Legal Mysteries - The Law On The Door Of Paranormal Activity
Author: LawSphereX
Category: General Law
Published:
Updated:
LEGAL MYSTERIES: THE LAW ON THE DOOR OF
PARANORMAL ACTIVITY
Aysha Khatoon, Integral university, Lucknow Mohd Somaan, Integral University, Lucknow
ABSTRACT
The legal field has been linked to paranormal beliefs through great development: through the expansion and compression of time. Historically, witch trials of the 16th or early 17th centuries were harsh ones, often with people accused of being witch or sorcerer. Religion played a large part in the legal system, and many were severely punished if there was thought to have been supernatural practice attributed. As a result of popularization of Spiritualist movement, the development of consumer protection laws in the context of fraud associated with spiritual claims and interest in paranormal research began in the 19th century. In modern cases, we are dealing usually with disclosure laws particularly in real estate cases where, for example, properties with ‘haunted’ or stigmatized histories can hurt property value. Stambovsky illustrates such an example. There are no such statutes in other jurisdictions except for physical defect and Ackley have established those precedents which require such disclosure. In legal cases where there are paranormal claims, practitioners argue that their activity is part of their spirituality, freedom of religion and expression are both important. Still, courts tip the scales on these rights in favor of the protection of fraud prevention, needing proof of harm or being deceived. When the legal field reacts to the societal move to rely on evidence-based law (rejection of superstition and doctrinal religious doctrine as a basis for public policy) it has also moved its reaction of paranormal claims from a superstition and doctrinal religious doctrine (and faith) based position to a position in law based on the protection of consumer rights and disclosure, and protection of individual rights. Keywords: Historical Relations, Paranormal, Spiritualist, Ghostbusters, Exorcist, Jurisdictions, Amendment.
Historical Background This is when the ancient superstitions become the basis of the historical relation between the law and the paranormal activity, until they obtain a formal legal framework dealing with supernatural events. Both legal and religious practices were influenced by the fear of ghosts, spirits and witches, an area in which society classically feared. As an example, during the medieval period one could find numerous charges of witch trials and sorcery, and the laws themselves would generally be the reflection of these beliefs1. Witchcraft and sorcery were generally believed in the Europe and North America during those times and people accused of witchcraft were prosecuted, tortured and killed. These trials were often based on spectral evidence: It reported that witnesses claimed to have seen apparitions or supernatural messages. Evidence of the supernatural was considered legitimate in the legal system of the time and the accused were not only punished but very severely punished. Religion determined the workings of the legal system in medieval Europe, and so when a claim couldn’t be validated as to religious law it was very easily charged as blasphemous or heretical. The Church had great power over what was acceptable to believe and practice and this meant should you see speak to the dead, or consult the leaves of a Yew tree, or ‘see into the future’, you could be accused of witchcraft. The first would have been that the Inquisition spent a great deal of time prosecuting those who were rumored to practice paranormal practices or to believe ‘heretical’ beliefs. The Spiritualist movement was popular in the 19th century and the Western countries were very popular. As with Spiritualism, communication with the dead was encouraged, through séances, mediums and other supernatural practices2. This was a controversial movement most of the time, and people were accused of psychic fraud if it was ever possible that others were being deceived by people who claimed the ability to communicate with the spirit world3. The early 20th century saw the start of the systematic laws about psychic fraud that form a base for fraud/consumer protection laws today. Waxing interest in paranormal research of the sort, the study of phenomena such as ESP (extra sensory perception) and telekinesis through use of the
1 Salem Still making history, SALEM WITCH TRAILS OF 1692, (Nov. 09, 2024, 4:44 PM),
https://www.salem.org/salem-witch-trials/.
2 The Rise of Spiritualism in 19th Century America, HISTORY IS NOW MAGAZINE, (Oct. 18, 2021),
https://www.historyisnowmagazine.com/blog/2021/10/18/the-rise-of-spiritualism-in-19th-century-america.
3 Susan Krysiak, Victorian Spiritualism, Cape May magazine, (Nov. 09, 2024, 5:08 PM),
https://www.capemaymag.com/arts-and-entertainment/victorian-vignette/victorian-spiritualism/.
methods of parapsychology as an academic discipline were pursued during the 20th Century. At least scientifically inconclusive, Parapsychology's influence on public attitudes towards the paranormal. Modern courts, at least those that find fault with paranormal claims, usually call for scientifically validated evidence, however. Yet when people still claim they have psychic abilities, as evidentiary and legal standards imposed on them boil down to fraud, courts determine how such cases are handled4. Recently, disclosure laws have been produced through legal cases of "haunted" properties. In Stambovsky v. Ackley (1995). For example, Ackley (1991), or the “Ghostbusters” ruling. Helen Ackley had long advertised her house as haunted, and this triggered a contract rescission suit brought by the property's later buyer, Jeffrey Stambovsky5. His purchase agreement was allowed to be rescinded, and established a real estate law precedent whereby stigmatized properties had to be disclosed in full. Nowadays, the legal system takes individual systems of belief into account and protects everyone from the exploitation. The validity of paranormal beliefs, however, is not the focus of modern legal frameworks which instead concentrate on fraud and maintaining the public safety6. For example, bad faith use of paranormal skills for profit is subject to consumer protection laws that prohibit exploitation and put the burden of proof on the claimant, not the state. Though the legal field’s view on the paranormal has evolved from punitive witch hunts and strict heresy laws to the current emphasis on fraud prevention, property disclosures, and consumer protection, many contentious issues related to standing arise intermittently. This is typical of a larger social trend that has been toward law based on evidence rather than superstition and the fear of the unknown, and in favor of individual rights7. Fraud and Misrepresentation Unfortunately, they can be used in fraud cases when those people claiming to have psychic abilities or paranormal knowledge don’t have any. Such as, someone claiming to communicate with spirits or the future, charging fees (large) depending on their claims. In such cases, if
4 S.E. Porter, The Complicated-Yet Inspiring!- History of Spiritualism in America, (Feb. 16, 2024),
https://lithub.com/the-complicated-yet-inspiring-history-of-spiritualism-in-america/.
5 Ben Gazur, 10 Weird Court Cases Featuring Supernatural Beings, LISTVERSE, (Sep. 25, 2023),
https://listverse.com/2023/09/25/10-court-cases-featuring-supernatural-beings/. 6 Stambovsky v. Ackley, Briefs Pro, (Nov. 01, 2024, 5:33 PM), https://briefspro.com/casebrief/stambovsky-vackley/. 7 Stambovsky v. Ackley, Legal Dictionary, (Nov. 01, 2024, 5:45 PM), https://legaldictionary.net/stambovsky-vackley/.
proven deceptive, fraud applies because courts may see these claims as exploiting the weak to take advantage of them8. The fortune tellers9, mediums, and psychics may ask their high paying customers large fees for helping their clients with either the dead, or for telling what lies ahead10. Fraudulent misrepresentation courts may consider this in cases where these practitioners specifically promise something and in cases where they prey on vulnerable people — people grieving or in distress. For instance, a psychic can suggest that a client still pay for sessions to ‘remove a curse’ or ‘connect with a loved one’ in order to profit from the emotional naivety of a client11. For some self-proclaimed spiritual healing or exorcist, they say they heal people’s physical illness, mental illness or ‘demonic possession’ with ‘supernatural’ means. In most cases these are unskilled, untrained medical or psychological healers, who can potentially do a lot of harm or let medical care not do what it needs to in order to heal. Courts normally treat this as fraud and unless the fraud causes physical injury, or great financial loss, or severe mental distress to the client, courts will reduce civil awards. If the healer poses as medical professional courts have recourse to medical fraud laws or consumer protection laws. There are some individuals or businesses that market services to cleanse a 'haunted' property, or to exorcise suspected evil spirits. That often means demanding big sums from property owners, for what could be called a ‘paranormal service.’ If these services are advertised as guaranteed solutions to supernatural problems courts may find that claims of ghost removal are misrepresentation or fraud, as there is no scientific support for such services. In addition, property owners might be left with nothing to show after these services, and will feel misled and will seek legal recourse12. Fraud claims can occur in real estate field in regards to the seller being untruthful about the property as being haunted or otherwise free from paranormal disturbances in order to sweeten the pot. Others may purposely fail to mention paranormal rumors or genocide if their
8 SPIRITUALIST AND PHYCHIC FRAUD LITIGATION, INVESTIGATION COUNCIL Fraud Recovery
Lawyers, (Nov. 01, 2024, 6:12 PM), https://investigationcounsel.com/fraud-recovery-litigation/spiritualist-andpsychic-fraud-litigation/.
