Tuesday, 1 March 2016

Farrant's Final Feeble Fillip on the Flop



"A ghostly unexplained apparition . . . yes. Particularly everyone was in agreement with this, but not with other ‘crank theories’ that there was any substance in the Hammer Horror film portrayals of their horror films portraying vampires, when that international film company had given this idea to thousands – if not millions – of cinema goers throughout that 1960s periods and into the early 1970s. Many were influenced by the vampire horror movies (indeed, these attracted international audiences across the world) but many more tried to imitate this idea (especially college students) by actually trying to make their own amateur ‘vampire films’ in the cemetery itself. But these were really no match for a professional film industry such as Hammer, and such film projects were quickly forgotten, if seen by the general populace at all! But at the end of all this, the phantom figure witnessed in and around Highgate Cemetery lives on. It has been seen by too many witnesses to dismiss its credibility out of hand, as some sceptics and those attempting to jump on the ‘occult bandwagon’, apparently try to do. The conclusion of the 9-hour Symposium (which went on until well into the night ‘after hours’) on July 19th last year, was that this ‘phantom figure’ was still ‘there’. But that it was by no means a ‘blood-sucking vampire’! But after all, we have only got Hammer movie films, and a few of its pale imitators to thank for all that!"

 David Farrant, self-styled president of the non-existent BPOS (28 February 2016)

Seventy-year-old David Farrant, now slipping into some sort of strange undead slumber himself, feebly stuttered the above afterword on his practically lifeless blog two days ago. By "everyone" he means those participating in and attending the Highgate Vampire Symposium held on 19 July 2015. The contributors were a mixture of his flunkies like Redmond McWilliams and Paul Adams, plus an assortment of commentators and dabblers in the dark arts who harbour personal animosity towards author of The Highgate Vampire, Seán Manchester, who investigated the case from start to finish.

The audience, albeit carefully screened to omit any possible sympathisers of Seán Manchester, or anyone else likely to raise awkward questions, was far from in agreement about anything. We have heard from several who attended the Symposium who were less than happy about being fleeced of £12.00 to be sent to sleep by most who spoke from the platform where sat David Farrant and Paul Adams, only to learn nothing about the Highgate Vampire from any of the contributing speakers.

"Crank theories" abound from Farrant who imagines the phoney ghost he hoaxed in early 1970 isn't one, or that his desperate efforts latterly to convince the public and media alike of a "phantom" remaining in the graveyard bisected by Swains Lane, Highgate, amounts to anything more than him riding the "occult bandwagon" that he boarded forty-six years ago which ran out of steam when he was imprisoned for vandalism and desecration in 1974. By which time the predatory entity known as the Highgate Vampire had been successfully exorcised. Farrant, needless to say, played no part in the serious investigation of this case, but he did ruthlessly exploit it for his own attention-seeking purposes and was willing to jump on the vampire theory bandwagon in 1970 to further that ambition.

Those genuinely researching the peripheral madness surrounding events back in 1970 must wonder what Farrant was doing on numerous occasions with an armoury of stakes, crosses, crucifixes, rosaries, holy water and bibles? Was he merely inspired by Hammer's vampire films, or was he, as seems more likely, jumping on what he perceived at the time to be a publicity bandwagon, imitating Seán Manchester and his vampire theory publicised in February 1970, before moving onto more sinister and indeed diabolical attention-seeking magnets to hold the attention of newspaper editors?






Monday, 15 February 2016

Shambolic Symposium Grinds To A Halt



"During our final session of the day, we invited panel and audience members alike to share their questions and perspectives upon the nature of the Highgate entity. We were joined by John Fraser of The Society for Psychical Research and The Ghost Club, founder of ground breaking radio show Mind Set Central Gareth Davies (who flew all the way from Los Angeles!) and esoteric author and co-host of Keeping the Paranormal Friendly Andy Mercer. We were also graced with the presence of two witnesses to the entity, who were brave enough to share their experiences in public before a live audience, and to them we would like to extend enormous gratitude." - Della/Anna (14 February 2016)

Three words describe the line up of speakers at the Farrant organised Highgate Vampire Symposium of July 2015: dull as ditchwater. Even if just one of them had an engaging personality that was likeable, or could entertain those present with some vestige of wit and intelligence, the fact remains that none were blessed with an iota of knowledge about vampires. They were all hand-picked, of course, for precisely that reason, ie their established prejudice against the existence of such things.

