious to me why it's important. Why is it not obvious to others? I don't have any insight, I'm afraid. I don't want to say other people are being self-centered, short-sighted or condescending by making those types of comments (they deserve to be scammed if they're so stupid, what's the harm, it's their money, it's all in fun, as if it's just some silly parlor game that can't hurt anybody), but in a way it strikes me that way. It's a serious misunderstanding and under-estimation of the type of damage that can be done by people like Browne, at the very least. It seems a lot of people just haven't thought it through very well.

ETA: I posted this at the same time you posted your last comment! I agree. Very strange. And wrong.
 
Last edited:
Very well said! Mostly people just don't understand the damage psychics can do. If they did, they wouldn't shrug it off. And they are being self-centered and condescending and short-sighted. That's exactly it.

The human need to feel superior to others must play a role here. Maybe also natural human selfishness. And natural lack of a certain empathy. Every single human being has done something smug and selfish in their life- it's part of our makeup (it's also part of our makeup to be kind, selfless and empathetic and often very much so, which is something I fear I will simply never understand).

Also applying yourself (and your standards, your ideas and what you find obvious) to everyone else, which we all do, in many life situations. "I would never go to a psychic and therefore I can't imagine anyone else ever doing it." Basically assuming that everyone on Earth is more or less like you.

Heck, we have all been guilty of that. Even in a situation like, say, someone not understanding why their house guests would be offended at the host wanting them to take their shoes off in his/her home. "Gee, I'd take my shoes off! It's only common decency!" and not allowing for someone else's feelings, cultural differences, etc.
 
Last edited:
ExMinister said:
And "live and let live." That's another one.
Click to expand...

And that doesn't extend to just psychics, either.

When I was 17 going on 18 years old and at summer camp, I saw a boy of about 13 or 12 bullying a girl of 11 and decided to step in.

A guy of 18 or 17 saw me and not only didn't he rush to help me or even do nothing, he rolled his eyes at me and dismissively said "Hey Red, leave them alone! Let them fight it out themselves. It's not your business and you should live and let live."

You can only throw up your hands at something like that.
 
Last edited:
EeneyMinnieMoe said:
And that doesn't extend to just psychics, either.

When I was 17 going on 18 years old and at summer camp, I saw a boy of about 13 or 12 bullying a girl of 11 and decided to step in.

A guy of 18 or 17 saw me and not only didn't he rush to help me or even do nothing, he rolled his eyes at me and dismissively said "Hey Red, leave them alone! Let them fight it out themselves. It's not your business and you should live and let live."

You can only throw up your hands at something like that.
Click to expand...


Yeah, that is one of my least favorites. Live and let live, it's none of your business.

So I do agree.

If I can help, then I feel that it IS my business. I would feel guilty to stand by and watch something wrong happen without at least trying to help.

There are times when it IS none of my business. But I'm just talking about the sense of responsibility that is there when you know someone is being hurt, you know you CAN help, and if you don't say or do anything, it isn't going to stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom