“Right, for this morning’s lecture we’re going to look at psychics, witches and clairvoyants and how they can help the police with their inquiries. So if one comes into the station, what do you do? You don’t throw them out when they say they’ve seen a tall, dark stranger. You write down the stranger’s height — in metric, please — and what ethnic group he might be. You ask why he’s a stranger. Has the psychic seen him in a dream or maybe in the supermarket? Can we set up a seance to eliminate this stranger as a suspect?
“And now witches. We’ll need a cauldron in the station. Bring the good ladies in and see what they chuck in it. They probably won’t be adding eye of newt or toe of frog. But if they come up with nose of Turk and Tartar’s lips or finger of birth-strangled babe, then you’d better start pursuing a line of inquiry. Birth-strangled babes are usually a sign that a witch knows more than she’s letting on.
“OK? So can we use clairvoyants to help to solve cases? You’d better get their eyes tested first, to see if they can see as far as they say. Get them to read one of the number plates on a patrol car. If they can’t see anything, you might have them up on a charge for wasting police time. We need results.”
Britain’s police do indeed need all the help they can get nowadays. Of course in the past they had Baker Street sleuths or Belgian detectives or little old Miss Marples who listened to village gossip. They always seemed to get a better result than Inspector Lestrade or Assistant Commissioner Japp. But isn’t extrasensory perception more 21st century? The US army has spent a fortune over the years looking at ESP and there must be something they’ve picked up that could help the Met.
And it can all be explained scientifically. Psychics follow proper routines. They keep their minds open. They come up with some names. We should use them. But be careful of expenses.