9 Christopher Coble, Is Fortune Telling Illegal, FindLaw, (Mar. 21, 2019),
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/is-fortune-telling-illegal/. 10 Jason Cheung, The Legal Fortunes of Psychics and Fortune Tellers, Legal Match, (Nov. 09, 2024, 5:54 PM), https://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2018/05/22/the-legal-fortunes-of-psychics-and-fortune-tellers/.
11 Susannah Crockford, The Religion Factor, University of Groningen, (Dec. 03, 2018),
https://www.rug.nl/research/centre-for-religious-studies/research-centres/centre-religion-conflictglobalization/blog/when-is-a-psychic-or-a-witch-a-fraud-03-12-2018?lang=en.
12 George Khoury, Can Faith Healers Face Criminal Charges, FindLaw, (Mar. 21, 2019),
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/can-faith-healers-face-criminal-charges/.
knowledge of a property's haunted or genocide history13. This is fraud grounds in areas where paranormal stigmatization has an effect on property values or psychological comfort. Cases like Stambovsky v. Ackley, in those instances, Ackley have created legal precedents that require full disclosure. Some psychics or astrologers claim that they can intuit the direction of financial markets or investment opportunities, and some even convince clients to passively invest in the amounts they promise to make them rich — or at least get rich. If the investments fail, or the money vanishes, these people may be charged with fraud. They are treated in much the same manner as other types of investment fraud, but the factor of paranormal claims really adds to the in violation of trust in supernatural powers as well. Now, of course, social media makes it easy to quickly connect with a very wide audience through psychics and paranormal 'experts'. However, there are cases where clairvoyant people or those who claim to be spiritual begin to reference their connection to the supernatural, claiming to be able to tap into your personal information or giving advice to help them lead a better life and sell special products to them, or expect followers to donate or pay for personalized readings14. Fraud cases can arise if their followers feel cheated or think they were cheated intentionally. When the promoter hunts for money through unsubstantiated claims, pursed online scams are likely an act of cyber fraud and consumer protection as well. Consumer protection laws that forbid false advertising and deceptive business practices, however, lie behind many of the prosecutions of paranormal fraud. For example, if a psychic or healer seeks to advertise services the impossibility to substantiate, or promises results, then the psychic or healer may be violating consumer protection laws15. Property Law Some jurisdictions have an expectation that sellers disclose some of the property’s nonphysical conditions such as a haunted property or a stigmatizing event. That can include prior deaths, 13 Jann Bellamy, Reiki: Fraudulent Misrepresentation- Revisited, Science-Based Medicine, (Sep. 28, 2017), https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/reiki-fraudulent-misrepresentation-revisited/. 14 Mildred A. Lewis, Fraudulent Online Psychic Mediums: Perusing Legal Action For Fraud And Misleading Practices, LawfulFinder, (Nov. 2024), https://lawfulfinder.com/fraudulent-online-psychic-mediums-pursuinglegal-action-for-fraud-and-misleading-practices/. 15 Mildred A. Lewis, Fraudulent Online Psychic Hotlines: Perusing Legal Action For Fraud And Misleading Practices, LawfulFinder, (Nov. 2024), https://lawfulfinder.com/fraudulent-online-psychic-hotlines-pursuinglegal-action-for-fraud-and-misleading-services/.
