6 ms·

Is this really a swindle if your "victims" are willing participants? Every purported psychic is "pretending" even if they don't realise. My sister in law makes

Is this really a swindle if your "victims" are willing participants? Every purported psychic is "pretending" even if they don't realise. My sister in law makes good money giving readings over zoom. She genuinely believes in this nonsense, as do her customers. Is there a practical difference though, whether she believes it or not?

ceejayoz 3y ago
The victims paid for personal readings from a specific person, and got mass-produced ones from someone else instead. Psychics are bullshit, but that's an extra level of fraud on top, and far more actionable by law enforcement.
- cosmotic 3y ago
  Sounds like shuffling a deck of cards and then selecting cards from the deck at random. It's redundant. Fraudulent fraud gets collapsed into just fraud, which is what the customer wanted from the start.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    If both believe in it and fulfil their bargain, it is not fraud. Fraud requires intention of missleading. Also, what most customers want, is emotional comfort. And whatever we think of it, it seems to work for them. Even though personally, I'll go with south parks take on it: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sH0dZDnD_GI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sH0dZDnD_GI
    - WheatMillington 3y ago
      Does it work for them "less" if the purported psychic doesn't believe?
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        If they find out, definitely. And if they don't find out, I would think yes, as they subconsciously probably notice some things are off with the intention of the "psychic".
  - pessimizer 3y ago
    They paid for a psychic reading, and from someone who they thought was a psychic. They weren't paying for psychic powers to be real. If I buy a book on psychic readings, is it alright for them not to send it to me because psychic readings aren't real? Is it "redundant?"
    - crazygringo 3y ago
      It's more like you ordered a book on Amazon, but it was shipped from Wal-Mart instead. You still got your book. These people got their psychic readings. Just from a different source. Can you prove that the different source was of lower quality, for something that you can't prove quality for in the first place? It reminds me of famous artists where a lot of their work was done by assistants. Should I be able to sue a celebrity when their autobiography was ghostwritten but that wasn't publicly disclosed? Or when their tweet is written by a publicist? We seem to have decided the answer to that is no.
      - vorpalhex 3y ago
        Ah but psychic readings are personal comissions, not mass marketable! I ordered a cat scratcher. Cat scratchers are perfectly commodity things.. but mine wasn't. I ordered a handmade one. What I got shipped was a repurchase from Wayfair. I sent a single picture of the box and got a full refund. Yes, I got a cat scratcher but the handmade part was a material term of the deal. Paying someone to do a psychic reading is not buying a paragraph of text. You are buying an action. If you hire someone to tweet original tweets on your behalf and they just use a bot to retweet random clever sayings... they have in fact engaged in fraud!
        evandale 3y ago
        Nobody has the ability to give you a psychic reading because psychic readings don't exist. I'm glad you brought up the paragraph of text because are literally buying a fictional paragraph. It can say anything and will still be a psychic reading. I'm struggling to understand how you can equate something that isn't real and something that's tangible.
  - dmonitor 3y ago
    not really. a “psychic reading” may not be supernatural, but it is still advice from a person. in this case they advertised advice from a specific person, but sold advice from a different person.
- recursivecaveat 3y ago
  I'm reminded of Robert Tilton, who was exposed for depositing/trashing prayer requests/donations without actually praying over them. Sadly it seems like he largely escaped intact. I suspect being a grifter is a very strong risk factor for being too lazy to grift 'correctly', no matter how easy it would be.
  - somehowlinux 3y ago
    I wonder the same sometimes but then think it might be due to survivorship bias that I think as much.
  - steve_taylor 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - alex_young 3y ago
      If you’re that stupid, you deserve to be swindled. The victims included mentally compromised people, the elderly, people who later committed suicide, etc. It's hard for me not think this sort of behavior is anything but criminal.
    - cowsup 3y ago
      If someone sells a good or service, knowing they will fail to deliver, they're committing fraud. Whether one believes in prayer or not should not apply in the judgment.
    - Narkov 3y ago
      > If you’re that stupid, you deserve to be swindled. Absolutely not. Laws should protect the vulnerable...no matter how stupid they are.
      - steve_taylor 3y ago
        My point is that people are saying the fraudulent aspect of his crime is that he didn’t actually pray. It wouldn’t have made a difference to their lives. Churches swindle millions of people out of billions of dollars annually.
- mromanuk 3y ago
  Si if he did a personal reading with a “real psychic” it wouldn’t be fraud?
  - mplewis 3y ago
    That's correct.
- SCAQTony 3y ago
  Not just bullshit, but money laundering centers as well since they are mostly a cash business with anon users.
- Palmik 3y ago
  I wonder if or how it's different from e.g. OnlyFans models delegating their chats to cheap labor in third world countries.
squokko 3y ago
Whether there is a "practical" difference, there is usually a big legal difference in outcomes based on what the perpetrator's intent.
insanitybit 3y ago
Willfully and knowingly defrauding someone is worse, yeah. Also giving "readings" and making vague comments / giving advice is very different from promising health outcomes.
- pbjtime 3y ago
  *except when they're promising health outcomes
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
LargeTomato 3y ago
>She genuinely believes in this nonsense, as do her customers. Is there a practical difference though, whether she believes it or not? It is legal for scientology to solicit donations from their followers. It's even legal for the Catholic Church to solicit tithes. If the party benefitting believes their own story then quite a lot seems to be legal.
55555 3y ago
There was an article recently about astrology apps. Are they fraud? My personal opinion is it shouldn’t be fraud if you believe it.
intrasight 3y ago
In the state of PA, it's illegal to be a psychic - for just this reason
SpiritualGuide 3y ago
[flagged]
causality0 3y ago
That's literally the definition of "fraud". If they were unwilling it would be plain robbery.

