A Legal Case For The Afterlife

The evidence for the afterlife is objective, stunning in its consistency and volume, and taken as a whole amounts to technical, irrefutable proof.
–V J Zammit

This is a short extract from V J Zammit’s fascinating paper A Lawyer Presents the Case for the Afterlife. Victor James Zammit, B.A.(Psych.) (Univ.of NSW), Grad. Dip.Ed.( Syd. Coll. Adv. Educ now Univ.Tech.Syd.), M.A. (Legal Hist.,Constl. Law)(Univ.of NSW), LL.B.(Univ.of NSW), Ph.D., lawyer, Euro-Australian, is a retired attorney of the Supreme Court of the New South Wales and the High Court of Australia.

Zammit tackled the question of the afterlife from a lawyer’s point of view. Interesting!

Particularly, as in this piece, he assesses the standards of evidence used to refute or establish the existence of life beyond death. It’s a pretty fascinating approach and well repays the effort in study. It is, of course, very pertinent to my series about Being and Consciousness.

From this point on the post is in Zammit’s own words:

From my experience, I find that the closed-minded skeptics are applying to evidence for the “paranormal” a totally unrealistic standard that is different from the tests applied by the courts and by science in other areas, such as the safety of medical treatments and drugs.

1. The “impossible to pass” test

Over the last one hundred and fifty years, psychic history has shown that there is a core group of critics who will not accept that psychic phenomena can exist. These closed-minded materialists apply a test that will guarantee the psychic phenomena being investigated will not be accepted under any circumstances.

The test, also called the “I will not believe in the afterlife even if you can prove it to me” test, is applied by those materialists working for the establishment who investigate psychic phenomena. As “investigators” they become the prosecutors, judge and jury who make sure that those who are producing genuine psychic phenomena are accused of fraud or cheating.

2. Cartesian logic test

From the Catholic Jesuit Rene Descartes, who today is ignored by nearly all the people in the world. The Cartesian test is, “doubt anything which can be doubted.” The courts do not apply this test, the Churches do not apply this test and the materialists do not apply this test when testing their own beliefs.

3. “Beyond reasonable doubt” test

This is the test used by the courts to establish the guilt of a person charged with a criminal offense. The testimony of one reliable witness is enough to find someone guilty of murder.

4. On the balance of probabilities

This is another test used by the courts to establish the liability of parties in a non-criminal, civil matter. It is obviously a much less stringent test than the criminal test of beyond reasonable doubt. The Church sometimes uses this test for its own beliefs since theology is subjective, personal, and no one can test theology on a basis beyond reasonable doubt. It is also the test usually used in medical research to test the safety of new drugs and in most areas of science.

5. Prima facie test

The “on the face of it” test. This is a very weak test. Circumstantial evidence is permitted to pass this test. Courts use it in criminal committal proceedings – the court decides whether a prima facie case has been established for the matter to be sent to a full hearing. Indirect evidence, sometimes even hearsay evidence, will be allowed. This is the test being used by some disciplines, such as psychology. All introspective psychology is accepted on the basis that it can establish prima facie that it may be correct.

There are those in orthodoxy (material and religious) who, for vested interests, fraudulently keep on applying test number one – the impossible to pass test – to evidence for the afterlife, while applying far lower levels of proof in the courts and in other research.

Yet the evidence for the afterlife is objective, stunning in its consistency and volume, and taken as a whole amounts to technical, irrefutable proof. Materialists, debunkers and closed-minded skeptics have NOT given a credible alternative explanation for any of the above-demonstrated afterlife phenomena.

Back To Prof. Keith…

This sort of rational approach is right for our project and I shall be giving out Zammit’s paper free, to all those who opt in for the free teleclasses.

Everybody gets this. You should read it while travelling with us on the journey of knowledge towards The Science Of Superbeing and Consciousness.

Go here to join the free teleclasses and review the options for SILVER, GOLD and PLATINUM options:


3 thoughts on “A Legal Case For The Afterlife

  1. Read: The Gospel of God’s Love. It will put you in touch with the highest of all humans, who have passed over from this life to an afterlife with unlimited progression to higher and higher spheres. This book came through a methodist , who was still practicing law, when his wife passed over. He missed her so much that he went to a “psychic medium, who conveyed his wife’s message to him. It was to go home and write. She would write through him. It’s called automatic writing. The Gospel of God’s Love tells the whole story of her experiences and much, much more wonderful TRUTHS.

  2. Over the many millions of centuries, it seems that we will never master or control communications, or will we/ In about 1980 Geo Meek and O’Neil in association with the deceased Prof Mueller who in life was a electronics professional. Among the three, they perfected radio communications with the “so called” dead, who, are more alive than we are. John Grant – Fuller, was the analytic author of their book “29 thousand megacycles”. Of the 350 odd media guests who took part in the reception / demonstration, some may read this and confirm what I write. This all took place in America.
    Also in America, Robert Monroe broke all the fairy tales and went to the “Other Side” on a regular OBE (out of body) expeditions and explored the Universe. His efforts are so authentic that an organisation was formed in Virginia, where anyone may participate in what he did. To my knowledge, he had over 5000 graduates in 1984. You may recognise the crime of communication?. .Or lack thereof? Please contact The Monroe Institute and report back to this page. I would like feedback as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *