My. Tesco Android Signal Is Poor
Technology1 min ago
The Blitz Witch
46 Answers
Did anyone watch this last night? Tony Robinson investigated a psychic called Helen Duncan, and whilst he came to the conclusion that some of her seances were probably 'fixed', he could not explain how, in 1941, she revealed that HMS Hood had sunk - a fact that even the Admiralty was unaware of. Since her claim sunsequently proved to be accurate, MI5 became involved and she was seen as a threat to national security. She was arrested and tried at the Old Bailey under the Witchcraft Act of 1735, and sentenced to a period of imprisonment.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Mrs. Duncan was also imprisoned again afterwards, for having a seance, yet another 77 year old woman was let off, due to her age. The criminal Cases Review Commission still rejects petitions for Mrs. Duncan to be pardoned. Is it because they'd look stupid for using the excuse for trying the woman under the old Witchcraft Act of 1735? She was considered a threat to national security - but did they believe there might've been something in her "powers", and if not - why not pardon her now?
rojash, she told of the sinking of HMS Barham before the news had been officially released, but subsequently told of the sinking of HMS Hood before the news was known to anyone.
http://forums.digiguide.com/topic.asp?id=28304
http://forums.digiguide.com/topic.asp?id=28304
Barham was given two very plausible explanations in the programme. The seance was held at Plymouth, a major naval area:
1. A spouse or other close relative of a fatality of Barham told her.
2. Duncan never claimed it was Syd from Barham that appeared before her - it was a member of the audience.
Re The Hood. Brigadier Firebrace was at that seance. One explanation is 'cold reading'. Duncan says, 'A big ship has gone down' to see if there is a reaction. The Brigadier says, 'The Hood?'
The Hood was a famous warship at that time, and she possibly thought the Brigadier knew something she didn't, so she simply said, 'Yes'.
This is a typical manner of cold reading and hot reading combined - stating a ship had gone down was a wild guess, but she knew the brigadier was in the audience.
1. A spouse or other close relative of a fatality of Barham told her.
2. Duncan never claimed it was Syd from Barham that appeared before her - it was a member of the audience.
Re The Hood. Brigadier Firebrace was at that seance. One explanation is 'cold reading'. Duncan says, 'A big ship has gone down' to see if there is a reaction. The Brigadier says, 'The Hood?'
The Hood was a famous warship at that time, and she possibly thought the Brigadier knew something she didn't, so she simply said, 'Yes'.
This is a typical manner of cold reading and hot reading combined - stating a ship had gone down was a wild guess, but she knew the brigadier was in the audience.
Ethel, re the Barham, there were possible explanations given in the programme which is why it isn't such a mystery, and why I didn't mention it in the original question.
However, although the programme confirmed that the Brigadier was indeed present at the second seance, I don't recall it offering the explanation you've given regarding the Hood. It concluded that it was a complete mystery, so where did you get that from? Or have I misunderstood you, and it's simply your explanation for what may have happened?
Tigerlily, he's doing something on the Ghosts of Glastonbury tonight - and I think there's another programme to come.
However, although the programme confirmed that the Brigadier was indeed present at the second seance, I don't recall it offering the explanation you've given regarding the Hood. It concluded that it was a complete mystery, so where did you get that from? Or have I misunderstood you, and it's simply your explanation for what may have happened?
Tigerlily, he's doing something on the Ghosts of Glastonbury tonight - and I think there's another programme to come.
I caught half of this show last night, to say a big ship has been sunk during a war in which U-Boats posed a major threat is no real gamble.
With all these kinds of people it's the times they get it wrong that you're not told about (it's a little like a gambler not telling you how much they've lost) we've always had sooth sayers, and we always will.
Titanic had a huge raft of letters saying it was going to sink, a premonition?
No, all ships launched at the time recieved similar letters warning of their doom, it's really a case of living each day as though it's your last as one day you'll be right.
I don't think it was fair to imprison her but she was bad for morale, constantly telling people of death, doom and destruction leads to defeatism and that as much as anything was a reason for silencing her.
I dislike mediums and the like I feel they're just vultures, feeding off the misery of others.
Added to that once your dead you'd kinda hope people'd leave you alone (they do say rest in peace after all) if you really wanted to say something you'd haunt them at some oppotune moment and do it then.
With all these kinds of people it's the times they get it wrong that you're not told about (it's a little like a gambler not telling you how much they've lost) we've always had sooth sayers, and we always will.
Titanic had a huge raft of letters saying it was going to sink, a premonition?
No, all ships launched at the time recieved similar letters warning of their doom, it's really a case of living each day as though it's your last as one day you'll be right.
I don't think it was fair to imprison her but she was bad for morale, constantly telling people of death, doom and destruction leads to defeatism and that as much as anything was a reason for silencing her.
I dislike mediums and the like I feel they're just vultures, feeding off the misery of others.
Added to that once your dead you'd kinda hope people'd leave you alone (they do say rest in peace after all) if you really wanted to say something you'd haunt them at some oppotune moment and do it then.
It is feasible, Ethel, but if that had happened, it would surely have come out during the trial. Even though the information concerning the Barham was deemed restricted, no arrest was made since clearly, unlike the information imparted concerning the Hood, a likely explanation was apparent.
Everton, It would be a huge gamble for a medium to take a guess at the name of a specific ship and say it had gone down. That would be a terrible thing to do and I don't believe it's reasonable to assume that anyone would treat something that serious so lightly.
Everton, It would be a huge gamble for a medium to take a guess at the name of a specific ship and say it had gone down. That would be a terrible thing to do and I don't believe it's reasonable to assume that anyone would treat something that serious so lightly.
I was disappointed in this programme, which I thought was going to be a detailled account of the trial of a woman for the silliest of reasons.
Instead we got a review of spiritualists and their antics - a subject which has been covered many times before with all the tricks of cold and hot reading revealed ad nauseam.
There were only two mysteries, the first being how people could possibly believe that the Admiralty remained ignorant of the fate of HMS Hood for more than a few minutes. Her death was witnessed by seamen from both sides who would have signalled their respective Admiralties at once. How this fraud of a woman then learned about it is a separate question
with many possible answers.
the second mystery is whether Tony Robinson is really as gullible as he made himself out to be or whether he was under orders to 'keep the mystery open' , an attitude which, alas, is normal when televison 'researches' the alleged supernatural.
Instead we got a review of spiritualists and their antics - a subject which has been covered many times before with all the tricks of cold and hot reading revealed ad nauseam.
There were only two mysteries, the first being how people could possibly believe that the Admiralty remained ignorant of the fate of HMS Hood for more than a few minutes. Her death was witnessed by seamen from both sides who would have signalled their respective Admiralties at once. How this fraud of a woman then learned about it is a separate question
with many possible answers.
the second mystery is whether Tony Robinson is really as gullible as he made himself out to be or whether he was under orders to 'keep the mystery open' , an attitude which, alas, is normal when televison 'researches' the alleged supernatural.
If she got the name Hood wrong she'd have just shrugged it off, or found a ship with a similar name (MV Hodder or some such) people tend to forget when they see the mistakes because noone really expects them to be accurate.
Chaka is right that the loss of the Hood would've been relayed very quickly to Admiralty House (I'm unaware as to the timescale involved from the loss to seance) as to how she could've learned of it's loss is another matter although she did have a R.A.F man speak for her at the trial so she may well have had a connection that way.
Chaka is right that the loss of the Hood would've been relayed very quickly to Admiralty House (I'm unaware as to the timescale involved from the loss to seance) as to how she could've learned of it's loss is another matter although she did have a R.A.F man speak for her at the trial so she may well have had a connection that way.
rojash, not spooky at all. This is from the Helen Duncan website:
http://www.helenduncan.org.uk/campaign/pardond enied.html
There is no doubt that Mrs. Duncan was somewhat of an embarrassment to the authorities. In particular, her guide, Albert, in a seance in Edinburgh announced that HMS Hood had been sunk earlier that day in the North Atlantic. The time of this seance was 3:30 pm.
