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)

The Real Perverts (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 09:20 am UTC (from 195.92.67.76) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
To accuse ALL clergy within (or claiming to be within) the Old Catholic denomination of perversion is no different to accusing all Roman Catholic (and any other denomination's) clergy of being paedophiles because of the appalling revelations about paedophile priests within the Roman Catholic fold over recent years. One is one too many, of course, but it is wrong to label everyone as being the same as a tiny minority of evil interlopers. Worse still, it is a travesty to attack a stalwart opponent of sodomites and paedophiles on the say-so of a man who surrounds himself with these perverts. Yet this is precisely what Ian Keith Gomeche (born 10 February 1952) has done on Combat 18's Nazi message board, having been duped into believing what Farrant told him about Bishop Manchester. Attempts to post corrective information has been censored. Only stolen images of Bishop Manchester plus libel provided solely by Farrant remain. Accusing totally innocent persons of being "nonces," as apparently happens with sickening regularity where Gomeche is concerned, devalues the currency of "Sarah's Law" and works totally in favour of the real perverts.

Farrant's longest standing friend is Nava Grunberg (similar age to Farrant) who lives in Hampstead lane close to Highgate Cemetery. She has known him since their early teens and took care of his possessions while he was inside prison. She also inherited a considerable amount of money and is thought to have funded some of Farrant's malicious pamphlets which he self-publishes from his Muswell Hill bed-sitting room. Grunberg was married and has two children. Now divorced, the children remain with her. Grunberg told a girlfriend that another male friend of hers was abusing her son. The girlfriend immediately reported the abuse to Social Services and the police in 1997. Social Services were prevented from examining the boy by Grunberg who would not make a statement to them, even though her son had been abused from the age seven until nine. She prevented any kind of investigation taking place, permitting the paedophile into her home until the relationship she had with him reached its conclusion.

Farrant and his current girlfriend, Catherine Fearnley (born 17 February 1973), spend a lot of time on the internet posting libel about Bishop Manchester. One of their favourite ploys is to falsely claim that the bishop once held membership in and canvassed for the National Front in the 1970s. Like all the rest of the fabrications circulated by them, no evidence is offered to support the allegation. People are just expected to accept Farrant's word for it. Even the Anti Nazi League have received this sort of misinformation from Farrant and his associates, resulting in Bishop Manchester being met by them at certain venues. On one such occasion, following a live chat show, the bishop confronted a group of ANL members in the BBC canteen at Wood Lane. They were easy to identify because they were all wearing white ANL T-shirts and had been heckling the bishop whenever he spoke. It was discovered that they had received the NF smears about Bishop Manchester from Farrant. Other colleagues of the bishop whose names are known to Farrant have also had similar confrontations with the ANL.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: BEWARE BOGUS BISHOPS (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 02:48 pm UTC (from 172.213.215.98) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
BEWARE BOGUS BISHOPS

The Bottom line is, Mr. Manchester, that you are NOT a bona fide bishop. The Old Catholic Church based in Holland does, indeed exist, but they totally deny that you were ever ordained and later consecrated as one of their bishops. So much for your claim to be affiliated with them.

You have also claimed to be recognised by the American Old Catholic Church but they too, totally deny this.

You have also claimed to be recognised by the Vatican, but they also have never even heard of you.

After the publication of my piece “Beware Bogus Bishops” in “Man, Myth and Manchester” (No.3), you stopped using the title “Old Catholic Church” and began instead calling yourself the “Bishop of Glastonbury” and the “Bishop of the Holy Grail Church” intermittently. Around this time, I again exposed these two false titles and you promptly began calling yourself a bishop of the “British Old Catholic Church”. (You just can’t seem to make up your mind!).

Your ‘consecration’ as a ‘bishop’ took place in the United Reform Church in Barnet. The person who ‘consecrated’ you was one ‘Archbishop’ Iltyd Thomas; himself a well-known local publicity-seeker in Barnet. You hired out the church for this purpose and invited a handful of your friends to video these proceedings and take other photographs copies of which you later offered for sale on your website. You then paid ‘Archbishop’ Thomas somewhere in the region of £100 for a mass-produced ‘certificate’ with your name typed in on it and you also proceeded to offer this worthless piece of paper for sale on your website for the sum of £14. 99 (I can’t remember if this included postage). This ‘certificate’, Mr. Manchester, constitutes your only ‘credentials. In reality, it is a worthless piece of paper.

Your allegations about other people in your latest tirade, really say far much more about your own true state of mind than they could ever do about other people. Your hypocrisy is almost unbelievable.
Take John Pope, for example: Here was a man that you regularly used to fraternise and photograph for publicity-seeking purposes.

Quite apart from duping John Pope over your fake Nazi story, only a year before this you had published photographs of him and yourself (“New Witchcraft No. 3) having a ‘magical duel’ in a lonely graveyard.

In the late 1970’s you often employed John Pope’s help to perform conjuring tricks that you performed at children’s parties. (I have you on tape describing one such party where you describe how he tried to ‘levitate a walking stick’.

You were the chief photographer at John Pope’s wedding in the late 1980’s, and you charged him extortionate prices for copies of these photographs.

There is really only one apt word to describe your (well, two actually) Mr. Manchester. A LIAR and a HYPORCRITE.

DAVID FARRANT.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 02:49 pm UTC (from 84.68.150.83) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
The real pervert is Mr. Manchester himself as we all know. Could Mr. Manchester please explain why we should post our names on a message board called Combat 18 and place our lives and those of our friends in physical danger? We had not even heard of the message board until our names, addresses and other private details had been posted on here. These postings were under the alias of Society of St. George and using Mr. Manchester's Freeserve email address of which I have got evidence of and which I can ask our good friend 'Archbishop Scrotum' to post on here if need be minus obvious details such as addresses etc.

On another note every time that Mr. Manchester mentions my name with anything on here, then a copy of this will be going to my solicitor. As it happens I have an appointment next week and I've a fair amount to take her as it is. But keep going Mr. Manchester you're digging yourself into an early grave but do we care?

Catherine Fearnley

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 02:51 pm UTC (from 192.100.124.218) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Hi,

Whilst I'm not in any position to refute or confirm the main body of the claims made in the above post, I would like to clarify that David Farrant does not live in a "bed-sitting room"! David lives in a top floor one bedroom flat (With separate bedroon and living room)in a fashionable North London Suburb.

Thanks for reading.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 03:32 pm UTC (from 84.68.150.83) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
And on another note, I do not spend a lot of the time posting about Manchester or anyone else for that matter as I simply cannot be bothered and if Manchester had not started the whole thing of by posting our personal details to Alex Lucard in the first place then none of this would be happening. If Manchester does not like the heat he should get out of the kitchen before he hangs himself with his own noose.

Catherine Fearnley

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
[info]alexlucard
2006-06-08 03:58 pm UTC (from 12.40.176.119) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
He posted personal details to me?

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 04:06 pm UTC (from 84.68.150.83) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Manchester posted our personal details to you if you see your Alex Lucard 1 thread hence the reason why all this has kick started and hence the reason why your website is now getting hundreds of hits no doubt and hence the reason why you are just getting as much publicity out this as we are.

Catherine Fearnley

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
[info]alexlucard
2006-06-08 04:21 pm UTC (from 12.40.176.119) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Heh. My LJ gets about 25-30 thousand hits a day already so a few hundred wouldn't really make much of a notice.

I don't really see how anyone is getting any publicity out of this as it's in a thread 13 months old. The only people reading it are the Farrant and Manchester sides. And me, because I have to unscreen every comment made without an LJ.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 06:24 pm UTC (from 84.71.184.52) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Yeah it maybe in a thread 13months old but the point is Alex, you knew what you were doing when you started this thread. You knew all the trouble and agro that this would cause, because you will have seen it all before on other sites, alright you may have had several thousand before we started but I guess you've doubled that by now and added to your self publicity.

The trouble with American sites and in particular this one is that people can say what they want because in America there is the 'Free speach' where as here in the UK this would be banned and the whole live journal would have been deleted. I'm surprised that Manchester hasn't tried to delete the whole journal anyway. Well maybe he has but has found out there is no way around it. We'll just have to keep posting on this life journal until we are blue in the face that is the only way round of it. No thanks to you being an interfering busybody.

