By Jerome Finley

THE ‘THOUGHT CHANNEL’ SUPPLEMENT

My original ‘Thought Channel’ routine was a tremendous hit among working magicians
and professional mentalists. The routine, as it stands, is still one of my all time favorite
pieces, one of the first things I do in my performances and a very heavy hitter. Often
times it is the ‘one thing’ I do and I’m very well known for it.

I’ve used the routine to open my close up sets and close my parlor shows. Of all the
people who purchased the original routine (limited to 50), not a single one was
disappointed and I still get emails everyday praising the work. It does my heart good
knowing that something I created was so well accepted and utilized by the magic and
mentalism community. I smile inside every time I perform ‘Thought Channel’ and it
retains a solid place in my top 5 routines and effects.

This supplement is intended for OWNERS and OPERATORS of ‘Thought Channel’. If

you don’t have the original ‘TC’ work and routine this manuscript may as well be written
in Greek.

Here you will find additional routines, methods and variations on the work. I’ll once
again break down how I personally perform TC and tip further applications for the work
in general. We’ll see contributions from other creators using ‘Thought Channel’ in their
own performances and take extra measures assuring the routines ultimate success.

Enjoy.

-Jerome Finley 2008

The Basic ‘Thought Channel’ Toolkit

Within ‘Thought Channel’ performers were taught to divine the location of an object with
no questions asked or verbal answers given using the basic method or ‘Hans method’ as
I’ve dubbed it.

To support the work a plethora of techniques were divulged and taught among them
being:

• Nose and Shoulder Tells

• The Hand Of Light Ruse
• The Cavalli Mind Echo
 • Hand ‘bobbing’ and other gambits

Using the ‘Hans’ method together with the Cavalli ‘Mind Echo’ we are able to create
other devastating effects besides normal object locations very easily and naturally.

***

THOUGHT CHANNEL LIVING AND DEAD TEST

Classic ‘Living and Dead’ tests can be extremely powerful. I’ve used one for a number of
years now that I’m very happy with. For those interested, the routine I use is “To Control
10,000 Minds” from the book “The Dark Waltz” by my good friend Michael Fraughton.

Michael’s routine is particularly interesting and useful because the entire audience can
get involved via pendulums, something I’ll speak about again later.

Pendulums can be extremely helpful for further ‘calibration’ exercises during ‘Thought
Channel’ routines and sequences, not unlike the ‘Mind Echo.’

So how can we use ‘TC’ concepts in a classic ‘Living and Dead’ test? The way I
currently perform it is as a kicker or additional phase. If one were so inclined one could
perform an ‘L&D’ test with ‘TC’ principles alone.

To begin 6 blank billets are given to 6 participants, one each. 5 of them write the names
of living people upon their backs and one (the last person) writes the name of a deceased
or ‘passed’ over friend, family member, pet or celebrity. This last billet/index or business
card is marked with a pin-prick in someplace I choose for identification later. Putting a
small ink dot in a lowercase letter also works very well when dealing with cards that have
text on one side.

I’m going to get a peek at the dead name before the routine begins and this is done right
out in the open. As I instruct the first 5 people to write the first name of LIVING people I
hand the last card to the 6th person and request they print the name of a deceased person
and I walk away.

After a moment or two I briefly check the participants to make sure everyone is following
instructions (looking at their cards) and nonchalantly look at what my 6th participant is
also writing. This is very casual and above suspicion – at this point nobody knows what
I’m doing and there is no reason to hide their cards or think anything is less than fair and
above board.
After I get this peek I make a big fuss of NOT seeing anything else written. Asking the
participants to turn their cards over when finished so that I CAN’T SEE, the cards are
then collected and mixed as I introduce a pendulum and explain its use.

The cards are lined in a row on the table as I ‘dowse’ over each object getting feedback
from the pendulum (circles for living people, straight back and forth lines for the
deceased). Here I am only locating my marked card and mentally willing/instructing the
pendulum to move accordingly through the ideometer response.

I won’t go into detail regarding many of these techniques as it is assumed the reader has a
solid knowledge of basic mentalism.

So, I’ve located the name of a deceased person among 6 billets. My success is confirmed
but the name of the deceased is not verbally revealed at this time. This is the first
revelation.

The next phase takes place a bit differently – the cards are mixed once again and one at a
time placed into my waiting palm up hand. At my other side (either one) another
participant takes my pulse. I’m going to do a pulse stop here at the dead name. I use Luke
Jermay’s work, “For Andruzzi” from his first book ‘7 Deceptions.’ I was first introduced
to the idea of timing a pulse stop within an ‘L&D’ test by Paolo Cavalli.

As I gaze off into the ethers I’m able to note BOTH the card in my hand (looking for my
mark) AND the top card of the other names. I can see well in advance when the deceased
name is coming to my hand. When it does I apply the work and stop my pulse.

With his pulse gone the performer travels into the Summerland and retrieves/reveals the
dead person’s name. It’s a very strong middle phase.

Having made this ‘contact’ and ‘connection’ the Spirit is now able to guide me. Once
again the names are passed out among our 6 participants and at this point EVERYONE,
the audience included, knows the dead name very well.

Using ‘TC’ techniques I am ‘led’ once again to the deceased bringing the routine to its
near conclusion. Once the name and energy of the dead is located this last time (through
TC methods) I finish by taking control of pendulums given to the audience and
participants beforehand. Again, this is all detailed in various works by Richard Webster
and in Mike Fraughton’s “The Dark Waltz.”

Using 6 people is an advanced use for ‘TC’ and we’ll get into that later.

My hope here is to show the reader and performer HOW to incorporate ‘TC’ in other
routines. For a very REAL ‘L&D’ test 6 names can be written down as usual with the
deceased name being located through ‘TC’ concepts alone.
This is very powerful in performance though as I prefer multi-layered, multi-method
based routines for my work I no longer perform this in such a fashion.

The nice thing about the pin-prick method (Anneman?) is you can note the deceased card
while re-distributing the names/billets for the last ‘TC’ phase remembering the marked
card and its location. This provides a sturdy set of training wheels for those still getting
familiar with the original work and concepts.

***

THOUGHT CHANNEL ‘SNEAK THIEF’

Larry Becker’s wonderful ‘Sneak Thief’ has become a staple in the repertoires of many
working professionals for a reason. It’s entertaining, powerful and sports a big finish. I
highly recommend this piece of work and will only comment briefly regarding how to
perform a truly impromptu version using ‘Thought Channel’ techniques.

Using the ‘Hans’ method as well as Cavalli’s ‘Mind Echo’ it is quite possible to take 4
drawings and after giving a short character reading return them to their proper owners.

If you would like to perform Larry’s finish to the routine check out ‘Stunners!’

***

THOUGHT CHANNEL ZODIAC SIGN

DIVINATIONS

One thing I’ve always loved is a PROPLESS Zodiac Sign divination/revelation. While
there are many ways to accomplish such a feat the best method for me and my work is
simply a branching anagram. I use Alain Nu’s system outlined in his ‘Astrologic’
manuscript.

Using ‘Thought Channel’ techniques the performer can divine another’s zodiac sign
through the Cavalli Calibration technique, ‘The Mind Echo.’

The sequence should be kept fairly simple – standard instructions for the ‘Mind Echo’ are
given to the participant and then a list of the Zodiac signs are called off. Watching the
participant’s tells will let you know which sign is theirs based on the feedback you gain
as the various signs are named. For those familiar with Rick Maue’s ‘Imagine’ technique,
this wonderful piece of work can also be used in a prop-less approach to the Zodiac.
I always keep these methods and handlings in the back of my mind in case of a severe
mind-blank (hey, it happens). For those of you who do not wish to study and memorize
the 12 zodiac signs, the dates they span from and a systematic anagram this variation
could serve you very well.

Me, I prefer the former using a system. One beautiful touch I’ll share here regards the
Zodiac divination and how I perform it with no verbal answers being given and is
simplicity itself – again, the pendulum.

A participant can be taught to get basic feedback from a pendulum in just a minute or
two. Circles for ‘yes’, lines for ‘no’, I begin with the pendulum in my spectator’s hand
and start with my anagram.

As I go down my list naming different letters that appear in their sign, instead of asking
for verbal confirmation I am simply watching the pendulum! This is not as scary as it
sounds and happens to work very well. My ‘questions’ are framed as ‘impressions’ and
directed to the pendulum, not the sitter.

Working in such a fashion allows me to divine the proper zodiac sign without receiving
any verbal confirmation from the participant.

Even more simple and still extremely impressive is teaching your participant in a few
moments how to receive basic feedback from a pendulum. Now begin calling out Zodiac
signs and watch the pendulum! It will circle after the participant’s sign is called,
especially if you TELL THEM it will. For an ‘in their hands’ effect with meaning this
one is hard to beat. You may proceed to the correct date in the same fashion.

***

THOUGHT CHANNEL SMASH AND STAB

I hate dangerous monte’s, roulettes and ‘Smash and Stab’ effects. I feel they play to the
lowest common denominator as there will always be a few people among the crowds who
hope you impale or shoot yourself.

The premise is stupid and irritating – “Watch as I try NOT to get badly injured!” Instead
of going off on a long tirade about WHY such effects constitute poor mentalism ( See
‘Phenomenon’) I’ll just say that S&S type effects can be replicated using ‘TC’ techniques
alone if that’s something you wished to do.
The only way this should ever be performed is with very safe objects, aka Styrofoam
cups and an egg, etc. As very few ‘Thought Channel’ techniques are 100% accurate one
would be a deserving fool to use ‘TC’ as the sole method for a truly (potentially)
dangerous monte.

This routine is handled much like ‘TERASABOS WITHOUT BALLS OF STEEL’ from
the original ‘Thought Channel’ manuscript. While the performers back is turned or in
another room a raw egg is hidden under one of 3-5 styrofoam or plastic cups. On a side
note - those performing the wonderful ‘TERASABOS’ can increase their direct hits
exponentially when applying ‘TC’ techniques during the routine.

