Saturday, December 11, 2010

The Wojdyla Testimony, Pt. 3

As mentioned, I'll be covering a rebuttal to Farrant's allegations concerning Wojdyla. I'm also gonna garnish it with a few other relevant items.

Forum member, Cú Chulainn, stepped into the debate concerning the hoax allegations, and shared a rebuttal from an unnamed, Manchester-friendly source. He prefaced it with this:
I hope that I'm not about to feed the flames with this posting - given the recent heated exchanges, but I recieved this communique from a representative of the Manchester camp and have been given permission to post it here. I am no way endorsing these opinions by agreeing to post, but I feel that on an open forum, they deserved to be aired and discussed:
Which, I feel, perfectly surmises the importance of balance in the Case. For the sake of disclosure, a few words on the formatting of the post. Chulainn originally posted it as a slab of plain text. The sections of the response quoting Farrant, I've marked in grey, for the sake of clarity. I've also closed up the spacing between paragraphs. Here goes:
But now let me get back to the Polish schoolgirl, Elizabeth, and the purpose of your question . . . Well, as stated just before, in 1985 , an aspiring ‘vampire hunter’ self-published a book on an alleged ‘vampire’ (and its so-called disciple) that he claimed had existed in London’s Highgate Cemetery.

The Highgate Vampire (unlike all of Farrant's self-produced efforts) was not "self-published." It was published by the British Occult Society in 1985 whose registered offices were at 13-15 Pond Square, Highgate, London N6 6BA. The "claim" of a vampire at large in and around Highgate Cemetery was made by scores of people over a few weeks in February/March 1970 and literally hundreds of people in the preceding and following years.

It didn’t anymore, he claimed in this book, as he had ‘staked’ it back in 1973 [sic] and then ‘tracked down’ its disciple “Lusia” whom he also ‘staked’ after she had changed into a ‘giant spider’ in 1982. The name of this particular author (there were many more) was Mr.[sic] Sean Manchester.

The Highgate Vampire was successfully exorcised in the only traditionally effective manner in 1974, not "1973." That such entities can sometimes be corporeal is a matter of public record stretching back to antiquity. It is recognised throughout advanced occultism, metaphysics and demonolatry in general that a small amount of blood provides the necessary component for the materialisation of a corporeal form. Such materialisations are not dependent on the operational needs of organs in the human body as we understand it in the natural world. The use of impalement and decapitation is a symbolic act backed by faith. Cremation is the only effective and final remedy for any host to the demonic agency. The host can be destroyed. The demonic agency cannot. The latter is expelled when exorcised to where it came from.

All good stuff for lovers of vampire fiction, I suppose.

A bit like this ... ?

(Shown pic of David armed with a wooden stake)

Mr.[sic] Manchester writes that in the late 1960’s, a story was brought to his attention of how two Convent schools, Elizabeth and Barbara, had seen ‘bodies rising from the graves’ as they walked past London’s Highgate Cemetery late one night.

So far, so good ...

Now, by coincidence – or perhaps not – one of these girls (Elizabeth) was the live-in girlfriends of one of Mr.[sic] Manchester’s friends called Keith – or ‘Brother Keith’ as Mr.[sic] Manchester ‘reverently’ refers to him.

Wrong. As stated on many previous occasions - including on this forum - Seán Manchester did not know Keith Maclean until he was introduced to him by Elizabeth Wojdyla in 1969, by which time he had known Elizabeth for two years. Four years later, Keith Maclean entered a Christian order as a "Brother" and was thereafter Br Keith. Farrant refers to this man in his self-published pamphlets as a "drug addict" and a "Jesus freak" due to Keith Maclean wearing his hair long and having a full beard. Such is David Farrant's mentality and manner of deduction and judgement. Farrant has not met or had any form of contact with Keith Maclean.

Now Keith began to get concerned about Elizabeth’s health; she lost her appetite, began to have vivid nightmares and became subject to bouts of sleep walking. Keith calls in Mr.[sic] Manchester for his ‘expert advice’ and it doesn’t take him (Mr.[sic] Manchester) that Elizabeth has been bitten by that Highgate ‘vampire’!

Seán Manchester became aware of Elizabeth Wojdyla's worsening condition when he met her on a public thoroughfare by accident two years after her experience at Highgate Cemetery, by which time he had still not met Keith Maclean.

Manchester immediately instructs that her room but adourned with fresh garlic, and she be made to wear a large Christian cross.. He also instructs Keith to feed her on some of his ‘nourishing broth’ in order to help her recover.

Seán Manchester did not "insruct" that Elizabeth be fed "nourishing broth." She was fed broth by Keith. Both she and her boyfriend were vegetarians. Indeed, she worked at Cranks vegetarian restaraunt off Carnaby Street, London, at the time. The constant mention of "nourishing broth" as a vampire repellant is a puerile joke created by Barbara Green and continued by Farrant who has the mentalitiy of a four-year-old. It is on par with him constantly referring to Seán Manchester's "tea-pot cosy," a traditional priest's/bishop's headwear (known as biretta), and use of the term "the bonky one." The man employing these infantile references is sixty-five-years-old next month!

In 1979, an Australian friend of mine phoned Elizabeth’s home in Southgate.

The "Australian friend" is Farrant's second wife, Colette Sully, who has since admitted that she was put up to lying for Farrant on innumerable occasions to blacken the name of Seán Manchester. Farrant had divorced his second wife by 1979. Elizabeth Wojdyla has never lived in Southgate. Elizabeth's parents have never lived in Southgate.

We were anxious to discover Mr.[sic] Manchester’s whereabouts as I wanted to ask him about a series of private photographs of myself that had been sent to New Witchcraft magazine and been published.

This is a bare-faced lie from start to finish. Farrant has always known where Seán Manchester resides and most certainly did in 1979. Seán Manchester did not send any material relating to Farrant to the editor of New Witchcraft magazine.

The editor told me that these photographs had been submitted by Mr.[sic] Manchester and he (the editor) assumed that he had my permission. In fact, he didn’t, but that’s another story.

It is safe for Farrant to make these false allegations because the magazine ceased to exist thirty years ago! The editor is probably dead. Nothing Farrant ever says can be backed by any evidence. You will discover he made no such allegations closer to the time.

When my friend phoned Elizabeth’s home, she spoke to her parents who gave her then work address and phone number. She was working at Thompsons Travel at the time.

Colette Sully did not telephone Elizabeth Wojdyla and did not speak to either Elizabeth or her parents. Based on what Elizabeth's brother has told us, it would have been impossible because none of them were in the country at the time.

She spoke to Elizabeth, but was informed she had lost all contact a few years before.

Neither Colette Sully, nor anyone else connected to David Farrant, spoke to Elizabeth Wojdyla at any time. Seán Manchester did have contact with Elizabeth during this period. Farrant has neither met nor spoken to Elizabeth Wojdyla at any time in his life.

"Please feel free to publish any of the above material should you choose to do so. The VRS has already done so on countless occasions and will only ignite more abuse from Farrant if it were to comment on the forum again. David Farrant, like other propagandists before him, believes that if you repeat a lie often enough people will start to believe it. This is why we and others refute his malicioius lies which have only one purpose, ie to feed his forty-year-old vendetta against Seán Manchester who has only sought to bring about reconciliation to end the vitriol. Farrant thrives on falsehood which he self-publishes and distributes for personal gain. He never conducts any interview or self-publishes any tract, pamphlet or booklet without defaming Seán Manchester throughout. In the meantime, Seán Manchester has not once mentioned David Farrant in any radio, television or internet interview he has given since March 1970."
Unfortunately, before the matter could be explored any further on the thread, it was locked due to abusive, sidetracking posts by forum member, BLACKORCHID (aka Claremonde). Indeed, the only rebuttal Farrant's provided thus far, is this, on a the thread I started, specifically relating to the Highgate Vampire Case:
I feel you had no right Cu to be allowed to post up the comments that you did from the 'vampire research society', which after all, were only being made by one person only, and one alone. That person does NOT reflect the general view of members here, and I think most of them realise this.

The problem therefore, is certainly not my own. I can only answer questions as these are put to me. But there is a difference between answering genuine questions, and being expected to answer allegations based solely on malice or with malicious intent. Whatever, I am afraid I must stay with my desision not to answer queries put to myself on this thread.
Talk about double standards. Chulainn later courteously apologised to Farrant for causing unintended offence, but emphasised the need to hear opposing views on the Case, adding: "I think that everyone would appreciate it if both sides could be heard so people can be free to make up their own minds."

I commended him for this approach, agreeing that the other side should speak out more, rather than sending rebuttals to his inbox.

There've been a few follow-ups on the Wojdyla claims since then. Fellow forum member, timelord, posted a video link which I recognised as an extract from the "Vampires" episode of True Horror with Anthony Head (2004). For the curious, here's the video:



I also followed-up with a few more comments on the vid, the hoax allegations and its Wojdyla's role in the Case:
As to Elizabeth, the clip you've posted features her testimony at the 2:34-2:43 and 3:09-3:19 marks.

David said she wasn't aware her "fangmark" photos had been distributed and considered them part of a "joke". However, he obtained this information from a secondhand source and has provided no follow-up to the rebuttal posted via Cu, except to say that it shouldn't have been posted here.

Point is, if Elizabeth did dismiss the "fangmarks" as a joke, then the recording provides a more sinister edge, implying her participation in an outright hoax.

I hope we can unravel more from the Wojdyla angle.
Which means the next step involves finding Wojdyla. If she can verify that it was all "just a joke", then a significant chunk of Manchester's case topples over and we'd be well on the way to establishing a smoking gun in the hoax claims. The question is: where is she? That's one mystery I'm yet to unravel.

2 comments:

time said...

Good work Anthony. Elisabeth would be an incredible find if she was prepared to talk to an independent researcher away from both parties involved.

Anthony Hogg said...

G'day time,

Thanks for the kind words! Elizabeth would play an invaluable role in this thing, especially as she seems to have up and disappeared.

Her distance from the main players would certainly be helpful in establishing just what went down with those fangmarks!

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails