Alexander Lucard ([info]alexlucard) wrote,
@ 2005-05-11 09:48:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Edit Entry  Edit Tags  Next Entry
Vampire Hunter Drama Part 3
http://www.livejournal.com/users/alexlucard/840004.html#cutid1 is part two, and there's a link in there to part one.

Anyway, the arch rival of Sean Manchester, the guy who has been annoying me since I was a teenager and the subject of the last two posts on the subject has emailed me as of last night. This guy has a criminal record a mile long, from digging up corpses and violating them on down.

But at least he's more eloquent in his madness than Machester. here's David Farrant's email to me.




Dear Alex Lucard
I was most intrigued by all your comments here about the so-called Highgate Vampire; not least about myself being a 'vampire hunter'! It would appear that you arrive at most of your conclusions about the Highgate Case and myself from sensational accounts you have gleaned from the internet the problem is however that almost invariably, most of this inaccurate sensationalism as been posted up by Mr Sean Manchester himself (Please note he is NOT a genuing bishop) and if you check back on these accounts you will see that I have only been forced to correct unfounded public allegations made by Mr Manchester himself - albeit frequently hiding behind his usual aliases.

It is not my intention to argue against all the points you have recently made on the insidepulse website, as I appreciate you, like anybody else are entitled to personal opinions (however wrong or misguided these have proved to be in your particular case).

I will just say one thing however, to set the record straight for you - ... I am NOT a 'vampire hunter', in reality I am just a psychic investigator and I do not even accept the existence of 'blood sucking vampires'. Mr Manchester apparently does (as he has publically stated in his self-published book The Highgate Vampire), but that is really his problem! In passing, I can conclude by saying that my non-acceptance of Mr Manchester's ridiculous public claims he makes about 'vampires', has been the main reason for his campaign of hatred against members of The British Psychic and Occult Society and myself.

Yours Sincerely
David Farrant
President BPOS.

NB: In the event that you might be interested my main website can be found at http://www.dfarrant.co.uk also could I refer you to Occult Forums International Vampire Thread, Off Topic Occult. The link is http://www.occultforums.com from which Mr Manchester has just been publically banned (within the last 3 or 4 days or so.


SHUTUPSHUTUPSHUTUP! Sigh. My email to him

Ummm...Dave? That column you read of mine was me printing the whack job hilarious emails Manchester sent me. Re-read the column. Those are his words, not mine with me making fun of him at the end.

It was in reference to the column I wrote back in Jan '05 (http://www.insidepulse.com/article.php?contentid=31102) where I recanted the entire Highgate vampire saga.

I know Manchester very well. And by that I mean, I know him by reputation very well, as he's been the butt of American folklorists and parapsychologists for as long as I can remember. Norrine Dresser, Paul barber, Carol Page. All of us snicker quite profusely at the whole "Highgate Vampire" incident.

I'll tell you what I told Manchester: Stop acting like children. Both of you. This happened 30 years ago. My god, both of you are old enough to be at retirement age soon and you're carrying on like schoolchildren about an event maybe 5% of the world remembers and only a fraction thereof even cares that it occured.

All your sniping between the two of you does makes you both look foolish and foppish. Like attention whores deserpately clinging to some sort of public limelight when one of you just needs to start completely ignoring the other. I don't care if he starts it, or is just really good at getting your goat, because the end result is STILL the two of you bickering of the world wide web. Please stop.

-Lucard


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

SEAN'S PICTURES - THE TRUTH (PWNED!!!111)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-02 08:59 pm UTC (from 82.18.10.226) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
At last, although you'll have to click reply to see them.

Sean...you thought it wasn't possible.
You haven't seen them for years.

I'm proud to re-unite you, with your shameless past.
Now go an steady your aging ricket wriddled frame, you fat, balding, cockless neuter pensioner.


Image
Image
Image


Archbishop Shórñ Scrotum

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: SEAN'S PICTURES - THE TRUTH (PWNED!!!111)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-02 09:28 pm UTC (from 172.189.212.57) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
GOD, I THANK THEE, THAT I AM NOT AS OTHER MEN ARE.
So, the picture of Manchester ‘charging a sacrificial knife in the course of a magical ceremony’ (according to the caption in Bourre’s book), assisted by John Pope, was only a ‘reconstruction’. Just what would a bishop wish to ‘reconstruct’ with a sacrificial knife and a professed Satanist? As to the picture’s copyright being ‘infringed’, he can hardly complain since he later lifted not one but two illustrations from Bourre’s book for his own ‘From Satan to Christ’.
I wonder how Manchester knows that Ian Gomeche’s computers, when seized by the police, proved to contain e-mails sent to the individuals he names? Has he learnt this by hacking into the police computers? Or is it bluff?
Unlike Farrant, Manchester is not a ‘convicted felon’, partly no doubt due to his saintly nature, but mainly because he has been dead lucky. In 1970 Stoke Newington Magistrate’s Court bound him over to keep the peace, on the sum of £200, after he had made a series of telephone calls to a Mrs. Gillian Bradish threatening to use ‘black magic’ powers against her. Since the question of far right connections has also been raised, I should point out that it was not Farrant, but Manchester who was expelled from the National Front in the wake of the publicity given to this case. Technically speaking, being bound over does not constitute a conviction.
In April 1971, Highgate Magistrate’s Court found Manchester not guilty of stealing property from David Farrant, on the grounds that “there is not enough evidence”, which is not quite the same thing as pronouncing him innocent.
In 1974, proceedings were started against Manchester for having sex with a fourteen year old girl whom he had picked up in his ice cream van. The charges had to be dropped as the girl refused to testify against him.
In 1981, two detectives from Scotland Yard interviewed Manchester about an unspecified alleged offence under the Representation of the People Act 1949. This referred to his standing for Barnet Council on a platform to stop proposed building on Great Northern London Cemetery, the very place where he would later claim to have staked a giant vampire spider. No charges were pressed, and by whatever means he may have been attempting to rig the election, it was evidently quite unsuccessful because in the end he acquired only 126 votes.
In 1984, he told the Hampstead & Highgate Express that he was going to hold a ‘Great Invocation of the Full Moon’ on Parliament Hill, Hampstead Heath, on Friday the thirteenth of August. At the same time he told City Limits magazine that the same evening he was going to fight a duel with David Farrant. The somewhat predictable result was that when, in front of a group of journalists, he raised his ceremonial sword to begin the Great Invocation of the Full Moon, the police promptly arrested him for possession of an offensive weapon. After being held for several hours at Hampstead police station he was released without charge, though also without his offensive weapon.
O lucky Sean!
Gareth J. Medway (posted by David Farrant)

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: SEAN'S PICTURES - THE TRUTH (PWNED!!!111)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-02 09:38 pm UTC (from 82.18.10.226) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
What?
You mean this one?

The one where he phoned up and threatened a mother of 2 children?
The swine!

Image


Stay tuned for the next exciting episode of Sean's Show where I produce his divorce papers and show that Lusia was in fact his live in lover and responsible for Sean's wife divorcing his genital wart riddled knobend.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: SEAN'S PICTURES - THE TRUTH (PWNED!!!111)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-03 12:25 am UTC (from 172.189.212.57) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
EVEN MORE LIES,

Quite frankly, I am personally fed up with all the deliberate lies and distortions that Mr. Sean Manchester has been posting about myself and other members of my Societies here. I do not normally answer Mr. Manchester’s fabricated allegations in public; and have done so now only because to have ignored his persistent allegations might have – to an unenlightened few – been seen as ‘proof’ that I was unable to answer these.

Not so. I have at my disposal, a full host of secretly recorded tape recordings I made when Mr. Manchester visited me at my home in Highgate in the late 1970’s/early 1980’s.

On these he can be heard admitting that he was a member of the National Front Party; although when I questioned him about this on tape, he replied that he was only ‘working undercover’ for some highly secret government department.. Hmmm . . . Well these tapes speak clearly for themselves, and it is obvious (to anybody listening to them) that Mr. Sean Manchester is a complete phoney who has for long been festering a personal grudge against other members of the BPOS (British Psychic and Occult Society) and myself.

In reality, Mr. Manchester is really a very sad individual: certainly not a bona fide bishop – as he claims to be – and certainly not a person who has any genuine knowledge in the field of genuine psychic research. He is an impostor as far as such matters are concerned.

And, with his tendency to always write ABOUT himself in the third person, not even a good one at that.

DAVID FARRANT.


(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: SEAN'S PICTURES - THE TRUTH (PWNED!!!111)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-03 07:38 am UTC (from 82.38.130.19) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Good point, boys. I have often questioned--though not been answered needless to say, how Bishop Spongebob Squarepants knows so much about everyone's affairs, like whats on their computers etc--surely he isn't that clever???Maybe he has a clever young friend who is a computer whizz? But things like people's medical histories and jobs and, indeed, thoughts,motives, so called pasts all these "facts" seem to be at his disposal. The "facts" are more often than not complete tommyrot so one can only presume he is not clever at all but makes up just whatever nastiness comes into his silly old tea pot cosied noddle to suit the partifcular occasion! GOsh, why don't we all so that, it could be such fun!

barbara

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: SEAN'S PICTURES - THE TRUTH (PWNED!!!111)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-03 08:55 am UTC (from 82.38.130.19) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Bishop Sponge bob Sqaure Pants is always making out he knows allsorts about people when all the time it is his own nasty thoughts festering under his tea pot cosy.

barbara

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: FARRANT'S BLACK MAGIC TELEPHONE THREATS
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 11:42 am UTC (from 195.92.67.75) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
"In Court in 1970, Mrs. Gillian Bradish said that she recognised your voice on the telephone when you made your vile threats as she had fequently heard you yalking in company in a pub. You said (in Court) that you couldn’t have phoned her as her telephone number was ex-directory! (This is a main point which led to you being held responsible for the phone calls0. If you hadn’t previously tried to telephone her, then how would you even know that her number was ex-directory? And another thing. You said you were later paid compensation by the Court for this. This is an outright lie. YOU WERE NOT. Where is your hard evidence to back up this statement? Please either refer us to it, or produce it here. DAVID FARRANT."

The Daily Mirror, 5 November 1970, published inaccurate and unbalanced report of the outcome of the court case. A complaint was immediately lodged with the Press Council against the Daily Mirror by Seán Manchester. The Press Council upheld Seán Manchester's complaint and the Daily Mirror was obliged to publish a statement offereing balancing commentary which they did at the foot of page two of their newspaper on 26 November 1970. Criminal compensation was awarded to Seán Manchester in the following year by the Criminal Compensation Board as the case brought by him, having been proved, resulted in compensation for injuries sustained. It is regrettable in the extreme that the deception upon Mr & Mrs Bradish by David Farrant was not realised by them until after the court case when Mrs Bradish was put on the spot by the prosecuting lawyer when asked how she knew who made the telephone calls. She went along with what she had been told by Farrant. However, in the following year she accepted that she had been wrong and realised it was Farrant who made the threatening black magic calls. Until the trial, Seán Manchester had never spoken nor met Mrs Bradish. There was no meetings in pubs or hearing voices in pubs. This is sheer fabrication from Farrant. How could she possibly have recognised Seán Manchester's voice when she had made no contact with him until the day of the court case?

Seán Manchester was informed by Tony "Hutchinson" (in whose cellar Farrant had been residing from August 1969 until August 1970) that the Bradish telephone number was ex-directory. "Hutchinson" was aware of Mr & Mrs Bradish and had spoken to them on various occasions in pubs. Seán Manchester most definitely had not. The information about the telephone was not solicited. It was revealed in a conversation along with much else about the Bradish situation. "Hutchinson" was a potential witness for the prosecution in the Bradish case but didn't want to get involved and would have therefore been a hostile witness if summoned. He had provided Farrant with his coal cellar when Farrant was evicted from his flat in August 1969. Farant remained ensconced in the coal cellar until his arrest on the night of 17 August 1970 after which he was held on remand at Brixton Prison. When allowed out on bail, Farrant took up residence at the Bradish household as their lodger, It was during this period that the black magic telephone threats were made.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Threatening to violate the Data Protection Act of 1988 now?
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 12:12 pm UTC (from 195.92.67.75) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
(1) Divorce documents, like most other court documents, are highly confidential and unauthorised access is prohibited.

(2) The only persons who can gain authorisation, outside of the court itself, are strictly the parties involved in the actual case.

(3) It is a serious offence and in breach of the the Data Protection Act 1998 for either of party, or a third party in whom such documents are shared, to publish any of the material contained in court files and documents. This applies to all divorce documents.

(4) Anyone found publishing court documents of the kind referred to here (it doesn't matter whose divorce) will be prosecuted by the Crown.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: Threatening to violate the Data Protection Act of 1988 now?
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 01:14 pm UTC (from 172.200.26.51) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
DATA PROTECTION ACT

Careful, Mr. Manchester, or you may be overlooku#ing your own point.

You say (Quote):

(2) The only persons who can gain authorisation, outside of the court itself, are strictly the parties involved in the actual case.

