Continued from here.
The following is derived both from the show and our telephone discussions. (And this is again to remind the readers that I tried again and again to give Manchester his chance to appear on the show and “correct the record” with anything he may have disputed.To be continued...
According to David Farrant,“Well, it's true that Manchester claims that two girls were attacked by the Vampire; Elizabeth Wodjyla and the ever elusive Lusia.What he fails to point out, is that the only two alleged victims, were friends of his. Allow me to explain.Elizabeth was indeed a real girl, but she also happened to be the girlfriend of a close friend of his, Keith McClean [Maclean. Incidentally, Keith also happens to be the Regional Area Secretary of the VRS. -ed.], with who Manchester is still friends with.
It was rather convenient, that his best friends girlfriend should be attacked by a Vampire that he created.Elizabeth, many years later, and in a phone conversation to an associate said that the whole thing "Was just for a laugh."Now, as to the fact that “The Highgate Vampire” went through two editions, with the second edition having several photographs removed,“Manchester released two editions of his book The Highgate Vampire. The second edition omits a number of photographs. One in particular, shows a victim with two bite marks on her neck; the problem is, that it isn't Elizabeth's neck, nor is it Lusia.
If it is Elizabeth as he may claim, then the marks are not consistent with later photo's of her wounds. Manchester failed to realize that one day with the aid of digital technology, we would be able to scan and blow up images to such proportions, that even the finest detail would show.What the original photo shows, is that the marks were quite clearly made by a marker pen or paint. The reason is that the lower bite mark has been dotted in twice; obviously the first attempt was too great a distance from the top mark. That isn't the only problem. If you look at both pictures of two obviously different women (the jaw line gives this away) you can easily see that the width of the two bite marks is different.So to recap:
Now if this were a vampire in other words, the bite marks would be the same. If a vampire really existed, their teeth and bite marks would be no different forensically than the host body they inhabited.
It is physically impossible to leave two point like marks in a neck and not leave an impression from the mandible; in short, it's impossible to suck blood using only the maxilla and teeth. One need only look at the animal world to see the case in point. Rather than two "Hollywood" pinholes, the throat would be torn apart.
Now, I must state for the record that I have never seen the first edition of Manchester’s book, it is almost impossible to find one anywhere. I do have the second edition book, but once again these photographs are missing showing “fang marks.” For what it is worth at this point however, I accept what Farrant told me, if for no other reason than the Manchester group (let me use some police speak here) the Manchester group was “SO HINKY” with the information … I knew something was ROTTEN in Denmark.
- Bite marks are inconsistent;
- Elizabeth was his friends girlfriend;
- Elizabeth stated in a phone conversation that it was all "just for a laugh".
I spoke to someone that was extremely familiar with all the “in’s and out’s” with this case and after this person was assured that I would keep his name confidential, he provided me with the following.“I should explain something else here.
In the late 60's/early 70's, Manchester made a short film on an old cine camera called "The Vampire Exhumed". In it, Manchester played not only the Vampire, but the Vampire Hunter as well. Only one picture exists outside of Manchester's lock & key and it was for the poster of his home movie. The poster shows Manchester dressed as a Vampire looking up at the camera after having bitten the neck of a woman who has been identified as Jacqueline Cooper. The film itself was shown to a small number of people back in the '70's. David Farrant was one of them.A few months ago, by pure luck, one of the members of David's organization and a fellow author, met a man at a book launch who claimed to have seen this film as well, back in the 70's.
A few months ago, by pure luck, one of the members of David's organization and a fellow author, met a man at a book launch who claimed to have seen this film as well, back in the 70's.
He corroborated the exact details that David had given of what he remembered. David always maintained that there was a small section of home movie at the end of the film that featured what he believed to be Manchester and a woman having sex in a garden or in public on some grass, but as soon as this came on, that Sean would automatically put it out of focus so you couldn't see what was happening.
The new witness brought this up himself and said that the woman was Jacqueline Cooper.
He also shed light on something that has either been a source of amusement or wonder; the infamous Vampire decomposing pictures. Well David has maintained all along that it's Manchester himself under the make up, but he didn't know how the effect was created. This new witness explained that when he had asked Manchester back in the 70's with a lot of praise for the effect, Manchester explained how he did it.
Now it's important that you realize that Manchester had a photographic studio at the time; something he brags about given the chance and a knowledge of photography.The film is basically time lapse photography played in reverse.
Manchester had a watery flour mixture on his face and a heater & fan set up nearby.
The heat source melted the mixture and the fan blew it off of his face.
Once the time lapse photography was finished, the effect was played in reverse.As the frame rate was so stilted, you wouldn't be able to see the blow off effect but simply a very basic face morph.
It is a set a 3 pictures from his home movie, that made their way into his book and on his own website.
3 very grainy pictures from someone who is supposed to be a professional photographer. The reason that they are so small, is that blowing up a cine film still, would leave too many artifacts in frame that would give the game away as to their origin.