ceejayoz 3y ago

The victims paid for personal readings from a specific person, and got mass-produced ones from someone else instead. Psychics are bullshit, but that's an extra level of fraud on top, and far more actionable by law enforcement.

cosmotic 3y ago
Sounds like shuffling a deck of cards and then selecting cards from the deck at random. It's redundant. Fraudulent fraud gets collapsed into just fraud, which is what the customer wanted from the start.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  If both believe in it and fulfil their bargain, it is not fraud. Fraud requires intention of missleading. Also, what most customers want, is emotional comfort. And whatever we think of it, it seems to work for them. Even though personally, I'll go with south parks take on it: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sH0dZDnD_GI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sH0dZDnD_GI
  - WheatMillington 3y ago
    Does it work for them "less" if the purported psychic doesn't believe?
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      If they find out, definitely. And if they don't find out, I would think yes, as they subconsciously probably notice some things are off with the intention of the "psychic".
- pessimizer 3y ago
  They paid for a psychic reading, and from someone who they thought was a psychic. They weren't paying for psychic powers to be real. If I buy a book on psychic readings, is it alright for them not to send it to me because psychic readings aren't real? Is it "redundant?"
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    It's more like you ordered a book on Amazon, but it was shipped from Wal-Mart instead. You still got your book. These people got their psychic readings. Just from a different source. Can you prove that the different source was of lower quality, for something that you can't prove quality for in the first place? It reminds me of famous artists where a lot of their work was done by assistants. Should I be able to sue a celebrity when their autobiography was ghostwritten but that wasn't publicly disclosed? Or when their tweet is written by a publicist? We seem to have decided the answer to that is no.
    - vorpalhex 3y ago
      Ah but psychic readings are personal comissions, not mass marketable! I ordered a cat scratcher. Cat scratchers are perfectly commodity things.. but mine wasn't. I ordered a handmade one. What I got shipped was a repurchase from Wayfair. I sent a single picture of the box and got a full refund. Yes, I got a cat scratcher but the handmade part was a material term of the deal. Paying someone to do a psychic reading is not buying a paragraph of text. You are buying an action. If you hire someone to tweet original tweets on your behalf and they just use a bot to retweet random clever sayings... they have in fact engaged in fraud!
      - evandale 3y ago
        Nobody has the ability to give you a psychic reading because psychic readings don't exist. I'm glad you brought up the paragraph of text because are literally buying a fictional paragraph. It can say anything and will still be a psychic reading. I'm struggling to understand how you can equate something that isn't real and something that's tangible.
- dmonitor 3y ago
  not really. a “psychic reading” may not be supernatural, but it is still advice from a person. in this case they advertised advice from a specific person, but sold advice from a different person.
recursivecaveat 3y ago
I'm reminded of Robert Tilton, who was exposed for depositing/trashing prayer requests/donations without actually praying over them. Sadly it seems like he largely escaped intact. I suspect being a grifter is a very strong risk factor for being too lazy to grift 'correctly', no matter how easy it would be.
- somehowlinux 3y ago
  I wonder the same sometimes but then think it might be due to survivorship bias that I think as much.
- steve_taylor 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - alex_young 3y ago
    If you’re that stupid, you deserve to be swindled. The victims included mentally compromised people, the elderly, people who later committed suicide, etc. It's hard for me not think this sort of behavior is anything but criminal.
  - cowsup 3y ago
    If someone sells a good or service, knowing they will fail to deliver, they're committing fraud. Whether one believes in prayer or not should not apply in the judgment.
  - Narkov 3y ago
    > If you’re that stupid, you deserve to be swindled. Absolutely not. Laws should protect the vulnerable...no matter how stupid they are.
    - steve_taylor 3y ago
      My point is that people are saying the fraudulent aspect of his crime is that he didn’t actually pray. It wouldn’t have made a difference to their lives. Churches swindle millions of people out of billions of dollars annually.
mromanuk 3y ago
Si if he did a personal reading with a “real psychic” it wouldn’t be fraud?
- mplewis 3y ago
  That's correct.
SCAQTony 3y ago
Not just bullshit, but money laundering centers as well since they are mostly a cash business with anon users.
Palmik 3y ago
I wonder if or how it's different from e.g. OnlyFans models delegating their chats to cheap labor in third world countries.

squokko 3y ago

Whether there is a "practical" difference, there is usually a big legal difference in outcomes based on what the perpetrator's intent.

insanitybit 3y ago

Willfully and knowingly defrauding someone is worse, yeah. Also giving "readings" and making vague comments / giving advice is very different from promising health outcomes.

pbjtime 3y ago
*except when they're promising health outcomes

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

LargeTomato 3y ago

>She genuinely believes in this nonsense, as do her customers. Is there a practical difference though, whether she believes it or not? It is legal for scientology to solicit donations from their followers. It's even legal for the Catholic Church to solicit tithes. If the party benefitting believes their own story then quite a lot seems to be legal.

55555 3y ago

There was an article recently about astrology apps. Are they fraud? My personal opinion is it shouldn’t be fraud if you believe it.

intrasight 3y ago

In the state of PA, it's illegal to be a psychic - for just this reason

SpiritualGuide 3y ago

[flagged]

causality0 3y ago

That's literally the definition of "fraud". If they were unwilling it would be plain robbery.