John Frazer is a perfect example of this. He is heard blurting his ill-informed nonsense early on in the final part of the symposium on video (which can be viewed by clicking on the images on this page).

Frazer absurdly states that vampires are not part of our culture which would explain, he posits, why the only cases in the British Isles he has ever heard about are the Croglin Grange Vampire in Cumbria and the Highgate Vampire in London. The reason he is not familiar with more cases is due to him not studying or researching vampires. Like the remainder of those chosen to speak at the symposium, he is not a vampirologist or vampire expert, which some might find strange given the topic supposedly under discussion, ie the Highgate Vampire. Needless to say, it wasn't discussed beyond dismissing it out of hand. Everything other than vampirism was tediously trotted out to explain away the occurrences in and around Highgate Cemetery up until the early 1970s.

The English term "vampire" was probably derived (via French vampyre) from the German wampyr, in turn thought to be derived in the early eighteenth century from the Serbian вампир/vampir. The Serbian form has parallels in virtually all Slavic languages: Bulgarian вампир (vampir), Czech and Slovak upír, Polish wąpierz, and (perhaps East Slavic-influenced) upiór, Russian упырь (upyr'), Belarusian упыр (upyr), Ukrainian упирь (upir'), from Old Russian упирь (upir'). Many of these languages have also borrowed forms such as "vampir/wampyr" subsequently from the West; these are distinct from the original local words for the creature. The exact etymology is unclear. Among the proposed proto-Slavic forms are ǫpyrь and ǫpirь. Like its possible cognate that means "bat" (Czech netopýr, Slovak netopier, Polish nietoperz, Russian нетопырь / netopyr' - a species of bat), the Slavic word might contain a Proto-Indo-European root for "to fly." An older theory is that the Slavic languages have borrowed the word from a Turkic term for "witch" (eg Tatar ubyr).  Records of vampirism in the British Isles reach back a thousand years, and I would refer John Frazer to Historia Rerum Anglicarum by William of Newburgh (1136-1208) where accounts of the undead who stray beyond their grave in such places as Buckinghamshire and Berwick are given in significant detail.

None of which was of any interest to the organisers and invited speakers at the Highgate Vampire Symposium in July 2015 where the most they could offer was a "ghost" and a phoney one at that!





Wednesday, 10 February 2016

A Bonky Speech Impediment



"A certain ‘bonky’ individual has attempted to give his own version of these witnessed and recorded events and sightings . . . this person being one known as a certain 'Bishop Bonkers.' ... But regarding the Highgate Vampire Symposium of last July (and as I stated in my last Blog), this bonky individual seems to have taken great exception to this public event held at the theatre Upstairs at the Gatehouse in Highgate Village. During that Conference, several witnesses came forward to confirm the ghostly legends and stories which have surrounded Highgate Cemetery for many years, including the appearances of a ghostly black-clad figure which have been claimed there. The general consensus during the Symposium however was that, although still unexplained, this ghostly apparition was definitely authentic as far as ‘earthly proof’ and testimony can ever go, but was definitely not a ‘vampire’ as this ‘bonky individual’ had been trying to make the public believe. I explained in my Blog that Bonky viewed (and views) the Highgate ghost reports of the apparition sighted at Highgate Cemetery as a serious threat to his ‘vampire tale.’ ... Personally, I did not take too much notice of Bonky’s presence. ... Anyway, (and don’t lose interest dear readers, as we are coming to the important part which I didn’t think to be of enough importance to mention in my last blog) . . . etc, etc, ad nauseam." - David Farrant (6 February 2016)

Readers by this point, unless already comatosed by Farrant's infantility, will have lost interest long before reaching this relatively early stage in his stumbling ramble where he promises the imminent release of the final edit of the so-called Highgate Vampire Symposium's ultimate wheezing whimper. 

In this one blog entry of which only a snatch is quoted above, Farrant employs the term "bonky" no less than twenty-one times to describe his arch-nemesis Seán Manchester whom he additionally calls "Bishop Bonkers." So, the use of the "bonky" / "bonkers" expression twenty-two times in all. We really do have to pinch ourselves to believe that this is issuing from a seventy-year-old man!

The ultimate farcical part of the ultimate farce is, therefore, pending, and will be duly covered here.



Wednesday, 6 January 2016

Carrie on Sam (but don't play it again)



(Click on image to view video)

"Since their inception in the mid-1970s, the Friends of Highgate Cemetery have had little time for rumours of supernatural incursions on their patch." - Della Farrant (5 January 2016)

That might easily be explained by the simple fact that the entity known as the Highgate Vampire was successfully exorcised by early 1974. Why would the Friends of Highgate Cemetery, not formed until 1975, have regard for the supernatural? There was nothing supernatural extant at Highgate Cemetery by the time they took over the running of the graveyard, and it is perfectly understandable why they would eschew the vampire topic in the wake of the panics and hysteria caused by its prior presence.

Monday, 21 December 2015

Theft and Perjury



"I expect most of you will have heard by now (especially those who have been following the Highgate ‘vampire’ saga over years) that the current video from the Highgate Vampire Symposium 2015, 'The Vampire Theory' Part 2, was suspended by You Tube recently following a complaint made by one Sean Manchester again myself for ‘copyright infringement’. [Seán] Manchester insisted that he had undertaken Court action and demanded the permanent removal of this session while Court proceedings were pending. This would have a perfectly reasonable request . . . if true. The only problem was – it wasn’t! While it is true that [Seán] Manchester made the complaint cited above, it is NOT true that [Seán] Manchester had instigated any legal action to substantiate his complaint against myself and was therefore unable to supply any evidence to YouTube to the effect he had done so. Accordingly, the video was restored on December 10th and people are now able to view it." - David Farrant (19 December 2015)

Seán Manchester made no claim whatsoever that he had "insisted that he had undertaken Court action and demanded the permanent removal of this session while Court proceedings were pending.

Farrant's allegation is preposterous nonsense. The only action Seán Manchester took was to issue a DMCA in view of copyright material from the British Occult Society's archive being published in the video without the consent of the lawful copyright holder. And that is all Seán Manchester did.

The entire video was taken down. Seán Manchester would have been content with just the portion where illicit material appears being excised. YouTube made the decision to take down the entire video. Farrant then made a counter claim to YouTube even though he is not the copyright holder.

This is what Seán Manchester received from YouTube:

"We have received the attached counter notification in response to a complaint that you filed with us.

"We're providing you with the counter notification and await evidence (in no more than 10 business days) that you've filed an action seeking a court order against the counter notifier to restrain the allegedly infringing activity. Such evidence should be submitted by replying to this email. If we do not receive notice from you, we may reinstate the material to YouTube.

"If you have any questions, please contact copyright@youtube.com

"Display name of uploader: David Farrant

"The video does not contain material which was or is known to me to be copyright of Mr. Sean Manchester. I request that further info is supplied ASAP re: the alleged copyright breach. I can supply copyright info, as known at the time of publication.

"I swear, under penalty of perjury, that I have a good-faith belief that the material was removed due to a mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.

"I consent to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the district in which my address is located or, if my address is outside the United States, the judicial district in which YouTube is located, and will accept service of process from the claimant.

"David Farrant
[House number DELETED by B.O.S.] 
Muswell Hill Road
London, London N10 3JE GB
[Email DELETED by B.O.S.]
[Telephone number DELETED by B.O.S.]"

Seán Manchester replied to YouTube:

"Regarding the New Copyright Counter-Notification: 

"David Farrant, the person responsible for the video infringing my copyrighted photograph, does not claim that he is the lawful copyright owner of the image in dispute.

"David Farrant, the person who has infringed my copyrighted photograph, does not claim that he knows the lawful owner of the image. If he does make such a claim, I have not been advised who he attributes it to.

"David Farrant, the person who has infringed my copyrighted photograph, does not claim that he was given consent to use the image. If he does make such a claim, I have not been advised by whom.

"Nobody appears to be actually disputing the fact that the photograph is my property. Indeed, recently published statements on the internet made by David Farrant capitalise on the fact that the photograph does belong to me.

"I issued a DMCA for copyright infringement of my picture. Farrant issued a counter notification in which he merely states that it was unknown to him at the time that I am the copyright holder. 

"I see no evidence of any copyright information he might be alluding to in his notification, but one thing is certain: David Farrant is not claiming that he is the lawful copyright holder. Whereas I am.

"In view of the above, how can my DMCA be cancelled and the video containing my photograph be restored on the say-so of someone who admits elsewhere that I created the photograph and does not lay claim to its ownership?

"Sincerely,

"Seán Manchester"

YouTube did not respond Indeed, nothing further was heard from them and the video was restored when the ten days expired.

Not quite "[Seán] Manchester insisted that he had undertaken Court action and demanded the permanent removal of this session while Court proceedings were pending," is it? Once again, David Farrant demonstrates that he is a pathological liar who is willing to steal and perjure himself.


Monday, 16 November 2015

Not the Vampire Theory (conclusion)



Patricia Langley, an accomplice of David Farrant, claims "I had a friend, I still have him, I still know him. His name is Roger" whose surname has conveniently been bleeped out on the video, so we cannot even begin to trace him. Anyone would have thought that "Roger" is a vital witness Langley would have wanted present at the Symposium to lend weight to her allegations, but no sight or sign of "Roger" was evident except on the lips of Langley. Had she have produced a willing dupe to be a false witness, of course, his claims could have been challenged and eventually revealed to be lies.


"[In the year 1990] Peter Underwood was completely dismissive of the whole phenomenon of vampires." - Patrica Langley (forty-seven minutes into the video)

This attribution by Langley about the late Peter Underwood, now no longer able to defend himself, claiming that by 1990 he would not have entertained the idea of vampires, does not accord with the known facts. In that year he published his book Exorcism! where Seán Manchester's vampire account up to the year 1970 is retold in Underwood's own words in Chapter Six, which is given the title Exorcism and Vampires. It is clear, reading this chapter where a full page photograph of Seán Manchester with accompanying accoutrements appears, Peter Underwood supported vampire belief.


Seán Manchester can be seen (above and below) attempting to exorcise the suspected tomb at the heart of Highgate Cemetery in 1970. The exorcism was covered by the BBC and also in the Hornsey Journal which had earlier reported on a satanic outrage close to the same sepulchral location.


David Farrant attributed words to Seán Manchester which anyone examining the programme (Today, Thames Television, 13 March 1970) will find he did not actually utter. Farrant can also be heard in the video denying that he intended to hunt out the cemetery vampire even though, when interviewed by the Hampstead & Highgate Express, 6 March 1970, he is quoted as saying: "I for one am prepared to pursue [the vampire], taking whatever mean might be necessary so that we can all rest." 


Farrant follows this by claiming at the Symposium, "Mr Manchester was nowhere to be seen on that night." The night he is talking about, of course, is 13 March 1970 when a massive public vampire hunt took place at Highgate Cemetery. How would Farrant know? He did not venture anywhere near the graveyard himself, and spent most of that evening in the Prince of Wales pub which is where history teacher Alan Blood discovered him before Blood proceeded alone to Swains Lane with its gathering throng. David Farrant, needless to say, stayed away from Highgate Cemetery that night.

By which time, Seán Manchester was already inside the cemetery with his hand-picked assistants. Some of that account can be read by clicking on the newspaper headline from the following day:


"We were also honoured with the presence of Dr Jacqueline Simpson. Dr Simpson first became aware of the case of the Highgate ‘vampire’ through the work of her American colleague, Professor Bill Ellis. The ostension approach posited by Ellis is postulated by Dr Simpson, with consideration of the Highgate ‘vampire’ flap." - Della Farrant aka Anna Hinton (18 November 2015 )

Enter Jacqueline Simpson twenty-four minutes into the video. Simpson is dismissive of ghosts, vampires and all things supernatural. When Langley started bleating on about ley-lines, which she explains has no supernatural aspect, Simpson's facial expression turned quite sour as eyebrows raised and eyes rolled in a most disapproving manner. Simpson rambles on with her historical folkloric anecdotes until we reach the question period with those posing questions anonymously.

"In 1993 we [Folkore Journal] got sent a very interesting article on the Highgate case by a man called Bill Ellis who came to London specially to research the Highgate story and he met David [Farrant], interviewed David, took lots of notes from David, and he wanted to interview Seán but Seán did not wish to be interviewed, got on his high horse, and said he had put all that behind him and needed the time to devote to his Church. As a result, Bill Ellis' article is full of references to David, and full or quotations from newspapers [provided by Farrant], and does quote from Manchester's published book, but he has no interviews with Manchester. Consequently, as those of you who know the man will readily appreciate, in a few months there was an explosion." 

FACT: Bill Ellis was given a clear choice to either interview David Farrant or Seán Manchester. It was widely known and appreciated at that time that the latter would not participate in any project which involved the publicity-seeker Farrant. Ellis knew this, and chose to involve Farrant. When the article was published Seán Manchester contacted Folklore to point out some serious errors which were acknowledged by both the journal and Ellis who omitted the most offensive material in his article when he regurgitated it as a chapter about the Highgate case in his book Raising the Devil.

There was certainly no "explosion." Such a term is Simpson's way of currying favour with her host, David Farrant, at the Symposium. Seán Manchester and Bill Ellis had a very convivial correspondence throughout the entire episode. Jacqueline Simpson was rather more abrasive - and economical with the truth! By the time she co-wrote The Lore of the Land and long before she spoke at the Symposium, she was in possession of a CD (The Devil's Fool) on which Farrant can be heard being interviewed across the decades. When interviewed in the 1970s he makes clear that he hunted a vampire at Highgate Cemetery and is quite unapologetic about the fact. Details of his attempt are provided by him when interviewed. Simpson knew this, but remained tight-lipped when Farrant denied having any part in this ambition. It did not suit her anti-Seán Manchester agenda to rock the boat.

This is Bill Ellis' correspondence of 22 February 1996 to Seán Manchester:


(click on image to read letter properly)

In his correspondence, Bill Ellis writes:

"We agree that the contemporary press handling was often inaccurate, and most subsequent discussions were even more distorted. Mr Farrant, since he brought the matter to the papers and was repeatedly arrested for his activities in and around Highgate, clearly was 'central to events' in this sense. Credible, I don't say: I give his explanations for what they're worth and expect that most readers would also recognize that a judge and jury found them unconvincing."

Not the Vampire Theory (Part 2)



(Click on image to view video)

The second part of the Symposium's supposed coverage of the vampire theory descends into a tissue of lies from the onset with Paul Adams coaxing David Farrant to tell all about an early witness recounted in Peter Underwood's anthology The Vampire's Bedside Companion by Seán Manchester and in even greater detail in The Highgate Vampire by the same author, Seán Manchester. An image of the witness, Elżbieta Wojdyla, published illegally at the Symposium for the audience but not in the video, can be seen below. Farrant's rambling, unsubstantiated claims are interspersed by rebuttals.


One minute and forty seconds into Part 2 of what is really not the vampire theory, Farrant alleges:

"I needed the girl's address that appeared in Peter Underwood's book, The Vampire's Bedside Companion, I can never pronounce her second name. Is it 'Wojdyla'? She's Polish. So I got this [unidentified] friend of mine to 'phone up her parents and it was either the mother of the father, I can't remember which way 'round it was. She said she wanted to speak to Elizabeth. For example, suppose it was her father, he said 'I can't speak English' and passed her to Elizabeth's mother who spoke really good English. And said, 'I'm sorry but I'll give you her work [telephone] number."

FACT: Elżbieta Wojdyla's father spoke excellent English. Indeed, considerably better than Farrant's stammered assault on English grammar. Her mother was not English. Neither was she Polish. Her accent was quite strong; probably stronger than that of her husband. They were warned about Farrant when they were both alive and were asked if anyone had ever contacted them as Farrant describes. (He has made this claim in the past). They stated unequivocally that they had not been contacted.

"My friend 'phoned and actually spoke to Elizabeth - she was very surprised - and said 'I'm looking for the address of Seán Manchester.' Elizabeth said, 'I'm sorry, I don't know. He used to live not many streets away from me, but I don't actually know the address.' And my friend said, 'Well, I thought you might do because I saw a picture of you, and I contacted the publishers and managed to trace your address. That's how I got your 'phone number and your mother gave me your work address'."

FACT: At the time that Seán Manchester and Elżbieta Wojdyla lived as close as anything being attributed in this fabricated conversation she visited him at that address and would have obviously known it. At the time Farrant claims her parents were contacted by his unnamed friend, Elżbieta Wojdyla was not living with them and her actual address was some distance away from where they lived. The publishers (Leslie Frewin Books and, later, Coronet) had absolutely no information about Elżbieta Wojdyla and could not have possibly disclosed her telephone number. Even Peter Underwood did not have any personal details of this kind about her. Only Seán Manchester did. It should also be added that Elżbieta Wojdyla's parent's telephone number was unlisted (ex-directory).

"[Elizabeth] said she hadn't seen Peter Underwood's book, and when it was described to her, and the caption read out, she burst out laughing. My friend asked her, 'What about those vampire marks on your neck?' [Elizabeth] said, 'Oh that was Seán just playing a joke."

FACT: When the paperback edition appeared in the year following the first edition's publication, Elżbieta Wojdyla was spoken to by a national newspaper when they reviewed the vampire anthology. She supported what had happened to her, as she did when interviewed much closer to the time. 

FACT: Elżbieta Wojdyla has been asked about Farrant's allegations by Seán Manchester who spoke to her directly. She totally denies everything Farrant claims; categorically refuting the absurd notion of her being contacted by him (or anyone else) with regard to the Highgate Vampire case. She was also adamant that her parents were also not contacted by anyone in this connection. David Farrant, as far as she is concerned, is a liar. Moreover, if what he falsely attributed to her was remotely accurate it would make her liar, which she is far from being, as she gave testimony to the occurrences she witnessed and experienced. Recorded at the time, these have since been televised.

Click on the book in question (below) on which cover her image from the 1960s is visible, and listen to her own testimony in person, fifty-five seconds into the video True Horror: Evidence of Vampires:


One minute and thirty-seven seconds into the same video, Elżbieta Wojdyla can be heard saying: "One day I woke. I went downstairs, and there were two lumps on my neck. They weren't lumps. They were like pin holes." In the full interview recording (available on CD), Elżbieta Wojdyla tells of nightly visitations and specks of blood appearing on her pillow after such nightmarish experiences. Her brother even asked if she had been bitten by a vampire when the marks became more prominent; indeed, developed into open punctures.

Farrant claims she told his "friend" that the marks were Seán Manchester "just playing a joke." Listen to the brief extract from Elżbieta Wojdyla's recorded testimony from 1969 again. Then decide whether it was "just a joke."


Seven minutes into the video we hear from Patricia Langley who collaborates with Farrant's fabrications to the point of making up ones of her own. She is frequently described by Farrant as the "secretary" of his "British Psychic and Occult Society," which he invented circa 1983 after being repeatedly exposed in the media as having fraudulently hijacked the nomenclature of the British Occult Society, one of the first organisations to publicly expose Farrant as an inveterate charlatan and  impostor.

"About 2003 to 2004, when I began researching this case, I had a friend, I still have him, I still know him. His name is Roger [surname bleeped out on the video], and he is a computer scientist. In the 1960s [when Patricia Langley herself was a young child; she was barely ten when the case first hit the headlines in the following decade], he was studying computer science at the University of London and my friend Roger was into the vampire scene, the vampire sphere. And the sphere, the whole paranormal was something he was into and is still into. And he came into contact with Mr Manchester and became a good friend of his. And Roger, in 2004, told me when I was researching, 'Do you know about the film that was made?' And I said, 'Well, I know of it. Can you tell me about it?' And he said, 'Well, yeah, I can tell you about it because he invited me and a few other students that were studying at the University of London to go to a screening at his house one Saturday evening and this Jacqueline was there laying on a few nibbles, and drinks and things, and they settled down to watch this film, The Vampire Exhumed."

FACT: Seán Manchester wrote a manuscript, later a screenplay, in 1979 that he gave the title The Vampire Exhumed. A French art house film was made soon afterwards with an independent director, starring the French film actress Sylvaine Charlet who was a very close personal friend of Seán Manchester. The film was titled Le Vampire Exhumé. This was made professionally by a French production company at the turn of the 1980s. Seán Manchester did not meet a computer scientist by the name of "Roger" and had no contact with any students at the University of London. Nor did he entertain this mythical "Roger" and his student friends, or indeed anyone else, in the way described.

"And this Vampire Exhumed was the story of a vampire hunter who chases out a vampire, seeks out a vampire, in Highgate Cemetery. Made in colour, but it had no sound. It was full colour, but it didn't have any sound. Mr Manchester on film was playing both the vampire hunter and the vampire. And so I said, 'Well, this is the second independent case of the film actually having been seen by someone other than David [Farrant]  who saw it with others, and for which Mr Manchester categorically denied it. And Roger then revealed some quite good technical details about the film. He said, or he offered to me, details about the decaying scene of the vampire. What it was, Mr Manchester covered himself in flour, wet flour on his face, let it dry and after a little while it dried and fans were used and a hot breeze was used to blow the flour from his face so it looked as if his skin and the muscles and everything of the vampire's face and body was disintegrating. And I knew at that time Mr Manchester was a very good photographer. Very adept in technical effects of this kind. And Roger told me that this is how the effects of the vampire decomposing were achieved."

FACT: This is the steadily evolving account that owes its origin entirely to David Farrant who has even claimed that images of the vampire corpse in The Highgate Vampire were taken from this non-existent film. "Roger," of course, will never come forward to be identified because he does not exist. Langley claims that she "knew at that time" that Seán Manchester was "a very good photographer" and "very adept in technical effects of this kind." In fact, Seán Manchester was a portrait photographer with his own studio and a permanent staff of five people, but he did not have any expertise in ciné film, much less technical effects using ciné film. How would Langley know such a thing? She would have been practically a babe-in-arms at the time. Farrant is her exclusive source.

"When I put this to Mr Manchester in my research - it wasn't just David I interviewed, I did eventually ask for an interview with Mr Manchester and I did put these points to him in 2004 - not only did he categorically deny that this film exists, existed, but [he] told me I was all wrong, a complete liar, that I was a member of Farrant's evil cabal, and so on."

FACT: Seán Manchester has never spoken to Patricia Langley and has never discussed anything to do with the Highgate Vampire case with her. She did not interview him. The whole thing is fabricated. Langley was born in 1960, and was therefore still in junior school when the Highgate Vampire case first hit the headlines. She is a self-proclaimed witch, spiritualist, medium and number one fan of Farrant whose phoney witchcraft and pseudo-occultism has been exposed many times by investigative journalists and the law courts. The latter saw fit to sentence him to a term of almost five years’ imprisonment for crimes associated with his publicity-seeking behaviour at Highgate Cemetery in the early 1970s where he threatened witnesses in the case of his demented and perverted associate John Pope, a self-proclaimed Satanist found guilty of sexual assault on a boy.

What Langley describes as her “casebook” comprises fifty or so stapled pages bearing Farrant’s address and self-styled imprint “British Psychic and Occult Society” as the work’s publisher. The publishing address is Farrant’s attic bed-sitting room in London’s Muswell Hill Road. The copy we have seen bears a front cover containing a stolen image, as does the rear cover which displays a copyright protected photograph of Seán Manchester. Inside (on page 47 near the pamphlet’s conclusion) is another stolen image reproduced without consent from page 182 of Seán Manchester’s The Highgate Vampire. No photograph can be found of Langley, who opts to be known as “Patsy.”

Farrant apologist Gareth Medway provides the Introduction to Langely’s stapled effort. He is the only person willing to lend his name to the printed pages and quickly runs out of steam reprinting the same invective we have seen dozens of times before in Farrant’s malicious tracts that concentrate on pursuing his principal obsession. Medway, an apologist for Left-hand Path occultists and sundry diabolists, also has an axe to grind with Seán Manchester. Like Patricia Langley, he has never had contact with Seán Manchester, but is a very close friend of Farrant with whom he has conducted publicity stunts involving an illicit, albeit phoney, “occult ritual” over a private grave in April 2005.

Patsy Langley’s little “casebook” is a clear attempt to make money off the success of Seán Manchester’s The Highgate Vampire, and she is reliant on an ex-convict waging a personal vendetta.

Twenty minutes and twenty seconds into the video, David Farrant makes the following claim:

"A person also on the programme [Today, Thames Television, 13 March 1970], being interviewed by Sandra Harris stepped forward and he said, 'No, it's definitely not a ghost. It's a vampire. And, as if to emphasise this point, as he said that he pulled a large wooden stake out of his trousers and produced a very large silver-plated crucifix."

FACT: No such words were uttered by Seán Manchester, as examination of the transmission will confirm, and no "large wooden stake [came] out of his trousers." Nor did he at any time "produce a very large silver-plated crucifix." At least, not in the Today programme of March 1970. Farrant did, however, produce a large cross and stake from inside his trousers, as confirmed four minutes and forty seconds into a video of him reconstructing for BBC the night in August 1970 when he went vampire hunting. Seán Manchester was also asked to demonstrate a Christian exorcism, as had taken place earlier in the year at Highgate Cemetery, and elucidate on the ancient practice of impalement, which he did by revealing a small wooden stake. Click on image below to view video:


                                                                                                               (... continued ...)