GARY P. POSNER

A Man Obsessed with A Psychic's Destruction.

Part 3

** Featuring the Downfall Of John Merrell **

On the 13th page of his article, Posner begins,

My initial contact with Renier occurred on October 28, 1986, when she and I were guests on Bev Smith’s former radio program on WKIS in Orlando. Shortly before air time, as we introduced ourselves, Renier informed me of her recent victory in her libel action against John Merrell, a co-founder of the Northwest Skeptics. Renier seemed to believe that her claims of psychic powers had been vindicated by the jury, and that her legal battle with Merrell was now behind her.

Is the above true, or is it a blatant lie? We only have Posner’s word that Ms Renier said any such thing. No-one else seems to have heard her say it. If we are to believe Posner; Noreen Renier is a ruthless publicity seeker. Surely such a person would include this in their advertising package - Federal Court vindicates my psychic powers. That she did not speaks volumes. I fear the only place you will find this alleged utterance by Ms Renier is inside Posner’s head.

Apparently, Merrell informed Posner that he first heard of Noreen Renier in mid-1985, at a time “when she was doing her rounds in his home state of Oregon.” What “rounds” I wonder was she doing - a milk round perhaps. Or maybe a paper delivery round? Yes, make her sound cheap to bolster the case. In fact she was living there to be near her father and younger brother.

Merrell, being a true pseudo-skeptic, “conducted some research” on Ms Renier. The final file was a collection of malicious lies and half-truths. Ms Renier sued Merrell, after receiving a copy of a letter that Merrell had sent to a newspaper editor (who quite rightly refused to publish it) in an attempt to discredit her.

After a three-day trial the jury found Merrell guilty of libel and awarded Ms Renier $25,000 in damages. Merrell appealed and lost. He declared himself bankrupt to avoid paying the debt, however, this too failed. Bankruptcy would only alleviate the debt as long as no act of malice had been committed. Merrell’s malicious lies caught up with him once again. Four malicious lies to be precise. Out of ten allegations made by Merrell, the court found four to be “malicious.”

All Merrell’s further efforts to discredit Ms Renier failed...miserably. Merrell claims that Ms Renier’s won because she managed to move several female jurors to tears by her dramatic reenactment of a murder. If that is indeed what tipped the balance, why did he fail to convince the Court of Appeal? Did she also succeed in bringing the Court of Appeal to tears also?

I suspect the only person who cried after the litigation was Mr. Merrell.

[Note from Gary Posner (March 2010):  Merrell's website was revamped in early 2010, and much material removed, in conjunction with an apparent cease-fire with Noreen Renier.]