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)

Farrant's Black Magic Telephone Threats - The Facts
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 11:44 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 (not the following year as previously stated). 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)(Thread)

Re: Farrant's Black Magic Telephone Threats - The Facts
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 02:45 pm UTC (from 172.200.26.51) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
FALSE REFLECTION

The Daily Mirror did NOT retract anything in their report, Mr. Manchester. The merely later stated in a tiny paragraph that you had asked them to point out that Mr. John Bradish had ‘kicked you in the leg. (and that little wonder!?.).

You most certainly drink regularly in the Prince of Wales public house, Mr. Manchester. You were usually with your ‘side-kick’ Toni Hill. As you know, John Bradish also used to use that pub on a regular basis, and more often than not, he was with his wife, Gillian.

For goodness sake, stop telling such deliberate lies, Mr. Manchester. It is perhaps little wonder why you choose to write ABOUT your self in the third person here (and elsewhere). I cannot change the truth, Mr. Manchester – neither can yourself But by blatantly denying the truth, you are only proving yourself to be a liar.

It is YOU who have been making blatantly untrue and libellous statements on this website for the past year Mr. Manchester. I largely ignored it because hardly anybody ever believes you .But when your statements leave the realm of ‘petty bitchiness, and enter the realms of fantasy and the absurd, you leave me with no choice but to reveal the real truth. The simple truth is that it is YOURSELF posting all this rubbish here, Mr. Manchester and doing so under of originating from a ‘bishop’. (Sorry, I forgot, an ‘archbishop’ now if we can believe what you claim on your own website). You are not a bona fide bishop, Mr. Manchester (or an ‘archbishop’); what you see in the mirror is only a reflection; and a false reflection at that.

DAVID FARRANT .

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: Farrant's Black Magic Telephone Threats - The Facts
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 03:26 pm UTC (from 192.100.124.218) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Has anyone got a copy of the newspaper "retraction"?
Surely that would end this little dispute once and for all.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: Farrant's Black Magic Telephone Threats - The Facts
(Anonymous)
2006-06-05 08:55 pm UTC (from 172.215.177.12) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
SENILE OR MENTAL - OR BOTH?

I have got a copy of the Daily Mirror's later 'retraction' somewhere in the files so will try and find it in the files (It was NOT on the front page).

But, as I said, the original report was not altered or retracted in any way. The newspaper just added that they had been asked to point out (by Manchester) that Mr. Manchester had stated in Court that he had been assualted (by being 'kicked in the leg').

The Mirror's reportage of the phone calls was not changed in any way.

This was clearly stated in Court by Mrs. Bradish after her husband had stood bail for me and they had both kindly agreed to let me stay at their home until the Court case.

These phone calls were made whilst I was still staying there, so does this really make sense? Why should I have wanted to revoke my own bail and go back to prison?

Also lets remember that Mrs. Bradish knew my own voice very well and would have quickly recognised it on the phone.

Mrs. Bradish clearly stated in Court that she recognised the voice of the person who phoned her as being that of Mr. Manchester. She added that she had heard him talking on many occasions in the pub.

You will have to do better than that, Mr. Manchester!

DAVID FARRANT

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

Mass action on selected comments:

Welcome, [info]alexlucard!