@ Q&A. That would be good to see; it would certainly be as fair a use of the libel law as Morgan's intended.
No one here is saying that what she is doing is actually a crime, but some of are saying that it should be. In terms of your support for the parasite, if holding a gun to someone's head is the only form of exploitation you're prepared to recognise, then you'll presumably be a fan of cowboy builders who fleece old people of their life savings by pretending that work needs doing on their roof - it brings them a bit of comfort so no harm done, eh?

She's a charlatan, plain and simple. She and her ilk prey on the vulnerable and make a heap of cash in the process. Vulgar doesn't even cover it. I do hope she tries to sue. For the first time in my life, I'd be on the side of the Mail...

She should be jailed for wanton exploitation of the grief of the vulnerable and the weak. She makes me sick. She's just bought herself a £3. luxury pad, I wonder where she got the 'spons' for that? Answers on a postcard, please.

A true Medium would take it on the chin and not waste the Coursts and everyone elses time.
If it can be shown that a false Medium is using 'apparatus' to hoodwink their devotees then a criminal charges hould be brought.
A devotee is entitled to get their moneys worth and not be connedby tricks, magnets hidden wires electric fans hidden assistants etc.
The use of an earpiece on stage to get stage directions is not illegal.
If Mrs Morgan is not careful she could find a criminal charge filed against her.

What seems to have been forgotten here is that after the Mail and several other papers insinuated that she may have been using an earpiece on stage, Sally Morgan, in cleverly and misleadingly-worded statements, gave the clear impression that she hadn't and didn't. She then had her lawyers announce that they had been instructed to commence libel proceedings. I then uncovered video evidence of her removing an earpiece as she walked off a theatre stage (which I revealed on 'This Morning') and, strangely enough, there has been no further action re the libel. Oh, and a couple of weeks later she admitted that she did actually wear an earpiece, but only sometimes, for 'stage directions'. I assume they might consist of something along the lines of "Walk forward. Stop. Impersonate dead children to their grieving parents. Stop. Walk off. Stop. Count money."

@ swatantra nandanwar - whether or not that is possible is not the issue here (and if it was and people made money out of it, it should be regulated and require proof anyway)- have a look at some (any) footage of her peddling her vile trade and it's patently obvious that she is using the tried and tested techniques that fake 'mediums' have been using for over a century to exploit the vulnerable. Audience members are invited to fill in a postcard with a 'letter of love' to a departed one before the show and drop it into a big fishbowl (sorry: the 'psychic orb'). This is an arcane and esoteric technique known as 'reading'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6fQ5MCpwlc

In the same manner as Enlightened self interest dictates that we should make laws and seek to apply them to prevent credulous neighbours being poisoned by foodstuffs, a law that you would presumably despise because it interferes with 'their right to personal freedoms' (the one to be conned being closest to your heart by the looks of things), we should bring whatever pressure to bear that can be reasonably done to prevent charlatans from draining their coffers. http://www.windows101.org/

Will Associated Newspapers be referring to the leading case of Arkell v. Pressdram (1971) in their reply, I wonder?

Interesting piece. But will you please clear one thing up for me?
Does Sally Morgan deny any wrongdoing?
And if she does, how strongly does her denial manifest itself?

This grisly phony preys on the gullible when they are stricken with grief and at their most vulnerable.

She should have seen this coming

sally told me that my cat was trying to speak to me from the other side, after being hit by a lorry. She told me not to worry, my cat was ok and my cat wanted to her deliver this message to me. The next day, the cat came back home and was sitting outside my back door.

I find it strange that she hasn't denied any wrongdoing.

Uhm...ok.

Well, then what would happen if for instance an atheist publicly libels a Christian priest or pastor as being a cheat and a liar for preaching something he cannot prove? If priest / pastor goes to court - to get atheist to stop his character assasination - could the court then not insist that the priest or pastor prove his case through science?

Who committed the crime here? No matter what Sally and her followers believe, it is their personal business. She has to date not been spotted holding a gun to anybody's head to attend her shows.

The only obvious crime here as far as I can see is that someone has been slandered and humiliated by someone else. If only we would learn to leave other people in peace. Each to his own.

Don't get angry Sally....get everything!

Doesn't instituting proceedings against the Mail in itself constitute communicating with the dead?

Hmm. Wow aren't you all clever with you ability to know she is a fraud and an exploiter. You are making some gib assumptions though, and that is about the victims. I feel very uncomfortable with anyone, telling anyone else what is in there best interest. I know she is a fraud, but if she sells false comfort to people who need comfort, is that all bad. I am less interested in her motivation, than in what benefits might be. Religion and psychics give comfort when no other comfort is available. It is as if you arent just angry with her for being a fraud, but angry with her "victims" for needing the service. Feel free to think you are smugly right, because you are, but you are almost certainly doing less to comfort those who need comfort than the fraudster