Showing posts with label The Highgate Vampire Society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Highgate Vampire Society. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Tomb aux folles

Yesterday was International Talk Like a Pirate Day. To (belatedly) commemorate the occasion, let's take a peek at a paranormal pirate 'investigated' by David Farrant.


He reproduced an article covering the event from the Evening News, dated 'Wednesday 1, 1972'. While a month would've been helpful for citation purposes, we can pinpoint it to November, thanks to contemporary coverage of the case (e.g. 'Halloween ghost couple held', Daily Express, 1 November 1972, p. 13). Citations have never been Farrant's strong-point.

However, far from detailing any supernatural activity, the press coverage concerns the arrest of Farrant and his assistant, Victoria Jervis (listed as 'Lucy Grant' in the Daily Express account) while conducting a summoning ritual in St. Mary's churchyard, Monken Hadley, Barnet. On Hallowe'en night, no less.

The reproduced Evening News article describes Farrant's intent: 'Farrant, 33-year-old President [Farrant would have been 26 at the time, as he was born on 23 January 1946] of the British Psychic and Occult Society [his organisation was not called this until 1983. Farrant must have incorrectly transcribed the article], explained . . . "The ghost of Wallmsley the Pirate comes out twice a year - on Hallowe'en and Christmas Eve."' The source for this tale, was 'local stories'.

The couple were charged with 'disfiguring a churchyard' ('Halloween ghost couple held'), which later articles would clarify as 'indecent behaviour under the Ecclesiastical Courts Jurisdiction Act of 1860' ('"Ghost watchers" fined for ritual in churchyard', The Guardian, 23 November 1972, p. 10). They were fined £10. The same article mentions the presence of a reporter, who, according to Farrant was only there to 'be a witness if the spirit appeared'. He also denied informing the press. If that's the case, he certainly chose a strange 'witness'.

There is evidence that Farrant didn't tip-off the press, in this instance: mainly because it's clear he got his assistant, Victoria Jervis, to do it instead. After being subpoenaed for another one of Farrant's trials (in 1974), here's what she had to say about her involvement in the ritual:
I have tried to put most of what happened out of my mind. The false letters I wrote to a local paper were to stimulate publicity for the accused. I saw him almost every weekend in the second half of 1972 and I went to Spain with him for a fortnight at the end of June that same year. I was arrested with him in Monken Hadley Churchyard. That incident upset me very much. Afterwards, my doctor prescribed tranquilisers for me.
She added, 'You have photograhed [sic] me a number of times in your flat with no clothes on. One photograph was published in 1972 with a false caption claiming I was a member of your Society, which I never was.'

And reporter in question? 'By coincidence, her cousin was a reporter on the Barnet Press', as Farrant mentioned in Dark secrets: a true story of Satanism, Black Magic and modern day Witchcraft exhortations (London: British Psychic and Occult Society, 2001), p. 70. The irony is, Jervis was not even 'qualified' to participate, as the same page says: 'For the purpose of this ritual, I planned to use a psychic medium (in fact, one who helped in the Highgate Cemetery ritual some two years before) but, as she was unavailable at Hallowe'en, I chose an assistant called Victoria Jervis instead.'

After noting that Jervis was 'visibly shaken' by this event, he went on to say, 'Her cousin had certainly come across a good story but, now, before the case had even come to court, the episode had found its way into the national press' (p. 71).

The funny thing is, all these troubles could've been avoided if Farrant took the trouble to conduct an actual investigation, rather than trespassing on church property to conduct rituals in the dead of night. The 'mystery' of our ghostly pirate, Tom Wallmsley [sic], was unravelled by Jennie Lee Cobban.

For those unfamiliar with Cobban, a local historian and archaeologist in Barnet, she was the original founder of the Highgate Vampire Society. According to Farrant:
So lets begin at the beginning: in the latter part of 1995 a historian from Barnet started The Highgate Vampire Society. Her name was Jennie Lee-Cobham [sic]. She began the Society when she was researching material for a book (published in 1996) on ghosts in North London, including Highgate and the Barnet area. This was started mainly as an historical Society, but in 1997, the work-load got a bit too much for Jennie and she asked me if I would be interested in taking this over from her and running it as a ‘sister society’ to the British Psychic and Occult Society. I agreed, and kept the name and the membership she had gathered up to that point.
A similar version of events was recounted on the Arcadia forum:
In 1995, a lady called Jennie Lee Cobban was researching a book on the history of Barnet and Enfield, and had contacted myself. She was particularly interested in a case I was involved with at Monken Hadley churchyard, when I was arrested for 'summoning up a pirate's ghost' in the churchyard, in October 1972. She was also interested in the so-called Highgate 'vampire' case that had occurred in Highgate in the early 1970s.

She had been commissioned to write a book on the history of Barnet and Enfield, and she also wanted to include the so-called Highgate Vampire case as well.

For this purpose I was invited to her home in 1995, and learned that she had done a lot of research into the Highgate 'vampire' case. Because of all the interest, she had at that time formed a society, the Highgate Vampire Society, which she had set up to deal with the interest into this particular subject.

Her book came out in 1997 [sic], and was titled 'Geofrrey de Mandeville and London's Camelot: Ghosts, Mysteries and the Occult in Barnet', and dealt with these aspects, as well as including a chapter on myself.

As part of her research - as said - Jenny had already formed the Highgate Vampire Society, and because of domestic reasons she asked me if I would be willing to 'take this over'. I did so, using the name, and all of her initial membership.
Those are probably the only references you'll find to its founding, as this 'history' is not mentioned in the Highgate Vampire Society page. If anything, it alludes to Farrant being its sole founder and Cobban's role has been all but 'erased':
But in 1997, following a mass of speculation about the so-called Highgate Vampire and misguided controversy that had come to surround his name - not least because this had spread to a world wide interest in the case - David Farrant decided to form the Highgate Vampire Society, its purpose (as he said at the time) . . . “One of our main aims will be to become a repository for all the oral history and written data concerning the Highgate Vampire”.
While Cobban makes no mention of founding the society in the book Farrant mentions, Geoffrey de Mandeville and London's Camelot: ghosts, mysteries and the occult in Barnet (Barnet, U.K.: The Author, 1996), she does deal with the Monken Hadley case:
David may console himself with the knowledge that even had he managed to conduct his ceremony uninteruppted in 1972, he would still not have managed to raise the ghost of a pirate at Monken Hadley, because no pirate was ever buried there (p. 138).
She went on to say, 'The gravestone in question is that of Walter Walmsley who died in 1723 at the age of 42. His grave is certainly decorated with a design of a skull and crossbones (still just about discernible), but this was a very common funerary emblem and was never intended to imply that a pirate had been buried in the grave.' Indeed, the 'skull and crossbones' motif was used by pirates because of its symbolism, not to signify pirate graves. Here's more on trends with tombstone motifs:
Early monuments and grave stones in Europe and in old New England were crude and were carved with frightening motifs like winged skulls, skeletons and angels of death. The idea was to frighten the living with the very idea of death. In this way, they were apt to live a more righteous life after seeing the images of decay and horror on the markers of the dead. It would not be until the latter part of the 1800’s that scenes of eternal peace would replace those of damnation.
'Coincidentally', Farrant does not mention these revelations in his subsequent books which cover the case. A classic example of 'mystery mongering'. Therefore, it's safe to assume the story's a bunch of arrrse.

Edit (26 January 2012):  Farrant actually does acknowledge the revelations in one of his publications, Rob Milne's Return of the vampire hunter: an exclusive interview with reclusive vampire hunter, David Farrant (London: British Psychic and Occult Society, 2003). Sort of: 'A ghostly pirate. Presumably the reason it was supposed to be the ghost of a pirate was because a very small 17th century gravestone known as the pirates [sic] grave, had a skull and crossbones on it and so people imagined that it was a pirate (p. 12).

However, this revelation is obviously derived from Cobban, sans acknowledgement. After all, what was Farrant trying to summon, if he was aware of this 'urban legend's origins at the time?

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Gross Distortions for Personal Gain

Dave, much like his "pal", engages in deliberate, distorted censorious tactics for deleting my commentary on the Case.

The latest is a real corker.

After the messages left behind on the HVS Facebook group wall, he decided to go ahead and take 'em up a notch. Here's his non-sequitur reply to a previous message:
Which mostly have their basis in 40-year old newspaper reports about the so-called Highgate 'vampire', as you well know - or more precisely your misinterpretation of such reports. I have already made my position quite clear, both on my Blog, Arcadia, here and elsewhere that I do not accept the existence of 'blood-suck...ing vampires'. Your one ambition in life seems to be in trying to convince people that I do. THAT is what I'm not willing to waste time discussing with you. The case itself is, of course, open to discussion here; just not your distorted conceptions of it. That's all.
Which he followed up with this:
I have had to delete another of your posts Anthony. I told you very clearly on Arcadia that I did not want elements of your repetitive 'feud arguments' carried over here. You seem trapped in a meaningless 'jig-saw' of words about 'vampires' and unable to fit these into their proper context or place. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, ... See Morewhether I happen to agree or not. That is partly what this group is for. But that is not what you are trying to do. You have turned the whole Highgate 'vampire' case into a personal obsession, and are making personal allegations about other people and myself in the process That is what I cannot allow. Discuss your belief that ghosts and vampires are really demons sent by the devil to deceive the living that they are really 'spirits of the dead', if you want to, as that would fall under the agenda here. Personal allegations about living people will simply not be tolerated. I cannot put it clearer than that.
In other words, discuss the case if you want, but not your personal interpretation of the motivations of the people involved in it.
That is common policy across most Forums. You will not be made an exception here.
What David failed to disclose, however, was what the deleted post was actually about.

In it, I wrote that I know he doesn't believe in vampires (of the blood-sucking variety, anyway). I also mentioned that the content I quoted him on, were references found in his blog and website. Something along those lines.

In fact, I was only made aware of his censorious Facebook activity, after he quoted himself on Arcadia. Yes, the same guy who complains about dragging Arcadia stuff onto Facebook...is more than happy doing the reverse, himself.

I suspect that he's gone to these lengths after a recent drubbing of his psychical investigative approach by Wombat and the like. Typically turn the tables by attacking me and claiming that I am being repetitious in my arguments, claim that I keep reinvoking the vampire (he's been using the term much more than myself), win back some of that old "support", and keep trying to sell his own (or affiliated) merchandise (see here and here).

Hopefully, the other forum members will see through this slimy tactic.

Monday, March 8, 2010

Contradiction Man Gets Censored by...Contradiction Man!

I've been sharing the adventures of Contradiction Man (episode 1; episode 2) on Facebook, including the Highgate Vampire Society group.

However, David saw fit to delete links to it. Here's how it's gone down:


Of course, the laughs don't stop there. You see, in censoring my links, all he's done is (that's right) contradict himself. Again!

You see, David presents himself as a big advocate for "freedom of speech" concerning discussions on the Highgate Vampire Case. On top of that, here's what he has to say about the topic on the Highgate Vampire Society page:
It is a matter of public record and should thus be open to continued input and debate, and not one that should not be allowed to become clouded or influenced by any who have no knowledge of events (which they certainly do not ‘own’) as these actually occurred or happened. There are many such persons around (including sensationalistic authors and members of the Press) but their stories should really be shared in total, and not be allowed to become ‘dictorial’ in the sense that these necessarily represent the public view of things. [emphasis added -ed.]

Friday, February 26, 2010

DAWWIH Branches Out

I was having a browse through the Highate Vampire Society and Vampire Research Society Facebook groups, when I thought "Hmm, I want a piece of that."

So, I've gone and made myself a Facebook profile and started up a Did a Wampyr Walk in Highgate? Facebook group!

Try not to get too excited.

Thus far, I've added Dave, Manchester, Arminius, Patsy, Alex, Carol and David Carter-Green to join my Facebook profile. Let's see if they do. Hahaha!

I've also joined the HVS and VRS Facebook groups, too. Let's see how long I last. In the meantime, here's my first posting to the VRS:


And here's my first posting on to the HVS:


Saturday, February 6, 2010

A Unique Perspective

Catherine Fearnley has been on both sides of the fence. She was a former moderator on VRS-affiliated forums and later became the Secretary of the British Psychic and Occult Society (see here) and Regional Secretary of the Highgate Vampire Society (see this thread and this one).

She was also
his girlfriend at the time:
As being David's girlfriend I might like to add that I am in contact with him every day via telephone and will be staying with him in June. Long distance relationships can and do work and this is one example and we are firmly at ease with the situation.
A status also acknowledged by Alexander Lucard. However, by August 2007, she had changed tack:
Barbara and Catherine have not arrived just Catherine. So please get your facts right. I am not fighting anyone’s battle on here except my own. You think it’s right to get your mates sending death threats through my email account and yet haven’t got the courage or the guts to face me personally. Says it all. The reason why they sent the death threats through the email is because they knew damn well that the police wouldn’t do anything because it’s not face to face. Very cowardly is it not. I happen to agree with the informative one (the genuine one) however, that talk is cheap and it shows the true mentality of the people publishing these false and malicious statements. And Farrant’s books are equally delusional.
So why the switch?

She vaguely alludes to it in her MySpace blog entry, "Welcome":
Hopefully now most of the harassment has now stopped regards to these people although my name keeps cropping up every now and then. Really a 40 odd year feud needs laying to rest, not only that but people who are obsessed by certain celebrities need to get a life like I have. You can like somebody without being so obsessed by them that you start attacking not only the celebrity in question but also their fans as well simply because they have contact with said celebrity every now and then. I will not allow this person to spoil my friendship that I have with this celebrity because the next time they threaten me they will receive a solicitors letter. They really are trying my patience big style.
I've decided to ask her directly, via her "Wintry Scenes" entry on I Did It My Way:


For the record, my reference to us speaking "some time ago" occurred when she was a moderator of the HVS board and I was more actively involved in my forum. You'll also see that we had an inter-forum "correspondence" of sorts (forgive the horrible formatting of the posts).

Either way, let's hope she responds.

Goosestepping with the BNP?

I recently came across Richard Bartholomew's blog entry, "'Master of the Black Arts' to Speak at Springbok Club" which contains a little bit of info on our favourite miscreants.

It's nice to see that despite David's insistence that he does...
not find the ‘feud’ interesting [...] but one-sided, and extremely petty minded on the part of the ONE person who instigates all this nonsense against myself whilst hiding behind aliases
...that Bartholomew recognises their two-sided "sparring" for what it is:
For several decades he [John Pope-de-Locksley -ed.] and his occultist associate David Farrant have been in a feud with Sean Manchester, a bishop of the Old Catholic Church who pops up on TV from time to time with tales of battling vampires and other paranormal manifestations.
According to Bartholomew, the Springbok Club "agitates for the return of white rule over Africa."

The link in the chain here, of course, is John Pope-de-Locksley.

Bartholomew
acknowledges him as "an associate of David Farrant". To cement the connection further, Pope-de-Locksley also mentions that he's "head of the junior department of the Highgate Vampire Society", which, of course, was founded and still presided over by Farrant.

Pope-de-Locksley also happens to be the nephew of Bill Binding, a former member of the BNP.

So, what we now have are two Vampire Society figureheads, with possible connections to racist organisations.

In the Bishop's case, I've established that he plagiarises from BNP sources and tries to cover it up through deceptive means.


In David's case, there's a more explicit allegation, as found in the thread on Alexander Lucard's "Vampire Hunter Drama Part 3", left by "Anonymous" (2006-06-02 07:56 am UTC):
What was the significance of the symbol of a rune beneath an eagle on WWP [Wicca Workers Party -ed.] posters circulated by Farrant in the late 1970s? This same rune was being employed at the time by the extremist Column 88 group. It is now used by the BNP youth movement. There are slogans on the posters that bear an uncanny resemblance to Neo-Nazi slogans. Any comments?
To try and untangle this mess, I left a comment on Bartholomew's "'Master of the Black Arts' to Speak at Springbok Club". Let's hope we can solve this mystery.

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Strange Coincidence

I just noticed an eerie coincidence in terms of David's latest reports on the Highgate Vampire being "active" again.

In 2005, David was interviewed by Marc Mullen for an article called "Vampire Active Again, Claims Occult Expert".

"Coincidentally", this timed well with the reformation of his Highgate Vampire Society, as discussed in the article.

And now, shortly after the publication of his autobiography, In the Shadow of the Highgate Vampire (2009), his January 27, 2010 blog entry mentions the following:
I have been asked to give another Talk soon on latest reports about a ‘vampire-like figure’ that has been sighted again in and around Highgate Cemetery. These reports seem to have escalated again in recent years, but luckily I have most of these witnessed experiences on record, with appropriate permission to use them for future books, Talks, etc.
To paraphrase Marcellus in Hamlet, something is rotten in Highgate.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Denial Ain't Just a River in Highgate

It's nice to see David taking note of my comment-presence on Net Curtains Lurkers:
[...]I see my old friend the Overseer is on there trying to unravel the Highgate ‘vampire’ mystery (at least, what he sees as a ‘mystery’) and the parts various people played in the saga.
No problems so far...
The only ‘mystery’ – if any – is exactly what this apparition was, or is. But the “Overseer” seems to think that this might be a ‘real-life vampire’, or more precisely, he is trying to follow up claims made by others that this might have been the case.
Wait-what? When did I say that it might be a "real-life vampire"?
Well, sorry ‘Overseer’, you’ll have to rule me out of this one, because I never said the ghost reported at HC was a vampire. In fact I was very careful to avoid using that term when talking to the TV or Press. I have never accepted the existence of ‘blood-sucking vampires’ and it was not myself who went on the television twice then advising people how to ‘stake’ them! That was another person. Sorry!
Hmm, that's odd, because I could swear that you did think it was a vampire and refer to it as one.

After all, you might remember that when I asked this
You claim the press connected you to the vampire story due to the court case. So why, as early as March, 1970 were you entertaining the vampire hypothesis as a possibility?
You responded with:
I put many ‘possibilities’ to the Press at this early stage: not lease [sic] that Highgate Cemetery was being used by a group of professional Satanists. I was asked abot [sic] the ‘vampire theory’ – I did not volunteer it.
And let's keep in mind, that what you said to the Press was this ("Why do the foxes die?", Hampstead and Highgate Express, March 13, 1970):
The odd thing is there was no outward sign of how they [dead foxes found in the Cemetery -ed.] died. Much remains unexplained, but what I have recently learnt all points to the vampire theory being the most likely answer. Should this be so, I for one am prepared to pursue it, taking whatever means might be necessary so that we can all rest.
And don't forget, that when I asked
Why is it that after the court case, you allowed yourself to be filmed in a television news article reconstructing your patrols for the vampire with a stake and cross? You also did the same thing for an article with Barrie Simmons. If you say the press labeled you with a "vampire hunter" tag, then why did you give demonstrations of stalking vampires in Highgate Cemetery to other members of the press?
Your response was:
Why not? It was what the Press and television wanted.
And then, of course, while you were promoting your Highgate Vampire Society to the Press in 2005, you said this:
The Highgate vampire has had the effect of completely overshadowing all my other investigations.
It also made you come to this gripping conclusion in the same article:
The sighting of a tall, black figure in April on Swains Lane makes me think the vampire is active again.
Looks like you need to be more cautious, Dave!

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Demonologist Gets Sidetracked

Unsurprisingly, TFO aka "Demonologist" bypassed my previous post and instead, shifted his focus on something truly insipid and paltry, via a comment he left on "Wanna Be Their Friend?".

The blog entry gave coverage to "rival" Facebook groups, namely the Highgate Vampire Society (presided by David Farrant) and the Vampire Research Society (presided over by Sean Manchester).

In the post, I pointed out that the VRS group "outranks David's group of "friends" (40 members against 77, as of this writing)".

TFO/Demonologist decided to "correct" this statement thusly:
It actually outranks Farrant's group by significantly more.

You might want to review your statistics.

The Vampire Research Society currently has 177 members (not 77).

While Farrant's Highgate Vampire Society has 43 members on Facebook.
Obviously, TFO/Demonologist isn't familiar with the term "as of this writing". The "statistics" were correct at the time of my blog entry's publication, i.e., Friday, May 1, 2009 1:44am.

Apart from the blatant error, I do wonder what TFO is getting at. Is he trying to say that because Manchester's group has more "friends", that it somehow makes it more legitimate?

What an odd way of upholding their claims!

Let's discount friend requests, spam, multiple user names and so forth, to think about this for a second. Let's say, for argument's sake, that all the people on the VRS's page genuinely want to be the Bishop's friend.

Has the VRS surveyed them to determine how many actually believe what the VRS claims? How do you know they're not merely "fans" of his writings and/or claims rather than actual believers?

Facebook is populated by a huge array of strange groups. Who's to say the VRS isn't viewed in the same manner?

Now that we've sorted all that out, will you get onto responding to my queries directed at yourself, Demonologist?

Friday, May 1, 2009

Wanna Be Their Friend?

You can't keep a good vampire down. Vampire group, that is.

Now you've got your choice of two! And you can add them both via the wonders of Facebook: the latest medium the opposing sides of the Highgate Vampire Case are using to promote their...uh...cause.

David gave me a heads-up on his group's Facebook presence ("The Highgate Vampire Society") in an e-mail dated Tuesday, 21 April 2009 9:55:38 PM. The e-mail I sent him prior to that (Tue, 21 Apr 2009 7:46 am) concerned answers to a batch of questions I'm awaiting his answers to.

Interestingly, the date given on the Facebook page for his Society's founding ("1996") contradicts the account given by Marc Mullen:
David Farrant, president of the British Psychic and Occult Society, founded the Highgate Vampire Society in 1997.
Oh, and David's own website:
But in 1997, following a mass of speculation about the so-called Highgate Vampire and misguided controversy that had come to surround his name - not least because this had spread to a world wide interest in the case - David Farrant decided to form the Highgate Vampire Society, its purpose (as he said at the time) . . . “One of our main aims will be to become a repository for all the oral history and written data concerning the Highgate Vampire”.
And now, contrast this raison d'être with the one found on the Facebook page:
The Highgate Vampire Society (THVS) was established in 1996 to investigate ongoing reports of any unexplained phenomenon in and around Highgate Cemetery, in North London.
Hmm...

Next, we have the Vampire Research Society.

It outranks David's group of "friends" (40 members against 77, as of this writing), but, of course, there's not much else you'd find on it, that you couldn't find from the VRS's website. Hell, even its "blurb" is taken from there.

Apart from three links to books available for sale (accessible via its links page) by the VRS (can't say Manchester ain't an opportunist!), it also features links to blogs (Vampire Research Society, Journal of a Vampirologist and Did A Wampyr Walk In Highgate? [no, not my one]) by the decidedly suspect TFO. You'd think Manchester (the site's administrator) would would to step back from such connections. Not embrace them!

But, there's also another blog featured on the VRS's Facebook group links page. One I haven't seen before: In the Shadow of the Vampire (subtitled, "The Life of a Lack-lustre Luciferian Layabout"). Is it a mere coincidence that it shares the same primary title as David's autobiography?

Mmm, I doubt it.

Oh, and it also "borrows" the screencap I took for "Farrant on YouTube".

Did I mention that the blog is attributed to a guy who died in 1913? Its author bills himself as "Arminius Vámbéry". Nice and subtle there. Anyway, I think we'll look more into that blog, later.

Oh, by the way, if you join either of those Facebook groups, you do so at your own peril! If you find that your personal info has or hasn't been, possibly, used against you, can't say you weren't warned!

Saturday, February 21, 2009

A History of Societies

Vampire Research Society
You can have a read of a timeline posted on www.Vampirewebsite.net, regarding the formation of the Vampire Research Society.

In contradiction of David's recent claims, the timeline establishes a link to the British Occult Society, allegedly founded in 1860.

The VRS also has a page covering its history, incorporating an article called "Lone Vampire Hunter Caught on the Moonlight Trail of Highgate Vampire" (The Sun, 19 August 1970), in which David Farrant's name has been censored. For some reason.

The Highgate Vampire Society
You can read about The Highgate Vampire Society on David's webpage. It is also given coverage by Marc Mullen in "Vampire Active Again, Claims Occult Expert" (Ham & High, 02 September 2005).

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Vampires Drain David Dry

Poor David.

The author of Beyond the Highgate Vampire (1991; 1992; 1997), The Vampyre Syndrome (2000) and interview subject of Return of the Vampire Hunter (2003), among others, has had it with vampires!

He expresses his frustration with the subject in his latest blog entry, "That's All I Really Have to Say":
I have said it before, and I’ll say it again: This Blog is not intended to be about ridiculous fanciful ‘vampires’; although I have said it is OK to discuss ‘ghost cases’ here and the paranormal here if anybody wants to. But NOT talk about bloody stupid vampires or their so-called ‘creators’!
Amusingly, the following screencap reveals the name of his previous blog entry. Serendipity?:



Of course, that doesn't stop things like this ("Talk Went Well"):
Anyway, it was well received. Almost an empathy between the audience and myself. It was only in a religious Community hall but there were quite a few people there. I only ‘skimped over’ matters relating to vampires. How can you talk about things that you know don’t even exist – although I am expected to do so, so often. And I said so!
And this ("The Film Was On..."):
The film was on the whole history of the Highgate/Muswell Hill areas and, perhaps needless to say, my part involved talking about the so-called Highgate vampire.
And so forth.

Yep, the same guy (who also happens to be the President of the Highgate Vampire Society) who's also been quoted as saying, "The sighting of a tall, black figure in April on Swains Lane makes me think the vampire is active again." has had enough!

Ah well. I guess it's best to let him use his blog to get back to the more important stuff. Like, uh, well, like this ("To Return to the Boring Stuff"):
I went up to the town centre yesterday (not far away) and on the way back, I passed a house that had just been cleared out. There was a perfect piece of wood by the skip, and I thought it would be just right to replace the one I have been using as a ‘coffee table’. Problem was, it was very, very heavy. So heavy, in fact, I had to keep resting down the road in order to carry it. When I could, I kept resting it on a wall to take the weight, then carry on some minutes later.
Exciting!

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Peroxide Gets Bleached and Unfortune Associations

Well, it looks like another blog dealing with he Highgate Vampire Case has gone and bitten the dust.

Current attempts to access Peroxide's blog, are now met with this calling card:



No surprises there.

It had pretty much degenerating into the typical slanging match found elsewhere. That said, the blog's zealous aim of discrediting David Farrant, probably didn't help much.

Speaking of David, his "Whatever Keeps People Happy..." entry in The Human Touch, has yielded this gem:
I see my interview on the Highgate case has gone up now on “Paranormal Knowledge”.

Nice to be referred to as a “Famous psychic investigator” as opposed to being referred to as a ‘vampire hunter’!

It's strange that David seems adverse to such a term, when his own website advertises a book called (wait for it), Return of the Vampire Hunter: An Exclusive Interview with Reclusive Vampire Hunter, David Farrant (2003) by Rob Milne.

Even the "reclusive" bit is kinda funny, considering how much contributions he makes to discussions concerning the Highgate Vampire Case (which, paradoxically, he claims not to like discussing). Oh, and he's also the head of the Highgate Vampire Society, to boot.

Saturday, September 13, 2008

Getting Bothered

I've recently had the "fortune" of being written about ("I Don't Know Why I Bother Really") in David Farrant's blog, The Human Touch.

Farrant, the founder of the Highgate Vampire Society, has this to write:

Thought I better do a Blog tonight, as Gareth is coming over tomorrow and might not get a chance then. I have already promised my “friend” The Overseer (from ‘down under’) that I answer something for him and that I’d do it on Friday. I don’t know why I bother really concerning myself with old history concerning non-existent ‘vampires’ but I have always tried to answer questions where these concern matters which are in the public domain.

David was addressing a post I made on the Dark Matters Radio forum, concerning various quotes attributing him to a belief in vampires (despite his maintained non-existence of them) in the Press. Or, at the very least, making use of the term to describe his encounters with a supernatural phenomena he allegedly encountered at Highgate Cemetery.

I've touched on this matter in "When a Vampire Isn't a Vampire" and "The Highgate Vampire Resurrected?".

He was also going to discuss the reasons behind his arrests and imprisonment and mentioned that he was going to get his friend, Gareth Medway, to transcribe a rebuttal to my comments.

Unfortunately, I was not able to read Farrant's response, because it seems that the forum has gone offline! As Homer Simpson might say: "D'oh!"

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails