Litigious pet psychics

My cat thinks “you’re a twat”…

In my articles I research and then report. I research claims, and report my experiences in testing these claims.

Occasionally, a subject doesn’t like my precise documentation, and so resorts to nasty threats…

I have currently been trying to arrange a visit with a pet psychic, to investigate this as a belief and practice. An internet search revealed Diane London - pet psychic.

I never thought I’d need proof of the claim before I could even ask for proof of the claim, but here’s what happened…

I emailed Ms London with the following polite, upfront request:

 

“Hello! I found an article about you that said you do pet readings, and that you’re in San Rafael. I’d love to book an appointment with you if you are a pet psychic, and still live in the Bay Area.
 
Looking forward to hearing from you!” 

Pretty innocuous stuff, a friendly request for her services…services that she advertises publicly. Nothing litigious there…surely?

However, it elicited this unexpected litigious response:

“please be advised that any further contact is unwelcome–and shall be deemed as harassment–I am forwarding this email to my attorney—and law enforcement agencys—an  investigation is in progress—and possible civil action–as required–in the future–please include your phone number-address–so that my attorney can locate you—you have been warned”

Yet her website gushes: “I take a very personal interest in everyone (sic) of my clients – It is with sincerity, compassion, sensitivity and confidentiality that I have to offer the insight and answers to your questions and concerns – I look forward to being your personal psychic.”

Her personal reply to me was not so “compassionate” or “sensitive”.

Did my skeptical reputation precede me? Did she fear a debunking? Impossible. I never revealed my last name. So, why the unincited acrimony? Does she have something to hide? Does she want to remove herself from her previous claims? If she is further retracting her claim of being a ‘pet psychic’, I counsel her to delete:

This page.

And this page.

And also this page.

Not to mention this page.

But most importantly, and damningly…this page from The Seattle Times. Oh shit…it’s syndicated all over the web like a psychic rash…

What’s the story? 

London was formerly an actor - Most wait on tables, but London became a telephone psychic…for ten years…

Working for a large company, London reveals that many of her former colleagues ”are about as psychic as a potato”, but maintains her own claims of psychic abilities. Following a dispute with her employer, in which she threatened the company, as one does, with black candle Santeria, Diane was terminated. In response, she sued the company. She eventually received unemployment benefits as compensation.

Does she now fear reprisal from her former ‘colleagues’?

Paranoid, she ’sensed’ danger, but of the legal kind…

This defensiveness might explain her aggressive, abrasive, unwarranted reply to me…but I further interpret this as a denial of her ‘pet psychic’ claim. To this end, I have linked her claims above, and made copies of each page, should I be reproached for merely repeating her claim, which is:

“You have probably wondered about how your pets ‘think’ and what they ‘think’ about. Anyone who has pets in their home has. Animals are by Nature telepathic. Your pets have so much they want to share with you. Their ‘thinking’ is not so different from ours. I can help you establish deeper communication with your beloved animals.”

Fight fire with facts.

Diane – you are as psychic as a potato…