EXACTLY. So might be as well to think again on this one.

DAVID FARRANT

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: Threatening to violate the Data Protection Act of 1988 now?
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 02:56 pm UTC (from 192.100.124.218) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Hi,

I don't know if Bishop Manchester is aware, but the divorce document has already been published on several sites over the last three weeks or so. I've run into it several times recently.

I don't advocate the publication of this document as I feel that the divorce was a private matter between Sean and Marie, but I think unfortunately, that it is now in the public domain. I know the Bishop had a family with his first wife, I just hope the Bishop's two sons, H and D don't get to see all this or things could be about to escalate to a whole new level altogether. Talk about your whole life falling apart, I just hope the Dear Old Bishop doesn't do anything silly.


PlasmaBoy.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: Threatening to violate the Data Protection Act of 1988 now?
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 05:40 pm UTC (from 84.68.50.216) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
I hope that the dear old 'bishop' will do something silly because that will prove what we have been saying all along. The man is a fool. We've already got 2 injunctions pending and evidence that someone is hacking into our message boards on his behalf. We'll see this through to the bitter end.

Catherine Fearnley

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Running Scared
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 04:13 pm UTC (from 82.18.10.226) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Thankyou so much for that Sean, you idiot.

In that one post alone, you have shown how scared shitless you are about the truth behind the Lusia story coming to light.

You are making this too easy.
At least try a little harder or maybe let somebody with a bit of knowledge sit at the computer.......which wouldn't be a first, would it Sean?

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: BRADISH AND FARRANT - THE TRUTH
(Anonymous)
2006-06-03 04:11 pm UTC (from 195.92.67.76) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
All this unpleasantness with Farrant began when Bishop Manchester discovered soon after the James Bradish case (where Bradish was found guilty of assault and the bishop received criminal compensation, albeit bound over because of Gillian Bradish's surprise allegations) that David Farrant, in fact, had made the black magic telephone threats to Mrs Bradish.

This was confirmed by people who had heard Farrant boasting of making the telephone calls immediately after the case. Those who told Bishop Manchester they heard Farrant admit to the threats are T Hutchinson, R Holt and J Baker who were personally acquaintanced with the bishop. They overheard Farrant in the Prince of Wales, Highgate, boasting to a couple of his drinking partners that he had successfully set the bishop up and was celebrating.

Farrant was far less cautious in those days and was yet to gain the sort of publicity he so desperately craved. His compulsion eventually led to a prison sentence of almost five years, two years of that sentence being awarded due to him making black magic threats to witnesses in a sexual molestation case, the offender being the only known member of Farrant’s so-called coven.

Mr Gillian Bradish soon after the case realised that Farrant was the real culprit. Bishop Manchester has since spoken to James Bradish and this man is in absolutely no doubt that Farrant was responsible. Prior to the court case, however, Mr & Mrs Bradish were not acquaintances of the bishop and he had only seen them at a distance in Highgate where they sometimes visited. It later transpired they were known to Farrant who, until the Bradish court case, Bishop Manchester merely dismissed as a bandwagoneering interloper. The bishop did not especially know Farrant outside of his "ghost story" claims in the local press when he met him at Highgate Cemetery and talked to him in his coal bunker in nearby Archway Road.

Tony Hutchinson allowed Farrant to reside in his coal cellar 1969/70. He admits to feeding Farrant with many fabrications, some of which Farrant has used as ammunition. Equally as much about the bishop has been invented solely by Farrant himself who enjoyed a comfortable middle-class existence before squandering everything he had inherited in 1967/8.

Crucially - in a rare moment of honesty in early 1977 - seven years after the case where Bradish was found guilty of assault on the bishop - Farrant informed Bishop Manchester that he had made the black magic telephone calls to Mrs Bradish. Whether this was to get some sort of a reaction or not is academic because there was absolutely no doubt in anyone else’s mind that Farrant made these black magic telephone threats.

Should a professionally executed lie detector test become available as previously discussed, Bishop Manchester would insist on the following question being directed at Farrant and, of course, to himself;

"Did you you make the black magic telephone threats to Mrs Gillian Bradish?"

If no other question is asked, it must be determined who is telling the truth about this matter because it is at the core of everything that has happened since. When we initially asked for a lie detector test it was to clear up this matter once and for all. The hostility which followed was largely owing to Farrant’s devious manipulation of events surrounding these black magic threats.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

Mass action on selected comments:

Welcome, [info]alexlucard!