Sensing Murder (2 Viewers)

[_muse_]

yeah i always wanted to believe tthat psychics were real too, except there was always a part of me that knew that there arent as many out there as their is advertised. I dunno, they still have freaking me out down to a fine art.

 

[mcdickpants 2.5]

i feel the same way about spiders. being freaked out by them, that is to say.

 

[Beckiki_S]

It frustrates me that there's never a proper conclusion. Unlike snickers, it doesnt really satisfy.

And mcdickpants, last week the psychics had to walk for 250 metres up the road then about 500 m into the bush (no path) to where they sensed the bodies were found. And they were dead accurate.
(But yeah the house thing was silly... but they did have to FIND the house and then she described where the room was that she was found.)

 

[_muse_]

i feel the same way about spiders. being freaked out by them, that is to say.

ooo yeah those creepy things have got me sorted out too *shudders*

 

[It]

ill feel totally raped by rebecca gibney if its all fake cos i totally believe her.

even tho there is plenty of doubt as to the validity of the psychics "findings" the info that the private investigator dude comes up with is pretty genuine dont u think? i dont get how if EVERTHIING the psychics say is set up yet somehow it is proven to be real by the investigator guy.

meh i dunno

 

[bluesky100]

its creapy i watch csi and without a trace instead

- except I don't watch csi or W/o a Trace. Last weeks ep. was pretty disturbing.

 

[kittycat552]

"dead accurate" - that's gold

and i didn't mean to be disrespectful in any way.

 

[phantom limb]

that show on channel 7 - forensic investigators i think... it was so much better than sensing murder

the one of these on neddy smith was hilarious
best reenactments EVER

 

[kittycat552]

forensic investigators was creepy... such as that guy that was like 18 and killed young girls and the crazee guy with the crossbow

 

[Cape]

Watched it properly a couple of times, but most of the time i just have the tv on next to the computer. And the few times that I have watched it properly, the same psyhic has been on. If i heard correctly they choose the psyhics based on how much information they give them (or something), but i thought its kinda strange that they keep using the same psyhic for numerous shows.

But i guess its alright to use psyhics to help to solve crimes which are just about insolvable. And it might bring closure to the families affected to the crimes, so we shouldn't complain that much about them using psyhics.

 

[Mejc]

Any show with dead people invovled freaks me out

 

[table for 1]

that show on channel 7 - forensic investigators i think... it was so much better than sensing murder

i can't quite remember it now, but i remember how lisa mccune would always say something like "...vital clue which ultimately lead the investigators to solve the mystery" over and over again in the one episode. got annoying after a while.

anyways, sensing murder is creepy because they're dealing with actual murders, and then all those re-enactments are creepy. especially since they show the same image many times throughout the episode, and play creepy music. like the one on this wk, they kept showing that close up of Beth with her eyes blank and blood smeared around her mouth. about that episode, they spent so much time building up to the "1 piece of new evidence", except i missed part of it. something about Beth's blood on a newspaper in the truck parked on the bridge? could someone tell me what it was about?

what i hate about sensing murder is that in the ads or next wk preview, they always make it seem as though they've found new evidence/leads that have lead them to actually solve the murder, when they haven't. well, it always makes me think they've solved it. but i think it's amazing how clairvoyants can be accurate with their findings. though i'd find it incredibly freaky if i was in their position. i mean, see snippets of a murder? dream of them? feel them? etc?

 

[It]

well its kinda confusing so i apologise if i dont make ne sense......

i cant really remember names so ill go by "dg" for the young dead girl and "odw" for the old dead woman...

the odw's blood was found on towels in dg's house but as the ppl investigating found, whoever killd the dg, smeared all the blood from the victim on the legs of the body. so, if odw had killed the dg, then both the odw's and dg's blood wld be on the towels however only odw's blood was, suggesting that odw didnt kill dg and the towels were planted there.

it ended up with the idea that odw had been framed for the murder (by placing her blood soaked towel in the victims home) before she was then murdered herself but made to look like a suicide.

so yeah, if u understand that, then good on u cos its pretty confusing and my explanation isnt the best. sorry!

 

[table for 1]

no! i watched that bit. i'm talking about them finding dg's blood on a newspaper that was found in the truck that they believe odw was driving. the truck that was parked on the bridge where they used to think she jumped off.

the part i'm talking about came after the bloody towels bit.

the blood on the newspaper was the "1 piece of new evidence" right? the one that they missed before because it was such a small detail.

 

[It]

ohhh i know the bit ur talking about, but i cant bloody remember it. i have been sitting here for 10 minutes thinking but its not coming to me. sorry. if i do remember il post again. argh fuck this is bugging me!!!