Revealing the tricks of Psychic John Edward Part 1

Since I published the analysis of a couple of readings by Harry T whereby I showed step by step exactly how he was doing it, it occurred to me that the name of this site is indeed BadPsychics, that perhaps I should expose a few more psychics, as I had become a tad lazy, and by doing the reviews of Most Haunted, I had become a bit of a whore for ratings. Reviewing Most Haunted gets me easy traffic to the site, but after I checked how many people had read the Harry T article, I realised that in fact more people read that, than the review of MH I had done the day after.

So bizarrely it seems that people are more interested in seeing me expose fake psychics than make fun of a fake ghost hunting TV show.

Well, after speaking to someone via email, who had insisted that John Edward was the real deal, I thought I would revisit this man. A man who has in fact been exposed as a fake many many times over the years.

I was challenged to analyse a reading he had done on an Australian TV show, as this I was told was similar to the reading they had received, and that they could not figure out how he was doing it.

So I summoned my favourite minion to transcribe the reading for me, (Forum member girlseeksghosts), and below is what I found out.

Now for the record because people ask, when I analyse these types of readings I prefer to make it as analytical as possible, I take out any emotion. So right now, as I write this I have not seen the video. I will work only from the transcript.

I do this as it allows me to concentrate purely on what is being said.

Now should I come to a part that I cannot understand how it is done, or I need to know a bit more about the person being read for context, I will then watch the video to see what clues were given away by the audience member, or to better understand why something was said. But usually the words are enough. It allows the purest form of analysis. And I advise anyone who has ever been convinced by a medium, to get the reading transcribed, and read it through.

Much like any magic trick, when you see the routine written down, it is much easier to figure out how it was done. So with regards to a psychic reading, you can see how many questions are asked, how many hits/misses there are and so on.

First you can watch the video yourself if you like. And after you have scroll down to see my analysis.


KEY:
John Edward - Regular font
Audience Member - BOLD
Jon Donnis (Me) - Red

I was getting pulled to this section and I feel like there is a father figure reference that they want me to bring through so I don't know if there is a father figure for you guys who passed but that to me would be like father, uncle or grandfather. There is J or a G name that they want me to highlight so that's either someone who is living or passed but it's in that section over there, does that make sense?

My father in law.

Passed?

Yes passed.

I always find John Edward easy to expose, since he uses a technique called "Shotgunning" basically that means he fires a load of information out very quickly and hope that some sticks.

Whenever you hear the words "Father figure" you know you are dealing with a fraud, someone cold reading.

The reason they use these words is because it widens their net for catching the fish. It is deliberately vague.

Father Figure could be, an actual father, step father, father in law, grandfather, great grand father, older brother, older male friend, any older male relative, uncle, cousin, a friend of the family, someone you work with. Basically any male who is older than you. And even John admits this when he says "father, uncle or grandfather"

He then says that it could be someone who is alive or dead! 

So to clarify here, the man who claims psychics powers, and can talk to the dead, is ASKING the audience member if they know someone alive or dead, or could also be a father, uncle or grandfather. 

And then he expands this by saying a "J or G" name.

So to get a hit, he needs the woman to acknowledge, 1 of 3 possible relatives that are dead or alive, with a name that could be, John, Jonathan, James, Julian, Jacob, Jason, and Jeffrey, Jushua etc etc. 

or

George, Gavin, Greg, Gabriel, Grant, Graham, Gordon, Glenn, Gilbert etc etc

So this as you can imagine is a pretty huge net.

But the hilarious thing is the woman says Father in Law, so not even one of the 3 that John Edward guessed at, but since it was a father figure, the net is so wide he will count that as a hit.

And then he asks her again "Passed?" and she confirms.

And there's got to be a J or G name connected to that.

Yes, he's Giovanni but we call him Jonny.

So with the huge net cast, the woman comes back with Giovanni or Jonny as the name.

Note. John Edward asked the woman if she knew a G or J name, He did NOT know the name he did NOT tell her the name, he did NOT know the relation to her, he did NOT know if the person was dead or alive.

