Research paper on Are ghosts legal, Papers of Research Methodology

Download Research paper on Are ghosts legal and more Papers Research Methodology in PDF only on Docsity!

ARE GHOSTS LEGAL?

Submitted to: Mr. GANESH GADEKAR (Faculty: Political science & History) Submitted by: GURIVELLI SISINDRA KUMAR Submitted on: 28 th^ November 2022

CERTIFICATE OF DECLARATION

I, GURIVELLI SISINDRA KUMAR, have undergone research of the project work titled “ARE GHOSTS LEGAL?”, as a student of BALLB(hons.) Third semester, hereby declare that this Research Project has been prepared by the student for academic purpose only, & is the outcome of the investigation done by me & also prepared by myself under the supervision of Mr. GANESH GADEKAR. The views expressed in the report are personal to the student & do not reflect the views of any authority or any other person, & do not bind the statute in any manner. I also declare that this Research Paper or any part, thereof has not been or is not being submitted elsewhere for the award of any degree or Diploma. This report is the intellectual property of the on the part of student research work, & the same or any part thereof may not be used in any manner whatsoever in writing. GURIVELLI SISINDRA KUMAR 3 rd^ semester

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY

This is to certify that GURIVELLI SISINDRA KUMAR, PRN : 210104051004 , student of 3 rd^ Semester of B.A.LL.B.(Hons.), Sandip university has undergone research of the project work titled “ARE GHOSTS LEGAL?”, in partial fulfilment of the subject of Third semester. His performance in research work is up to the level. Place: Nashik Mrs. GANESH GADEKAR (Faculty-Political Science & History) Sandip University Date: 28 th^ November 2022

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

At the outset, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude & thank my teacher, for putting her trust in me & giving me a project topic such as this & for having the faith in me to deliver. Ma’am, thank you for an opportunity to help me grow. My gratitude also goes out to the staff & administration of Sandip university for the infrastructure in the form of our library & IT Lab that was a source of great help for the completion of this project. GURIVELLI SISINDRA KUMAR (Third Semester)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

THE EXISTENCE OF GHOSTS IN COMMON LAW

GHOSTS AND CONTRACT

GHOSTS AND TORT

GHOSTS AND CRIME

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTION

Paranormality is a topic debated over decades but there is no proper conclusion has been derived many paranormal experts and scientists have tried to prove its presence through various methods but there has been no satisfactory conclusion. One of the remarkable features of common law is its hyper-specificity. Any area of daily life that generates sufficient litigation soon acquires a distinct and freestanding body of common law. Thus there is a common law of roads, a common law for water, and even a common law for animals, which means that there is a common law for all areas which we experience in our day today lives. This raises a question whether there is a common law of ghosts? The research paper deals with the same question the common law of ghosts, surprisingly the existence of undead has been a live issue throughout legal history. At various times and courts have given different answers on the existence of ghosts which include “Yes”, “No”, and “Estoppel”.

THE EXISTENCE OF GHOSTS IN

COMMON LAW

The existence of ghosts has been assumed implicitly or explicitly in a number of common- law decisions. In McClary v. Stull^1 , for instance, the Nebraska Supreme Court was asked to invalidate a will because the testatrix allegedly drafted it based on advice she got from her dead husband through a planchette. The testatrix's children alleged that the ghost of their father had undue influence over his wife, preventing her from giving them a share in the will. The Nebraska Supreme Court approached the case as raising a question of fact: Did the deceased husband actually exercise undue influence over his wife, rather than rejecting the possibility of a ghost exercising undue influence? The Court concluded: It is commonly accepted that spirit-wills are too celestial for earthly tribunals to consider, and that law is "of the earth, earthy." In the Australian case of Descas v. Descas^2 , the presiding Magistrate treated the question of whether the family home was haunted as a question of credibility, rather than science. The Magistrate in Descas appeared ready to accept that the family home was indeed possessed by a poltergeist, if only the wife had been a better witness. However, the courts have not assumed to deny spirits of the deceased the privilege of holding communion with those of their friends who are still in the lastly, allegations of haunting were treated as factual assertions subject to the rule against hearsay in an Ontario case in 2013. Presumably, the outcome would have been different if the appropriate witnesses had been called. Cases that refute the existence of ghosts are veritable phantoms in and of themselves, making them much more difficult to locate. In the case of Manitoba Free Press v. Nagy^3 , a Winnipeg newspaper was sued for injurious falsehood after it published a report that Mrs. Nagy's property was haunted. Mrs. Nagy had to demonstrate that the Free Press' report of the haunting was false in order for her claim to be successful. Although it would have been possible to demonstrate the falsity of the report by demonstrating that Nagy's property in (^1) McClary Vs. Stull (^2) Descas Vs. Descas (^3) Manitoba Free Press Vs. Nagy

particular was not haunted, both sides fought the case on the more general question of whether ghosts existed at all. The Free Press argued that Nagy was obligated to demonstrate the absence of ghosts and that she had failed to do so. The Manitoba Court of Appeal received this argument with mixed feelings and noted that ghosts did not exist: Naturally, it is impossible to demonstrate such a thing using conventional evidence. Superstitious people believe that a ghost's very nature is that it only appears occasionally. The statement's falsity could never be completely demonstrated unless we hold that the courts should take into account the fact that ghosts do not exist. As educated men should, I believe the members of the Court may conclude that there are no ghosts and that the statement is therefore untrue. The Supreme Court of Canada's sole comment on the matter was, "In the case at hand, I think the evidence only admits of one conclusion, and that is that the article complained of was false." This was the Supreme Court of Canada's sole statement on the appeal.“ This statement is ambiguous because it is unclear whether the Supreme Court decided the case on the more general ground that ghosts do not exist or the more specific ground that Nagy's house was not haunted. When confronted with a particularly difficult issue, the Supreme Court appears to have equivocated, as is often the case. As a result, the absence of ghosts has been acknowledged by the law in Manitoba and possibly throughout Canada. However, in the end, the conduct of a litigant may prevent that person from denying the existence of ghosts, so whether ghosts exist or not at common law may be irrelevant in many instances. The New York case Stambovsky v. Ackely^4 is a good example of this rule of law. In that case, Mr. Stambovsky tried to back out of his promise to buy Mrs. Ackely's house. Mrs. Ackely had previously reported that her house was haunted in local and national newspapers, but she did not tell Mr. Stambovsky that the house was widely reputed to be. This information was not provided to Mr. Stambovsky by Mrs. Ackely. This was countered by Mrs. Ackely, who argued that ghosts do not exist and that a haunted house could not be a reason to cancel a contract. (^4) Stambovsky Vs. Ackley

Mrs. Ackely's defense did not impress the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court, which responded by saying: The court hedged its bets over the factual existence of ghosts, allowing that their source could be either psychological or parapsychological, but the legal doctrine of estoppel prevented Mrs. Ackely from denying that her house was haunted. Whether the source of the spectral apparitions seen by the defendant seller is psychogenic or parapsychic, the defendant is estopped to deny their existence and, as a matter of law, the house is haunted. Despite the effects of Winnipeg Free Press v. Nagy, this estoppel would probably apply in Canada. After all, estoppel is the most common legal fiction, and courts have prevented litigants from denying even the most obvious facts.

GHOSTS AND CONTRACT

Contracts appear to be relatively unimportantly influenced by ghosts. Cooper v. Livingston^5 , in which the Florida Supreme Court ruled that a promise to cure illness by conjuring spirits was not enough to support a promissory note. Since the Florida Supreme Court appears to have assumed that the spirits to be conjured were either satanic or infernal in nature, it is unclear whether this case establishes a general rule regarding the insufficiency of ghostly consideration. Naturally, entering into a contract to summon such spirits would constitute blasphemy, a common law offense, and a promise to commit a crime is never sufficient consideration. In addition, American judgments occasionally investigate the question of whether ghostly consideration has "failed," which presupposes that such consideration may be valid and succeed in other circumstances. As a result, it is still unclear whether ghost-related transactions can constitute sufficient consideration for a contract. Ghosts have played a much more prominent role in invalidating contracts, despite the fact that they are nearly invisible during contract formation. Ghosts can be the source of undue influence that results in the annulment of a legal document, as was demonstrated in McClary v. Stull. Although McClary v. Stull dealt with a will, ghostly undue influence principles also apply to contracts. Indeed, contracts procured by spiritual leaders who exercised undue influence on behalf of the Holy Ghost have been invalidated by British courts. Last but not least, think about the issue of ghostly misrepresentations. If a contract is based on a false representation about ghosts, can a person get the contract cancelled? The answer to this question is, according to a series of American cases, a resounding "no." Based on the following line of reasoning, this outcome: False statements must relate to facts; The existence of ghosts cannot be established or disproved; Therefore, rather than being a known fact, the existence of ghosts is a matter of faith and belief; As a result, it is impossible to make any false or misleading claims regarding ghosts. (^5) Cooper Vs. Livingston

GHOSTS AND TORT

Ghosts are discussed in this section as both a defense and a source of tort liability. Ghosts appear in the most unexpected areas of tort law, as will become clear. First, as we saw in the case Winnipeg Free Press v. Nagy, a person who claims a house is haunted is guilty of the tort of injurious falsehood and is responsible for any special damages the owner can prove. This rule of law is in effect in both Canada and the United Kingdom. The Barrett v. Associated Newspapers^6 case in the United Kingdom recognized that unfounded claims of haunting could result in tort liability. False claims of haunted property have not been brought to light yet, but the same principles should apply. Next, think about defamation of individuals caused by ghosts. At the time of this writing, no reported case has addressed the issue of whether a person—or his estate—can pursue defamation claims against a person who claims to be a ghost. However, the authorities can provide some advice regarding whether similar conditions constitute defamation. On the one hand, we are aware that merely claiming someone is dead is not grounds for defamation. However, claiming that someone is possessed by a demon is false and defamatory. We can confidently assert that the law on this point is unclear if we make the reasonable assumption that claiming someone is a ghost falls somewhere in between these two extremes. The rights of the alleged ghost's relatives are more clearly defined. The family of the deceased airline pilot Robert Loft filed a lawsuit in Loft v. Fuller^7 against a publisher for publishing a book about alleged sightings of Robert Loft's ghost. The book was found not to be defamatory, an invasion of privacy, or an intentional cause of emotional distress by the Florida Court of Appeal. According to the Court, despite the book's numerous claims that Robert Loft's ghost haunted his former employer's aircraft, these claims did not cause any tortious harm to Robert Loft's living relatives. Thus, while the alleged ghost's legal options are still unclear, it is now tolerably clear that the alleged ghost's relatives have no tort claim. (^6) The Barrett v. Associated Newspapers (^7) Loft v. Fuller

GHOSTS AND CRIME

Rumours circulated in London in December 1803, claiming that a ghost was present in the Hammsersmith^8. This phantom was said to frequent some fields next to Black Lion Lane after 1 a.m., threatening villagers and attacking travellers. On January 3, 1804, a villager by the name of Francis Smith made the decision to use a gun to patrol Black Lion Lane. Thomas Milwood, a bricklayer, had emerged that gloomy evening in his brand-new white work attire and standard-issue footwear. When wearing his brand-new uniform, Milwood had twice been mistaken for the enigmatic ghost. Therefore, it was perhaps not surprising that a terrified smith believed he had discovered the ghost as milwood travelled down the dimly lit black lion lane. After making two unsuccessful calls to the ghost, Smith's anxiety increased due to the phantom's unflinching approach. Assuming that Milwood was a ghost, he, therefore, pulled out his gun and shot him to death. Smith made it clear that he had killed Milwood, but he pleaded guilty to manslaughter rather than murder because he truly believed at the time that he had shot a ghost. The jury agreed, but the judge was still not convinced, pointing out that smith's belief in ghosts was absurd. As a result, the judge instructed the jury to either find smith innocent or guilty of murder. They decided in favor of the latter, and Smith was given the death penalty. However, because of significant public sympathy, the royal pardon later saw his sentence reduced to one year in prison. Arne Cheyenne Johnson's trial, also known as the "Devil Made Me Do It"^9 case, was the first known case in the United States in which the defense claimed demonic possession and denied personal responsibility for the crime to prove their innocence. Arne Cheyenne Johnson was found guilty on November 24, 1981, in Brookfield, Connecticut, of first-degree manslaughter for the death of Alan Bono, his landlord. The Glatzel family's testimony suggests that 11-year-old David Glatzel was the host of a demon. David's family decided to enlist the assistance of Ed and Lorraine Warren in a last- ditch effort to "cure" the child after witnessing a number of increasingly ominous events involving David. The family was exhausted and terrified. After that, the Glatzel family and the Warrens made a formal petition to the Catholic Church for several priests to perform an (^8) Hammersmith Ghost case (^9) Devil Made Me Do It (Arne Cheyenne Johnson’s Trial)

exorcism on David. The process went on for a few days before, according to those who were there, a demon left the child's body and moved into Johnson. The Devil in Connecticut, written by Gerald Brittle, describes these occurrences in detail. Johnson killed his landlord at a party a few months later. His attorney argued that he was possessed in court, but the judge ruled that such a defense was impossible to prove in a court of law. After that, Johnson was found guilty, but he only served five years out of a total of ten to twenty years in prison. Due to numerous depictions of the trial in literature and television, it has gained some notoriety and attracted international media attention. On August 31, 2006, a live-action television prequel titled "Where Demons Dwell" was released. The story was later turned into a movie with the name "The Conjuring: The devil made me do it.”

THE INDIAN SCENARIO

A similar case was seen on January 14 2009 in the district court of Bhadra (Allahabad) when a spirit possessed a witness and tried to depose before a judge. Additional sessions judge V M Chaudhary had to adjourn a hearing on Tuesday afternoon. The witness claimed to be possessed and then started making wild allegations. Shanta Rai had deposed before the court on Tuesday morning in connection with a dowry death case, wherein her daughter Varsha had allegedly hanged herself in 2006 at her in-law’s house in Bardolpura, Dariyapur. Rai’s husband too had given his statement in this case. But, when the couple was called in for cross-examination by the court in the afternoon, she suddenly started shivering and had a fit. She even started shouting in the courtroom. The judge asked the policemen to take her out, but when she was approached, her pitch increased. She claimed she was possessed by a ghost and was able to see the circumstances in which her daughter died. Earlier too, in her statement, she had told the court that Varsha’s mother-in-law practiced black magic to get her killed, said the public prosecutor, in this case, Naresh Nandolia. Ultimately, Rai was taken out of the courtroom, and after some time she calmed down. However, it was not possible to cross-examine her in this condition and the hearing was adjourned. “During my 8-year practice in this court, I witnessed such an incident for the first time,” Nandolia said.

CONCLUSION

Although the question of whether you deny ghosts exist or not might at first seem immaterial, such differences can lead to eery legal decisions. The court’s inability to recognize ghosts has developed a curiously haunted jurisprudence. Indeed as long as they remain elusive, it appears that lawyers on occasion may be called to confront ghosts or even defend their cause. In my opinion, Law should allow and recognize ghosts as witnesses or proof as according to many spiritualists ghosts communicate through living people or various other ways when they seek justice. What if Rai was really possessed and was telling truth? The world is not yet ready or doesn’t have the resources to prove such a thing but what if a person can prove it, there is a need for a ghost law in today’s world so that the deceased can also get justice and innocent are not punished for a wrong which they never committed.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

WEBLIOGRAPHY :

• www.legalcheck.com/2021/10/the-haunted-jurisprudence-of-ghost-law/
• www.fasken.com/en/commonlawofghosts/
• www.radiotimes.com/movies/the-conjuring- 3 - true-story-arne-johnson-case-real/ BOOKS :
• Paranormal case files of Great Britain by Malcolm Robinson
• Supernatural Encounters True Paranormal Accounts from Law Enforcement by Elliot Van Dusen