Victor J Zammit Lawyer interviewed by C. Andrea recently mid 2006.

Question: I understand Victor, judging by what I read on the website you are highly controversial. There are those who speak highly of you and others who attack you. Do you care about those who attack you?

Victor: When I first started to debate about the paranormal in public some twenty years ago, I was on occasions attacked. I used to care and used to spend time preparing counter offensives and to respond to the attacks. But these days, I find that the attacks come from the lower end – the uninformed, the amateurs who do not understand the rules of professional rules of debate. There is just one exception: one academic in the last 20 years who may be good in his field, but when he went out of his specialty, he showed he is ignorant of professional rebuttals. In retrospect, it must be very embarrassing for him and his university. My delight would be when someone rebuts – attacks my work methodically. But no one, no biologist, no physicist, no psychologist, no lawyer has so far done that. It appears skeptical debunkers do not have the substance to properly rebut substantive empirical work - or the truth is that my objective empirical evidence is just irrebuttable. These debunkers indulge in very low level of dirty attacks – but nothing formal, nothing of value, nothing substantive. Those who agree with me positively articulate why they support my afterlife research – I thank them for it. Of course, the battle between the attackers and the supporters inevitably highlight why my work is controversial.

Q. How did you become interested in the paranormal?

Some sixteen years ago I began to experience paranormal activity – mainly telepathy. This was at a time when I was involved socially with the humanists ( hard-line skeptics). I went to experts for explanations – one of them was Francisco Coll of the Inner Peace Movement (U.S.) for explanation of what was happening and was told I had a ‘psychic gift’. I wanted to keep away from all personal beliefs – because beliefs are subjective and are subject to complete invalidation. So I investigated the paranormal and the afterlife evidence using only evidence I considered to be objective - because I knew from my professional work as a lawyer that no one can rebut objectivity and repeatability. In the last eight years my evidence on the website, no closed minded professor scientist – or any other debunker has been able to rebut my afterlife evidence – not even for the alluring $1million.

Q. What advantages, if any, do you have being a lawyer in the studies of the afterlife?

Victor. My comparative advantage as a lawyer is that I have expertise in what is admissible evidence. My experience shows that not all scientists and not all psychologists and empiricists really fully understand what is admissible evidence. In addition to my formal qualifications in law, I also am formally qualified in scientific method. The combination of evidence with scientific method is a huge advantage for me when dealing with the afterlife and the paranormal. I’m now retired, but I still have a low key legal aid/advice service, purely on voluntary basis. I regard the understanding of admissibility of evidence being extremely important in any empirical afterlife or paranormal experiments.

Q. So you believe in the afterlife?

Victor: I do not particularly believe in the afterlife. I accept the evidence for the afterlife. I do not have the luxury of beliefs because beliefs are personal, are subjective, are not empirical, are not scientific. And any personal belief, any subjective belief is itself subject to complete invalidation. In other words, I accept the twenty three areas of empirical evidence for the afterlife I researched – see my book on the Net – www.victorzammit.com .

Q. How certain, how sure are you that the afterlife exists?

Victor. Absolutely certain! I am absolutely sure, I am one hundred per cent certain that when we humans physically die, we cross over to the afterlife but our duplicate etheric body – the spirit body - continues to exist. As I said, this is not based on a belief or wishful thinking or religion or superstition. My acceptance of the afterlife is primarily based on my own experiences and the empirical, objective evidence.

Q. What is this acceptance of the afterlife then based on?

Victor: The most persuasive evidence is my own experience of entities communicating with me through telepathy. I am clairaudient – I can hear spirit voices telepathically – clairaudient experiences I’ve had for the last sixteen years. In addition, there are powerful afterlife experiment and studies by world famous scientists – see second chapter of my book about these scientists. There are also others I know and trust who informed me that they had similar afterlife experiences …

Q. What kind of personal afterlife experience did you have?

Victor. Some sixteen years ago I studied psychic phenomena in depth and was tutored by experts in mediumship. I became clairaudient. My own father came through and after spending some time authenticating who he was, I was satisfied beyond any doubt that the contact was genuine. I asked questions that only he and I knew about. But just let me qualify this: I am intelligent, I am healthy in mind and body – and we know that throughout history there have been a number of people who were clairaudient. For example, Joan of Arc was clairaudient.

Q. This means you hear voices in the head?

Victor. Absolutely, even if it’s put rather bluntly but … accurately. There are empirical studies in the Society for Psychical Research which shows the empirical validity of telepathy. Of course, telepathy means the transfer of thoughts from mind to another mind on this planet earth and from the afterlife dimension to earth. I suppose thoughts can be voices in some way.

Q. Have not there been cases where violent people claim to have heard voices in the head?

Victor: That may be true because one has to ascertain who is sending the voices. Voices that come from the afterlife darker realm – which is a realm where mischievous entities roam around do cause a lot of trouble on earth. The voices and messages can come through electronic voice phenomena, through instrumental trance-communication, the ouija board or through mediumship. The example is similar to you getting some obscene phone calls. But you may also get phone calls from others who are not obscene or rude or crude or offensive, but are sophisticated, more polite, more refined, more knowledgeable.

Q. Why is it that many people do not accept there is an afterlife?

Victor. That’s very easily explained. These skeptics you mentioned have not done any research on the paranormal. As a matter of fact closed minded skeptics and debunkers do not read paranormal information which gives them huge anxiety if they have to read it. So they don’t. There are of course the professional hard core skeptics with an irretrievably closed mind who are on a crusade against those who present the evidence for the afterlife and the paranormal. For the open-minded person, there is more than enough evidence to convince them that the afterlife and the paranormal exist.

Q. What about those highly qualified, high profiled scientists and psychologists in the skeptics’ organization who keep on harping that there is no afterlife, no psi?

V. What I said earlier goes for them as well. The fact is that if they could prove they are right, they would apply to beat my one million dollars challenge I have on the Net. But they haven’t. And they won’t. Most interesting is that while there are hundreds of quality books written about the reality and validity of the afterlife - these books written by some of the most intelligent scientists who ever walked on this planet earth - there is NOT one book written by any of these materialist giants of science who wrote a book giving reasons why the afterlife does not or cannot exist.

Q. How do you view religion then?

V. I do not interfere in people’s religious beliefs. What they believe in is their business. My focus is on the empirical – that is, using scientific method to measure some psychic phenomena. But if some religious person tells me that I am wrong, I ask him what objective evidence he or she is citing to show that I am wrong. Incidentally, in the last twenty years or so, no theologian or religious person has ever asked me that. All agreed that religion is subjective and science is objective.

Q. How do you find the truth then?

V. As an empiricist and a lawyer with technical knowledge of what technically constitutes admissible evidence I use scientific method to get to the truth. If something is repeated over time and space and yields the same results - keeping variables constant - then I can state I found the truth. To put it simplistically, 7+5=12 – that can never be wrong. It is repeatable. But if you say to me that a divorced Catholic is committing some heinous sin by remarrying and will go to hell for eternity – that is something which can never empirically be proved. In religious writings there is nothing which is subject to empirical testing. We get all the time, “you must have faith”. But intelligent people from all credible universities around the world will immediately tell you that faith is no authority for objective truth. The only faith I would like to have is when whatever I have faith in can be backed up empirically. That I know I am dealing with the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - and I can never be wrong, never!

Q. What do you say to the reports that there is a lot of inconsistent information coming from the otherside through mediums?

V. That’s not difficult to explain. This is like getting general information from a 10 year old and someone with a university degree. In the afterlife there are different realms from the lowest vibrating realm to the highest. The lowest realm, the lower end of the Astral level is dark with very low vibrations – some religionists people call ‘hell.’ Then the realm of the light is usually the third level where most decent folk end up after their life on earth.

Q. Where did you get this information about the afterlife and why is that not a belief?

V. First, as I said earlier, anything which is empirically repeated and gets the same results, I know I am dealing with something substantive. Now the information about the afterlife comes from mediumship. This mediumship has been subject to empirical studies by empiricists – for example, Prof Gary Schwartz and others. Besides, I also had experiences to confirm what Prof Gary Schwartz empirically tested. That is not a belief, that is empirical evidence about the afterlife. The afterlife transmissions are most critical because we get to know what exists in the afterlife directly, by highly credible eye-witnesses, not by someone who lived on earth some 2,000 years ago we do not know his background, who he is or where he comes from.

Q. Do you accept that people on earth will eventually meet their loved ones who passed on?

V. Where there is a heart to heart link, it is guaranteed that there will be a reunion when the one on earth eventually crosses over to the afterlife dimension. Highly credible information from the afterlife repeatedly stated that. Love we are informed is the most powerful force in the universe – and physical death can never sever the heart to heart link, never. However, there are exceptions.

Q. What exceptions?

V. First, let me state a scientific truism: for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. So it also happens in spiritual physics. There is a consequence to everything we do on earth. The soul gets higher vibrations through interaction with other people, especially when we are unselfish, fair, reasonable, just and equitable. But, if a person is consistently cruel, selfish and even brutal, the soul’s vibrations are automatically reduced. This kind of a person is likely to have a fairly rough time on crossing over because a person with low vibrations is automatically pulled down to the realm of the same low vibrations to accommodate the same vibrations. There is no St Peter, no Pearly Gates, no one there to judge you. You judge yourself by the level of accumulated vibrations you gained throughout your life on physical earth.

Q. But are not there psychics who do not agree with that?

V. Again, not all psychics are spiritually advanced. Besides, there is a most important difference between someone who is psychic and someone who is spiritually advanced. Psychics may demonstrate their psychic skills but that does not mean they are in fact spiritual. Those psychics who are not spiritually advanced could be dangerous. But someone who is psychic and also highly spiritual, then you have pure gold. So that the qualitative, spiritually advanced psychics usually agree with what is afterlife valid knowledge.

Q. But aren’t there many so called psychics who deceive the public?

V. Frauds you get everywhere because of the human condition. But let me qualify that: there are people who are not psychic and are not who they claim they are - and try to fleece the public of their hard earned income. That is unfair. That is unjust. That is criminal. Then you get the second class of people who are a little bit psychically gifted. But unless they are accurate they should not take any money from the public. The pure gold, as I mentioned earlier, is where you have spiritually advanced and psychically gifted mediums – they are not easy to access, sometimes impossible to find.

Q. Do you yourself have any psychic insights when talking to people?

V. Interesting you should ask that because sometimes I do get psychic insights.

Q. What about those big time scientists who specifically wrote against the paranormal and the afterlife?

V. The ones I came across over the years - Professor Richard Dawkins, Professor Carl Sagan and those other negative psychologists I have on my net I rebutted – those giants of science thinking because they are scientists they have ‘authority’ about anything on earth. They may be good materialist scientists but NOT ONE OF THEM ever rebutted the objective evidence for the afterlife – not one! They have NO OBJECTIVE AUTHORITY at all when they deal with psi. The rule is that they can’t have a valid argument without objective authority. I have my rebuttals on these scientists who have shown they are really ignorant about anything paranormal – go to my homepage www.victorzammit.com. I was so amazed reading Prof Carl Sagan’s attacks on the paranormal where he confused everyone about mediumship: he confused trance-mediumship with mental mediumship and direct-voice mediumship. I reiterate: these materialist scientists, and negative psychologists have not done their homework, do not understand what is the real paranormal, do not discriminate between the quacks and the psi geniuses, did not rebut the existing objective evidence for the afterlife – they just regurgitate their own pre-conceived negatively entrenched bias. They have no authority at all. You can access my full rebuttals of these giants of science on my website.

What’s your final message for the listeners?

Victor: I put it very simply: in the overall scheme of things time on earth is very short. Inevitably we – rich or poor, black and white - all have to cross over. Understand what you must do to obtain higher vibrations – higher spirituality. The more you get to know about the afterlife the easier the transition will be from physical planet earth to the afterlife dimension: that’s guaranteed! The afterlife has huge consequences – and whereas the good, average decent folk should make it to the realm of the light, there are many who end down in the dark realms. You do not have to be perfect, because we are all subject to the ‘human condition’ – and we know that the ‘human condition’ is not perfect. But keep away from cruelty and selfishness, be optimistic, do the best you can to help those who genuinely need help – and you will be alright!

Andrea: Thank you Victor for you time.

<< Return to Articles