ALL of this information the woman told to him. This is how basic cold reading works.

There's a five connection that they want me to talk about so the five connection to me would either be the month of May because that's the 5th month or the 5th of a month, birthday or anniversary but there is something 'five' related that they want me to talk about and he has to have a child that's with him or there is a younger energy that passed so there's a younger person that's connected to him, correct?

He had 5 kids.

Back to shot gunning, he is giving a lot of information here very quickly, this doesn't let the woman really think, every guess he makes regarding the "five connection" is wrong, every single one is wrong. Not a month, a day, an anniversary a birthday, hell just by pure chance I am surprised he didn't hit on anything there.

But the woman has found something that matches the number 5, that being how many kids he had. Remember John Edward did NOT say this, he did NOT tell her, she is telling him the connection. All John said was the number 5.

So other possibilities to the number 5 could be, outside of what he said.

House number, so 5, 15, 25 etc. Age the person died (50, 55, 65, 75 etc), a favourite number, how many animals he had, a military number, a number on a tattoo. Basically when a psychic is this vague, and just asking questions, then something like a simple number is almost impossible to miss on.

Ok, and is one of the kids passed or is there...

Two of them.

John guessed that one of 5 children had passed, it was in fact two, so John is wrong here, just think how much more impressive this had been if he had said straight off that 2 of the children had died. But please don't forget, John did NOT know that any child had passed just seconds earlier, remember the audience member told John that this man had 5 kids, John Edward was going on about months and birthdays. So he has taken information given to him by the person being read, and is letting that shape how the reading continues, again this is basic cold reading.

So far it is safe to say that John Edward has not said a single thing that could be classed as a straight forward statement, he has only asked questions, and in fact he has pretty much been wrong on every single thing when he was slightly specific

Ok somebody passed from something head related or there was something...

That was him.

John is clearly talking about one of the dead children here, probably assuming that someone died in a motorbike accident, or a car accident, it is a typical go to by many psychics as everyone knows someone who has died in such an accident.

But again John Edward is wrong, and the audience member tells him that it was her Father in Law who passed from someone head related.

But lets quickly look at how common head trauma is when someone dies.

As I previously mentioned, any kind of vehicle accident, whether as the driver, passenger, or even being hit by car, then there are brain tumours, brain cancer, water on the brain, brain swelling, stroke, dementia, and on and on. So any of that would be a hit if you are so vague as to say "something head related".

Ok so there was something head related that comes up with him. A Catherine or Karen, there is a C or K name but it's a nickname not a real name so it's like somebody that was known to have C or a K, I hear the 'K' sound.

He's got a younger daughter Celina.

John quickly moves on, since as part of the shotgunning technique, you want as much info given in as short a period of time as possible, then you move on, that way after the reading when the client is remembering back, there is simply too much to remember, so they tend to concentrate on things they feel were right, not realising that it was in fact they who gave all the information away.

It is time for more guess work. I wont bother listing all possible C and K names, you get the idea.

The woman desperate to keep helping John forwards the name Celina.

That would be an S.

It's a C.

No, no it phonetically would sound like an S to me so I can't accept that, its got to be a 'K' name. Think like Coco or Kiki or Keara or someone with like a 'K' kind of name and then they are telling me to you that.... has his wife also passed?

Yes.

Just keep in mind they are in Australia, and you can understand why he guesses those names.

Next he then ASKS the woman if her father in laws wife had passed, again note John does NOT know, he is asking a question, not making a statement. The woman answers, and therefore is giving John information, not the other way around. If you have to ask, then you are not psychic.

Because I see him with his contemporary which is the wife energy and someone had congestive heart failure that means like they fill up with fluids or heaviness in the chest in some way and that was either his sister or somebody that would be like a sister figure to somebody that's here because they are talking about the sister figure, now is there some reference to him losing a sister as well as his wife?

There was a lot of family overseas in Italy but there was one that went..

and do you know her? (points to lady nearby)

It's my sister.

Hang on, we moved away from the wife, and now to a "sister figure" of the man who died, John is very clear here, he is talking about a dead sister figure, to the dead father in law of the woman being read.

But then that quickly changes as he points to a woman near the woman being read. John ASKS her "do you know her?" And the woman reveals it is her sister.

Because I feel like I need to bring you into this and I am supposed to talk to you about , is it your mum thats passed? (now addressing the sister)

No no.

So again John is jumping all over the place here, what happened to the father in laws dead wife, or his sister/sister figure, all of that is quickly forgotten. He then starts talking to the woman's sister in the audience, and instantly gets things wrong when he ASKS if her mum had passed. Again he did NOT know, he is asking a question, and this time the reply is "no, no"

Then who would be the aunt you are named for or the older female that has passed the name down? They are showing me parallel lines so when I see parallel lines it usually means a name has been passed down.

Crystal, my auntie's daughter is Crystal and my daughter is Crystal.

This is hard to keep up, when reading text on a screen, imagine facing this barrage of ever changing info face to face and trying to keep up with what is being said.

So John was wrong when he asked if the mother is dead, so he goes to the next best thing, that being an aunt, but John was originally asking who the woman being read was sharing the name with, that is what he was saying. But the woman then TELLS John that her cousin and her daughter share the same name of Crystal. Again none of this information has come from John Edward, he has been consistently wrong on every question he has asked, ever assumption he has made. Everything, every important detail he has been wrong on, but the sheer amount of information he has said, the speed in which he says it, the way he asks a question and latches onto the answer, its incredible how fast he is.

Ok and is your aunt passed?

Yes.

Again John does NOT know, he is asking a question, something a real psychic would never need to do, this time the assumption made in the question is correct. It is afterall a 50% chance of being right, and looking at ages and so on, its a fair assumption to make.

So that aunt, C or K name, is connected to you as well, correct?

Yes, yes, of course.

Yes it is her Aunt, that is how she is connected, she has literally just told you that.

You are all connected its just how I have to get it in my head, so the C or K name is telling me to come to you to you to acknowledge how the name has been passed down, so you both have children with the same name?

Yes.

Back to the C/K name, and he is now stating that this person with this potential name is dead, and that is who is talking to him. Bizarre that the dead person couldn't just say "my name is...." Instead they say "I have a C or K sounding name, you work out the rest"

Now I don't know if there is some reference to you going to school for healthcare or somebody dealing or doing something healthcare related?

Crystal is.

Which Crystal? The cousin, the daughter? 

Ok that so thats just my way of backing up the information. Why do I do it like this? Well for all the people that are going to tweet me that I am not actually doing this, we have never met, correct?

No.

I have not spoken to you?

No.

So who is the dead person with the C/K name?

John is now for some reason doing the old magicians technique of making sure everyone knows the audience member is not a plant, but he has literally gotten everything wrong, so who would think this was a plant I don't know.

I just want to be very very clear. One of the most important things is validation and what this does is show that your father in law, your mother in law, with their children and connected to your aunt who's passed, its their way of saying they are around you guys and they see what is going on. Did you know that somebody is expanding their family did you know that there is either like an engagement and somebody is kind of getting together or there is a marriage and people are expanding, do you know this?

Yes.

I am legit getting a headache trying to keep up with all of this.

Since when was there a mother in law? This is the first she is mentioned as far as I recall?

Now he is ASKING if someone is pregnant, well lets be clear here, we already know that this woman has a lot of family, her father in law had 5 kids for a start, we have cousins mentioned, daughters and so on. So to guess that someone might be pregnant or thinking of starting a family, but then to not actually specify who is really really vague if you think about it.

But also notice that he also threw in their a marriage, an engagement, blimey this net is so big I don't see who wouldn't be in it.

Ok so its been announced already?

Yes.

Now at this point, John does not actually know what the announcement is, is it a baby, an engagement, a marriage, so note how he will not specify anything until the woman tells him.

Why am I feeling like we had to put it off? Like what did we have to put off like did somebody put off their date? Or they put off doing this. They had put something off, I feel like it can't happen now it has to happen then, its like a putting off of something?

Well she can't have the baby when she was supposed to because it falls on your birthday! (said to daughter)

So they decided to it put off?

Once again the woman gives away the info, John Edward did NOT know.

The wedding?(daughter)

Well no, the wedding is in April but the baby is due October but she found out yesterday she might have to have a Cesarean I said that would be good because then it won't be on her birthday (points to daughter)

And again all this information is coming from the women in the audience and NOT John Edward, he did not know any of this remember, he asked a vague question and the women filled in all the blanks. This is known as "fishing" hence the reference of nets I keep making.

This is what I talk about this being a current event and it's their way of saying to you we see whats going on around you and if I could be so bold and I know its live television and if you dont want to go there its absolutely ok you don't have to but you were saying that you wanted to keep things separate in other words you wouldn't want to have two people... its like having your birthday on Christmas...

Oh exactly I don't want ... you can't have the baby...

Its all good! Now we saw a very cute video ealier in the show of a little dog messing around with the cat. They are telling me that you have one of those that passed, somebody has a dog thats there and it's so funny I supposed to talk about all these people in your family and the reaction the dog got was bigger than the people, no matter where I go it's the same.

Yes.

So first of all do you think that John was perhaps watching the audience while this video of a little dog was playing earlier, and seeing peoples reactions? How often do you see a dog on the TV or in real life and turn to someone and say "oh look at him he is just like Rex", so that is a possibility here, however I just think that John took a simple guess here, since most people have pets, and everyone has had a pet die on them, and he is talking with 3 people pretty much here, so its an easy assumption to make that one of them would have a dead dog.

I could start on the logistics of pets being in the afterlife, the sheer number of dogs and cats etc that have ever existed, then you have to ask about other mammals, are all mammals in the afterlife? All mammals that have ever existed? Just think about that for a moment. Is it starting to sound ridiculous enough yet?

I supposed to talk about either somebody had a mishap on the big boat or there was a mishap in the family on the boat or there is a joke about the mishap on the boat?

She was just on a cruise (daughter)

I just got off a boat!

Was there a mishap?

Once again John makes a vague comment and then ASKS a question about a boat, straight away the daughter comments about a cruise (not a boat), but then the mother continues.

There was a lot!

So hypothetically could we say that there was a reference of umm I don't want to say man overboard, but could we say there was an issue where maybe somebody did...

They were kicked off the boat!

So a man overboard is what John says, the woman however says something completely different in that someone was kicked off a boat, two very different things I think you can agree.

Yes, It happened? Was it somebody you were with?

(daughter says no)

Indirectly?

John doesn't know because he is not psychic, so he ASKS the women. He assumes it was someone they knew, but his assumption is wrong, and by telling him it was not someone they were with, that sets up his next reply.

Yes, because I have a feeling of good riddance like good riddance...

Yes, yes!

Now if they had answers his questions with a "yes" and that being someone they knew, would he still have then said "good riddance"? Probably not. This is how the reply of a client shapes the reading.

If you had to ask for someone to come through today, would it have been your father in law to come through for us?

I feel like he's in our house all the time.

More questions from John, remember back at the beginning, John had no idea who he claims had come through, the woman gave him all the information.

Yes because I feel he's making me feel like it's no big deal

John Edward asks a question, gets a reply, and then uses that as part of his reply to make it sound like he knew all along.

So to better understand.

Psychic asks Question: Would you want this outcome

Client gives Answer: Yes that is what I want

Psychics gives Answer: Yes that is what I thought.

Can you see how the psychic is using the answers to his questions to shape what he says next. This is cold reading. This is the method used so that after the reading has finished, and the client is remembering the reading, they will remember these confirmations as if the psychic knew all along, or like the psychic told them, when the truth is the complete opposite. The ONLY way to keep up with what is going on, is by analysing the reading and really seeing and understanding how they are doing it.

I'm so glad that you have said that, I'm not going nuts, I can go home and tell my husband.

You're not nuts but why is your husband not taking care of his stomach stuff? I'm just passing on what I see I am not a doctor I can't diagnose I just want to know why your husband is not taking care of his stomach stuff?

Oh I don't know about any stomach stuff!

The woman mentions her husband for the first time, and straight away John Edward jumps on it, and ASKS why he is not taking care of his "stomach stuff".
And of course its a complete miss. 100% wrong.

But to understand why he said this is to understand how psychics work, they work on statistics, on educated guesses, and so on.

Looking at the woman he is talking to, he is guessing her age, looking at her own outwardly physical condition, and making assumptions about the husband without ever seeing him. So she looks to be in her 50s, over weight, so it is fair to assume her husband is older than her, so maybe 60 or on his way to 60, and if she is overweight then good chance he will be too, so an overweight man around 60, well most have issues with diet, with their stomachs, many will be on drugs for other issues, and those drugs can affect the stomach as a side effect, however in this case the woman's husband has a good stomach, but I wanted to show you how psychics think and why they say the things they do, it is all about educated guesswork.

No, no, isn't he the person, oh maybe I got the wrong guy. Is there another son that he has that has like really bad acid and stuff?

Yes one of my sons, yes yes.

So John admits he is wrong but doesn't want to give up, so moves it to a son, the woman then tells him it is her son.

Why is that not checked?

Oh it is he has been to a specialist about that and he is on treatment now for it.

It's happening?

Yes.

There is no way around this, John is wrong on every step, first he assumes the husband is ignoring a problem with his stomach, he is wrong so moves onto the son, and again assumes he is ignoring the problem, but is wrong as the woman says that the son is being treated and not ignoring it at all.

Ok, so maybe it's just they are showing it to me, it's like we see it happening. I always err on the side of lets be cautious, lets look at it!, Maybe ask him if he is taking his meds, maybe see if there is any change in that. I know I'm in Sydney but is he in a different part of the country, in a different place?

No he lives with me but he is going soon, moving soon.

Despite being proven wrong John is trying to reword things to get out of it, he then makes an assumption that the son lives far away, but yet again John is wrong

Away?

Yes.

That's just his grandfather's way of looking after him. Thank you very much I hope this helps.

And that is that. Every full name that John said was wrong. All of them were wrong.

He got the relations wrong, he got the conditions wrong, he literally got every single thing he said wrong, he asked a ton of questions, the woman gave him all of the information.

This was a really poor reading. But look at the audience, look at the reactions, the people lapped it up. John Edward never said a single statement that was correct, the closest he got was by saying there was a dead dog, he never said the name of the dog, the breed, nothing. There was not a single part of that reading that even came close to being right. Yet the audience all lapped it up. And the reason why, is because John Edward is incredibly good at his particular type of mediumship, he has performed this style day after day, year after year, he does it now without thinking, he just fires off so much information, that it is hard to keep up, even me with text on a screen which I can read over and over found it hard to keep up. Yet when you really get to the bottom of it, he is a terrible psychic who gets nearly everything wrong.

Yet he is one of the most successful psychics in the world. He is charismatic, he has a near perfect method of delivering his readings in a way that make it very hard if you are the recipient to even follow, never mind debunk.

Anyway I hope that I helped people better understand how Psychic John Edward works. And perhaps give you the tools to spot other fakes who use similar techniques. As always if there is anything you disagree with, let me know in the comments.

If you would like to show your appreciation for my work why not donate an Amazon Email Gift Voucher to me to show your appreciation. I do this for free, you will never see a load of ads on this site, so the only way I get anything out of writing, or running this site is if people donate.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Amazon-E-mail-Amazon-co-uk-Gift-Voucher/dp/B006AUF6X0/

Just click the link above, and you can donate anything from £1 to £1 Million!

Just send any voucher too webmaster@badpsychics.co.uk 

This is the best way to show your appreciation for the work I do. So if you enjoy the site, then how about donating me a voucher, and I promise I will only spend it on good stuff like video games or whiskey! And if not that's ok. I will keep doing my reviews regardless.

Please leave your comments below. 

Tweet me on @JonDonnis and send your abuse to @TheBadPsych

You can also join the Forum and share your thoughts there. 

We are also on Facebook, just search BadPsychics and you will find us. 

By Jon Donnis