Again all we are doing is applying the ‘Hans’ method to deduce which cup contains the
egg. This works particularly well with a blindfold! When blindfolded and using the
‘Hans’ method the audience lowers their guard even further and will show you very
clearly exactly where the object to be avoided lies.

When Armando Lucero was first shown the basic ‘TC’ concept over 20 years ago` a
young woman did this with cards. As done prior, take your cues from the audience and
people involved. This is fairly self explanatory.

Of course if you are not up to par with ‘TC’ techniques you could end up with ‘egg on
your face’ and with all bad jokes aside, let us proceed.

***

ULTIMATE ‘THOUGHT CHANNEL’

PSYCHOMETRY

“This trick, to my mind, is one of the greatest one-man psychic effects ever
conceived. It has all the elements necessary to make it your most talked-about effect,
and any performer with but a bit of showmanship can’t help but make a hit with it.
If you are endowed with a goodly share of showmanship, this effect will create a
sensation and can be built up to be the feature attraction of your show.

Last, but not least, the effect needs very little preparation, and it can succeed under
the most exacting conditions. In short, we have before us an idea with unlimited
scope. Another of those rare secrets wherein the method is nothing and the effect,
from the audience viewpoint, is everything. Your audience will never tumble to the
simple detail that makes it possible. The enormity of what the performer attempts
completely overshadows the means by which it is accomplished.” - Ormond McGill
(Regarding Anneman’s ‘Pseudo-Psychometry’ as re-released in ‘Psychic Magic’ Volume
Three.’)

***

I happen to agree with everything Ormond wrote above and testify to the strength of the
Anneman routine. It was a staple in my repertoire for many years and a routine that I
would still use today.

Psychometry is a wonderful demonstration in just about any venue, for any audience. It
packs small and plays HUGE. Ormond’s testimonial serves as a thoughtful reminder for
how incredibly strong such a routine is and can be.

Please enjoy, ‘The Ultimate Psychometry’ and ‘The Ultimate THOUGHT CHANNEL
Psychometry.’

***

This is one of my favorite routines in this manuscript and one I do all the time. It’s based
on a fabulous John Riggs routine from his book ‘The Compleate Fortune Teller’ and is
dubbed ‘Ultimate Psychometry’ for a reason. As far as ‘real’ goes this is as good as it
gets.

The following routine is bold. John recommends upping your testosterone levels before
you attempt to perform the piece. We’ll look at the routine and effect in depth first and
then go onto describe how and why to implement ‘Thought Channel’ strategies for even
greater success.

Truly beautiful, I present you with ‘The Ultimate Psychometry’.

EFFECT:

5 people are selected from the audience. Brought to the stage and seated the 5 participants
are asked to offer items or objects of some personal meaning or value for a demonstration
in psychometry.

The objects are collected sight unseen and gently mixed. Donning a legitimate blindfold
the performer obstructs his vision while the objects are placed in a pile before him. In
classic fashion the psychometrist selects objects one at a time, gives a reading and returns
the item to its proper owner.
‘Ultimate Psychometry’ uses –

• No gaffs or gimmicks
• No marked cards, envelopes or containers
• No stooges
• No electronics
• No tricks
• No kidding!

This is an impromptu anytime, anywhere miracle that can play for either small or large
groups, feels and looks just like it should and is devastating both in effect and execution.
There is nothing to find and nowhere to backtrack. The ‘Ultimate Psychometry’ is one of
the most pure routines I have ever come across.

John Riggs is one of my heroes in mentalism and when he says something I listen. John’s
belief is one that places the emphasis on REAL skills (mnemonics, cold reading, muscle
reading, psychological forces, hypnosis, etc.) and less on props and gimmicks.

This radical approach has transformed my performances and tool set over many years.
Other performers have questioned how my shows and material remain so pure and
untainted. The answer is simple. I only use mentalism as an OUT. Most of the time I am
doing exactly what I say I’m doing and not via traditional mentalism techniques.

Most classic psychometry routines, in fact ALL of them that I have used besides THIS
ONE, used some type of marking or coding device for the containers. John believes it is
not too much of a reach for an intelligent audience to suspect secret marks for object
identification.

While I have never personally had a problem with the audience suspecting this I can see
where Riggs is coming from with his concerns. When playing for real and taking no
prisoners the last thing you want to happen is someone finding or even suspecting a
marked envelope.

‘Ultimate Psychometry’ takes this problem and throws it far out the window.

John’s solution was to collect the objects in one container. He prefers a paper bag so after
the items have been set on the table the bag can be balled up and tossed away leaving the
skeptics with no clue. Riggs offered a few different handlings for the collection process;
either another participant would collect the objects or the performer would do it himself
behind his back.

Doing it yourself has its own advantage as you can TELL the approximate size and
weight of the given objects during the collection process. If one person offered a cell
phone and the next person a finger ring, it’s not hard to feel this as they are dropped into
the bag and noted for later.
In time I found that having another person collect the objects for me was the way to go.
Eventually I even did away with the bag used to gather objects and opted for people to
simply place some objects on the table before me while I was in another room, back
turned or blindfolded. This is still how I handle ‘Ultimate Psychometry’ today.

Following John’s structure for the explanation of his own effect, let’s discuss the
PREMISE of ‘Psychometry’ next.

It should be noted the STRENGTH of psychometry routines is NOT handing the objects
back to their owners but giving the readings. All the focus is on the readings and the
return of the item is just icing on the cake, albeit very sweet icing!

John tells of a REAL ‘shut-eye’ psychometrist who would openly take an object from a
tray and ask, “Whose is this?” Noting the person he would then deliver a reading and
return the object. Mediocre as the readings were this man brought the house down!

Basically people are only concerned with the return of their objects when we are. They
want the readings, nothing else. I’ve found the same to be true in my own work.

John’s premise is to take an object, immediately begin a reading and then return the
object to its owner with no gaffs or gimmicks.

It should also be noted that performers working with audience based readings,
psychometry, q&a, etc. often find people naturally giving themselves away and
responding to the readers statements. Even when asked not to this reaction is inevitable
much of the time.

We will be capitalizing upon these reactions during ‘Ultimate Psychometry’ and using
human nature to our extreme advantage. You’ll see how and why ‘Thought Channel’
concepts work hand in hand with this routine shortly.

We know people are going to react, but how much more will they react if they believe we
cannot SEE? Well, all the way since there is nothing for them to hide and no reason to
hide anything at all including their reactions and response to your work and readings.
This is the secret to ‘Ultimate Psychometry.’ We don’t know what object belongs to who,
but we are going to use some very clever gambits to find out.

THE BLINDFOLD –

Let’s briefly discuss the blindfold. Though the BF does not need to be gimmicked for you
to see, you WILL need to be able to see through it (straight ahead). Again I’ll go with
John and recommend the rolled handkerchief method that Anneman advocated. This is
simplicity at its best. You can carry a handkerchief with you and with nothing else
perform this routine at a moments notice and KILL with it.
The Anneman BF method assures that NOTHING is left to be found later and a test
condition blindfold is NOT necessary for this effect. Why? In John’s own words, “Being
able to see would NOT make what you are doing any less impressive!”

It’s this simple truth alone that we shall fully capitalize on later with a no blindfold
performance of ‘The Ultimate Psychometry’ using ‘Thought Channel’ techniques.

Performing this routine today I do not use any blindfold.

In my formal performances I did sometimes wish for something a bit fancier and I always
used Osterlind’s ‘Stainless Steel Blindfold’ when not using the rolled kerchief. Now I
simply do not use a blindfold at all. The great thing about Osterlinds BF is that for all
intents and purposes it is a legitimate BF and not gimmicked in any way.

In the end simply use or don’t use whatever suits you best.

A few golden lines along the use and motivation to use a blindfold – I often quote a
passage from the Talmud, “We don’t see things as they are, we see things as WE are.” I
explain that I do not need or want to physically see the objects.

Another wonderful line comes from Bascom Jones, “I want to see with my mind, not my
eyes!” Perfect.

BASIC METHODOLOGY –

So, the objects have been collected and placed before you. How do we begin? Pick up an
object and begin your reading! At first you do not actually KNOW to whom this object
belongs, but you’re going to find out very, very soon.

It is far outside the scope of this supplement to teach effective reading strategies. I’ll list a
few helpful resources at the end but a knowledge of delivering basic readings is assumed
here.

To begin, start describing the object through touch and how it feels. Hold it up high so
that everyone can see it. It is vital that the owner of the object realizes you have their
belonging in hand.

Now you begin your reading. Naturally the owner of the object assumes you are speaking
to them. Watch for their reactions through the blindfold and you will see very clearly
whom you are dealing with.

Your readings should be delivered directly to the person, i.e., “You long for personal
expression and spiritual liberation. Eclectic in your world view you find it easy to get
along well with others whose beliefs may differ from your own.”
Speaking directly in this manner will cause the objects owner to react either responding
in the affirmative or negative to your statements. With the blindfold in use this gives you
a world of options and possibilities. You know after any statement if you need to reframe
or readjust your reading, based on their reaction. You also know exactly who the object
belongs to!

Since you are blindfolded when you begin the reading it appears as though you could be
speaking to anyone. It is the object which says, “This reading is for you.” You can begin
with a very general reading because it is NOT really directed at anyone specific yet and
you cannot make eye contact because of the blindfold. It is very easy to look around and
see who is reacting to your statements during the reading. This is the owner of the object
you hold.

Once the items owner is known you can begin getting male or female impressions,
working based on their appearance and age, etc.

After you know who the object belongs to it is time to refine the reading and close it
before handing the object back.

The two following ruses are things Riggs came up with to know FOR SURE to whom
each object belongs. They are very simple concepts to use and work like a dream.

First, ask a direct question! Say something like, “Do you get this a lot?” or “Has
anything like this ever happened to you before?” It seems you are thinking out loud and
not really asking for a response, though one will be given to you.

Other direct questions might be, “Was this watch a gift?” or “Does this object have some
connection to another person here tonight?”

My favorite direct question and command is simply, “Don’t say anything, but does that
make sense?”

Watch how the person responds and reacts to your question and ‘BINGO!’ you’ve found
the owner.

The second ruse is to begin spouting odd facts and statements such as, “I’m sensing a
connection to either a Susie or Sally, definitely an S name that ends with a vowel, an
important date around the end of July and a change in career or career direction for the
best in the next 4-6 months.”

By throwing out a statement such as the above it will be easy to find the objects owner.
Look at who is slightly confused (or elated!) and trying to place the information,
responding in the affirmative or the negative to your prior statements. Now you know
whose object you hold.
The final ruse that John gives us is very bold and simple as well. This is to be used in the
worse case scenario when you have been unable to identify WHO the object belongs to.

With object in hand you approach the group and extend the object as if giving it back
with a nice, “Thank you.” The items proper owner will take it from you!
This really has the same effect as returning the object in the eyes of the audience.

You can see now that this demonstration hinges upon simplicity, boldness and a
confident, casual performer. Given the above there is no way you can go wrong.

THE PARTICIPANTS -

Something else John recommends is hedging your bets by choosing 3 women and 2 men
to join you on stage for the demonstration. The objects are easily differentiated, men from
women and makes the whole process a bit easier to handle.

I also recommend choosing 3 women and 2 men when allowed. I’ve done the routine
with all men, all women and a combination of both. I choose people who really WANT to
join me on stage. This is easy to see when calling for volunteers. If they happen to be
men or women does not really matter. What matters is they are into me and my
demonstration and wish to experience it.

Following are additional ruses of my own creation and how to use ‘TC’ concepts to make
the routine even more dynamic.

* Who shows the most interest? From the moment I pick up an object I am actively
looking for who pays the most attention to it. Even if participants are stone faced and do
not react to the reading (which almost never happens), they still give themselves away
through being attentive and naturally interested/invested in their object. This is simply the
‘Hans’ method from ‘Thought Channel’, “Who is showing the most interest?”

* Like John I begin speaking and throwing out random dates, names and other
information and look for who seems confused or trying to place the information. I also
ask direct questions as per the original instructions.

* The Ericksonian Gambit - After taking an object I will ask the owner of that item to,
"Sit up straight, place both feet flat on the ground and hands palm down in your lap."
Obviously through hoodwinked eyes I simply watch who follows my direction. Another
ruse I have used is, "If this is your object please raise your hand so the audience can see
you" followed by, "Have you done that? Good. The impressions I get from this particular
piece . . ." and so on and so forth.

* Asking to confirm what I've just said to the rest of the group, "If what I just said makes
sense, give the others a big ‘thumbs up’ so they know!" This allows me to identify the
owner PLUS see if my reading needs to be adjusted.
* Following along these same lines sometimes I will place the borrowed item next to my
chest as if to really FEEL it, asking the participant to focus on the area around their heart
and any warmth that might be emanating from there. Most times the objects owner will
touch or rub their chest as I work with their belonging.

* Another thing I enjoy doing is asking a direct YES OR NO question, “Don’t say
anything aloud but . . .” and I simply watch the participant respond with their head (yes
or no). I'll then ask that person to whisper the answer to my question to the person next to
them and have them BOTH focus on yes or no together, to which I'll then offer the
correct answer. Now I get a small bit of telepathy involved for free!

* Something very sneaky is asking a person to whisper something to the person next to
them. This can be anything, how long they have had the object, if it was a gift or they
bought it for themselves and more. Obviously I look at who is doing the whispering to
ascertain the objects owner.

These tips are more than enough to get you started. Through performing this routine you
will come up with many others that you like and will remember to use in future
performances.

***

The Ultimate ‘Thought Channel’ Psychometry

Like the ‘Ultimate Psychometry’ and ‘Thought Channel’ this routine is ingenious, bold,
daring and has tremendous pay-off’s. It uses no blindfold and is a combination of
‘Thought Channel’ and ‘The Ultimate Psychometry’ routine of John Riggs creation.

5 people are invited to participate in a demonstration of psychometry. With my back

turned or in another room these 5 participants each offer a personal item or object for the
readings.

Turning around or returning to the room I pick objects up one at a time and begin my
reading.

A few different strategies are in play now.

As soon as I pick up an object I look at who is showing the most interest and paying the
most attention. Often times it is painfully obvious. I begin the reading and simply
WATCH how the people are reacting. Only one should be really into the reading at this
point though ALL are interested.
A gambit I like to use is hovering over two or three different objects so the items owner’s
can see this. Everyone wants a reading so they are excited and most interested when their
object is chosen.

Many times while doing this I can see which items belong to 2 or 3 different people. I
might pick up one object, feel it for a moment and then change my mind picking up
another item instead to start the reading.

You will see the faces, demeanor, energy, interest levels and body language of those
present shift and change with your handling of the items. Watch the face and eyebrows.
After you select an object often the owner’s eyebrows go up and they lean in, smile or
change positions as they become very interested in what you have to say next.

While the blindfold lends its own advantages I personally prefer doing this routine
without one. “Your being able to see would not make this any less impressive!” and with
those words I began performing without a blindfold using the ‘Hans’ method to ascertain
the items owner. The results have been tremendous.

You will see the owners raised level of interest when handling their object. Difficult
people feel so sure they are not going to say anything or give themselves away – okay.
They say more than they will ever know, non-verbally. Their heads still nod and shake,
their eyes still grow wide with hits and their levels of interest are piqued very noticeably.

Remember too the emphasis is placed on the reading and not the return. I work with 5
people and how I hedge my bets is by taking the first object and giving a very general but
specific SEEMING reading. I then ask, “Whose belonging is this?” The owner responds
and I offer them their object with my thanks.

Now we are down to 4. Obviously the last object is usually is a weak return as there is
only one item and one person left. Later I’ll teach you how I handle this. For now though
we have just 3 objects which we would like to read and return. This is easy.

I pick up one object, get a feel and then change my mind by setting it down and choosing
another. As I do this I am actively (nonchalantly, casually) noticing the participants and
noting available information. You can learn a lot by handling the objects a bit.

Using a second object I give the reading and return the item straight to its owner, no
questions asked. Again I am only using the ‘Hans’ method of ‘Who is showing the most
interest” to ascertain the owner and together with their non-verbal cues, head nodding,
body language, eyebrows raised, confused looks, reactions to ‘hits’ and the placing of
direct statements and other information I will always succeed. I could not be more direct
and straightforward. I then return the object.
This is repeated with 2 more objects, the reading and eventual return. In the case you are
off on the return DO NOT WORRY. For possibly the first time ever you are doing this
for REAL. If you get 3 out of 5 objects correct and more or less ALL solid, correct
readings, who would not fall out of their seats in sheer amazement?

There are a few ways this can be structured and performed and I’ll speak about those
variations as well. Using the ‘Cavalli Calibration technique and ‘Mind Echo’ from the
original ‘Thought Channel’ manuscript we can have people mentally answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’
to the question, “Is this your object?” Working with their given cues and responses we
can tell very easily. Although this works very well I find it is unnecessary but possible
and accurate.

Another bold bluff happens when we near the end of the routine and only have two
people and two objects left. It’s very impressive to give simultaneous readings at this
point and return the objects at the same time. I do this by simply giving my readings and
then approaching the 2 participants with objects in hand, one in my right and one in my
left. I should know at this point which one belongs to whom. If not I shall bluff my way
through it!

I simply extend these items towards the people in front of me and something very neat
happens. If the objects are aligned with their owners properly they will IMMEDIATELY
reach out to take them back!

If not you will see and sense some hesitation. This is very easy to recognize. In this case,
simply switch hands IMMEDIATELY (you don’t want to skip a beat here) and offer your
hands again! Now they will take their objects. The illusion is perfect.

As we shall see with the self-working ‘which hand’ techniques that follow, why do all the
work when your participants will do it for you? This is working smarter not harder.

The problem with most psychometry routines (besides the questionable envelopes and
containers) is the structure of the readings and returns. They tend to get boring if
repetitive so it’s imperative that we change it up a bit to keep the pace exciting and
interesting. Every return should be different.

Here are some ideas and variations that I have used.

First object – do the reading but NOT the return. This puts peoples guard down as they
do not expect the items return later. This then gives the eventual later returns even more
power.

Second object – give the reading and return the object. Already it is different and more
impressive. That said, your emphasis should still always be on the reading only. This
handing the objects back to the owner is that extra delicious icing I spoke of earlier.
Third object – A planned miss. I nail the reading but when giving the object back, I start
to hand it to a person on either side of the actual owner, pause a moment to correct
myself and then hand the item back to its proper participant.

OR for the third object I might borrow an idea from Richard Osterlind from his
performance of the Anneman routine and state there is not much energy emanating from
the object I’m holding and for the owner to simply shout “MINE!” loudly in their mind
which I apparently pick up on and promptly return the object! This is very impressive.

The fourth and fifth objects might be duo returns, that is, both readings and returns at
the same time which is also extremely impressive to an audience and the participants.
Multi-tasking is a wonderful thing.

OR I will use the 4th object in a reading and normal return and as the owner reaches for
it, I might notice their palm and something ‘extra’ I can see within the lines.

I use an audience member to deliver the last and final reading for the 5th object. This
ending is always remembered by everyone and talked about after the demonstration.

So how do I do this? It’s easier than you think.

***

SPECTATOR AS PSYCHOMETRIST

This kicker ending of having another audience member deliver the final reading is
something I keep very close to me. I am tipping my work here for the very first time.

First you need to find someone in the audience who fancies themselves as pretty intuitive.
One of these folks will be called to do the final reading WITH YOUR HELP, AID AND
ASSISTANCE.

This takes the pressure off the assistant but still gives them all the glory. It's a nice bit to
add when empowering the audience to embrace their own natural knowing and intuition.
I get an open and receptive person with me up on stage. Now I hand them the final object
and ask them what they feel! “Just say what you really feel and you’ll be fine!”

I'm sure to let them know to speak their minds and heart, what REALLY comes to them.
Here I begin pacing and leading the reading by asking questions like . . . "Do you get the
impression this person is involved in . . . or "Do you ALSO feel, as I do, that the owner of
this object is . . .

You see? I ask appropriate leading questions and give subtle suggestions that I am
picking up on ‘such and such’ information and “Can you confirm this yourself by holding
the object?” or "Do you get this also? Yes? Perfect. Keep going . . . what else do you
feel?"

I simply interject as necessary to keep the reading on track and ask the object's owner,
“Does what she's saying (regarding my helper) make sense?”.

I'll throw in some names, dates, zodiac signs, lucky numbers, etc. and expand upon any
"hits" my helper is getting with my own skills. I am merely expanding the reading for
them and asking if THAT is what my assistant was ALSO picking up on. They always
confirm. I'm just putting it into different words for my helper and clarifying what they
pick up on.

The key to this whole bit is to ALLOW your assistant to really go with their feelings and
intuition. You'll be surprised at how accurate some of them are and the ones that aren't
APPEAR to be very accurate with my assistance!

Think of it this way . . . my assistant is getting his/her own impressions about the object
and its owner. I am ALSO getting impressions and ask if my impressions happen to
coincide, compliment or confirm THEIR impressions. It’s very simple. I can steer the
reading any direction I wish for it to go while the information and reading seemingly
comes from my chosen participant.

Since we are down to the very last person we already know who the object belongs to.
My audience "assistant psychic/psychometrician" obviously knows who the last person is
and has already begun to size them up in their own minds, taking their manners, being
and appearance into consideration and will now verbalize those impressions with me on
stage.

It’s a very natural thing to do when we meet a person to begin consciously or

unconsciously analyzing them and we ALL do this whether we realize it or not.

Like I said before most of the spectator’s turned psychometrist’s do a very nice job of this
reading and I interject as little as possible. At the end I recap what was said on behalf of
my helper and this person walks down and returns the object to the owner and thanks
them, handshake, etc. at the conclusion.

This presentation is unique because at the end many times you will see two perfect
strangers embracing each other gratefully and in awe at the end of my demonstration.
There is a definite connection there and this final image stays in the audiences mind for a
long time to come.
My assistant reader gets all the credit for this last reading and is praised for their
willingness to come on stage and do this with me to deliver a DYNAMITE reading! The
last objects owner is praised for being so open to receiving others thoughts and feelings
regarding them and their object and verifies the reading was accurate.

The readings tend to be surprisingly accurate without my involvement because I ask for
someone who fancies themselves somewhat ‘psychic’ or ‘in tune’ and ‘believes in this
sort of thing.’

A proper selection on your part will yield someone capable of bringing the house down
with their own reading and with your assistance when necessary the reading will stay
flowing and on track.

'The Ultimate Psychometry' continues to be one of my all time favorite pieces, a staple in
my repertoire and compliments exactly what I speak about in 'Thought Channel' very
nicely. It is the very same concept at work in both routines and experience with one will
naturally lend experience to the other.

I offer my most sincere thanks and utmost gratitude to John Riggs for graciously allowing
me to speak of his excellent work and routine here. John is one of the true heroes of
mentalism and I’ve looked up to the man since I first heard his name. Thank you St.
Germaine. You’ve blessed us today.

Please also reference John’s book, ‘The Compleate Fortune Teller’ for his original write
up and explanation of ‘The Ultimate Psychometry’ as well as numerous other
psychometry and Q & A acts and routines. It’s an excellent book and if you’re not privy
to John’s work I personally feel you are doing yourself a great disservice.

***

MY THOUGHT CHANNEL

There have been many requests from those who purchased ‘Thought Channel’ to share
my private handling, subtleties and nuances.

I still do the multi-phase routine from the original ‘Thought Channel’ manuscript with a
few changes.

You’ll remember that I use a piece of card and fold it in preparation for Millard
Longman’s ‘Acidus Novus’ peek. Since the card now has 4 distinct boxes from being
folded I use three of those boxes to ‘warm up’ with my participants.
How I ‘warm up’ is via 3 psychological/statistical forces that I will apparently transmit to
my participants. It doesn’t matter if they receive my thoughts correctly. This is an attempt
at ‘calibration’ or ‘attuning our minds’ in preparation for ‘Thought Channel.’

If the subjects (participants) get all or most of the psychological forces correctly,
GREAT. If not, I’ve got a feel for how they think now and the demonstration will be a
success! Either way I win.

The forces I use are (in this order), blue, circle/triangle and 37. Again a basic knowledge
of mentalism is assumed and you should be familiar with these basic psychological
forces.

I do send the forces one at a time. This ‘warm up’ phase and attunement process is to
accustom the participants to the idea of sending and receiving thoughts.

Writing ‘blue’ in the first square I fold the card in half and attempt to project a simple
color to the minds of my participants. If there are more people around, get them involved
too. Hedge your bets and harvest your ‘hits’ using psychological forces and the entire
audience can participate in this phase.

Once I send the thought/target/information I get the answers from my participants and
very openly show them what I was projecting/sending to them. ‘Blue.’

Now I state, “Let’s try something a little more difficult” and proceed with the
circle/triangle force. I write it down in the second box, fold the card in half and project
two simple shapes to the minds of my audience and participants.

After the two subjects give me their answers I open the card and SHOW exactly what I
was projecting, a circle within a triangle. I question the audience and see how many of
them ALSO received my thoughts.

For the third box I write the number 37 and repeat the above steps of sending, getting the
answers and confirming/verifying/showing my written target.

The fourth box remains empty and here is where I have changed my routine a bit.

You might remember I used to have one of the participants write the name of an object in
the fourth box and then use the ‘Acidus’ peek to read it. I don’t do this anymore.

The reason I don’t do this anymore is I did not want to make the routine about an object,
which is the very thing I was trying to getting away from. Wherein similar routines such
as “Prevaricator” were about finding a concealed object based on lies and body language,
‘Thought Channel’ was about connection and what is possible with a group of
sympathetic minds.
I wanted something with more emotional impact and so I began to use one of the top
effects in my repertoire for the final phase after my full ‘Thought Channel’ routine.

Not to jump ahead of myself, let’s get back to phase 2 of 3 in my pet routine and
sequence.

I’ve done the 3 psychological forces and in the 4th box a small line is drawn and I ask
whatever participant got THE MOST correct answers during the ‘warm up’ phase to
PRINT the name of a close friend or family member.

My instructions are clear to print the name of a CLOSE friend or family member,
someone they might have seen recently and enjoy spending time with. The reason I ask
for such a person is multi-fold.

First it helps the participant to decide quickly on a name instead of having dozens of
names flash through their minds of celebrities, second cousins and so forth, they can
easily choose one person they are quite fond of.

Second, I know they will be writing the name of a person they are very close to. This
information is going to help me later as I end the routine with a very big and visual finish.

Third, it assures I get the name of a living person to avoid any awkward situations
regarding the person and later reading.

That is all you need to know until we progress and get to the final phase of this routine.

Moving forward . . . I’ve peeked the name written in the process of taking the card/billet
back and fold it in half and half again creating a small pellet. This is immediately handed
back to the participant(s) in preparation for my ‘Thought Channel’ routine.

Back to the original I give the same script I have always used and with no questions
asked or answers verbalized I divine the thoughts of my participants. Remember it is
NOT about finding the card but in mentally ‘hearing’ the subject’s thoughts and answers.

After I find who has the card I divine which hand they hold it in. I use a combination of
methods taught in the original ‘Thought Channel’ and ones that appear in this book to
find the hand.

Now I repeat this sequence again of ascertaining the subject’s thoughts, the card is
located and again I find the hand which holds it based on this mental connection.

After I have found the card and hand which holds it twice I move to close the routine.

NOTE: There is a ‘show-off’ phase I do when I have great subjects. When performing
this phase for others I’ve left rooms filled with very knowledgeable magicians and
mentalists scratching their heads for an answer.
In this phase I do everything with my back turned to the subjects. After they have decided
where to place the card among them I turn around and explain that I will proceed to do
this AGAIN but with my back turned the entire time. They are to direct their mental
answers at the base of my neck.

All I’m doing is gathering my necessary information as I tell my 2 helpers that I shall do
this again with my back turned. Using the ‘Hans’ method I see what I need to see and
turn around immediately proceeding to ascertain their thoughts and correctly identify
who holds the card!

If I cannot get my information so quickly there is an ‘out’. I seemingly receive the

answers with my back turned and face them to reveal what I’ve received. In this state I
can now get the required cues from both participants and locate the object. I play it as
though I received this information with my back turned.

I ham this up and say, “I believe I was getting a very warm ‘yes’ answer right on my neck
from Brant and a cold ‘no’ from Ann in the middle of my shoulder blades. Brant, you
have the card!”

This hot/cold touch is something else that lends to the routines inexplicable nature. Now I
am apparently ‘feeling’ thoughts upon my body!

I now ask ‘Brant’ to place the card in either hand and to hold both his fists in front of
them. With my back still turned I name the correct hand which holds the card! We will
get to this method later in the ‘which hand again’ portion of this manuscript.

After the showoff phase I proceed as tipped below to close the routine.

Once the regular ‘Thought Channel’ portion is finished the other participant (the one
NOT thinking of the peeked name) can be seated. His/her role is finished for now. They
are thanked and congratulated at doing so well and given a handshake and a nice smile
with applause from the audience.

This last phase with the kept participant (the one who wrote the name) will use a unique
combination of reading techniques and psychological forces. I won’t tip the workings
here (because shamefully it is not mine) but the series and structure I use here is Paolo
Cavalli’s wonderful, ‘Shades of Mind’ routine from his book ‘Sigma’ and another piece
of work ‘Into the White’ that Cavalli also penned.

It is this combined ‘Shades of Mind/Into the White’ routine that I use to reveal the name
of the person thought of and written in the card. Remember I peeked this name a long
time ago, a proper delay and time misdirection has been established and I’m going to use
an idea from my close friend Alex McAleer to make this ending very visual.
This ‘Stepping Forward’ touch comes from Alex’s routine ‘The 37th Deception’ from his
forthcoming book, ‘Hybrid Mentalism’ and is loosely referred to as ‘The 6th Sense Ploy.’
You’ll have to get the book to find out why!

Your participant thinking of a person is stood about 8-12 feet (it can be more or less)
away and asked NOT to say anything or speak a word until the end. This is to happen via
telepathy only, or so we say. If room does not allow for this placement I still perform the
‘Shades of Mind/Into the White’ combo to finish, only without this visual process.

My subject is asked to concentrate upon this person as I tune into their mind and
thoughts. You will note that Cavalli’s ‘Shades of Mind/Into the White’ is a very clever
way to get the most out of a name revelation. Paolo reveals the information drip by
precious drip and takes his time. A combination of cold reading techniques and devious
psychological forces create the perfect illusion of telepathy.

The only thing I do different here is ask the participant to take one small step forward
with each correct statement I make and a step backwards if given an incorrect statement. I
might begin with a male presence (based on the name), they take a step forward.

Now my subject focuses on a letter in the persons name and I get that as well. They take a
step forward.

This style of statement giving and stepping closer is repeated until the participant is
standing directly before me and then WHAM! I reveal the person’s full name bringing
the routine to its powerful conclusion. In our efforts to make mentalism and mind reading
more visual ‘The 6th Sense Ploy’ is remarkable and can be applied to all sorts of known
information from names, words and numbers to geographic locations, questions, answers,
etc.

***

THOUGHT CHANNEL KEY BENDING

I want to share another item very near and dear to my heart. It has served me well for a
long time now and is my preferred key bending routine bar none. I present it with a
hypno-flavored script (not given) regarding suggestion and the power of the human mind.

EFFECT:

A small purse (filled with keys) is introduced and shaken.

“Can you guess what’s inside?” questions the performer.

“Coins” or “Money” is the normal response.

Regardless of what the response is I open the purse and dump the contents onto the table
or directly into the hands of my participant(s).

I now explain that already my participants have been psychologically influenced.

“You assumed that coins or money were in the purse as these are its normal contents.
You heard the keys clinking around and assumed they were coins. One might say you are
quite suggestible which is a good thing given what I’m about to do.”

If anything besides ‘coins’ or ‘money’ is named I roll with it.

“Ahh. See what just happened? I held up a change purse, shook it around and asked
what’s inside. Immediately you felt a trap and replied with something entirely different
than what might be expected. This tells me you’re a leader, not a follower and have a
bright mind that thinks for itself. I’d also wager you are fairly intuitive and exactly the
type of subject that does well in this experiment.”

The spectator is given a free choice of keys. It should be noted that among the dozen or
so keys only one is silver/metallic and all the others are copper/brass colored.

We will be using the silver key as a “test” key and any copper key freely chosen by the
participant.

After the participant’s choice has been made I place the extra keys back in the purse and
the entire kit goes into my pocket. I also take this time to remove a sharpie and place it
upon the table.

“One silver key, one copper key. It’s easy to tell them apart by look, but what if I couldn’t
see them?”

The participant is instructed to place both keys behind his back, one in each hand.
Holding both hands out in front of him, the performer divines the hand which holds the
copper and silver keys, respectively.

The copper key, the one freely chosen, is always the ‘subject’s’ key. The silver one is
always MINE and referred to as such.

This process of divining which hand holds which key is repeated 2 or 3 times total with
stunning success and accuracy.

Taking the keys back the performer and subject switch roles. Placing the keys briefly
behind his back as the participant had done the keys are placed one into each hand and
extended before the subject.
“You’re trying to find YOUR KEY. It’s obviously either in this hand or this hand. I don’t
want you to think about it but go with your FIRST IMPRESSION. Which hand is it in?”

Surprisingly the subject is correct! The keys and position are both revealed and
confirmed. This sequence of the subject finding their key while hidden in the hands of the
performer is repeated 2 more times with the same success.

To conclude the routine the performer’s key (silver) is put away and the subject now
initials their key. Placing it into the subjects hand a light ‘trance like’ state is induced and
a short visualization process utilized.

At the end the subject opens his or her hand to find their signed key now bent and
disfigured.

***

I really love metal bending. Coins, keys and spoons are all mangled in my wake and
over the years I’ve come across and created some very good methods and routines.

Something about this routine I adore is the fact that it is so clean and fair. The bend
happens way before any work is detected and the opening phases cement the
impossibility of the later bend. It’s also completely self contained requiring no external
gaffs or gimmicks and nothing involved besides the two keys, subject and performer.

One thing I never did like about key bending routines is that very few of them had an
opening complimentary to the later effect. There was no build-up, only, “Here is a key,
now I’ll bend it.” Most bends, while strong, suffer from such a presentation. I love and
appreciate the opening script as well, a variation on Christian Chelman’s wonderful
presentation of ‘Equivox’ from his book, ‘Capricornian Tales’ and used here with his
permission.

Another unique point is the second phase wherein the participant finds their own key
repeatedly. It all adds to the fairness and ingenuity behind the effect which culminates in
an impossible bend.

There are many things to discuss here so let’s take it in steps again.

THE KEYS:

As mentioned before the keys are all normal keys. In a small coin purse I carry about 12-
15 copper keys and a single SILVER key, my key. I call it ‘my key’ or the ‘test key.’ We
need two contrasting keys or the effect is unclear.
The silver key is a ‘bender’ meaning that on its head there is a hole or slot another key
may be placed into and bent. This is a very old technique I was first introduced to in Ben
Harris’ excellent book, “Gellerism Revealed” and has become a staple technique as far as
bending keys goes. Thanks to Ben for his kind permission to include the method in this
manuscript!

Remember these are normal keys with normal qualities that make this possible. It’s not
hard to find a ‘bender’ key, you likely already have one. If the shaft of another key is
placed into the ‘benders’ head, applying some pressure will bend the key placed into it.
It’s simply a natural slot in the head and design that gives us a fulcrum point and some
leverage. The bend takes place easily and naturally. Place the copper key into the silver
key and squeeze.

For some reason people have a hard time finding keys. They are very easy to source.
Simply go to any grocery store, hardware depot, locksmith or ANYWHERE keys are
cut/made and ask the sales clerk for their “junk keys.” These are garbage keys that
CANNOT be used and usually these places have bins filled with them just lying around.

I always offer to pay for the keys but never once has anyone accepted my money. They
are happy to give the keys away. I’ll often perform ‘Thought Channel’ or this key
bending routine as a thank you.

Something else worth mentioning is that keys will come to you in various shapes and
sizes or many of the same design. You will also get an assortment of metallic and copper
keys. For my key bending routine you’ll want about a dozen copper keys and a single
silver key for the effect.

What do I do with all the extra silver keys? I make another performance set. This one has
all silver keys and one copper key to work with. The copper key in this second kit is a
‘bender.’ I throw these in a coin purse and toss it in my close up case, ready to roll.

Moving on . . .

PHASE ONE – Performer ‘which hand’

So your silver key and the participants copper key are ready to begin the routine. As per
my rundown of this effect, the keys are hidden in the participant’s hands and divined by
the performer. Really all I am doing here is locating the subject’s key. Obviously I can
tell which key, by default, lies in the OTHER hand. When I find one, I find the other.

This is better than simply stating, “Your key is in the left hand!” but instead, “My silver
key is here and your copper key is here!” This gives us just a bit more mileage with two
apparent revelations.
Asking the subject to focus on their key I apply the ‘which hand’ work from the original
‘Thought Channel’ to divine its location. I might also (or instead) use the extra work that
appears in this manuscript to find their key.

The beauty of this combined ‘Thought Channel’ and ‘TC Supplement’ is its modular
nature. You can pick and choose from the techniques that suit you best and have a
plethora of methods and presentations to apply the work to.

I locate and name the respective keys and their locations up to three times.

PHASE TWO – Participant ‘which hand’

Here is where psychology and suggestion comes into play.

I explain the participant will try their own hand to locate their key. Like the participant
had done I place both keys behind my back and immediately extend my closed fists in
front of me.

When both keys go (very briefly) behind my back I place their copper key into the head
of my silver ‘bender’ key and bend it. This bend will be concealed until the final phase
very naturally.

While behind my back the bent copper key (participants) is placed in my left hand with
the silver key (mine) in the right. Both closed hands now come out and are held in front
of the participant. The scripting and motions that follow are VERY important!

“I know where your key is and I’m going to send that thought from my mind to your
mind. It’s either here or HERE. I don’t want you to think about it, but go with your first
impression. Where is your key?”

As I’m giving this above line a few things happen.

When faced with two alike hands the mind takes notice of the first one that MOVES.
This hand sticks out in the back of our mind. The participant’s (bent) key is in the left
hand.

I’m going to extend my right hand and say, “It’s either here . . .” and then my left hand,
“Or HERE.”

As I say this the right hand is the first to be acknowledged BUT the left hand moves
towards my body first. Think of a lever . . . as the right hand is extended the left hand
comes back towards me. It appears to happen at the same time BUT THE LEFT HAND
ACTUALLY STARTS TO MOVE FIRST! It’s very subtle.

The left hand is drawn towards me just a split second before the right hand begins to
move towards the subject. This is the first unconscious cue. Here are the others.
I say, “It’s either here (gesturing with my right hand) or HERE” (gesturing with my left
hand).

More emphasis is put on the second ‘HERE’ . . . “here or HERE.”

When I present the left hand with the words, “Or HERE” I turn/rotate the fist a bit subtly
suggesting my left hand. I also nod my head towards the left fist when saying, “Or
HERE.”

These motions and subtle cue’s and suggestions are immediately followed with the line,
“I don’t want you to think about it but go with your first impression.”

Done correctly the participant WILL choose the left hand and properly find their key.

Keep in mind their key is bent. When they successfully locate it I show both keys. This is
as simple as displaying the key’s head at my fingertips (they can see it is copper) and
doing the very same with the silver key in my right hand. They don’t need to see the
entire key! It will not be questioned so don’t make an issue of it.

After they have found it once, we do it again.

The keys go briefly behind my back and I switch hands. Their bent key is now in my
right and my silver key is in the left. The scripting here is very important.

“NOW which hand is it in?”

Giving the above question IMPLIES a change has been made. ‘NOW’ subtly suggests
that something has changed and indeed it has. The participant will more than likely
choose my right hand for their key.

They do and again both keys are shown.

The third time also makes use a clever and subtle linguistic ploy.

“One more time EXACTLY as before. Which hand?”

The subject will again choose the right. Why? Because I’ve just told them, “One more
time EXACTLY like before. Which hand?” and NOT “Now which hand?” which
remember implies a change has been made.

In this third run I steer the participant’s decision by firmly implanting ‘EXACTLY as
before’ in their mind. Well, exactly as before the key was in my right hand. Again they
will choose it.
When they do I once again reveal BOTH keys and congratulate the subject for receiving
my thoughts.

Much of the time my participants will get 3 for 3 when finding their own key. If not, no
biggie. I try it again and again and they will likely get two out of three correct, something
I can comment on and praise!

2 misses is extremely rare. Done in the fashion which I have explained above they will
get it right, period.

If the routine hits disaster during this phase don’t fret. We are about to end the
demonstration in the most powerful way possible – a key bend in the participants hand.

The key is already bent. Let’s progress to Phase 3.

PHASE 3 – The bend.

The first two phases were met with success. The sharpie I removed earlier is within reach
and very openly I place my silver key into my pocket. Asking the participant to take the
marker and mark their initials onto the key I simply adjust the key so that my subject can
initial the head of the key and not see the bend. Since I am holding the key this is very,
very easy. They will NEVER see or even suspect the key is bent. A severely bent key is
very easily hidden behind your fingers as the key is offered for signing/marking.

“I’d like to try one last thing with your key. If you could take the marker and just put a
mark or your initials right there for me . . . perfect.”

I never comment when the key is signed to the effect of, “To make sure I don’t switch it”
or other nonsense. It really doesn’t need to be said. I might offer the key in my left hand
for marking and then ALSO take the marker (after the subject has initialed the key) and
initial the other side myself. Now it is more of a memento of the occasion and NOT
security against a switch.

The marker is capped and placed aside and I ask for the participant’s hand.

“Can I borrow your hand?”

As I ask for the hand I gesture with my empty hand, palm up and flat. Think of a sponge
ball or coin routine (eek!). I’m going to place the bent key into their palm (covering it as I
do), close their hand around it and turn their hand fist facing down.

The work is done. Now we play it up.

I like to use an induction here. The subject is placed into a light trance like state and their
arm is extended before them. I do an arm, elbow and wrist lock so they are unable to
move or bend their extremity. They begin to feel energy circulating around their hand and
the key. It may become heavy and eventually the key gets very hot and soft.

When my subject can feel this happening I ask them to open their eyes and open their
hand. To their astonishment the signed, bent key is now staring them in the face and
brings this routine to its powerful conclusion.

Finis –

OTHER POINTS –

I need to mention a few things here. You will notice throughout this effect I refer to the
participants copper key as “your key.” This is by design. After the routine I let them keep
the bent key (I have plenty) with both our marks upon it.

In time they will tell people about the man who caused their key to bend while they held
it. Many times the participant completely forgets I provided the key or omits this fact
from their story and recollection of the event. Perfect.

If you would also like to sign the key as a momento you can do it after the participant has
signed the key OR after it is bent! Sign the key and let them keep it with your thanks,
gratitude, a handshake and smile. They will have it forever.

When the participant opens their hand/eyes and sees the bent key you could take it and
continue to bend it more with some optical ratcheting and pseudo-bends to give the
appearance it still bends more.

One thing I always tell a person after bending metal for them is to, “Take this home and
put it in a drawer or cupboard, somewhere where nobody will touch it. Check it in a few
days because a lot of times this key (spoon, coin, etc.) will continue to bend even more
over time.”

Of course it doesn’t but placing the key out of their mind and reach for a few days and
checking on it later will often yield the desired result.

To end I will say that this routine can be used with ‘TC’ techniques and two people. One
will hold the silver key and one will hold the copper key. With no questions asked or
answers verbalized you can ascertain who holds what key and where using original ‘TC’
techniques and the ‘Hans’ method, among others.

Progressing to the second phase in which the participant locates their copper key and
‘which hand’ it’s in, you can take turns alternating back and forth between the two
assistants, closing with the bend in both their hands, one on top and one on bottom.

***
 ‘WHICH HAND, AGAIN’

In the original ‘Thought Channel’ manuscript I taught you how to ascertain which hand
an object was held in using a number of different methods. These are still the methods I
use today when performing the routine.

Below we’ll look at additional ‘which hand’ work, techniques and gambits. This comes
from my own unpublished work and a very generous contribution from Bryn Reynolds.

It is my sincere hope that I shall continue to raise the bar regarding propless ‘which hand’
effects and continue to provide the latest methods to successfully achieve such an effect.

One thing you will appreciate below is that ALL these techniques work very well
together and require NO CUES or TELLS coming from your participant. These
revelations and sequences could be done with your back turned or even blindfolded –
something my other methods do not allow.

As there is no guess-work involved and given my instructions you will be perceived as

‘CORRECT’ 100% of the time, readers may wish to implement these other pieces in their
own demonstrations of ‘Thought Channel.’

Though much easier and surefire these additional techniques are not meant to replace the
original work set forth in ‘Thought Channel’ but to supplement it.

To get us started the following has been graciously placed before you straight from ‘The
Safwan Papers’ by Bryn Reynold’s. I’ll mention it again later but if you have not picked
up this wonderful offering yet, GET IT! Bryn’s text appears here, unedited or altered, for
you to learn from.

(We all owe Bryn and ALL the contributor’s to this manuscript a heart-felt THANK
YOU!)

Briefly about ‘The Safwan Papers’ - Not a single mentalism book in my memory has
ever been so touching and thoughtful. It truly is a remarkable work and one you do not
want to miss or be without.

Let the following be a powerful testament to the rest of Bryn’s book and story. I’m
honored to have his work and its background included here and without further ado I
present to you Bryn Reynold’s ‘BOHT’ from “The Safwan Papers.”

***
 BOHT

The “which hand” effect is only a 50/50 proposition, but for some reason it
plays extremely well., especially if performed multiple times…and perhaps
ending with a prediction of what had just occurred. What follows is not a
complete effect. It is a method, that when performed with complete confidence,
enables the performer to appear to be able to divine in which hand a spectator
has hidden an object.

I will tell you up front that BOHT requires the performer to appear that he has
complete confidence in what he just accomplished. When first reading this you
may think that it is just a scam and that it will never work. I assure you it does
work, (and magnificently) and at the conclusion I am going to point out how a
very famous mentalist uses a similar technique in a routine that most of you have
at least seen, if not perform a variation of yourself.

I have been performing BOHT long before I ever saw that said famous routine,
and it was nice to see someone of such high regard using a similar principle.
Many will say “It is too bold!” Those that will try it out, with the confident air
required, will drop the “too” from their description. This will not work perfectly for
some of you the first few times you try it; for others it will work right away. I mean
no disrespect to those whom I mention that it will not work well the first couple of
tries. The only reason that it may not play as strongly as you may like is that you
will be giving off an air of feeling guilty that may be picked up by the spectator.
Let you inner, emotionless, psychopath out to play for a minute and this will be
an out that will serve you well.

Before we begin, I am going to take a couple of pages to describe the genesis of

this and describe one of my best performances of mentalism….and I wasn’t even
aware of what I had just done! The reason I succeeded in the final phase of
BOHT, described below, was due to me not KNOWING what I was doing so
therefore had no guilt at all to telegraph.

I will try to be brief, but this is a great example of how other cultures view magic
and those that perform it. I was also deployed with the Army to the Middle East
during Operations Desert Shield & Storm in 1990/1. After the short ground war
was over, we had taken literally tens of thousands of Iraqi prisoners. We set up
prison camps in the middle of the desert by making “compounds” in the sand with
several rolls of razor wire forming squares that would each contain several
hundred prisoners. We divided our unit into shifts, and then spent the next few
months simply sitting at the entrance to each compound to “guard” them. (Where
were they going to go in the middle of the Arabian Desert?)

Most simply surrendered upon seeing us. While some were hardcore Republican
Guard soldiers, the vast majority were just regular citizens that were given a rifle
and sent to the front lines. Many would come up to the wire and want to talk to
us. Of course, most did not speak good English, but there is one universal
language that everyone seems to understand: making a coin completely vanish
before their eyes. They would tell their fellow captives of what I could do, who
would in turn come up and hand me a coin to vanish. (I had a whole bag of coins
to bring home that were either sleeved, pocketed, or simply dropped into the
sand!) I had some of the best reactions to a simple coin vanish that I had ever
seen. I came to find out why the reactions were so strong: they thought what I
was doing was real.

I truly believe that from their frame of reference regarding cultures, that they
thought I would not pull an Ali-Baba and set up what I was doing as trick. I told
them I would make their coin vanish; it did indeed vanish according to their eyes,
so therefore I used what inner-magic I had to accomplish this. Once one of our
interpreters informed me of this I was dumbfounded. He also told me that many
now referred to me with an Arabic word that loosely translated into “MagicMan.”

Being a 20 year old kid, the Gulf War taught me a lot of life’s lessons. This was a
big one. My experience with what I refer to as BHAT (and no, not Khat, that leaf
you chew that gets you high!) taught me even more. This beautiful experience I
am about to describe truly left an indelible mark on my mind every bit as potent
as some of the terrible things I had seen and done. It was what probably got me
more into mentalism and further away from magic.

I worked the 6pm to 6am shift. Usually the prisoners were in their tents and
sleeping around midnight, but during one of their holiday periods I recall them
being up all night. I was asked by one of the English-speaking prisoners if I would
come into the compound to watch some sort of ceremony. Grabbing “a ‘terp”
(one of our interpreters,) we went inside. There were about 60 prisoners sitting
cross-legged on the ground. There were two rows of about 30 each, facing each
other and creating an isle about three feet wide which one could walk down. The
generator-powered floodlights lit up the place.

I watched as one of the prisoners I recognized as being more “senior in social

stature” walked up and down the isle, stopping at each sitting person randomly
and showing those he stopped at something wrapped in cloth. Each would reach
in and come out with a closed fist. Keeping security in mind, I asked my terp what
was happening. He told me it was a “game” and explained the significance of it.
He also described it as being called, what sounded like to me, to the best of my
recollection now: BOHT. If I had known what was about to transpire I would have
written it down. The guy that had the cloth said something to the interpreter. “He
wants you to try,” he told me. Try what? Apparently, this game entailed him
presenting a single stone from the cloth to quite a few of the people that were
sitting. One would actually take it, but all had to pretend they did by coming out
with closed fists. Apparently the job to discern who actually had it was now mine,
and since I was “The MagicMan” they wanted to see me do it. And I did…..and
how.

I didn’t want to spend all night guessing sixty guys, and I certainly did not want to
get caught playing a game with the prisoners by someone higher ranking then
me. This was well before Abu Ghraib, but we still had our concerns. Declining
wasn’t an option from the uproar, so I decided to take a quick guess, apologize,
and get back to my post. I simply walked up to one of the guys sitting and pointed
at him. I looked at the “terp” with a “can we go now?” look, and his look back to
me is one I will not forget. Ever. That guy stood up, and the cloth-holding “elder”
and he started dancing! Uh-oh….what just happened? Yep. I got it right. He had
the damn stone.

Sixty guys causing an uproar. One of the luckiest guesses of my life. I had to get
out of there. Apparently there is a “Part II” to BOHT, though. “YEA! Now try the
HAND!” is as close as I recall to what was said next. I didn’t have anywhere the
experience in body language “tells” that I have now. Hell, I hadn’t even started
my career in law enforcement yet, let alone have attended The Reid School of
Interview and Interrogation. From the result, it is probably better that I hadn’t. I
didn’t overthink anything. The stone-holder held out both hands. I simply
grabbed one and covered his fist with my fingers. I cannot remember if this
was his left or his right.

I simply thought that was the hand with the stone. Honestly, I didn’t care…this
was getting surreal, and I didn’t want to get in trouble. With me holding his one
fist closed, he had no choice but to open the other hand. It contained the
stone. Two for two. I had to get out NOW. Terp and I left, I recall more dancing
and hollering, and my fondest memory from that episode is remembering my
superior officers thinking “why does Reynolds never seem to have any discipline
problems in his compound?”

My once in-a-lifetime version of walking on water. For obvious sentimental

reason, I am a huge fan of the impromptu “which hand” type of effects. Through
various courses in psychology, gambling, and Jack Bauer-like interrogation over
the last 15 years I am in a better place research-wise to make an informed
decision as to which hand presented to me holds a hidden object. (However, I
will never be more lucky than I was in 1991 – and to be lucky is better than to be
good!)

While most of the time I can control a performance setting while setting up this
“which hand” premise, and have time to get my much cherished and needed
“tells,” there are others where honestly I cannot.
It may be a very crowded bar where I cannot devote my full attention to the
participant. Or, quite honestly, it may be a participant which I simply cannot read.

Those that claim definite, 100%, accuracy rates with their purely psychological
methods are lying to you…..Humans are very individual creatures, and unless
you have spent a lot of intimate time with a particular one, there will be times
when your purely psychological tells are off, as much as I love these methods.

BOHT resurrects my lucky, ancient, Arabic method of old, and can pull your a**
out of the gutter when one of the “pure” psychological methods fail…..and they
will (BOHT is a “pure” technique also: pure B.S.) A simple reread, above, of how
I pulled this off accidentally and will tell you what I base my “hand grab”
technique on.

When presented both closed hands by the prisoner, I grabbed the one that I
tought had the coin and thought that by grabbing his hand I was indicating such.
However, to his mind, apparently, I was eliminating that hand,: since he could not
open it he had no choice but to open the one I was not holding. He brought the
whole thing to a successful conclusion in his mind.

WOW! I could either be indicating the closed fist I grabbed as being

indicative of where I thought the coin was, or I could be eliminating it by
not allowing it to open. Thinking about this later opened up a whole new way of
thinking and structuring of effects for me. Again, as mentioned elsewhere in this
book, we have two different paths to lead us to the same desired result. To the
spectator, either path we take looks like it was the only logical choice.

The routine and famous mentalist I refer to at the beginning of this is Max
Maven and his excellent Kurotsuke routine. He has a clever handling that
allows him to narrow down who is holding the stone to two final spectators.

From there it is all audacity and bluff, similar to how I am going to describe my
BOHT handling. I am certainly not going to tip it here, but most of you have seen
the clever way in which he manages the ending. I was SO happy when I saw him
perform this routine.

To see a well-known mentalist perform something very similar to what I had been
performing for quite some time made it feel “justified” in my mind. In the above
paragraphs I have sprinkled how I employ my BOHT handling. I am going to put
it all together here now. We will assume that the spectator is holding an object in
one of two closed outstretched fists.

You simply are not confident that you got your tell(s) correctly and want to appear
to bring this to a successful conclusion. While I am all for the occasional miss in
mentalism, this is a technique to employ when you simply have to appear to get it
right. I simply look back and forth at each hand while softly, but loud enough for
the participant to hear, mutter to myself: “If I am going to figure out which hand
the ****** is in I need to eliminate the one that it isn’t in…..” I say this almost
as if I am talking to myself and am giving myself direction and guidance on
what I need to do to be successful.

I try to conjure up a look like a light just went on inside my mind & I immediately
do two things simultaneously: I grab hold of one of their fists with my hand,
holding it shut, and with my other hand I point to their other fist and command
“Open that hand!” No matter what I see I loudly give a self-congratulatory
“YES!!”

OUTCOME # 1:
If the hand they open contains the object I immediately let go of their closed fist,
gently pushing it down to their side, and take hold of their open hand, with the
object on it, with one of my hands. I raise it up a little into the air, almost as if I am
displaying the object on their open hand and using that hand as a “display tray”
to proudly display my prize. I told them to open their hand, they did, and there is
the object for all to see. Arguably the most desirable of the two possible
outcomes, but here is how we still bring this to a very successful conclusion
when the object is not there

OUTCOME # 2:
If the hand they open does not contain the object I still give the “YES!” verbally
and do two things: I nonchalantly, softly, brush their open hand down to their side
while at the same time my fist that is holding their closed hand raises both of our
hands high into the air, much like a referee does for a winning boxer after he
has delivered the knockout punch! The combination of this gesture that
symbolizes winning and success in our culture, coupled with a confident
“YES!” on your part will ensure that in the mind of the participant that you
succeeded what you were trying to accomplish. They don’t even need to
open their hand to show the object to confirm this success!

This works because we implanted the suggestion of an elimination process, by

seeding the idea of elimination in our mutterings to our self. We successfully
eliminated the hand NOT containing the object, just as we muttered to ourselves
that we HAD to do that in order to locate the hand that DID have the object. We
have primed the participant to accept either outcome as logical by our verbal
utterances and, just as importantly, how we then react to the situation. Any
reaction other than an air of complete success on your part, for either outcome,
will result in less than stellar reactions.
Please give BOHT a few trial runs in real-world settings. I hope it is an effective
“out” for you as it has been for me. We, as performers, define what success
is……

I hope you go forth and always find the correctly colored stone in all
aspects of your life……

***

Absolutely wonderful, Bryn. Thank you again and again.

***

On to my own techniques, it’s exceedingly hard to follow ‘BOHT’ but I’ll try!

#1. Something I've been doing for a long time now is having the participant hide an
object in either hand and extend both fists out in front. Now I hold both my palm down
hands over theirs (as if sensing) and after a few moments simply TOUCH either hand, it
doesn’t matter which!

Something interesting will happen here. If it's the CORRECT hand and holds the object
you get an instant reaction. If not, I also immediately touch the OTHER hand as well.
Now I know it’s in the second hand I touched.

How? If it was in the first hand I touched there would be a visual response or reaction.
The person would smile, nod their head, open their hand and show the object.

If the object is not in the hand I touched there will be a visible hesitation. You can sense
this before you see it. If the person does NOT react immediately to your first touch,
IMMEDIATELY touch the other hand as well and go for THAT hand.

Again, if the object is NOT in the first hand I touch I IMMEDIATELY touch the second
hand as well and then continue to hold both of my hovering hands above theirs as if
sensing the objects location.

It's almost as if I am sensing through touch or psychometry and works very well. The
point is not skipping a beat and being very fast on your feet, natural.

One big key here is to hold your hands above theirs for a few moments FIRST and then
touch one hand. They will naturally assume you are committing to that hand and react. If
they hesitate at all or there is little to no response, any negative reactions, etc.
IMMEDIATELY touch the other hand as well, rub both your hands together and again
extend them above the subject’s clenched fists. The illusion and effect is perfect.

I would only use this once in any given sequence. Repeating it as written above will not
have the same effect.
#2. Something that works very well with Bryn’s ‘BOHT’ in mind is instead of gripping
one hand I simply push one of the fists down to the participant's side and smile at them
knowingly.

If the hand pushed down has the object, it's the one I moved and identified by placing it at
their side. If not, the hand left has the object. The key here is not saying a word and
letting the participant figure it out for themselves! The meaning is always implied yet
open, not unlike certain equivoque techniques.

Something else I've done is use a linguistic deception as such . . . I'll touch a hand and
say, "Place it in your pocket.” I follow this with, “Show them I’m right!”

This is wonderful BECAUSE it can mean, "Place this (empty) hand in your pocket" OR
"Place the object (which I have just located) in your pocket." It's great for the second to
last which hand divination/revelation in my ‘self-working’ 4 Phase ‘which hand’ routine
detailed below, alone or in conjunction with other techniques.

#3. - Something else I'll share that works extremely well and is based on psychological
technique takes a note from Rick Maue's brilliant 'TERASABOS' and makes the which
hand effect possible with a very bold move.

Let’s call it, “The TERABLE hand” technique.

I turn my back and ask the participant to place the object in either hand and to hold both
hands out in front of them. Here is where 'TERASABOS' comes in . . . when I turn away
from the participant I place myself further to their RIGHT, meaning I'm standing off to
one side a bit.

Like ‘TERASABOS’ the participants AVOID their right hand (much like the end cups in
TERA.) due to psychological marking. It's funny, they place that object in their left hand
most of the time trying to get it as far away from you as possible.

It's very surprising with back still turned to then tell them, "It's in your left hand!" and be
correct. A small key here is having the object visible when you turn your back so that a
decision has not yet been made. It won't work if the object is already in a committed hand
(unless it happens to be their left hand of course).

If you don’t own ‘The Book of Haunted Magic’ by Rick Maue and don’t know what
‘TERASABOS’ is I have two things to say. First, the above likely did not make much
sense to you at all and second, shame on you ☺. Instead of spending your money on
quality ebooks like this one you might consider investing in the vast wealth of knowledge
already out there and developing your paper library and performing arsenal.

#4. – Touching upon Colin’s technique from the original ‘Thought Channel’ manuscript
he notes that often a person will glance at their hands, the one glanced at first usually has
the object.
This usually only works once and you have to be quick to notice which hand they look at.
Following is my solution for those times I miss the ‘tell’ and would like to get it again.

The participant has an object hidden in one of two closed and extended fists. I tell them,
“Focus and look at your hands as you send the image to me.”

By taking the participant’s attention away from me and placing it back on their hands
they will usually AGAIN look first at the hand containing the object. Also their ‘nose
tells’ become more exaggerated for some reason. Using these bits together equals
ultimate success and the correct hand can then be found accordingly.

#5. Freebie – As explained in my key bending routine whenever I nail the object and
hand containing it, many times with the following instructions I can immediately do it
again with the same results and the same hand.

“Let’s try that exact same thing again. Just like before bring both hands out in front of
you. Perfect.” Few people will change hands with these instructions. The key here is to
be bold, confident, commanding and relaxed. The nose, shoulder and eye cues let me
know if I am on the right track and my instructions/suggestions have been followed.

***

WHICH HAND X4

In this sample routine (which I currently use) you will see how to use the above ‘which
hand’ methods together in one short routine. It is a very convincing display and
something I use when performing one on one or in small groups. Again my scripting will
be omitted.

Phase 1. The object is hidden in either of the participant’s hands and both are held out in
front. Remember that although this entire routine is self-working (to the extent it can be) I
am constantly using the techniques and gambits from ‘Thought Channel’ for the best
success and outcomes. This routine and above work is also excellent practice for your
other techniques.

Here in round one I get my normal shoulder, nose and eye tells. Proceeding with the first
technique in MY ‘which hand’ portion of this manuscript I hover my hands above the
participant’s and after a few moments touch one. Either way, I’m going to be correct.
Read the above.
Phase 2. Offering to repeat, the object is once again hidden in either hand OR given to
someone else to play. Both hands are extended to the front and now I use Bryn’s ‘BOHT’
to find the object.

Phase 3. I proceed with my “Freebie” ‘which hand’ technique and nail it again.

Phase 4. I end the routine here with the very bold and beautiful “TERABLE” which hand
technique based on the ‘TERASABOS’ principle discussed above. With my back turned I
will call out the object’s location, “It’s in your left hand!”

Using a combination of techniques from this manuscript as well as the original ‘Thought
Channel’ manuscript I have gone for 10/12 correct guesses playing the ‘which hand’
game. I missed the first one and the last one only. This is my best record so far.

***

WORKING WITH MULTIPLE PEOPLE

In the original ‘Thought Channel’ manuscript we briefly discussed working with multiple
people during the ‘TC’ routine and ‘Thought Channel Tag.’

The only thing I can really say about this is although possible you really need to be above
par with ‘Thought Channel’ tools and techniques for the best success.

The most I have ever worked with is 8 people. I handle it as such –

The very first thing I want to do before I find who HAS the object is determine who does
NOT have the object. This is fairly simple using the ‘Hans’ method. I begin by
eliminating those I know and feel DO NOT have the object. Right off the bat I get rid of
4 people.

Now I’ve got to check and make sure (with confidence) that I have not eliminated the
object by mistake. This HAS happened to me quite a few times when learning and is a
great learning experience. The misses will teach you more than the ‘hits.’

I’m now down to just 4 people. I do the mental questions and answers as per the original
routine. Usually at this point I know exactly who has the object and can really play it up!

Even so, I eliminate two more people NOT holding the object and proceed with just two
people left milking the situation for all it’s worth.
Though very possible I would advise against going straight for the object when working
with 5 or more people. I normally do the routine with 3 people these days and no
eliminations are required.

When working with larger groups it is vital to eliminate others until you have a
manageable number to work with. Applying the ‘Hans’ method and other techniques will
allow you to do so.

Once I’m down to two or three people I can then find the object and hand which holds it
bringing the demonstration to its conclusion.

Look and eliminate first!

The last thing I can tell you is simply to get comfortable with ‘Thought Channel’ tools
and principles and then gradually start working with more people. Experience is the best
teacher when using these methods and will show you far more than I can tell here.

***

SPECIAL THANKS
To John Riggs, Richard Osterlind, Bryn Reynold’s, Ben Harris, Christian Chelman and
Alex McAleer - I cannot thank each of you enough! Thank you for believing in ‘Thought
Channel’ and offering your own golden material, pointers, tips, subtleties and nuances
here. My manuscript wouldn’t be nearly as good without your generous offerings and
contributions to this supplement. I stand on the shoulders of giants. Thank you all from
the bottom of my heart.

***

THANKS
To the original contributors and developers of ‘Thought Channel.’ I feel great knowing
that we’ve made a true contribution to the art of mentalism with ‘Thought Channel’ and
the supplement which has followed.

I’d also like to thank Chris Karim, Craig Rovinsky, Alex McAleer, Nathan Pain and Don
Theo for their assistance and feedback regarding this material and finished manuscript.
You guys are all-stars and I appreciate you always.

Thanks as well to the original purchasers of ‘Thought Channel’ and this supplement.
Your support and interest in this work means the world to me.
My deepest thanks to those close friends and peers who lend me their support in life as
well as magic and mentalism. You know who you are.

Yours,
Jerome Finley, 2008

REFERENCES

John Riggs, ‘The Compleate Fortune Teller’ (1995) and his routine, ‘The Ultimate
Psychometry’ which both come with my highest recommendation.

Bryn Reynold’s, ‘The Safwan Papers’ (2008).

Richard Osterlind’s psychometry touch appears on the Volume 4 DVD of his ‘Easy to
Master’ series and is used here with his permission. Thank you, Richard.

Alex McAleer, ‘Hybrid Mentalism’ (2008). I use McAleer’s ‘Stepping Forward’ touch to
close my ‘TC’ routine. This visual ending comes from Alex’s routine and effect ‘The 37th
Deception’ and is dubbed ‘The 6th Sense Ploy.’

Michael Fraughton, ‘The Dark Waltz’ (2005)

Larry Becker, ‘Stunners Plus’ (2002) and his routine, ‘Sneak Thief.’

Christian Chelman, ‘Capricornian Tales’ (1992) and his routine ‘Equivox’ within its
pages.

Paolo Cavalli, ‘Sigma’ (1992) and ‘Into the White’ (2007)

Richard Webster, ‘Pendulum Power’

Alain Nu’s ‘Astrologic’ (2007)

Banachek’s “The Ring of Truth” Psychological Subtleties (1998) See also Banachek’s
wonderful books Psychological Subtleties 1 & 2 (1998 & 2006) for further use of the
eye and nose tells plus tons of information regarding psychological and statistical
forces.

Rick Maue, “Truth of the Relic” The Book of Haunted Magic (2000). See also Rick’s
“Imagine” manuscript (2007) for another great piece of impromptu mind reading and
further use of subtle work and tells.

Patrick Redford, Prevaricator (2005)

‘Gellerism Revealed’ by Ben Harris (1985)

Recommended Reading List

Lee Earle’s ‘The Classic Reading’ (1989)

Kenton Knepper and J. Tank, ‘Completely Cold’

Herb Dewey, ‘Red Hot Cold Readings’

Ian Rowland’s ‘The Full Facts Book of Cold Reading’ (1998)

Anything and everything from John Riggs, Enrique Enriquez and Richard Webster is
pure gold when it comes to readings. Learn from the best and go with these guys.
They know what they’re talking about and do this stuff in the real world for real
people to make a real living. Enough said!

All rights reserved. No part or portion of this manuscript may

be reproduced or transmitted in any shape or form by any
means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy,
recording, or retrieval system without prior consent and
permission in writing from the author. Thank you.