CUCKOOS AND COCOA PUFFS by Carol Krol [originally published in Skeptical Eye -- Vol. 8, No

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

CUCKOOS AND COCOA PUFFS by Carol Krol [originally published in Skeptical Eye -- Vol. 8, No. 3, 1995, a newsletter published by the National Capital Area Skeptics (NCAS), a local activist group based in Silver Spring, MD The next issue of "Skeptical Eye" will publish letters from Phil Klass and Barry Karr taking issue with some of Randi's comments about CSICOP.] After years of battling spoon-bender and self-proclaimed psychic Uri Geller, James "The Amazing" Randi finally has reason to celebrate. So do we. The well-deserved personal triumph of this noted magician, author and skeptical rabble-rouser is clearly a triumph for the skeptical community as well. "This is a total victory against Geller," says Michael Kennedy, Randi's New York attorney. Three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a decision in December, 1994, siding with a lower court judge, that ordered Uri Geller to pay sanctions to CSICOP (The Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) in a 1991 lawsuit brought against both James Randi and CSICOP. In the opinion, written by Judge David B. Sentelle -- who was joined in the decision by Judges Patricia M. Wald and Judith W. Rodgers - - he states, "Since Geller's rise to prominence in the early 1970's, Randi has set about exposing various Geller feats as the fraudulent tricks of a confidence man." The editorial nature of this statement, along with Sentelle's subsequent reference to Geller's "litigious history," can be seen as particularly significant in light of the fact that the decision by the court was based on a series of technical findings rather than on the merits of the case itself. Geller was originally ordered to pay $149,000 to CSICOP to cover the cost of CSICOP's legal fees. He made unsuccessful attempts to overturn the sanctions award, and a final settlement was reached in January. Geller has paid the first $40,000 of up to $120,000 as part of this agreement. He has agreed to pay a total of $70,000 over the next three years, in addition to the first $50,000 of any sums he might recover in a new action he is bringing against his former attorneys. As we go to press, Randi and Geller have hammered out a final agreement as well. "Everything is completely settled," says Michael Kennedy. "It is a global settlement of all disputes." Kennedy adds, "...Geller has dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice rather than appear at a continuation of the deposition of his that I was taking wherein the court ordered him to perform minor miracles." The confidential settlement covers all potential actions in the future undertaken by either party. In 1991, Geller filed this $15 million suit against James Randi and CSICOP, claiming that Randi was speaking as an agent of CSICOP and alleging that Randi had defamed him by comments made to the International Herald Tribune. Randi's exact comments were that Geller "tricked even reputable scientists" with tricks that "are the kind that used to be on the back of cereal boxes when I was a kid. Apparently scientists don't eat cornflakes anymore." Legal battles with Geller are hardly novel to Randi. Geller has hounded Randi for the past several years with lawsuits that span the globe, from Japan to Florida to Hungary to New York. The Japan case in particular would almost make for good comedy. Randi had granted an interview to a Japanese reporter who spoke no English. There was an interpreter present, and the reporter began asking Randi a series of questions, some of which involved his opinion of Uri Geller. "The spoken Japanese language and the written Japanese language are NOT the same thing," Randi explains. "Characters must be looked at in context to figure out the meaning." At one point, Randi told a story about a supporter of Geller's, Wilbur Franklin. A classic game of "telephone" ensued, and the quotes on the page were quite different from his original comments. "Wilbur Franklin, a parapsychologist, was a diabetic who gave up insulin and went to a faith healer and eventually died," says Randi. "I said Franklin had a way of shooting himself in the foot, because every time he would make a statement about Geller, it would turn out to be not so. And I said he sat down at his typewriter and this time he shot himself in the head, because he wrote in a magazine article that he would stake his entire personal and professional reputation on the reality of Uri Geller's phenomenon. That's shooting yourself in the head; that's not shooting yourself in the foot. The way it got translated was that 'Wilbur Franklin found out Uri Geller was a fake and shot himself.' "Then they asked me whether I thought Geller knows that what he is doing is a trick. I said there's no other way that it can be done. You have to be conscious of what you do when you do trickery. I said the reason for it is that Geller doesn't have any sense of what he does to people when he performs these tricks and tells them that