even violent ones, that might make a property unmarketable or undesirable. Stambovsky v. Ackley (1991)16 This landmark New York case is one of the most famous haunted house cases; Ackley (1991). Her name, in fact, is Helen Ackley, who has often advertised her house as haunted and allowed it to be featured in -- shall we say -- the newspapers. Jeffrey Stambovsky bought the home and had no idea it was haunted when he did. Later, Stambovsky argued that the “haunted” reputation of the house had lowered its value17. The court agreed with Stambovsky, ruling that Ackley owed him a duty to disclose his promotion of the haunting and that he should be able to break the purchasing agreement. The disclosure of some stigmatized conditions in this case further set a precedent under real estate law18. Though most states have no such laws, some jurisdictions do have specific 'stigmatized property' laws that specify what sellers must disclose. The laws are extremely different: while some require sellers to disclose paranormal or stigmatizing info, others do not require anything beyond physical defects19. Milliken v. Jacono (2012)20 A couple decided to buy a home and find out it was a notorious murder-suicide site. When they
tried to back out of the sale, the court found Pennsylvania law did not require the disclosure of a murder or suicide on the property. Psychological stigmas were not a material defect as defined in Pennsylvania property law the court ruled, buyers were not required to know histories. Buyers may also rest a duty on themselves to examine the condition of the property in question if it is related to the stigmata or paranormal clamors. In most, if not all, cases, it also imposes a duty that prevents a buyer from claiming they were misled if they didn't investigate their
16 Stambovsky v. Ackley (1991).
17 Stambovsky v. Ackley, Briefs Pro, (Nov. 01, 2024, 5:33 PM), https://briefspro.com/casebrief/stambovsky-vackley/. 18 Stambovsky v. Ackley, Legal Dictionary, (Nov. 01, 2024, 5:45 PM), https://legaldictionary.net/stambovsky-vackley/.
19 Ben Gazur, 10 Weird Court Cases Featuring Supernatural Beings, LISTVERSE, (Sep. 25, 2023),
https://listverse.com/2023/09/25/10-court-cases-featuring-supernatural-beings/.
20 Milliken v. Jacono (2012).
own21. Reed v. King (1983)22 A buyer in California sued the seller for not disclosing to him that a gruesome murder happened
on the property a decade earlier, and because it made the property less valuable. (King, 1983) According to the California Court of Appeal, a seller must disclose material facts that are likely render the property less valuable, such as a violent history if the seller knows about those facts. In fact, this ruling highlighted the need for full disclosure in the California real estate law, as one issue that should be addressed is the possibility of property stigma that will ultimately affect resale value. But some buyers who file for emotional distress after encountering paranormal activity in their homes and claim they were 'unprepared' for the psychological impact of living in a reputedly haunted property. Young v. Burton (2006)23 The Virginia case is of a couple that purchased an estate known for it's hauntings and paranormal activity. They sued to recover leaving emotional distress and fraud. But the case was dismissed by the court who argued that such claims are subjective and hard to prove, considering paranormal experiences have no verified evidence. Sometimes property owners allow or hire paranormal investigators to explore the property of their acquaintance rumored having a haunted reputation and the investigators will sometimes cause damage. That can result in arguments about responsibility for repairs or the effect of an investigation on the property’s reputation. Tenants who suspect something is wrong with their apartment may sue a landlord for not disclosing the property’s history or that the environment is hazardous and unlivable, or terminate a lease early, claiming the events are unlivable or the landlord should have disclosed
21 Milliken v. Jacono (2012), JUSTICIA US LAW, (Nov. 01, 2024, 6:00 PM),
https://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvania/supreme-court/2014/48-map-2013.html.
22 Reed v. King (1983).
23 Young v. Burton (2006).
the property’s history. Romano v. Gawrysiak (2003)24 Among the Xeno paranormal cases is this one in New Jersey where tenants of a supposedly haunted apartment sued the landlord for neglecting to warn of the apartment's paranormal reputation. The court however found that new jersey law didn’t require landlords to disclose nonphysical property stigmas, and sided with the landlord. As a business, owners may choose or highlight a haunting for their property’s unique character and draw in tourists and earn revenue. Unfortunately, some of those municipalities do have zoning restrictions or such public health regulations regarding how they can be used. Amityville Horror House25 The house in Amityville, New York with DeFeo family murder victims, was a popular attraction after it became associated with the story, 'the Amityville Horror.' Zoning laws later became a problem for the house’s subsequent owners, due to large crowds and unwanted attention. This case and there hasn’t been direct litigation associated with haunting claim shows challenges of owners of infamous property. Freedom of Religion and Expression Cases in which First Amendment issues have arisen are with respect to the paranormal, especially when the paranormal intersects with the religious spheres. When paranormal claims involve spiritual or religious beliefs, paranormal claims may have to be separated from religious freedom and distinguishable from fraudulent practices, so courts may have to consider the situation26. Sometimes, cases involving paranormal beliefs involve freedom of religion and expression matters as people want to act on or propagate paranormal beliefs that may become inconsistent with public standards or legal statutes for freedom of religion or expression. But these cases
24 Romano v. Gawrysiak (2003).
25 FROM AMITYVILLE TO RINGU: THE EVIL EYES OF THREE HOUSES AND ONE CABIN (Nov. 04,
2023), https://thegaijinghost.com/blog/amityville-ringu-evil-eyes-three-houses-one-cabin.
26 First Amendment and Religion, UNITED STATES COURTS, (Nov. 01, 2024, 7:32 PM),
https://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/educational-activities/first-amendment-and-religi%C3%B3n.
present interesting challenges for courts who must sort out between constitutional rights and protections against fraud and public safety concerns27. Religious Rights of Paranormal Practitioners Psychic readings, tarot or even mediumship, are often practiced by many who are doing it as an integral part of their spiritual or religious beliefs. Since democratic nations with strong freedom of religion protections, such as the United States, must decide whether restrictions or prosecutions of these practices infract religions freedoms, courts have been forced to consider this. Yet courts tend to scrutinize these practices under the consumer protection laws, particularly if they’re charging fees or involve public solicitation. People v. Fernandez (2000)28 Sylvia Fernandez, who was charged with fortune-telling fraud in New York, called her work a religious practice and claimed liberty under the First Amendment. Her conviction was overruled by the court for the First Amendment does not protect that which is predatory or fraudulent. But this is not a case that pits religious expression versus deceitful law. Fortune-Telling Ordinances and First Amendment Rights Concerns of fraud have attracted several municipality ordinances which limit or regulate fortune telling and psychic businesses. Usually, psychic practices are related to spiritual beliefs, and these ordinances are challenged as violation of freedom of speech and religion29. Argell v. City of New York (1993)30 City of New York ordinances to regulate psychic practices and fortune talking. They said psychic practitioners’ right to free speech was violated. The restrictions permitted were things like licensing requirements and the court upheld other overly broad bans, ruling they unfairly 27 Catherine Kaufman, Cults and Religious Freedom in the United States, (Nov. 08, 2019), https://policyperspectives.org/2019/11/08/cults-and-religious-freedom-in-the-united-states/.
28 People v. Fernandez (2000).
29 Christopher Coble, Is Fortune Telling Illegal, FindLaw, (Mar. 21, 2019),
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/criminal-defense/is-fortune-telling-illegal/.
30 Argell v. City of New York (1993).
trampled on free speech and expression. The boundaries created in this case involved how municipalities should govern paranormal as well as free speech. Religious Exemptions for Paranormal Practices Closely related to some religious movements mediums commonly associated with Spiritualism are some paranormal practices like spirit communication. Typically, practitioners argue that such practices should be less than religious exemptions given for more traditional religions. These practices are sometimes legalized by courts as religious expression but also judged as fraudulent, or hurting the great mass. United States v. Ballard (1944)31 This was a landmark case in which the Ballard family at its head, which led the “I Am” spiritual movement, was charged with fraud for saying they could heal people and work miracles. The Ballards’ were safe with U.S. Supreme Court which held that the courts should not test the truth or falsity of religious doctrines but question the sincerity of the beliefs of the Ballard. Nevertheless, the case enabled the government to charge fraud when people knowingly represented that they cured followers by false pretenses. This is the critical precedent to how to handle paranormal claims tied to religion32. Protection of Cultural and Indigenous Paranormal Beliefs All countries have protective laws that protect practices that are indigenous or cultural, concerning supernatural or spirit communication. Cases involving indigenous groups can always turn on the issue of sacred practices, and in particular beliefs or rituals seemingly devoted to the paranormal. Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association (1988)33 Not directly on the subject of paranormal phenomena, but for the protection of indigenous practices as in Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association (1988). The Supreme Court
31 United States v. Ballard (1944).
32 United States v. Ballard (1944), FREE SPEECH CENTRE, (July 02, 2024),
https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/united-states-v-ballard/.
33 Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association (1988).
ruled against the Native American plaintiffs, but subsequent cases acknowledge their protection of indigenous spiritual practices, explaining that they are religious expression, also with the supernatural. Psychic Mediums and Spiritual Counseling Proponents of psychic mediums (or ‘spiritual counselors’) who identify as psychic mediums or spiritual counselors sometimes argue that their work provides people with similar services that other counseling does; and therefore, their work should be protected as free of religion and expression. These practitioners typically assert that when they are challenged in court on their communications with spirits or guides, are engaging in religious speech. Marks v. City of Roseburg (1987)34 In Oregon, a psychic medium sued to overturn an ordinance banning fortune telling, because it violated her right of freedom of speech and religion. The court said she was right, noting that psychic spiritual counseling was protected under the First Amendment. The point of this case was to affirm the right to practice some of that psychic counseling under the rubric of religious expression. Zoning and Licensing Conflicts Phasic businesses may be constrained by zoning or licensing provisions of municipalities if they are thought likely to attract public nuisance or to promote fraudulent activities. Depending on how aggressively these practitioners press these claims of religious expression, they may also find that these zoning issues overlap with their activities. Spirits of Health, Inc. v. Miami-Dade County (2013)35 The zoning laws that became part of life for the psychic organization in the Miami-Dade County area which classified certain areas as no-go zones. That was a violation of their right to religious expression, they argued. The court overturned the zoning law but stated that
34 Marks v. City of Roseburg (1987).
35 Spirit of Health Inc. v. Miami Dade-County (2013).
municipalities cannot overly restrict businesses' spiritual components even when they rest on an unconventional belief. Challenges in Distinguishing Fraud from Genuine Belief In paranormal cases, courts usually have a difficult time differentiating fraud intent from real spiritual belief because these things can be closely tied together. The First Amendment shields individuals from being punished, and being held in contempt of court on their religious beliefs even if that includes supernatural beliefs. But courts are wary of allowing the protections to be abused to defraud others. Commonwealth v. Hoss36 A psychic in Pennsylvania was convicted of theft after charging high fees to 'lift curses'. The
psychic replied that it was part of their religious practice. Despite that claim to religious protection, the court let the conviction stand and found that the fraudulent charging for curse removal overrode any claim to that37.
CONCLUSION
Finally, the interface of paranormal experiences and the law reveals an interesting progression from the ancient superstition based legal techniques of the day to contemporary treatments that require objective evidence and the right to be judged by one’s peers. In the past, the responses to paranormal beliefs were legal and witches and accusations of sorcery rarely received any kind of pardon or leniency in response. But, with society advancing, so did the system of law, as 19th century movements such as Spiritualism both encouraged the movement for fraud and consumer protection laws designed to protect the public from fraud perpetrated against it. Cases like Stambovsky v. Ackley's are set precedents to disclosure obligations of haunted or stigmatized properties and how real estate transactions resolve non-physical property defects. Paranormal beliefs also continue to become involved in lawsuits related to freedom of religion and expression in which courts judiciously strike against fraud and in favor of public safety concerns. However, although this is still a complex legal challenge in terms of paranormal
36 Commonwealth v. Hoss (1971).
37 Commonwealth v. Hoss, Casetext Part of Thomsons Reuters, (Nov. 01, 2024, 7:14 PM),
https://casetext.com/case/commonwealth-v-hoss.
beliefs and practices, today society’s approach is markedly more individual based, evidence driven and centered on consumer protection rather than superstition, and thus a more modern legal response to the protection of diverse beliefs without infringing upon legal harmony. This shift represents a legal field adjusting to society in its changing attitudes towards paranormal claims and out of a sense of equality and fairness to an appropriate and balanced approach to paranormal claims.