Housekeeping: As is posted on the EMF Message Board page, this forum is for support, sharing opinions and experiences for those who have left RSE and have doubts and concerns about their tenure there. It is NOT a place for proselytizing for RSE, JZK Inc or Ramtha. Play nicely or your post will be sent to cyberspace time-out for all eternity. The disclaimer for EMF is located on this page http://enlightenmefree.com/disclaimer.html and all posters agree to the terms of the disclaimer. Be sure you've read it before posting.
You may also want to visit a complementary forum at FACTNet http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/779.html
If you wish to use a Spell Checker, you may wish to use this free one: http://www.jacuba.com/
I was wondering.. at one time they played a very old Ramtha tape at BTO and I -as a foreigner- had big difficulties to understand what he/she was saying the syntax was not normal english and there was a heavy dialect. If this was JZ faking it, it must have been difficult to maintain?
(I have no difficulties to understand her current english as Ramtha)
So my question is: Did she change suddenly from the very heavy accent to her more or less normal voice or was this a gradual process? Does somebody remember?
As it were indeed, the alteration was gradual...
That is my observation also.
Thanks for the information. Lots to think about...
My first dialogue was 1984 - heavy accent;
A Phoenix Intensive - about '86(?)- with the 'circles'- a New Mexico twang accent; Then back to the heavy 'British' accent - and back and forth over the years. In "Where Angels Fear to Tread" you can hear the full range of accents - alcohol seems to make maintaining an accent difficult...
He once said that as he got more familiar with JZs body and our language it would gradually adjust to the way it sounds now ..like us. I too wonder how she could have faked that talking.
I also wonder
WHY JZ won the court case against Jeffs allegations back in the day...it seems the Chanelling phenom was validated by the decision makers in our legal system. Why?
SAS- re: Why Jeff lost to J in court?
Of course I do not know- Everything I am saying is only my personal perception based upon the videos I watched. I am sharing my perspective and know NOTHING of this issue first hand. when I watched the videos of Jeff, I looked at it from an outsider's point of view.
He exposed J/R as a fraud... then he claimed he had a right to some of the fortune she made because he helped her "build the business"
To an outsider, it sounds fishy. Almost like, hey she robbed the people, and I am entitled to some of that money because I helped her do it! I am not saying that is what he said, but it is a possible interpretation from the legal world. All that is needed is a little doubt to blow his case, and he did not look so credible.
I was not around in those days, I did not know Jeff. Please receive the true meaning behind my communication. I have empathy for the man. He bought into all of the stories just like we did, and probably more! First he was told his highest fulfillment would be in marriage to his "soulmate" My understanding is he was a homosexual. (?) If so, How could going against his true nature possibly bring him his "highest" joy? He was used to make J money with horses. He did not seek medical care for his condition because he was focussing on "blue" to heal himself, as we have all been taught. He was denied access to R and grieved the loss of his teacher, and friends. The man truly suffered, and in the end lost his life! I feel for him-
my only point is, looking at the situation from the viewpoint of those that made the ruling, he may have sounded contradictory. We all know how charming J is, who knows what hypnotic NLP she used on the justice system- the story she told us was how she was traumatized over his "indiscretions", I am sure she received more empathy, a beautiful married woman finds her husband has aids, and he claims SHE is a fraud! ??? AND he wants his share of the loot, that she tricked people into giving her because he helped her do it. He sounds like an accomplice.
Do you see how that interpretation could happen now? I don't think the channeling was validated, I do not think they were "judging" on the validation of the channeling- they were deciding whether or not Jeff was entitled to more money after he made a legal settlement. Sure there is alot more drama in this case, but their legal task was to determine the validity of the first agreement /settlement made. think of how many people get less than their fair share in divorces in this country. Lots!
Please excuse me if I made any inacurate assumptions here.
In my interactions with Jeff Knight before and during his trial he talked about his bewilderment when he first heard Judy channel Ramtha at Richard Chamberlain's house (1980?)--this was at her invitation. Jeff was not into spiritualism so he more or less took the event as somehow authentic--ramtha was "real" enough to him. He had nothing to compare it to. As years went on he noted how utterly repetitious the whole thing was and how JZ could seem to manipulate the entity to appear at will as she could other spirits including a harsh version of a "Jesus" and a 19th century equestrian named "Charles." Apparently Charles was not too good at picking Arabians and overvalued them continually.
Jeff realized after he had time away from RSE that JZ was quite the actress the whole time. Whether she had or has a "split personality" that she does not entirely control was possible he said. If she does have a "split", imo, she's mentally ill, not gifted as a medium as so many of her devotees and some scholars perceive.
I used to study channelers for over a decade whenever I had a chance in New Mexico (1975-1993) in the 'haydays' of the channeling phenomenon. To the person the channeler or medium spoke more oddly, more filler words, and with more of an affected accent when they started out. Later on their styles would get more polished and fluent until they could yakyakyak away like politicians on a stump or evangelists at the podium. JZ is no different. If you think so, check your perception or point of view. One needs to step far back from her, compare and contrast her style with a dozen or so others, then make up your mind.
Jeff Knight was 7 years old visiting his grandfathers farm when he first rode a horse — a pony — and he was 16 when he took his first lesson.
He remembers the name of the first Arabian he rode - Star Jur and he remembers how it was that his dream of becoming a top breeder and trainer grew, from the time he began giving lessons in California to 1984, when his $40,000 mare VP Kahlua won first place honors both at the U.S. Nationals and the World Championships in Paris……….
The News Tribune..
columnist CR Roberts
re the settlement and evidentiary hearing--it was not a trial, there was no jury, only a judge. Jeff claimed, as I recall, that he took 120,000$ in slush money that he and JZ kept in a safe in the house when he was departing. Somehow, JZ/R had him convinced that this was enough and he signed something to that effect. Later, when his shared delusion over the Ramtha entity waned, he realized 2 things: He helped JZ raise millions of dollars, and JZ was looking more and more like a rascal who chose to manipulate folks whether she believed in the Ram or not. It literally took him years with help from his friend Geoff and others to come to sane terms with this mess. In that he was no different than most ex-members of cults.
One of Jeff's goals at the "evidentiary hearing" was to expose JZ and help others. His primary goal was to recover monies owed him to assist with his failing health and extensive medical bills. In the end, the judge decided in favor of JZ but did award Jeff litigation expenses for his effort because he had a good point but he just did not establish it well enough. Jeff could not afford to carry on with an appeal and he ran out of time in any case.
It was my understanding that Jeff won the first round and after he died Judy appealed and the decision was reversed.
It was my understanding that Judy had promised Jeff assistance with medical care, and when he refused to return to her, she refused help. This conversation was heard by a former staff member.
It was my understanding that the issue of channeling and the validity or not of Ramtha was not addressed by the court.
"He had a good point but he just did not establish it well enough."
In court, rulings are made based on a "preponderance of the evidence." Preponderance means that there is more evidence for something than against it.
It is the job of the attorney to gather and present evidence in a logical and meaningful way. An attorney must also be able to "think on their feet" in order to rubut false or exaggerative claims made by the other side.
This is what transpires in a "normal" courtroom. Now let's throw in some of Derren Brown's examples of how to control and manipulate others.
In response to cynical: "It was my understanding that the issue of channeling and the validity or not of Ramtha was not addressed by the court."
If you study case law regarding religion in court, look at one that is cited often: Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson's statement as he presided over "US vs Ballard" in California, 1944 (the trial from 1940-44 was about the alleged fraud by the I AM cult perpetrated on various members. The case was dismissed on a technicality by 1946. The I AM was indicted on 19 counts and could not use the US mail to distribute their religious stuff again until 1956.
Jackson said---They had organized a bogus and deceptive cult, Mighty I AM, which taught "nothing but humbug, untainted by any trace of truth." But having said this, and having admitted the potential harm to "over-credulous people," Jackson stated that "the price of freedom of religion or of speech or of the press is that we must put up with, and even pay for, a good deal of rubbish." [I quote this from Philip Jenkins 2004 "The Dream Catchers" (p 249) but you can find other sources for this statement including as early as "These Also Believe" by Charles S Braden, 1949 in his chapter on the I AM cult]
The I AM case decision is still used as a guide when it comes to "bizarre religious beliefs" in court. Thus, the validity of channeling or the existence of Ramtha could not be not an issue in Jeff's hearing against JZ. What was at issue was whether Jeff could prove that JZ hid money and assets from him and whether he deserved any of it.