they're real. He has no social conscience was my final word. That came out in Japanese as 'Uri Geller is a loathsome social disease.'" Randi would have been able to prove that he had not made the published statements, since the publishing company had the original tape recording. However, he could not afford to go to Japan, nor pay a lawyer, for the duration of the trial. While Randi communicated all of this in writing to the Japanese court, he received no response, and the case went to trial, whereupon he was convicted of "insult" (as opposed to libel). Randi was ordered to pay $2,000 U.S.; ultimately, however, since the charge of "insult" is not recognized by American law, he was not compelled to pay Geller. The global settlement recently negotiated by Michael Kennedy, in fact, resolves this case as well. These issues were re-visited due to the communication difficulties between the Japanese lawyers and Randi. It has been a long, difficult, expensive process for Randi. However, he's garnered tremendous support from a variety of people -- from good friends to total strangers on the Internet. "The support I got was just incredible," says Randi. "I could not have expected this kind of reaction. People were exceedingly generous from the very beginning. Those checks just started to pour in. Every last one of them are saints as far as I'm concerned." It wasn't just money pouring in either. "If I needed any kind of information, all I had to do was get on-line," says Randi. "For example, look at the Cocoa Puffs box." Randi had been fishing around for an example of a trick printed on the back of a cereal box. He decided to find out if anyone in cyberspace could help. "I just said, 'Anybody got any examples?,' and this guy replied that he had a friend in California who collects cereal boxes as a hobby," says Randi. "The guy immediately came up with a photocopy of [a trick on the back of] a Cocoa Puffs box and said he would send me the original box if I needed it. Bang! Just like that. I got my answer within 48 hours. And I got so many offers from lawyers all over, offering help with references and so forth." Though they were initially named as co-defendants by Geller, Randi and CSICOP fought their legal battles separately in the 1991 suit. As an executive council member and one of CSICOP's founders, Randi constantly promoted the group and spoke on their behalf. "[CSICOP Chairman Paul] Kurtz cut me loose from the very beginning. He told the insurance company that I hadn't been working on behalf of CSICOP when the 'dreadful act' of telling the truth about Geller was actually uttered. And of course I was. That was part of my job." Although Randi was compelled to defend himself without CSICOP's support, he concedes that it may have benefitted him to pursue his own legal battle with Geller. "It may not have been very wise for me to accept CSICOP's lawyers," says Randi. "For instance, they might emphasize certain things in CSICOP's favor that might not be in my favor. And CSICOP obviously recognized that they had different interests." CSICOP ran an advertisement in the _Skeptical Inquirer_, appealing for contributions to help fight the 1991 case. Randi's name was mentioned in the advertisement, and he feels this was misleading to the skeptical community. "CSICOP did me a disservice by running that ad with my name attached to it. I got a lot of response from people, especially on e-mail, who thought they were contributing toward my defense as well when they sent checks to CSICOP. Not one cent that was ever given to CSICOP defended me except, I believe, in two cases where the check itself was made payable to CSICOP and Randi. Otherwise, it all went to CSICOP." Randi is in in good company when it comes to being sued by Geller. "Litigious" indeed. Geller has sued Timex, the watch company; Prometheus Books and Victor Stenger (an author for Prometheus); and Michael Hutchinson (a book distributor in England), to name a few. His beef with Timex arose from a commercial they ran which featured a "psychic;" Geller claimed the "psychic" looked like him. The "psychic" tries to stop a Timex watch, but can't do it. It, of course, keeps on tickin'. The case never went to court. So what now? What's left after years of battling Geller? "Nothing," says Randi. "Just me going after the insurance company for the money." Legal counsel in Baltimore are currently reviewing the possibility of recovery of at least a portion of Randi's litigation expenses. Randi concludes, "The bottom line on this whole Geller thing is that I didn't yield an inch. I didn't back up once. I never gave him the satisfaction of ever seeing me flinch, ever. Any time that he really threw the gauntlet at me, I hit him right back." Randi's legal battles with Geller are finally over. That's the good news. The bad news is that his legal costs are still sizable, and any and all contributions are welcome. Contributions to The James Randi Fund may be sent to: The James Randi Fund 3555 West Reno Avenue, Suite L Las Vegas, NV 89118

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank