Virginia woman sues over 'fortune-teller' label

Posted to: News Virginia

By Larry O'Dell 

RICHMOND

A federal judge seemed unmoved Thursday by a self-described spiritual counselor's claim that Chesterfield County officials violated her religious rights by subjecting her to onerous licensing requirements imposed on fortune-tellers.

U.S. District Judge Robert E. Payne said it appeared Patricia Moore-King filed a lawsuit against the county before exhausting all her options for obtaining a business license and proper zoning for her office.

"She's the author of her own misfortune," Payne said during a two-hour hearing.

King's lawyer, Roman P. Storzer, said his client, who operates as "Psychic Sophie," applied for a business license as a counselor. King says her counseling methods include Tarot card readings, energy healing, astrology, clairvoyance and psychic abilities.

Storzer said county officials looked at King's website and told her she would have to apply for a license as a fortune-teller, which requires a criminal background check. King demanded the decision in writing but never got it.

King did not apply for the fortune-teller permit because she felt the background check requirement violated her rights by subjecting her to tougher scrutiny based on her viewpoints and expressive conduct, her lawyer said.

Payne said the government has good reason to check fortune-tellers' background.

"Fortune-tellers have fleeced people in the past," the judge said. "... For all we know she's been involved in chicanery elsewhere in the United States and doesn't want her background checked."

Payne did not issue an official ruling, but said it seemed that neither King nor county officials followed through on her attempt to get a license and that she needed to press for a formal resolution of the dispute before going to court.

"I want her to go back and do it right," Payne said.

The judge also seemed skeptical about King's claim in the lawsuit that she is not a fortune-teller because she doesn't predict the future. He said King has made statements to the contrary on the Internet.

"She tailored her affidavit to get into court," Payne said.

County Attorney Jeff Mincks said King's online proclamations also undermine her free exercise of religion claim because she says she is not a follower of any particular religion.

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

Wall Street investment is a

Wall Street investment is a form of legalized gambling. Some people make money off of it, many lose!

This gets me thinking

I have a languishing minster's certificate, two or three, actually. I should be using those to generate income. I can save people with the best of the major religions, and without violence.

headlines we don't see

Psychic wins lottery _ _ weeks in a row.

If I could only prognosticate …

My financial advisor, when he was first starting out, had an office in the Five-Corners section of Norfolk next to a fortune teller. The fortune teller’s husband was apparently an independent investor and asked my friend one day what he thought the market was going to do in the 2nd quarter of that year. My friend told him he was asking the wrong person and that he should be asking his wife!

Yeah, right!

So why didn't she see this coming and carry her act somewhere else?

Doesn't matter what you call it

It really doesn't matter what you call it. The government should not have that kind of arbitrary rules on the books. It would be interesting to check the history of the law. I bet it was targeted to some individual or group making it an unconstitutional bill of attainder.

arbitrary how?

How do you know it's arbitrary? I agree that it would be interesting to check the history of the law and probably time for a re-write.

The nitpicking

The nitpicking about terms shows that it's arbitrary. You can also find cases where people got cheated in any kind of business so why is one of them singled out? The assumption of guilt is a big problem.

see how it plays out

In my mind the issue isn't the classification ('fortune teller') but the elements that define it. If her business model substantially includes most of the elements that define a 'fortune teller', then she is one for the sake of this argument. She can call herself anything she wants.

On another note it might be time to update the books.

If I could see into the

If I could see into the future, I would have spell checked.
Sorry

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: News rss feed   


Toolbox


Partners

special features