Warren Caylor

Wes wrote:That's odd, not a single word about cable ties.

wattie wrote:Gary Mannion has posted this on the PM4U website:

   In reagards to Warrens seances. I was there and there was nothing wrong with the Cable ties expect in Warrens case he likes them lose enough that he can slip out. The way Warren broke the cable tie is from pulling on it to break it. Which he did because he couldn't get out himself. This being the second seance as the first one had no spirits doing the phenomenaand yet we gave him the benefit of the doubt and let him sit again to prove otherwise. In my opinion Warren went home because he was caught out. That is my opinion I am not speaking on behalf of Wallacia development Centre. I would point out for Warrens benefit though that he stated we could apply any protocol we wanted and then on the sitting refused to do anything apart form let us change the colour of the cable ties. Also the second seance is recorded and clearly has me stating the way he was tied up he could get out of yet he refused to change it and also Warren is asked are the cable ties ok to which he replies they are fine. Anyone in doubt look at the picture warren has posted of his cut hand and try for yourself. You will find that you will not be cut from your chair being dropped by spirit however you will be cut if you pull on the cable tie to break it. Also if Warren wasn't trying to get out how was his hand cut. As cable ties would only cut from friction on the skin not from sitting still. Before anyone thinks I am just posting this to cause trouble you will notice none of us have said anything bad about him he is the one coming out and saying this and that happened to him. So I felt I should give my side of the story

Lis wrote:Obiwan,

To my knowledge there has not yet been a report posted anywhere, however, I was informed there might well be one published before too long.

I do hope so, as I believe the public and in particular those who are into physical mediumship are made aware of what happened and why Warren Caylor really left the Wallacia Centre before his scheduled events took place.

Lis wrote:Hi Obiwan,

I understand that Scott Milligan has responded to Caylor's posts on PM4U saying that he "was not happy" with the way Caylor was tied on the occasion Milligan sat in Caylor's circle, and he made his concerns clear to the circle leader.

Apparently, based on his experience in séances and the controls necessary with regard to cable ties, he seemed to be implying that he thought WC was able to get out of the cable ties, and had been given reports by others expressing concerns about WCs mediumship.

He also mentioned he was unhappy with videos that WC had posted on the internet and had made it clear he did not support it, and suggested that it might be time for WC to re-think the PN editor's offer of a séance, I presume under strict séance conditions!

Not surprisingly, it seems Caylor responded by saying: "Scott, you seem to have made the mistake that I give a toss what you think."

Of course, Caylor's response typically avoids the actual issues raised by Milligan, but that seems to be the way the man deals with all questions raided about his mediumship.

scottmilligan wrote:Sadly yes it looks like eastenders but I have to say people like wc make my job harder. I will support anyone who is seeking and demo on behalf of the other world but when you sit with him there is no power and sence of the spirit there. I have had enough of people lip speaking for the spirit. Doing a diservice to the spirit. no one is prepared to stand up and say this is not right.
people on this site have there view on how pm should be demo but "YOU WOULD NOT WALK INTO A SYNAGOGUE EATING A BANCON SANDWICH." why walk into a seance room and say I want you to sit this and that , but I agree a standard Must be set regarding demos and I know wc fall under par ......

Lis wrote:Hi Mark74,

I take your point, but perhaps your question should be posted on the Kai Muegge thread.

Lis wrote:Hi Scott,

Thanks for your post.

While many on this forum may consider what currently occurs in many physical séances lacks the certainty of séances in the past, I feel sure that all would agree there is a need for clear standards set for what constitutes a controlled séance demonstration - standards that ensure there is no possibility of fraud.

You say that no one is prepared to stand up and say that  things are, in your opinion, and based on your experience, not right in the Warren Caylor séances. What I have noticed, however, is that to stand up and say something is not right, especially if one is part of the PM community, almost inevitably results in people being ostracised or banned.

That makes it very difficult, I think, for people to speak up even when they really know for sure that something is wrong. In many respects this forum is one of the very few outlets for people to speak out about concerns with some physical mediums without fear of censure.

We want the truth, and do not want to see fraud in mediumship. While there has always been a certain amount of fraud associated with physical mediumship (sadly, all too often a great deal of fraud) as Spiritualists we know that there can be genuine physical mediumship and we do not want to see Spiritualism, and the spirit world's interaction with our realm to be ridiculed and its credibility destroyed by those who do act fraudulently.

As for Warren Caylor, there seem to be many who privately express significant concerns, but few are willing to actually offer specific evidence to support their claims. And it is specific first-hand evidence that is needed to put a stop to dishonest actions by those mediums who are prepared to do such a dis-service to the spirit world, while claiming they are working for spirit.

Until people are prepared to say Enough is Enough" (to re-use the heading of Caylor's post) and speak up to expose the dishonesty, those like Caylor will continue to do what they do with total disregard for the damage they are causing. By remaining silent, when people know that fraud is going on ultimately places the responsibility for that damage on the backs of the people who could have spoken up and put a stop to it.

Caylor suggests that he really doesn't care what we say (thank's Warren) and even that by talking about him it only serves to improve his client list. But, if people really spoke up and told what they have seen that was wrong - what was false - then Caylor's popularity just might begin to decline.

So, for all out there that have real concerns about Caylor now is your opportunity to share what you know.

Neilos wrote:Great post and what would you consider an acceptable standard of controls? Picking up on Scott's heartfelt stand should the Psychic News re-issue the challenge to Warren with strict controls in place?