Legal

Jurisprudence: Clairvoyance activity and fraud*

Generally speaking, the victim’s erroneous belief and limited control are not obstacles provided for by law to the creation of the offense of fraud, from the moment where the sufficient maneuvers and deception of the perpetrator had the aim and effect of maintaining or annihilating them. This is indeed the case in this case since it appears from the file that by using a set of artifices giving each other force and credit, the defendant used fraudulent maneuvers and made use of a false capacity as a clairvoyant with the sole aim of deceiving the victim by making him believe in the existence of a power and the occurrence of chimerical events, in order to obtain from the latter the payment of various sums of money without any connection with any result. It is therefore appropriate, contrary to the opinion of the first judges, to condemn him for fraud, without the victim’s supposed habit of consulting magicians, marabouts or clairvoyants being able to hinder the creation of the offense. 

Bordeaux Court of Appeal 10/15/2010

  • With the kind authorization of “Echos Judiciaires Girondins n°5737 of December 31, 2010”.

A word to the readers

Comments

1 comment
l-inad

Notre avis: cette Jurisprudence vient conforter les actions de l&#39INAD afin de protéger le consommateur et moraliser la profession. En effet,de nombreux &#39&#39praticiens&#39&#39 autoproclamés et certains services audiotels qui pratiquent des manoeuvres frauduleuses dans le domaine des arts divinatoires, pourraient être poursuivis sur la base du délit d&#39escroquerie.

Etant précisé que de nombreuses plaintes sont actuellement pendantes devant les tribunaux ou en cours d&#39instruction.

Report

Your opinion counts

Leave a comment

Your email address will never be displayed.