Brigadier Firebrace, a very enthusiastic believer in Spiritualism, who was the Chief of Security at the time in Scotland, attended that seance. He returned to his office and telephoned the Admiralty to see whether, as he called it, the rumour of the sinking was true. At that time it was denied.
By 9:30 p.m., as he was leaving the office, a telephone call was received from the Admiralty confirming the sinking at 1:30 p.m.
Everton and Chakka, it would appear that Helen Duncan announced the news just two hours after the Hood was sunk.
Everton, she didn't get the name wrong, so that argument is irrelevant.
Chakka, I'm not sure I'd call Tony Robinson gullible. Surely if he's investigating this case, as unlikely as some aspects may be, he has to consider them all, and do it with as few of his own pre-conceived ideas as possible. That's good investigative journalism.
Maybe it's just possible that she wasn't a fraud - at least not in this case. Ouch! It's certainly a difficult one.
http://www.helenduncan.org.uk/campaign/pardond enied.html
There is no doubt that Mrs. Duncan was somewhat of an embarrassment to the authorities. In particular, her guide, Albert, in a seance in Edinburgh announced that HMS Hood had been sunk earlier that day in the North Atlantic. The time of this seance was 3:30 pm.
Brigadier Firebrace, a very enthusiastic believer in Spiritualism, who was the Chief of Security at the time in Scotland, attended that seance. He returned to his office and telephoned the Admiralty to see whether, as he called it, the rumour of the sinking was true. At that time it was denied.
By 9:30 p.m., as he was leaving the office, a telephone call was received from the Admiralty confirming the sinking at 1:30 p.m.
Everton and Chakka, it would appear that Helen Duncan announced the news just two hours after the Hood was sunk.
Everton, she didn't get the name wrong, so that argument is irrelevant.
Chakka, I'm not sure I'd call Tony Robinson gullible. Surely if he's investigating this case, as unlikely as some aspects may be, he has to consider them all, and do it with as few of his own pre-conceived ideas as possible. That's good investigative journalism.
Maybe it's just possible that she wasn't a fraud - at least not in this case. Ouch! It's certainly a difficult one.
naomi, two hours after the sinking would have been about 1 hour and 55 minutes after the Admiralty had known about it, depending on how fast the signal went out from HMS Prince of Wales and how fast the receiving operator in Whitehall Wireless got it across to the officers on watch.
What time the Admiralty chose to release the information is quite another matter.
As for Tony Robinson's gullibility, Helen Duncan has always been well-known as an absolute fraud, yet he persisted in thinking that 'there was something in it' or words to that effect. Yet there was nothing - except the puzzle as to how she got the information - a puzzle, not a supernatural mystery.
In any case, did you see the second programme last night? He spent many minutes of prime screen time scribbling randomly on a piece of paper and then actuallly believing that the scribbles meant something. The sad truth is that an excitable, impressionable, not-too-bright, rather gushing actor is not the right person for that sort of job; I'd have preferred to have seen his intelligent woman companion in charge.
But then she would have spent no more than fifteen minutes on the "mystery" , which wouldn't suit television at all. Quickly-acquired truth is dull; sensationalism is all.
What time the Admiralty chose to release the information is quite another matter.
As for Tony Robinson's gullibility, Helen Duncan has always been well-known as an absolute fraud, yet he persisted in thinking that 'there was something in it' or words to that effect. Yet there was nothing - except the puzzle as to how she got the information - a puzzle, not a supernatural mystery.
In any case, did you see the second programme last night? He spent many minutes of prime screen time scribbling randomly on a piece of paper and then actuallly believing that the scribbles meant something. The sad truth is that an excitable, impressionable, not-too-bright, rather gushing actor is not the right person for that sort of job; I'd have preferred to have seen his intelligent woman companion in charge.
But then she would have spent no more than fifteen minutes on the "mystery" , which wouldn't suit television at all. Quickly-acquired truth is dull; sensationalism is all.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.