Catherine Fearnley


(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
[info]alexlucard
2006-06-08 07:00 pm UTC (from 12.40.176.118) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Actually, I really didn't expect any of this. I wrote an article about the highgate thing as I was asked to and then got craaaazy emails from Manchester and a much less crazy but still weird one from Farrant saying "I'm not specifically a vampire hunter" so I published them both, as I

1) Do mailbags of reader emails from time to time

2) felt the readers of my work should see the emails from the people involved so they don't feel misrepresented.

Sure, Manchester's been going "OMG! Lucard is DRACUL backwards so he must be a vampire!" since 1998, but I didn't expect the yammering back and forth.

You're right about the free speech thing, except in all my published work there's a caveat saying "any emails sent to the writer become his personal property." It's more winded than that, but it's legal in both the US and UK.

I just don't understand why you guys don't ignore him.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 07:16 pm UTC (from 84.71.184.52) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Hi Alex,
Thanks for that, it's a bit hard to ignore someone like Manchester when he's posting untruths and malicious lies about you day in and day out. It does get a bit waring, and I'm sure that if you were in the same boat and if someone was doing the same thing about your family, you'd be a bit miffed as well. I think, but could be wrong that the law in UK is somewhat slightly different with regards to emails but I will have to check it out. From what I've always been told is that emails and letters are the property of the person who has written them, and you should ask permission from the author before you publish these, same with photographs. I'll check with my Solicitor when I go and see them next week. Like I say I'm no expert on law as I've never studied it so I could be wrong.

Kind regards
Catherine

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: The Real Perverts (continued)
[info]alexlucard
2006-06-08 08:07 pm UTC (from 12.40.176.118) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Yeah, when I first started this whole commentary had no bloody idea it was still a sensitive issue being that it's decades old. I assumed it was blown over and just of historical value.

And you're right, 99% of the time the emails stay the property of the sender in the UK. The exception is in those occasions where you send them to a writer or a magazine where they stipulate in their contents that anything sent to them becomes their property and you waive your ownership writers. That's how you get letters published in a magazine or newspaper.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

NOW YOU SEE HIM - NOW YOU DON'T!
(Anonymous)
2006-06-08 08:08 pm UTC (from 172.189.86.214) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
NOW YOU SEE HIM – NOW YOU DON’T!

The problem is, Alex, he just can’t ignore us, and when we do respond to his speels of nonsense, neither is he able to answer us.

Take the lie detector thing; that has now been conveniently ignored after I challenged him to answer (in a L. Test) whether he had really ‘staked’ two vampires through their hearts and whether he was really related by blood to Lord Byron. SILENCE.

We asked him to explain what he was doing dressed as a Nazi. SILENCE.

We answered his Wicca Workers Party (i.e. that it was really himself for putting out the Nazi smears) but again . . . SILENCE.

I have personally challenged his ‘credentials’ to prove he is a genuine bishop and yet again (no surprise) . . . SILENCE.

I say it again now (under my own name as usual), Mr. Manchester is NOT a bona fide bishop. He used to canvass for the National Party and when I challenged him about this on tape he admitted this but said he was really ‘working undercover for some secret government department’!

The whole thing would really be hilariously funny, were it not for the fact that he is deadly serious . . . by that I mean, that he expects people to take his ridiculous claims seriously and not treat these as a joke.

Can you really imagine Mr. Manchester being questioned under an official Lie Detector test? My God, he’d blow the machine up!

DAVID FARRANT.

(Reply to this)(Parent) (Thread)

Re: NOW YOU SEE HIM - NOW YOU DON'T!
[info]alexlucard
2006-06-08 08:13 pm UTC (from 12.40.176.118) (link) DeleteFreezeScreen
Oh, I believe you on most everything. EVeryone from Rosemary Guiley to Carol Page have proven most of your claims to be true.

The guy is either deluded or is a pathological liar. Especially with the whole talking in a third person bit.


(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

Mass action on selected comments:

Welcome, [info]alexlucard!